[roscoe_the_1st]

Here's a very detailed recent analysis of why HMS Hood blew up.
Much material for discussion. No it wasn't penetration through the thin deck armour, the plunge angle at that range dismisses this theory.

Interesting video, several things here that I never knew. For example the crew on Prinz Eugen reported torpedoes in the water. The only ship with topedoes was HMS Hood. Norfolk and Suffolk were in no position to fire torpedoes at Prinz Eugen.

posted by Rumration - 16th Dec 2020

 

[Stephen J. Card]

Excellent. Great job of research and fine conclusion too! The author has done several of these do***entary films on YouTube.

Thanks. Stephen

 

[Rocket_Ron]

Hmmm, several scenarios dismissed as incredibly unlikely/needing split second timing. But as far as i can see, this was a one-off event, so basing average effects from other battles/ships is pointless.
Also, listing was mentioned once. Big ship, high speed, 20 deg of rudder on, fire in the 2nd line armoury (fire fighting water in full effect), how much tilt did that deck have on ?

 

[Stephen J. Card]

Not much heel at all. Two reasons why. 1. When the shells hit the ship she was just beginning to alter course, 20 degrees port helm on. As the narration, the ship was just making the turn. 2. Had she been making the port turn she might have been heeling to starboard and the side would have been even more submerged. The narrator belives the speed swell might have uncovered her side at that instant.

Found a good photo of USS NIMITS heeling in a hard port turn. I am not suggesting that HOOD behaved in the same way. This photo just for an 'example.

Stephen

 

[roscoe_the_1st]

Not much heel at all. Two reasons why. 1. When the shells hit the ship she was just beginning to alter course, 20 degrees port helm on. As the narration, the ship was just making the turn. 2. Had she been making the port turn she might have been heeling to starboard and the side would have been even more submerged. The narrator belives the speed swell might have uncovered her side at that instant.

Found a good photo of USS NIMITS heeling in a hard port turn. I am not suggesting that HOOD behaved in the same way. This photo just for an 'example.

Stephen View attachment 684870

From what I can gather from the narrative the signal to the Prince of Wales for a 20 degree turn to port had been signalled. This was to bring X and Y turrets to the firing position. The dive to the wreck confirmed the rudder was in a port turn configuration when she sank, but it would take some time for a very large ship to respond and actually turn. She was still going momentary forward at 28 knots when the shell hit low down on the starboard side into the machinery space but the trajectory was towards the stern. Assuming the fuse hadn't detonated it would go into the 4 in magazines and detonate. This started a fire in the 4 inch magazine space. This was the large vertical column of flame described as being like a giant firecracker by observers on the Prince of Wales. This fire propagated to the stern 15 inch magazines and a larger explosion occurred splitting the hull. The forward momentum would now begin to split the ship in two perhaps now with the partially detached stern section responding to the turn but the forward section not turning. This would explain the odd list to port followed by a bigger list to starboard reported by the survivors in the forward section as the stern, now rapidly detaching itself and filling with water, would pull the forward section first one way then the other. This is my understanding as to what the video is saying. The shell from Bismarck hit Hood at what would have been below the water line but for the trough caused by the bow wave and the speed of the ship.

 

[roscoe_the_1st]

Thanks. Stephen

Yes they did a three part do***entary into the salvaging of the battleships sunk in Pearl Harbor. Fascinating and a demonstration of what people can do if they have determination and guts.