KMS Tirpitz - Guide 117

The Tirpitz, last of the Kriegsmarine battleships, is today's subject.
Want to support the channel? - / drachinifel
Want to talk about ships? / discord
Want to get some books? www.amazon.co.uk/shop/drachinifel
Next on the list:
-Montana class
-Florida class
-Patreon Choice
-USS Salt Lake City
-Storozhevoy
-Flower class
-USS San Juan
-HMS Sheffield
-USS Johnston
-Dido class
-Hunt class
-HMS Vanguard
-Mogami class
-Almirante Grau
-Surcouf
-Von der Tann
-Massena
-HMCS Magnificent
-HMCS Bonaventure
-HMCS Ontario
-HMCS Quebec
-Lion class BC
-USS Wasp
-HMS Blake
-HMS Romala/Ramola
-SMS Emden
-Väinämöinen and Ilmarinen
-Destroyer Velos
-U.S.S. John R. Craig
-C class
-HMS Caroline
-HMS Hermes
-Iron Duke
-Kronprinz Erzerzorg Rudolph.
-HMS Eagle
-Ise class
-18 inch monitor
-Mogami
-De Zeven Provinciën
-Fletcher class
-USS Langley
-Kongo class
-Grom class
-St Louis class
-H class special
-All-big-gun designs
-USS Oregon
-Gascogne
-Alsace
-Lyon and Normandie classes
-Leander class
-HMS Ajax
-Project 1047
-O class
-R class
-Battle class
-Daring class
-USS Indianapolis
-Atago/Takao
-Midway class
-Graf Zeppelin
-Bathurst class
-RHS Queen Olga
-HMS Belfast
-Aurora
-Imperator Nikolai I
-USS Helena
-USS Tennesse
-HMNZS New Zealand
-HMS Queen Mary
-USS Marblehead
-New York class
-L-20e
-Abdiel class
-Panserskib (Armoured ship) Rolf Krake
-HMS Victoria
-USS Galena (1862)
-HMS Charybdis
-Eidsvold class
-IJN “Special” DD's
-SMS Emden
-Ships of Battle of Campeche
-HMS Tiger
-USS England (DE-635)
-Tashkent
-1934A Class
-HMS Plym (K271)
-Siegfried class
Specials:
-Fire Control Systems
-Protected Cruisers
-Scout Cruisers
-Naval Artillery
-Tirpitz (damage history)
-Treaty Battleship comparison
-Warrior to Pre-dreadnought
-British BC Ammo Handling
-Naval AA Special
-Drydocks
Music - / ncmepicmusic

[@Drachinifel]

Pinned post for Q&A :)

[@CG172375]

I think I've read on the wikipedia page that the convoy with Washington was a prepared trap for Tirpitz, and it makes me wonder if you would do a video on the topic of either plans where the specific aim is a certain boat or maybe traps that didn't work out or even backfired. It seems interesting that there are certain boats that one side deemed was worthy of "assassination" like the Tirpitz. I don't know much of naval history across periods, so maybe there haven't really been ships as hotly targeted as Tirpitz, but what do you think about it?

[@lexington476]

Were they able to rescue any of the crew after the Tirpitz capsized?

[@joshthomas-moore2656]

What do you thing of the scattering of PQ17 and the reasons not to reform it after they found out tirpitz was not out

[@michaeljones9861]

Drach thanks for the cool Tirpitz video, I have a couple of questions about the employment of German capital ships in WW2 1. Although Tirpitz never really fought the kind of battle she was designed for she did help the Axis war effort by tying down a lot of allied naval resources and effecting the way the Arctic convoys ran. Would retaining Bismarck in Norway have increased this effect? or was the fear of the Tirptiz caused by the success Bismarck had in the battle of the Denmark Straight? 2. Was the allied effort to contain/destroy Tirpitz justified? By 1944 what could she really achieve in the face of allied airpower?

[@solarisengineering15]

I've heard from some Veteran sailors of the Royal Canadian Navy that early in the war that there was a shortage of 4 inch BL IX guns in Canada. As a result, some Canadian ships (mostly newly built Flower Class Corvettes) sailed across the for the first time Atlantic virtually unarmed against the U-boats until they reached Britain where their turrets were fitted with actual cannons instead of wooden facsimiles. Do you know of any sources that confirm this to be true?

[@billbolton]

The visual image of a destroyer overtaking aircraft in hot pursuit of Tirpitz is priceless. Well done once again.

[@billbolton]

@Comment For No One conceivably if the carrier was going fast enough they could land backwards, just fly above stall speed in front of the carrier and wait till it was below....

[@Scoobydcs]

@@billbolton haha vtol

[@pd4165]

@@billbolton I was given a voucher for a joyflight for my last birthday - the day was windy and the pilot had a lot of fun making us fly backwards. Unfortunately it wasn't over a carrier (they tend not to venture that far inland) nor even the Tirpitz. Just my luck, it was somewhere else that day ;-)

[@SAarumDoK]

@@billbolton lol

[@MrConan89]

You mean 'mental' image?

[@avocedo975]

Tirpitz is a prove that you don't have to do anything to be recognizable. Legendary 10/10

[@KatyushaLauncher]

And Tirpitz also proved being locked up in the Fjords isn't helping anyone

[@someguyontheinternet7628]

Proof of the "fleet in being" concept. Tied up massive resources and hampered communications to the critical Eastern front without ever firing on another ship. Had Bismarck been held in reserve with her, convoys to Russia could have been near impossible, whether they sortied or not.

