Holland's real error was in calculating his line of approach, he had the opportunity to cross the T of the advancing Bismarck with a better approach angle, rather than being crossed and forced into an angling, converging approach that was less optimal.
Hard to say what immunity zone the Hood had against Bismarck's 15" rifles, which were a high velocity type and would be more effective against side plates than decks in comparison to the very heavy shell approach favored by the USN. Again I believe the thoughts were that visibility issues in the North Sea and Atlantic would favor shorter battle ranges.
Sea battles turn particularly on the unforeseen!
Cheers!
HMS Hood sinking
Moderators: Timmy C, Gernot, Olaf Held, JWintjes
- RaceFuel
- Posts: 144
- Joined: Tue Mar 08, 2016 5:39 pm
- Location: Medford, Oregon
Re: Calling all HMS "Mighty" Hood fans
No I know, I wasn't faulting the RN for having Hood there, since as I said before, she and PoW were all they had to work with to close the Denmark Strait to Bismarck and Prinz Eugen . What I meant by "under no circumstance" is that if any other capital ships had been available then they should have been there rather than Hood, except for maybe Repulse or Renown, since they were even weaker and more lightly armored than Hood. Ideally King George V and a worked up Prince of Wales would have closed the DS gap well, but KGV was too far south covering another gap.robertmelvin wrote:
If, Hood and PoW was all that was available in the way of capital ships, then that was what the RN had to work with. They certainly couldn't send cruisers alone to try to kill Bismark and Prinze Eugen. One unalterable fact of war is that you have to work with the tools at hand, even if they are not ideal. As I understand it, the officer in tactical command took a calculated risk in trying to close on Bismark and P.W. to get out of the range at which plunging fire would be a serious concern. He lost. Simple as that. As Nimitz told Spruance and Fletcher before Midway, "you shall be guided by the principle of calculated risk". The fact is that even the best naval tacticians can calculate the risk, arrive at the best solution, and still loose the fight. Calculated risk is just that, risk. Even the best tactical decision can have a negative outcome. You have to accept certain incalculable factors, such as simple blind luck. My impression and understanding was that the tactical CO had two choices with Hood, close the distance or run. I don't see any any fault that could be attached to the officer in tactical command. He took a gamble that he had to make to have a chance to kill Bismark and he lost. That doesn't mean he made bad decisions. Anybody who has ever played cards for money will tell you that you can have a hell of a hand (I'm a stud poker player myself) and still loose.
Bob M.
What I meant by "turned too soon" is not a condemnation of the tactical risk they took, just that the turn was executed a little too soon, before Hood was out from plunging fire and wasn't able to absorb more hits to her main belt vs the upper belt or deck.
- Admiral John Byng
- Posts: 2834
- Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2008 3:35 pm
- Location: UK
Re: HMS Hood sinking
I suspect that Vice Admiral Holland was aware of PoWs deficiencies in work-up and perhaps the problem with the turrets. He may have been attempting to concentrate fire on Bismarck as she posed the greatest risk. Even if they had disabled, or even sunk PE then Bismarck would still be there. As it was there wasn't time to do much damage to PE even if he had chosen her as the target.DavidP wrote:hood could still been used as to what she was designed for to take out cruisers & in this case prinz eugen. once prinz eugen was gone 1 way or the other then could shift her fire to Bismarck.
In 1757 Admiral John Byng was shot "pour encourager les autres". Voltaire
- hondaman117
- Posts: 303
- Joined: Thu Aug 13, 2015 1:28 pm
- Location: Mesa, Arizona
Re: HMS Hood sinking
The main goal of the British was to keep the Bismarck from getting to the Atlantic, they had plenty of ships that could stop the PE, but if Bismarck made it they had nothing to stop him from wreaking havoc. At the beginning of the battle Holland ordered fire on the lead ship because they thought it was Bismarck. What they didn't know was that when the British had lost radar contact the PE and Bismarck switched places because the blasts of Bismarck's guns had knocked out her forward radar. When the British regained contact they saw two dots and assumed nothing had changed. Combined with the similar silhouettes of the two ships, it is easy to see the mistake. Captain Leach on POW recognized the error and fired on Bismarck, this may have been the reason why POW was able to get hits on Bismarck and Hood didn't.Admiral John Byng wrote:
I suspect that Vice Admiral Holland was aware of PoWs deficiencies in work-up and perhaps the problem with the turrets. He may have been attempting to concentrate fire on Bismarck as she posed the greatest risk. Even if they had disabled, or even sunk PE then Bismarck would still be there. As it was there wasn't time to do much damage to PE even if he had chosen her as the target.
