Tirpitz

[Watchman]

Heh. By what I've read of it the bugger somewhat perversely had its greatest impact simply by existing there in Norway, but did not directly manage to get about anything done. The Allies were scared to death of the bugger, full well knowing that if it managed to engage one of the Murmansk convoys they'd have very little to stop it with at hand before it sent the freighters to the bottom. One of its typically soon aborted sorties actually made one of the convoys disperse and duly get severely shredded by the Kriegsmarine and Luftwaffe bombers and subs.

It was like some sort of gravity singularity that made all the operations in the region revolve around itself, and the Allies expended considerable energy in trying to get rid of the pesky thing.

[screwtype]

Heh. By what I've read of it the bugger somewhat perversely had its greatest impact simply by existing there in Norway, but did not directly manage to get about anything done. The Allies were scared to death of the bugger, full well knowing that if it managed to engage one of the Murmansk convoys they'd have very little to stop it with at hand before it sent the freighters to the bottom. One of its typically soon aborted sorties actually made one of the convoys disperse and duly get severely shredded by the Kriegsmarine and Luftwaffe bombers and subs.

It was like some sort of gravity singularity that made all the operations in the region revolve around itself, and the Allies expended considerable energy in trying to get rid of the pesky thing.

Yes, Hitler didn't understand the concept of a "fleet in being" and thought his capital ships should be employed, like U-boats, to sink stuff.

What he didn't get is that the very existence of these capital ships tied down major RN naval assets that could otherwise have been more usefully employed elsewhere.

[Watchman]

Well, let's be honest here - the Kriegsmarine never ever actually had the ability to genuinely contest "blue waters" with the RN. The best their surface combatants managed in both WWs was "brown water" defense, ie. looking mean enough the Brits didn't venture into the Baltic. Even the odd WW2 big ships were really more superheavy raiders, and keeping in mind what happened to the Bismarck...

I've gotten the impression the German navy actually had a bit of a schizophrenia. I mean, they made all the same postulations of glory and military honour as everyone else, and in the end their main contribution to both big wars was sneakily sinking cargo ships with subs... Must have been a bit galling.

[Kraxis]

The Bismarck class was most certainly glorified raiders. Or better yet, super Hipper class ships.

Their secondary guns were also specifically position and constructed to sink merchants rather than protect them from destroyers and light cruisers (which the big guns were supposed to blast apart). Also add the many DP 105mm guns. They were all positioned to be able to fire at ships to the front and rear (as would happen in a convoy) rather than fire out the broadside where any attacker would come from.

Also Bismarck's armour was specifically made for close combat rather than the falsely assumed plunging fire (with which she sank Hood). Her deckarmour was only marginally better than Hood's on the deck. Also her torpedoarmour was just about the best in the world. Bob Ballard proved when he went back to her that not a single torpedo fired at her ever penetrated her armour (the impact-on-deck theory doesn't hold water as the topedoes were set to quite a few meters depth).
The fact that more care was put on vertical belt and topedoarmour indicates that she was meant to meet her enemies so close that she could sweep sailors from the other ship with the barrels of her guns.

A raider in extreme... Never a slugger like the Rodney and Nelson, or the KGV class.

[KrooK]

But superb cannons didn't save Bismarck.
Anti - destroyers guns didn't save it too.
During hunting on Bismarck polish destroyer "Piorun" was fighting with Bismarck for over an hour until help came. Piorun did not any damages but told everyone where is Bismarck.

Anyway staying in Norway wasn't bad option. Royal Navy was vey afraid of Tirpitz. I heard there was a conwoy who divided itself because they thought that Tirpitz is coming. And during arctic conwoys - divide meant death.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Actually, I think most of the surface units in the Kreigsmarine larger than a CL were a waste of tonnage and crew. Replace the expenditures on these units with an appropriate number of Type 7's and 9's and then see about hitting some convoys...

Of course, Kaiser Willy made the same gaffe before round 1, building a second-best navy and draining away the personnel and steel that could have put 3-4 corps (more?) into the line at Tannenberg and the Marne.

[AggonyDuck]

Actually from what I've read it wasn't even plunging fire from the Bismarck that sunk HMS Hood, but a 8.1 inch shell fired from Prinz Eugen that pierced the deck armour and hit the secondary magazine that caused a chain-reaction.

But what I find impressive about the Bismarck-class was their armour. Simply the amount of pounding that the Bismarck took before being scuttled is quite amazing really. But on the other hand what use is there off battleship that has no turrets or speed left, but just refuses to sink?

[SwordsMaster]

I've gotten the impression the German navy actually had a bit of a schizophrenia. I mean, they made all the same postulations of glory and military honour as everyone else, and in the end their main contribution to both big wars was sneakily sinking cargo ships with subs... Must have been a bit galling.

Nope. Hitler had a bit of Schizophrenia.