[@bkjeong4302]

Really, the whole story is an example of “never interrupt the enemy while he’s making a mistake”. The Germans fucked up by building her but Britain failed to see that.

[@serjacklucern4584]

it proves also that whatever thing is german, in military history sell good for propaganda

[@metaknight115]

Yep. Yamato didn’t do much, but she did sink enemy warships, something Tirpitz never did. Kind of reminds me of “Luigi does nothing and wins”

[@R3volutionblu3s]

The sinking of Tirpitz also led to one of the Luftwaffe's highest scoring aces, Heinrich Ehrler, being wrongly blamed for the loss, tried, and sentenced to prison. Ehrler was later pardoned by Hitler and sent back to the front to be given a chance to "rehabilitate himself". On his last sortie he rammed a B-24 in his Me-262, his last words were apparently something close to "Theo, (Theodor Weissenberger, another high scoring ace from JG5) Heinrich here. Have just shot down two bombers. No more ammunition. I'm going to ram. Auf Wiedersehen, see you in Valhalla!"

[@secondlayer7898]

@Bigby Wolf perhaps neopagan, nazis promoted that quite alot, though many of them were christians

[@R3volutionblu3s]

@disc_oidal >added after his death While it's certainly possible there are two different closely matching accounts of his final words. One from Theodor Weissenberger and the other from Walter Schuck, so i'm inclined to believe it.

[@ThePuschkin1986]

i wonder if he sprayed his mouth with silver paint as well?

[@davekrab3363]

@@ThePuschkin1986 please explain?

[@jrtunderground]

@@davekrab3363 it is a Mad Max fury road movie reference.

[@SonOfAB_tch2ndClass]

The way they sunk the Tripitz was essentially the equivalent of dropping an anvil on top of somebody’s head like in looney tunes.

[@AWMJoeyjoejoe]

Yeah but it worked! Lol

[@vermas4654]

With the difference that nothing else really was effective

[@johnmercury2272]

Made by Acme?

[@heartandsouloftheenclave2306]

Yeah but it took 2-3

[@maxoforce2920]

True that! Because a 1v1 on that monster is suicide

[@Scarheart76]

British means of dealing with Tirpitz: "Throw enough shit at the wall and eventually enough will stick to get the job done."

[@watcherzero5256]

Remember they were using smoke generators to blanket the cove meaning after the first couple of runs you were essentially playing Battleship! Meanwhile the cove heights were surrounded by anti-aircraft guns in addition to the ship mounted ones.

[@Wallyworld30]

@@watcherzero5256 Ship mounted AA would be mort the most useless thing after it was enveloped in it's own smoke.

[@b.griffin317]

sounds like the US philosophy about the yamoto.

[@Wallyworld30]

@@b.griffin317 The Bizmarks fate is more reminiscent of the Yamamoto.

[@watcherzero5256]

Not really, she in addition to her multiple surface rangefinder radar antenna was fitted with a Würzburg air search radar to tell her what height to set the fuses of her 105mm AA shells too and the shorter range guns will fire at targets coming in low to make dive bombing attacks or seen through gaps in the smoke.

[@mytube001]

It's been said that the Norwegian roads administration to this day uses steel plates from the Tirpitz during road construction and repair, to cover holes.

[@MarieRosu]

www.vg.no/nyheter/innenriks/i/pzdzV/her-ligger-tirpitz-70-aar-etter (article in norwegian)

[@hakon5473]

My old teacher had a plate from the belt armor from the Tirpitz. He tried milling it but it broke the mill due to the hardness

[@sawyerawr5783]

@@hakon5473 that doesn't surprise me in the slightest.

[@legogenius1667]

Apparently you can still buy a knife made from the steel of Tirpitz. Pretty expensive though

[@SuperBartles]

@@MarieRosu I'm off to learn Norwegian, just so I can read this

[@Ambrosius50]

Retired engineer from Norway here. Back in the 60s, and even in the 70s, - when we should make any high loaded piece, we made it from salvaged 'Tripitz steel.'

[@MaxwellAerialPhotography]

Given the number of stories I’ve heard alot Norwegian Tirpitz steel, I suspect that it’s a bit like Jesse James revolvers, there hundred time more of them out there than there are of the genuine verified articles. I’m not doubting your particular stories but there are a lot of phoney stories out there.

[@PyleHD]

@@MaxwellAerialPhotography i don't think they are just stories. Remember this this was over 40 000 tons of steel. 40 000!!! I think it's possible that a lot of it was still around for decades to come, especially everyone knowing that the steel was of great quality, they probably didn't rush to melt it all as they would with other scrap steel

[@jasoncabral3831]

like the Argentine made 1911's being made from the armor belt from the Graf Spee

[@mortenstrm203]

Armor plates from the Tirpitz are still used today as temporary bridges over ditches, as in sewage system repairs.

[@mwnciboo]

Tirpitz was basically an RAF test bombing range with actually enemy defences.

[@daskaninchen5416]

mwnciboo lol

[@neniAAinen]

Not in this operation in particular, but it's worth remembering that losses in anti-shipping operations in Norway were very heavy till the very end of war. Iirc, highest lost rate for allied air crews in ETA, comparable to soviet ground attack units.

[@peter10245]

Outch :-).

[@josephgordon3723]

There were so many gramatical errors in this short sentence. My face locked in cringe.