According to files, Hood and POW had already made a 20* turn to better intercept the Germans, and they were in the middle of executing a second turn to unmask the rear guns as Hood was hit. The discovery of the wreckage confirmed this as the rudder was locked to port by the worm gear mechanism. Whether they were close enough to be safe from plunging fire or not we'll never know as it is impossible to tell exactly where Bismarck hit Hood.
In the end, even with the loss of Hood the British achieved their goal. The hits by POW forced Bismarck to return to France for repairs and ultimately sealed his fate. The only thing I think they should have done differently was POW should have lead, not Hood. Knowing Hood was susceptible from fire and that POW was a true battleship with better armor, it should have been in front to absorb more fire so Hood would be at less risk from being concentrated on. However as we now know POW was malfunctioning, so the British would likely still have to retreat, but maybe POW AND Hood would have survived to fight another day.
On a separate note, I find it depressing that the British didn't save a single Battleship. I think it's entirely possible that if Hood had survived the war she would have been saved. She spent so much time as the face of the Royal Navy the public would have been outraged if she was scrapped.
-Nelson
Current Project:
1:200 U.S.S. Arizona
1:350 U.S.S. Chicago SSN-721
Future Projects:
All of them!
Current Project:
1:200 U.S.S. Arizona
1:350 U.S.S. Chicago SSN-721
Future Projects:
All of them!
- RaceFuel
- Posts: 144
- Joined: Tue Mar 08, 2016 5:39 pm
- Location: Medford, Oregon
Re: HMS Hood sinking
The British, for all their love of naval history and lore, are not particularly sentimental peoples when it comes to grand preservation actions. It's only by the intervention of a private party that Belfast is still with us today.
Hood was a loved ship by the British people, but immediately after the war there were much more pressing concerns than saving an old battlewagon. Just like what happened with Warspite..even if Hood had survived DS and the rest of the war..she would have been in extremely rough shape by 1945 and likely would have been sent to the breakers by 1950 at the latest. A big part of her fame is her loss at DS and the near complete loss of her crew, without that..she'd have been less famous, much like Arizona.
Hood was a loved ship by the British people, but immediately after the war there were much more pressing concerns than saving an old battlewagon. Just like what happened with Warspite..even if Hood had survived DS and the rest of the war..she would have been in extremely rough shape by 1945 and likely would have been sent to the breakers by 1950 at the latest. A big part of her fame is her loss at DS and the near complete loss of her crew, without that..she'd have been less famous, much like Arizona.
-
FW_Allen
- Posts: 343
- Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2005 2:50 pm
- Contact:
Re: Calling all HMS "Mighty" Hood fans
Sorry, joining this one a couple of months late! I didn't see a complete answer, so here goes:IIRC Ted Briggs' battle station was in what I would refer to as the "fighting top". Does anybody know where the other two survivors' battle stations were? I also discovered that the total loss of officers and crew was 1,418. That
I am VERY familiar with Hood's casualties (having spent years helping compile data, photos, records, etc. on her crew. I can say that without doubt there were 1,418 men aboard that morning. 3 survived and 1415 were lost. This figure was subject to debate for some time...but it took time to determine that some people were transferred, some were in jail, some were in training...and some were AWOL (one of whom was not caught until after the war...sorry cannot go into it any farther). This last chap actually affected the official RN count...which stood at 1416 until our efforts. Working with the MoD and CWGC, we've since verified the actual figure at 1,415. What's the difference in 1 or 3 men? Its a BIG difference- we must ensure that only the correct men are properly memorialised.
As for Ted, we miss him very much. Nice chap indeed. Ted (along with Midshipman William Dundas) was located in the Compass Platform. This is the upper set of windows just behind the big cylindrical conning tower. Its NOT the Control/Spotting Top atop the tripod mast high above the bridge. Ted was manning phones and voice tubes at the back of the room. Dundas was forward near the chart table (slightly to port). This is the same room in which the Admiral, Captain and other senior squadron officers were located. Ted and Dundas both got out on the starboard side (Ted through the door and Dundas through one of the windows). Bob Tilburn was outside...he was located on the port side near the forward UP mount abreast the first funnel. He escaped from that very spot.
As for the rafts, Hood had recently been outfitted with numerous "Denton Rafts". These were small 3ft flat/square floats. I guess they kind of look like biscuits. Many folks assume they used the Carley Floats or life rings, but no. They DID have 'Mae West' life preservers, but for Ted at least, it proved useless...his was on UNDER his wool jumper and coat! Besides, the water was too cold to for them to remain immersed. He felt that the fuel oil might have helped insulate them a bit (they were completely caked in it) but even that didn't help after time had passed. If it hadn't been for Dundas keeping them awake, and the timely arrival of Electra...
