Utoobs of Norwegian ships being torpedoed

[rbgarr]

What a nightmare to have been torpedoed when magazines exploded, oil burned, in the dead of winter, etc.

Or any time really. Never a good time to get hammered like that.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XkUu2NR6t7M&mode=related&search=

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mgNtlEL2C3g&mode=related&search=

[The Bigfella]

Ouch. I was watching a battleship doco on the history channel last night and it included footage of HMS Hood blowing up during the battle of Jutland. 3 survivors - 1415 lost.

[WX]

Um, Bigfella, the Hood was sunk by the Bismarck WW2. Jutland was WW1.

[The Bigfella]

Oops - as usual, you are correct mate - it was the Indefatigable at Jutland that blew up, sinking immediately with her crew of 1,019 officers and men, leaving only two survivors - but it was the Hood blowing up in WW2 that was caught on film. I must be concentrating on my work here eh?

[John E Hardiman]

Oops - as usual, you are correct mate - it was the Indefatigable at Jutland that blew up, sinking immediately with her crew of 1,019 officers and men, leaving only two survivors - but it was the Hood blowing up in WW2 that was caught on film.

Not just Indefatigable, but Queen Mary and Invincible ...causing Beatty to remark "There seems to be something bloody wrong with our ships today"

HMS Invincible sinking, also caught on film.

http://www.worldwar1.co.uk/picture/invincsink.jpg

Notice how much it looks like the description of the HMS Hood.

PS-Why is the Norwegian FCB in English?

[Clencher]

Yes, well, Beatty got that one wrong. There was nothing "wrong with our bloody ships today." What was wrong was the way the gun crews in Beatty's battlecruiser fleet had been trained that rapid fire was all important resulting in many of the safety precautions being ignored. Flash doors left open, cordite charges out of their cases and stacked about, in effect they laid a powder train from turret to magazine. No wonder Beatty lost ships.

An uncle of mine served on one of Beatty's battlecruisers at Jutland - HMS Princess Royal. He survived. Not so another uncle who was killed when HMS Bulwark, a pre-Dreadnought battleship blew up whilst ammunitioning ship at Sheerness in WW1, or another uncle who at the age of 17 went down with HMS Hood in WW2.

[WX]

Try this for dramatic

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7009975008653689943

regarding Jutland, the German gunnery was excellent. Also the British Battle Cruisers were designed for speed and therefore the armour was much lighter than on the Dreadnoughts. I read an excellent book on Jutland a while back and it described in lucid detail the carnage inflicted on the guncrews when a turret received a direct hit.

[rbgarr]

The Time-Life book on the Dreadnought era is an interesting read, too.

[Clencher]

"I read an excellent book on Jutland a while back "

The best account of Jutland I have read (so far) is 'Jutland 1916, Death in the Grey Wastes' by P.Hart and N.Steel.

The eye-witness accounts woven into the text, the sense of duty and patriotism. Incredible.

[Andrew Craig-Bennett]

Part of the problem was that the range of naval gunnery had been increasing very fast indeed in the years before WW1.

There is a vast technical literature on this subject and those interested in Dreyer fire control tables, Argo clocks and Barr and Stroud rangefinders will find plenty if they type those words into Google.

IIRC the British Fifth (fast) Battle Squadron was the only unit at Jutland (on either side) that had regularly practised gunnery at the ranges at which the battle was fought.

"The fire of the English battlecruisers had resulted in no serious damage to our battlecruisers, but the ships of the "Queen Elizabeth" class created an excellent impression" according to Admiral Scheer, who was in a position to know.

Admiral Hugh Evan-Thomas is one of the forgotten heroes of WW1.

[Clencher]

Well said Andrew. Such a shame one of the QE class was not preserved, they were excellent ships. Another piece of our maritime history turned into razor blades or something equally useless.

[Andrew Craig-Bennett]

Yes, indeed. I have read that there was a move to preserve "Warspite", but this got nowhere.

[John E Hardiman]

The first film showing the Stavangar cut in two and still floating high is an amazing testament to the ruggedness of modern warships.

Jim

That's the effect of modern welding and structural practices. A sub keel gas bubble using an influence detonator will cause the main girder to fail, but will usually fail to sink the vessel in condition Y or Z. Additionally, it is VERY unlikely that you would ever get so perfect a shot on an aware and active enemy (come on...I mean cheering for a hit on an anchored target?...How many times did they miss that a hit made them happy?). Most weapons test like this tend to overstate real damage.

[WX]

The ship may have stayed afloat but the force of the explosion probably would have killed or seriously injured just about everyone on board I would have thought.

[John E Hardiman]

The ship may have stayed afloat but the force of the explosion probably would have killed or seriously injured just about everyone on board I would have thought.

Actually, if you weren't in the directly breached compartment, loads are fairly low.....f=ma and mass is large. Structure suffers more from loss of section due to deflection and lack of hydrodynamic support than actual physical force in a sub keel shot. Most personnel injuries are caused by whipping loads causing equipment to come adrift. That is why everything should have a place and everything should be in it's place. Stowage locker design is high profile on warships.