[@THE-BUNKEN-DRUM]

1 spelling mistake and 1 comma, sort it out mate, ya just being a dick.

[@mihjq]

Thank You for the details of the individual bomb hits. This is usually omitted in popular sources. I have always been interested in effectiveness of various types of ammunition and I appreciate Your contribution. I suggest putting together special episode concerning bomb attacks, types of bombs and how they worked against ships, and anecdotes such as bombs piercing the ship through and ending up in the sea. Keep up good work!

[@jameson1239]

I do actually like this idea

[@superfortressstudios]

It sounds like an excellent idea, one on naval shell development (i.e. fusing) would be lovely as well

[@knusern666]

We had a piece of Tiripitz at my school as a metal sample . I think my old teacher has it in his garden now

[@barkebaat]

Salvaged steel plates from Tirpitz are still in use today here in Oslo, Norway. They use them during road works to cover trenches and holes so the traffic can pass while they work on the cables and water underneath.

[@wiaf8937]

as a german i need to visit your country and witness that with my own eyes. that sounds interesting AF

[@spookyshadowhawk6776]

Tirpitz lived up to Germany's reputation as a Nation of beer drinkers, look at all the tall boys the British had to serve it to put it down for the count!

[@jimtaylor294]

Only took three in the end though ;) .

[@niclasjohansson4333]

@@jimtaylor294 But it was 3 LARGE ones.

[@jimtaylor294]

@@niclasjohansson4333 Aye. The RAF don't believe in half measures ;-) .

[@Boxghost102]

@@jimtaylor294 Well, they dropped like 30 in the final raid.

[@jimtaylor294]

@@Boxghost102 True, but three of them did most of the work. Given that usually it took thousands of bombs to destroy a typically sized factory (due to the comical miss ratio) the Earthquake Bombs did rather well.

[@GaryNumeroUno]

I must add a note for us to remember the brave souls on both sides who perished during the various operations to sink the vessel; in particular the mariners trapped inside the ship after the capsizing who died a horrible death. I'm surprised they did not leave it as a war grave but, I'm sure the bodies were interred back home in Germany. RIP.

[@RaysRailVideos]

Godbless all who have died in mans greed and craziness of war

[@GaryNumeroUno]

@@RaysRailVideos amen to that good buddy.

[@SynchroScore]

They couldn't have left it there. The ammunition and fuel oil both represented a hazard, but yes, they probably sent any remains they found back to Germany for proper burial.

[@tomasinacovell4293]

Wow, the salvaging of the Tirpitz would itself make a worthy documentary!

[@bigblue6917]

You mentioned the speed of the Albacores being so slow that a destroyer passed them. Well this reminded me of something I read about British aircraft in the early part of WW1. They were so slow that on occasion while flying westward to return to their airfields they would be flying into a head wind which could be anything up to 10 MPH faster then they could fly. So in effect they were flying backwards. The only way they could make any headway was to tack across the wind like a sailing ship.

[@inglebert123]

The upload rate of this channel is pretty nuts

[@steeltrap3800]

Surely would have to feature on a list of contenders for the title of "the most bombed ship in history". Meanwhile, WoWS gave it WORSE AA than Bismarck because WG logic.

[@bkjeong4302]

Steeltrap Also has to be on any list of “target that should just have been left alone”.

[@CRAIGKMSBISMARCKTIRPITZ533]

No WARGAMING Did EveryThing Right. Cause They Have Every Designs Of Every Ships,All Ships

[@ph89787]

@@bkjeong4302 doesn’t work either. Got my Enterprise sunk twice by Tirpitz.

[@bkjeong4302]

@@ph89787 I mean IRL. Also, the fact carriers can be sunk by battleships shows how hilariously nerfed carriers are in WOWS (yes, NERFED-in reality it would be outright I'm possible to attack a carrier because it would be hundreds of miles away and not closing that distance)

[@ph89787]

@@bkjeong4302 Unless of course something like what happened to Glorious occurs.

[@dimdimbramantyo7666]

Great video as always, Mr. Drachinifel! Such a poor lady, she held a great nickname "Lone Queen of the North Sea", but ended with just used as anti-aircraft batteries :(

[@bohellan6227]

Not trying to nitpick, but as a Norwegian the name translates more accurately to "The Lonely Queen of the North" for reference in Norwegian; "Den ensomme Nordens dronning". Though something is lost in translation with the original language capturing a bit more of its grandiosity and general role as a "figurehead" to tie up British naval and aerial resources.

[@jonskowitz]

Well she certainly performed that role spectacularly!

[@dimdimbramantyo7666]

@@bohellan6227 oh, no no you are right. I remember she's being called "The Lonely Queen of the North". I'm the false one, can't quite remember it when I wrote this

[@dimdimbramantyo7666]

@K.M.S Tirpitz heyyo

[@erichvondonitz5325]

All in all, I feel bad for every ship that got sunk or scrapped in WW2, they were beautifully made ships with immense costs

[@rossbabcock2974]

I have truly enjoyed all videos you have posted! Well researched and presented. I also love the dry British wit. Thank you!

[@greifer3866]

ty for your awesome videos drach! hope you have a nice weekend! greetings from germany. :)

[@toriasygramul7128]

My Grandfather, who passed away in 2017 served on her as the navigator/Spotter on her recon-plane. He contracted typhoid fever witch lead to him being transfered home to germany for treatment and recovery mere 14 days before she got sunk.

