Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: WhiskeyPapa
No doubt the southerners will blame that on Lincoln, too.
77 posted on 12/13/2002 5:15:56 AM PST by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies ]


To: Non-Sequitur
No doubt the southerners will blame that on Lincoln, too.

He's clearly implicated. Didn't Lincoln allow his navy to begin conversion to iron-clad warships?

Walt

79 posted on 12/13/2002 5:42:57 AM PST by WhiskeyPapa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies ]

To: Non-Sequitur
No doubt the southerners will blame that on Lincoln, too.

Another interesting thing about the Bismarck:

Prinz Eugen and Bismarck had very similar silhouettes. Eugen had 8" guns and Bismarck had 15" guns, but from any distance or the air, they looked very similar.

The show also pointed out that Admiral Tovey had Rodney and King George V close to very close range so he could observe the fall of shot himself. The flat trajectory of the shells probably lessened the effect -- there was no plunging fire. The Bismarck's battle bridge was cleanly holed, but the citadel was not penetrated.

I have this book on U.S. battleships that says something like the optimum range of the big guns was like 18,000- 21,000 yards. Plunging fire was very important. And some important decision President Roosevelt had to sign off on in 1938 had a very important effect on this. It broadened the "band" of effective ranges. I think it was some skullduggery with the 1923 naval treaty. That' when we laid down the Alabama and Washington class battleships.

I don't think the Japs paid enough attention to that.

Walt

81 posted on 12/13/2002 5:59:04 AM PST by WhiskeyPapa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson