Bell of battlecruiser sunk 75 years ago in Royal Navy's biggest ever disaster retrieved from [tr]

UK Daily Mail ^ | May 24, 2016 | Sam Tonkin

[az_gila]

And a nice story about a plaque being placed underwater at the site of the wreck -

http://www.hmshood.com/hoodtoday/2001expedition/hood/wreckplaque.htm

[abb]

History Channel or Military Channel did a piece on this some years ago. IIRC, Ted Briggs was taken out to the site and was able to participate.

[abb]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_Briggs

Briggs regularly told his story as a guest-speaker, lecturer, and subject of historical television and radio documentaries. In July 2001 Briggs visited the wreck site and released a plaque which commemorates the lost crew of the Hood.[7] He was co-author of a book on the subject, titled Flagship “Hood”: The Fate of Britain’s Mightiest Warship.

[tophat9000]

Wasn’t the Hood an American ship given to the British?

---

No.. it was the pride of the British Navy in the interwar Years....to say HMS Hood to a Brit is to say USS Arizona to an America...it one of those kinds of wounds

[Oztrich Boy]

One problem the Brits had is with few exceptions they did not put their capital ships through multi-year overhauls and rebuilds like the U.S. Navy did.

Actually they did. The 5 Queen Elizabeths all had a rebuild in the 20s and early 30s. The Royal Oak got a rebuild to the standard of Malaya, the last of the QE rebuilds, before it was decided the 'R's were too small.

In the mid-late 30s the Warspite, Queen Elizabeth, Valiant, and battlecruiser Renown got rebuilds costing as much as their original build. Barham and Hood were next on the list, to be followed by Nelson and Rodney, but a tiff with Germany intervened,

hypothetical later Hood

[rmlew]

The Battle of the Denmark Strait was hardly the biggest disaster for the Royal Navy. In terms of losses, Jutland was worse with over 6,000 dead and 3 battlecruisers sunk. The loss of HMS Prince of Wales, which had participated in the Battle of the Denmark Straight, and HMS Repulse by Japanese aircraft in December 1941 was worse in that it destroyed the pretense of British naval power in the Pacific, and was followed by the greatest military defeat in British history with the loss of Malaya and Singapore to a smaller Japanese army.

[oldschoolwargamer]

The Germans did build them tough. Don’t know if you have read “The Rules of the Game”, it is a tremendous read about Jutland and the culture of British naval command.

I think in that book there is also discussion that the British AP shell was not as effective as the German, that they used poor quality control in their proofing of shell lots.

German optical sighting equipment was outstanding as well, their shooting tended to be much better than the Royal Navy.

[Little Ray]

Have not read the “The Rules of the Game.” Sounds interesting. Did listen to some other books on WWI naval warfare.
German Optics have always been great and were a substantial enhancement to fire control systems on Imperial German ships.
The Brits were far to complacent about their ‘tradition of victory’ and it cost them. The Brits invented the Dreadnaught (well, launched the first one, anyway), but the Germans innovated and their ships showed it.

[SunkenCiv]

“Kirishima V.S. Washington” — also, the Washington had the ranging radar that Kirishima lacked. And speakin’ of that battle, time to revisit those topics...

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/575721/posts

[exit82]

Thanks for posting. Great story.

[SunkenCiv]

Bismarck vs Hood original WWII recordings footage (uploader stupidly added sounds from Silent Hunter III)