[@frankark1046]

When Tirpitz was salvaged, a number of steel plates was taken to Oslo. There you can see them today when they cover roadworks. Everytime I see them and step on them I remember Tirpitz!

[@antonyborlase3965]

I have read about the number of air attacks, but didn’t know it was actually that many.

[@marcatteberry1361]

The X-Craft are a little story in itself. The best part was after they dropped the charges, and were captured, they were taken below for questioning. They were observed to be anxious and nervous, and some were sweating profusely, all looking at watches or clocks from time to time, as they waited for the timers to countdown. Even after the explosions, they were treated well.. until it was discovered that the Beer stores, were destroyed... They didnt make any new friends after that...

[@deepgardening]

A great summation and with the rapid foto series, highly digestible. What a marathon ordeal for all involved. Thank you, after reading so much about the Tirpitz, I feel like my understanding has gone way up.

[@jimmiller5600]

Like with the Graf Spree, the final sinking was because of lack of logistical support. The Brits' global bases were a big force multiplier.

[@jnstonbely5215]

Amazing Report ! Thank you, Sir. Your exacting attention to detail is just incredible. BRAVO !

[@gregkerr725]

For a battleship that never really got to do what a battleship is intended to do...it sure was responsible for a high toll on aircraft and crew!

[@thefisherj3392]

Well they did order tirpitiz not to sail out if a aircraft carrier was present so the British had to sink it to free up the aircraft carrier so it could help out elsewhere

[@jawadad802]

the view with the massive smokegeneretors over the fjord is amazing

[@Grundag]

Bridge ensign to the Officer of the Watch, "Look, it's British bombers approaching!" "Ach! How many!?" "Ummm, all of them!"

[@jeffpeffers4519]

That comment needs to be in the next war movie!

[@jeffpeffers4519]

Ahh finally! Abloody good hole!! Seems tobe little small tho can we get a bigger bomb say what!?!!

[@MainesOwn]

the story of the Torpedo aircraft being overtaken by a "fast going destroyer" made my day.

[@TEHSTONEDPUMPKIN]

"Ich bin KEIN Hotel!" -Tirpitz 1941

[@stevenbaker470]

Nein, Sie war Eine KRANKENHAUS.

[@legogenius1667]

Yamato: It's OK Tirpitz, I was nothing but a hotel and the weebs still love me!

[@metaknight115]

Yamato: at least I engaged enemy ships once

[@Krieg-ch8ot]

The most bombed ship in history

[@niclasjohansson4333]

BY FAR !

[@penkagenova7073]

And took designing a whole new powerful bomb just to sink the ship Goes to show how legendary German engineering is at anything

[@biddyboy1570]

@@penkagenova7073 yep, it was all German engineering that sunk it. Legend.

[@biddyboy1570]

@@penkagenova7073 yep, it was all German engineering that sunk it. Legend.

[@MCAroon09]

not even Yamato has recieved so many bombs!

[@thomasgray4188]

who would win A 43000 ton battleship Or Some Tall Bois

[@thomasgray4188]

@@bkjeong4302 r/woooooosh

[@willatkins9686]

Another Barn Wallis bomb! 20000 pounder!

[@Puckoon2002]

The Tallboys and it's bigger cousins the 22,000 lbs Grand Slams where known as Earthquake bombs, they actually worked best when they landed close by, look up the attacks on the Bielfeld (14th Mar 1945) and Arnsberg (19th Mar 1945) Railway Viaducts both where destroyed by near misses.

[@AG3624C]

A 43,000 ton battleship as apparently the RAF couldn't hit for toffee... 43,000 vs a metric ass ton of tall boys however 😜

[@7thsealord888]

The Tall Boy Bomb. The RAF's way of saying "We are not F###ing around any more."

[@Noble713]

Great footage of the air attacks in Norway. Those Tall Boy bombs are insane, can only image what being on a ship subjected to them was like.

[@CMDRFandragon]

The biggest problem with battleships is how expensive and powerful they are, that the Navies never actually sent them into battle for fear of losing them.....

[@daleburrell6273]

CMDRFandragon SINCE WHEN HAS BEING "POWERFUL" EVER BEEN A PROBLEM FOR A BATTLESHIP?! THE REAL FACT(S) ARE, THAT BATTLESHIPS HAVE ALWAYS BEEN EXPENSIVE TO BUILD, EXPENSIVE TO OPERATE, EXPENSIVE TO MAINTAIN- AND WITH THE PRESENT DAY TECHNOLOGY- BATTLESHIPS ARE TOO DAM BIG OF A TARGET!!!

[@noobster4779]

I mean the german navy send its battleships into risky operations all the time though. The entire mess that should have never worked called the norway campaign right in the face f the Royal navy 2 german battleships (Scharnhorst/Gneisenau) breaking through the denmarks straight to the atlantic 2 german battleships, a heavy cruiser and escort destroyers breaking through the british channel during daylight (literally a garanteed suicide run) Both Tirpitz and Scharnhorst sailing out to engage convoys that were usually had strong escorts and barely making it out f there (Tirpitz) or fighting to a last stand to the death (Scharnhorst). Out of all the navies in WW2 the german navy was propably the most high risk navy in the entire war with most of its surface fleet operations

[@roykliffen9674]

She was a beautiful ship

[@MrBurgerphone1014]

indeed

[@bkjeong4302]

@@AWMJoeyjoejoe That's true of literally all battleships built just before or during WWII, though. And honestly, the others were even worse in that regard, since they didn't even act as strategic distraction like Tirpitz did (though this is more due to the Allies not understanding battleships in WWII weren't much of a threat, rather than her actual combat usefulness).