USSR got very bad situation on Baltic sea. Up to 1944 they couldn't even use a submarine ships. But of course later they got some easy victories

I disagree. The russian Baltic fleet is what caused the nazi invasion of USSR in the first place.

[Kraxis]

I disagree. The russian Baltic fleet is what caused the nazi invasion of USSR in the first place.

Interesting opinon... Would you care to elaborate, as most historians would argue several other points before the Baltic Fleet.

[SwordsMaster]

Interesting opinon... Would you care to elaborate, as most historians would argue several other points before the Baltic Fleet.

Yeah, well. Not only the Baltic fleet. But it was the first bell.

Consider this: Why does the USSR need a fleet in the Baltic? There was no coastline worth defending, no trade interests, and the Baltic sea is a trap for a fleet because even a small one can keep a large fleet bottled inside. The germans had enough ships in the Baltic to do that even if the USSR Baltic fleet was of the size of the Royal Navy.

The defences of St Petersbourgh were too impressive to need a fleet to protect the city (by all accounts, the amount of shells and ammunitions stocked there before the war lasted until the last day of the war) and the strip of land around the city had been fortified by every Tsar from Peter the Great. The city was impossible to tae from the sea.

So:

Germany traded with Petsamo (sp) in Sweden for a good bit of fossile materials and wood that was lacking in Germany (I've read accounds of potato leaves being used as substitute for wood in some cases. Of course you can't use potato leaves to build bridges, say). And the Baltic fleet and the islands (Alands) Stalin got out of the peace treaty with Finland, as bad as they were for large-scale naval operations, were more than capable of destroying the german convoys and therefore hidering its possibility of developing a civilised war.

There were also the russian troops stationed just 80km from the Swedish mines where the germans got their metals from, that could receive the order at any minute and cutoff the german supply of (IIRC) wolframium.

And the last bell was the invasion of Bessabaria. See, the germans got most of their oil from Romania. But Zhukov, being the genius he was, instead of patiently waiting, managed a half-assed attempt to threaten the german oil supplies without actually taking them, but alerting Hitler about his supplies being in danger.

Hitler couldn't just ignore all that, so he transferred his divisions from the west where they were preparing to invade Britain, to the East, and took all the russian supplies and planes stationed on the border because that genius Zhukov was preparing an offensive without thinking that an airport 20 miles away from the border and full of planes is going to get hit 2 minutes after the enemy bombers cross the federal bombers. I.e. without a chance at defending itself. And thus the destruction of the Red army in the first week of the german offensive.

And now, I'm of to bed. We'll continue tomorrow.

[Pannonian]

Yeah, well. Not only the Baltic fleet. But it was the first bell.

Consider this: Why does the USSR need a fleet in the Baltic?

1. Imperial Russia had a fleet in the Baltic, and the USSR inherited it.
2. To prevent enemy fleets from operating uncontested in the Baltic.
3. To protect Leningrad from amphibious attack. Trusting in a city's defences without a mobile component somewhere is generally a bad idea.

Also, the Soviet disposition was Stalin's idea. He was quite upset with himself for days afterwards, and fully expected a coup in response to his incompetence.

[AggonyDuck]

Consider this: Why does the USSR need a fleet in the Baltic? There was no coastline worth defending, no trade interests, and the Baltic sea is a trap for a fleet because even a small one can keep a large fleet bottled inside. The germans had enough ships in the Baltic to do that even if the USSR Baltic fleet was of the size of the Royal Navy.

Perhaps because the Baltic Fleet wasn't even intended to face off against a modern well trained navy like the Germans, but instead meant to be used against Sweden, Finland or the baltic countries and thus cutting off their trade?

Also the majority of the Russian Baltic Fleet was made of submarines and smaller surface vessels, while only a small number were cruisers or battleships of which a good amount were remnants of the Imperial Russian Baltic fleet.

Germany traded with Petsamo (sp) in Sweden for a good bit of fossile materials and wood that was lacking in Germany. And the Baltic fleet and the islands (Alands) Stalin got out of the peace treaty with Finland, as bad as they were for large-scale naval operations, were more than capable of destroying the german convoys and therefore hidering its possibility of developing a civilised war.

There were also the russian troops stationed just 80km from the Swedish mines where the germans got their metals from, that could receive the order at any minute and cutoff the german supply of (IIRC) wolframium.

Here you pretty much ruined the credibility of your argument. Firstly Petsamo was a finnish territory. Secondly the islands were not Ålands, but were a group of islands at the bottom of the Finnish Gulf close to Leningrad. These little islands were in no way a threat to the trade of metal and rare materials from Sweden and Finland, but they were a good addition to the coastal defense of Leningrad.


Also what actually surprised me was the fact that you even refute your own argument by first claiming that the Kriegsmarine could keep the Baltic Fleet bottled up with relative ease, but still claim that the posed a big enough threat to german convoys to initiate Operation Barbarossa.