I count myself very lucky...its one thing to read books and watch films, but its another thing entirely to actually know the men who were there. I've been very fortunate to know many crew from Hood (from the Empire Cruise to her sinking) and even some chaps from Bismarck.
-
biggles2
- Posts: 1980
- Joined: Thu May 30, 2013 1:50 pm
Re: HMS Hood sinking
Apparently, the reason the British lost Battle Cruisers at the Battle of Jutland was due to the practice of leaving the blast doors of the magazines open for quicker servicing. One report I read stated that 4" ammunition was stored along the corridors adjacent to the main magazines on the Hood. If the practice of leaving the blast doors open continued to WWll, then the hit that ignited the 4" could have started a chain reaction that ended up in the aft main magazine. 
- Dan Banks
- Posts: 424
- Joined: Sun Aug 22, 2010 3:05 pm
Re: HMS Hood sinking
All the what ifs are interesting, but the fact remains that the Royal Navy was tasked with eliminating the Bismark, and that's what they did. It is unfortunate that Hood was sacrificed in this effort, but Adm. Halsey's quote about eggs and omelettes might apply here.
- hondaman117
- Posts: 303
- Joined: Thu Aug 13, 2015 1:28 pm
- Location: Mesa, Arizona
Re: Calling all HMS "Mighty" Hood fans
FW_Allen wrote:Sorry, joining this one a couple of months late! I didn't see a complete answer, so here goes:IIRC Ted Briggs' battle station was in what I would refer to as the "fighting top". Does anybody know where the other two survivors' battle stations were? I also discovered that the total loss of officers and crew was 1,418. That
I am VERY familiar with Hood's casualties (having spent years helping compile data, photos, records, etc. on her crew. I can say that without doubt there were 1,418 men aboard that morning. 3 survived and 1415 were lost. This figure was subject to debate for some time...but it took time to determine that some people were transferred, some were in jail, some were in training...and some were AWOL (one of whom was not caught until after the war...sorry cannot go into it any farther). This last chap actually affected the official RN count...which stood at 1416 until our efforts. Working with the MoD and CWGC, we've since verified the actual figure at 1,415. What's the difference in 1 or 3 men? Its a BIG difference- we must ensure that only the correct men are properly memorialised.
As for Ted, we miss him very much. Nice chap indeed. Ted (along with Midshipman William Dundas) was located in the Compass Platform. This is the upper set of windows just behind the big cylindrical conning tower. Its NOT the Control/Spotting Top atop the tripod mast high above the bridge. Ted was manning phones and voice tubes at the back of the room. Dundas was forward near the chart table (slightly to port). This is the same room in which the Admiral, Captain and other senior squadron officers were located. Ted and Dundas both got out on the starboard side (Ted through the door and Dundas through one of the windows). Bob Tilburn was outside...he was located on the port side near the forward UP mount abreast the first funnel. He escaped from that very spot.
As for the rafts, Hood had recently been outfitted with numerous "Denton Rafts". These were small 3ft flat/square floats. I guess they kind of look like biscuits. Many folks assume they used the Carley Floats or life rings, but no. They DID have 'Mae West' life preservers, but for Ted at least, it proved useless...his was on UNDER his wool jumper and coat! Besides, the water was too cold to for them to remain immersed. He felt that the fuel oil might have helped insulate them a bit (they were completely caked in it) but even that didn't help after time had passed. If it hadn't been for Dundas keeping them awake, and the timely arrival of Electra...
I count myself very lucky...its one thing to read books and watch films, but its another thing entirely to actually know the men who were there. I've been very fortunate to know many crew from Hood (from the Empire Cruise to her sinking) and even some chaps from Bismarck.
Thanks for your input, I always like to hear the truth on historical events. I am envious that you got to talk with them and get to know them. I always enjoy meeting veterans and talking to them, they always have good stories to tell.
P.S. I'll probably be bugging you quite a bit when I get working on my 1/200 Hood later this year haha. I love the Hood Association website and plan on using it as a resource. I'd like my model to be a good representation of her and will be trying to correct as many of the errors as my skills allow.
-Nelson
Current Project:
1:200 U.S.S. Arizona
1:350 U.S.S. Chicago SSN-721
Future Projects:
All of them!
Current Project:
1:200 U.S.S. Arizona
1:350 U.S.S. Chicago SSN-721
Future Projects:
All of them!