[@folkestender2025]

@@AWMJoeyjoejoe You're right. Actually, the time of heavy cruisers and battleships was already over in World War I. To wage naval battles like Lord Nelson was absolute nonsense. But before the Second World War, all parties started to build new gigantic and idiotic prestige objects without any benefit. Most were lost in War or were scrapped after the war. In principle they had no advantage at all for the outcome of a war, except to sink each other. Every little submarine and every aircraft squadron had more tactical success, without to have 2.000 (and more) deaths from the loss of a single ship.

[@daskaninchen5416]

Roy Kliffen meh i think the richelieu looks wayyyy better

[@brpitrepeters7983]

Sometimes Pure Evil can be Beautiful

[@Maddog3060]

You'd think after the first Tallboy strike crippled the ship they'd move some of the crew ashore. Not like they'd be sortieing out any time soon.

[@dingledooley9283]

With the ordinance dropping all around, I think I'd be happier inside a collosal hardened steel target than a log cabin on the shore nearby.

[@mikebronicki6978]

@@dingledooley9283 unless the hardened steel target capsized and becomes a hardened steel tomb.

[@dingledooley9283]

@@mikebronicki6978 right up until 6 tons of tallboy comes smashing through the deck I'd feel safer!

[@jimtaylor294]

@@dingledooley9283 Proportionately you're safe in niether option from a 12,000lb bomb, so you might as well take the Log Cabin ;-) .

[@dingledooley9283]

@@jimtaylor294 I suppose the 1000 dead sailors would probably agree with you but technically it was the magazine explosion that killed most of them not the 2x hits from tall boys. I'm curious now how much explosive is in a tall boy and how much is it's inert armour piercing nose.

[@Ron-uq2hg]

There was a best selling book which I read as a teenager in the 1950s about the sinking of the Tirpitz, I forget its name but I always loved that the Royal Navy claimed that as the Tirpitz capsized the Royal Air Force could not claim to have sunk the Tirpitz.

[@vespelian5274]

I once had a very vivid dream I was at a Norwegian folk dancing festival staged on the upturned hull of the Tirpitz. Very strange. I didn't know about the Soviet air raid and was glad to have the deck torpedo tubes confirmed.

[@nathanrohde3440]

Are you Norwegian?

[@vespelian5274]

@@nathanrohde3440No, but part Danish. I don't know where the dream came from.

[@nathanrohde3440]

You're here so you're clearly a history enthusiast, the capsized ship part makes some sense. It is a really strange dream to have if you're not familiar with the area, or Norwegian folk dancing.

[@vespelian5274]

@@nathanrohde3440 It was definitely amongst the most memorable dreams I ever had. I am a historian and naval enthusiast, and as something of a polymathic find intrests often reflect in the subconscious. I remember seeing a film called The Heroes of Telemark about the Norwegian resistance in WWII and heavy water which made an impression. Being part German and part Danish probably helped. I do find Drach a mine of information. I only wish he'd been around when I was twelve.

[@nathanrohde3440]

@@vespelian5274 The height of my War War II obsession was around the same age 11 - 15. I would have been watching and rewatching everything on this channel on a daily basis.

[@klipsfilmsmelbourne]

when tirpitz capsized like Oklahoma, the German sailors realizing the water rising up due to high tides the upside down tirpitz was too large to upright and too cold so the wreck was left there until her hull was cutting metals and recover some shells that could be used or smelting it today some parts remain of the wreck still have small items what was left of her

[@vitkriklan2633]

English isn't even my mother tongue, but your grammar makes me feel like I'm having a stroke.

[@badcarbon7624]

Its was the 1956 British film, Above us the Waves, about the, chariot attack on her, that watched by my 8 year old self on a local television station in 1962 that sparked by life long love with Naval History, and Warship modeling as she was my first attempt, when after much cajoling I received the Revell kit that Christmas. Once again thanks for taking the time out of your life to produce these videos.

[@Wombat1916]

I know the feeling. I bought the 1:400th Heller model of Bismarck and was gifted the 1:350th Tamiya model of Tirpitz, 2 of the almost 30 ships in my "fleet".

[@badcarbon7624]

@@Wombat1916 Always nice to hear from a fellow Modeler. My "fleet" is presently at 25 which contains the Heller Bismarck. I only build ships that ended up sinking. I am currently working on the Swedish Ship Wasa, that sunk on her maiden voyage. The Mary Rose will be next as they sunk under similar situations. After the Mary Rose I plan to start the Jutland casualties, which after some initial searches it appears will be a bit of a challenge finding all the kits, at least ones that are in my price range.

[@Wombat1916]

@@badcarbon7624 Only 8 of my ships sank as that was never a point when I bought them. However, my first kit in 1959 was the Airfix DH Mosquito, and boy was it basic! The crew sat on pegs inside the otherwise empty cockpit! The 1/24th scale Mossie is better, by all accounts. Over the next 14 years I bult up a collection of 108 aircraft but was nagged by my parents into giving them away. When I left home I soon started again, and this time NO ONE was going to tell me to get rid of them. Currently along with my 29 ships, with several more still to be built, I have 322 aircraft and a dozen (mainly 1/9th scale) motorcycles and 15 AFVs of varying scales from 1/96 to 1/9th pus 5 nondescript models. My current "favourite" ship is the French battleship Richelieu. It is finished as it appeared in the Far Eastern Fleet in 1944-5 with RN ships and I love looking at it. It is in a display case along with 2 1/9th scale Protar motorcycle kis, a Manx Norton and an AJS 7R. Just as an aside, I still have a part of my original collection; the tailplane of the Airfix Walrus aka "Shagbat".

[@badcarbon7624]

@@Wombat1916 That's an incredible body of work. My first the Tirpitz met a similar fate as the original, due to an 8 year old boy with firecrackers. If I say so myself, and judging by my friends reaction's it was quite spectacular. In fact I still have a scar from a piece of one the turrets embedding itself in my forehead. My parents shared similar views and I reacted the same way. I also build aircraft. My first being a Spitfire. I've presently have 28. Although I'm a Yank my favorite is the Vulcan bomber. I've always considered the Richelieu a beautiful ship and your presentation sounds worthy of her. I've built many Titanic's as gifts most of them the Revell 1.570, not the mist accurate but its a quick build, and when lit looks quite nice. My favorite build is a little minicraft 1.350 centennial edition, which I've also encased. As a fellow Modeler I completely understand the satisfaction one receives when looking at a particularly good build of a favorite ship or any vehicle. Although not a fanatic rivet counter I do try to build as close to the reality as possible, hence the nine months I've spent just painting the Wasa. I've nearly finished the build and am looking forward with some trepidation to tackling the rigging and sails. Thanks for taking the time to describe your collection.

[@Wombat1916]

@@badcarbon7624 Ouch! Someone once slid a banger into the handlebars of my pushbike while my back was turned. When it went off I was so shocked I dropped the bike and then fell over it. My "friends" howled with laughter. Though a Limey I have a B-36, a B-52 and a B-58 pus the 6-engined Bv222 hanging down the wall in the lounge. The Bv222 has swastikas on the tail but my reply is "What would you put on the tail of a German aircraft from the period 1933-45?" My 1/144 Junkers G-38 also sports them, with the earlier red background. Xtradecal in the UK supplies sheets of the things. My personal politics are slightly left of centre, BTW. Sailing ships are not my thing. The rigging gives me the screaming heebie-jeebies when I tried it so I don't have any. My Heller 1/400th scale Scharnhorst has rigging but it is not pretty! After the demise of my first collection with only a few B&W photos to remember it by I think it helps to remember it. Of course, having replaced them all and gone on is another way of sticking two fingers up to my parents, who nagged me into getting rid of them, and even smashed the few I wanted to keep!

[@micuu1]

German Battleship: exists RAF: AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[@majorborngusfluunduch8694]

*"Kill it! Burn it with fire!"*

[@jimtaylor294]

More like: Anything German: exists RAF: Omai wo Shinderu~

[@janhemmer1414]

the british were always a bit special with their ships, but i dont think hated any other nations ship quiet as much as germanys.

[@glennpowell3444]

I am pretty sure the salvaged Halifax at the RAF Hendon museum was shot down by Tirpitz during one of the many attacks on the ship.There is actually a bulkhead door of the Tirpitz displayed by it. I was there only last year. The Halifax was recovered from a fiord after crash landing in Norway and was salvaged in the 1970,s and is completely unrestored.By far the best exhibit at Hendon.

[@williamkennedy5492]

Her engines were removed and used in the local power generator station excellent video, filling in gaps for me.

[@eugenvonsurschnitzler9588]

Germany's first and only true antiaircraft battleship.

[@andrewmontgomery5621]

"The Lone Queen of the North" as the Norwegians called and as Churchill call her "The Beast"

[@blakefrazier9991]

@G E T R E K T 905 what war crime?

[@houraisanproductions5879]

@@blakefrazier9991 go mention me once he/she says what warcrime it is. I'll wait

[@houraisanproductions5879]

@G E T R E K T 905 Oh thanks. More knowledge in the bank... (not sure how to react to me being a mass shooter now though)

[@kkhagerty6315]

The lonely queen of the north, thanks for covering this

[@LtCmdrGordon]

Holy crap, now I know why my uncle always had this model on display in the dining room

[@claypidgeon4807]

What ungodly Captain build did this guy use to get that kind of air attack survivability on a Tirpitz, of all things!? Or did he just division up with a Worcester and a Minotaur?

[@RPGTKingpin]

multiple built-in Z-52s cycling their smokes.

[@Kimdino1]

And good use of landscape.

[@redkabuki]

Been waiting for this one...and it was worth it. Thank you outstanding job as always.

[@havoc3742]

Ah yes, the Lonely Queen of the North, may her days of Freezing alone be at an end

[@tonygibson6806]

When I was at university I had the pleasure of visiting the old Marshall works in Gainsborough Lincolnshire where the x craft midget submarines were built and had chance to see some of the stuff left over from their construction, very interesting, wish I had documented it better, as Marshall's was pulled down and is now a shopping centre 😔

[@wgsvm]

I really learned a lot from all the extra details you gave on the Tirpiz with diagrams of the ship and its real life history. Well done! I wanted to ask a favor. Could you do 2 more similar videos: (1) The German Battleship Bismark, and (2) Another video comparing the differences between the Bismark and Tirpiz. Thanks again for providing a professor like video with so many details.

[@JoeOvercoat]

The Operations Room depicts the individual attacks on a simple map, to great effect.

[@princeofcupspoc9073]

9:56 Not the Arados ! 11:00 Not the Arados !

[@jasonz7788]

Great work Sir thank you

[@mrbeep8096]

Yes,Finally we get this video thank you so much.

[@shotforshot5983]

The repair, scrapping or salvage operations of WWII ships would be interesting to me as well. I wonder how many photos, videos and accounts of such still exist.

[@alantrske7583]

Plates from Tirpitz used as temporary cover surface at roadworks in Norway up until today.

[@jorgebravo415]

Helt riktig.

[@vermas4654]

when you need something like a tall boy to sink a ship. this was some very very durable ship

[@trevorhart545]

Torpedoes could not be used SO what other option was there other than another Battleship?

[@truereaper4572]

@@trevorhart545 He means that the Tall Boy is a massive bomb, way bigger than normal sized bombs.

[@amerigo88]

The numerous early bombing attacks likely destroyed much of the Tirpitz's supplies, fuel, etc interfering with her ability to sortie.

[@sigerfjording]

when this mighty ship went through Vesterålen, Norway, at full speed it broke the single glass windows. It was the largest ship to pass Sortland until 2019, when a cruise-ship beat it by 5m..

[@rickwhite4137]

The armored plates from Tirpitz are now used for covering holes on the roads while they're being repaired. You can find them all around, mostly in Oslo.

[@augustosolari7721]

The definition of fleet in being, the tirpitz would spend most of the war vacating in the norwegian fjords.

[@jasonirwin4631]

Sounds like a great vacation at least until the RAF arrived. Those guys ruin everything.

[@Yayaloy9]

I wouldn't call 1 single ship with coastal defence as fleet. XD

[@MajinOthinus]

@@Yayaloy9 If it's treated like a fleet by the enemy, then for all intents and purposes it *is* a fleet in effect.

[@bkjeong4302]

enderboy Not a fleet, but treated as such by the British (to their own detriment).

[@CGWelsch]

Good job as always, a pleassure to watch and listen to,

[@Anacronian]

You gotta say that Tirpitz was worth every single Reichsmark it cost, Considering all the resources RAF had to waste on it.

[@TheUltimateEel]

The Reichsmarks yes (have no inherent value), but the fuel, facilities and especially the steel used to built and employ her, a big NO.

[@AWMJoeyjoejoe]

@@TheUltimateEel Not to mention the 900-1200 men killed when it was sunk.

[@jimtaylor294]

Bombs dropped are never "wasted", mearly Accurate or Inaccurate ;-) .

[@neniAAinen]

@@TheUltimateEel arguably, but yes, she was worth it. Arctic convoys(and delays in their operation) were extremely costly, to both UK&US and the USSR. But it was so effective as fleet in being precisely because neither her nor Sharnhorst were intended to act as such.

[@XHitsugaX]

@@TheUltimateEel and the sailors lost

[@N0rdman]

Great presentation as usual, thank you.

[@falloutghoul1]

This probably would've been the fate of Scharnhorst and Gneisenau if they stayed in Brest. Bombed into submission.

[@theleva7]

Rather bombed out of existence.

[@robertf3479]

It was for that reason that Hitler ordered Prinz Eugene, Scharnhorst and Gneisenau out of Brest and back to Germany. The 'Dash' up the English Channel caught the British with their knickers around their ankles, unprepared. While many Brits would protest my evaluation I call 'em like I see 'em. "If it seems stupid but it works …", it worked far better than many in Berlin expected with all three heavies reaching home though not undamaged.

[@Wombat1916]

@@robertf3479 Yes, the Gneisenau never did recover and was scuttled in the end.

[@falloutghoul1]

@@robertf3479 Well, I wouldn't say they were "unprepared", but their preparations were insufficient.

[@robertf3479]

@@Wombat1916 True, she was damaged during the 'dash' and then instead of simply being repaired she began a conversion to 15" rifles IIRC and replacing the bow with one similar to Scharnhorst's. Bombing did even more damage and eventually sealed her fate.

[@coldsteel.and.courage]

Talk about one hell of a run for one ship to dodge all of that damage. The amount of resources spent chasing her is pretty astounding.

[@bkjeong4302]

Especially considering she was effectively out of the war ever since her sister ship was sunk, and the only reason she ever became a factor again was because the British failed to see that she’d basically become a nonfactor.

[@bificommander]

"Achtung, Englische flieger! Do you vant us to deliver a message to ze Tirpitz? Our destroyer is heading zat way."

[@Corn-y3u]

I couldn't help but think about half way through this video, "stop! It's already dead"

[@thhseeking]

"I'm not dead! I think I'll go for a walk..."

[@sarahcagle971]

Usually a battleship out at sea was a sitting duck for aircraft, as several well-known battleships found out...such as Japan's Yamato, and a couple of British 'ships learned as well. But, apparently, if you anchor a battleship in a narrow Norwegian fjord you can send literally thousands of aircrafts, hundreds of bombers at a time, over a couple of years, and "without causing any damage."

[@russellfitzpatrick503]

... and what earthly good is a powerful battleship secreted away in a narrow fjord - at least Bismarck and Schaenhort went down fighting the enemy's ships as they were supposed to

[@89Keith]

Generally hard to install torpedo nets out at sea. Added to that there is only so much AA guns you can fit on a ship, there's not really as much of a limit on land based installations

[@mbr5742]

Deep fjords or other cuts where a big problem for bombers. Even high altitude attacks need to roughly follow the Fjord and open themselfs up to rather accurate AA fire. The same happened at the "Wet Triangle" channel junction in germany where AA guns on the hills had a field day with attackers more than once.

[@herbertmische8660]

Great, fantastic and immortal german power!!! Respect forever!!!

[@rollosnook]

This was one of those embarrassing moments for the RN where the RAF finished the job. 617 Squadron was formed from 97 Squadron, who took part in the first and last ever daylight low level Lancaster raid on Augsburg. 9 Squadron carried normal loads and 617 carried the Tallboys. By this point in the war, Lancasters were removing turrets and fitting twin .50 calibre machine guns in the rear turrets and flying escorted daylight missions. Johnnie Johnson wrote in his biography about a Glaswegian bricklayer called "Jock" taking his Lancaster down to 2000 feet along the Caen road on D-Day to strafe vehicles, showing just how confident the allied airforce was by summer 1944. Even so, the RAF lost a fair number of planes against the Tirpitz.

[@bkjeong4302]

X51Games Actually this whole thing is embarrassing to both Germany and Britain. One side builds an obsolete and useless weapon. The other side wastes resources and gets people killed trying to destroy said useless weapon.

[@fyorbane]

@@bkjeong4302 Hindsight is a wonderful thing. At the time she was a major threat to shipping in the Arctic.

[@bkjeong4302]

Boz She never was: the British just assumed she was that much of a threat, which ironically allowed the Germans to use her as a distraction.

[@mikeprzyrembel6308]

Wrong about 9 squadron, they also used Tallboys. Normal loads were of no use due to the deck armour.

[@zoit303]

Armour plates from Tirpitz are still being used as cowers for road repairs in Norway. If you find yourself walking over a huge steel plate in Oslo or another Norwegian city, it’s most likely a part of the Tirpitz.

[@ryanfrederick3376]

The Kriegsmarine surface fleet, or "How to waste massive amounts of steel and oil while achieving almost nothing."

[@Ricky40369]

I couldn't agree with you more.

[@coldsteel.and.courage]

That's how it worked out yes, but the philosophy behind building it was sound. Unfortunately for Germany war was forced about 10 years before they really wanted it.

[@Jerinx90]

Nothing ?

[@abdulhameedal-sikafi8944]

Lol nothing? Look at the allies throwing bombs for nothing, it is so funny that one battleship gave them a headache that lasted for a few years before the ship was sank. Kinda served its purpose.

[@artrandy]

@@coldsteel.and.courage Yeah, Poland invaded..........

[@dave3682]

Great video as always, mate! A minor correction... Tirpitz's final loadout of 20mm guns was 78 (18x4, 6x1). Also, if Tirpitz was firing her main guns against aircraft during the final attacks wouldn't that also count as firing her main battery in anger? Meaning that Spitzbergen wasn't the only time she did so. Also, as long as we're on the subject of giving guns that were never intended to shoot at aircraft AA guns... her 15cm guns were also given special AA shells as well. So during the final few attacks on Tirpitz, she was using literally every gun on board against her attackers, pretty gnarly!

[@billyponsonby]

At 14:21 when hits are scored plus a near miss falls on land left of picture. The crater this made along with at least one other submerged crater can still be seen on Google Earth 69°38'51"N 18°48'11"E · 8.23 ft or Google maps JRX3+9G Tromsø, Norway 🇳🇴

[@richardvernon317]

I actually met one of the guys who bombed this ship in 1942 as part of the crew of a Halifax. His name was Vic Stevens and he was the Flight Engineer. The aircraft was very badly damaged during the attack and had to make a crash landing on a frozen lake in Norway which resulted in him suffering a injury to one of his legs. The rest of the crew got out uninjured, and the aircraft broke through the ice and sank. After managing to evade capture at the crash site the crew started to walk to Sweden after splitting up into two groups, getting food and shelter from the Norwegians homes on route, however Vic's injury stopped him from being able to up with the rest of his group. After dumping him with some Norwegians who delayed handing him over to the Norwegian police giving the other two somewhat of a head start on their walk to Sweden. The Police then delayed handing him over to the Germans until it was likely that the two member of his group had actually made it across the boarder. After having his injury tended to by the Luftwaffe, he was shipped off to Stalag Luft III. The Halifax wreck was found and raised in 1973 and returned to the UK, where it was put on display in the RAF Museum's Bomber Command Hall in 1983. Vic at this point had retired from his job with British Aerospace and he started doing lectures about the raid and his life in the prison camp, where his was involved in a small part in the Great Escape. The most amazing part of his talk was the photograph collection he had taken within the camp during his stay. When I asked him where did you get all the kit to take all of these photos, his reply was "From the Germans!!"

[@robertf3479]

Very informative sir. You included tidbits of information that I had not known previously including the summary at the end of the overall numbers of aircraft flights of all types. Also did not know about the 'dud' Tallboy or the total extent of damage caused by the midships hit and detonation in what I surmise was engine or boiler compartments. Again, Bravo Zulu. Well done!

[@bcluett1697]

so is a "tallboy" the bomb type that he says broke mach and came straight through Tirpitz?

[@robertf3479]

@@bcluett1697 Yes, the Tallboy and its 'big brother' GrandSlam were designed to exceed Mach 1. They had a sleek 'teardrop' shape for exactly that and offset tail fins that would impart a stabilizing spin on the bomb as it dropped so it was capable of incredible accuracy. The Brits found the bombs needed that 'spin stabilization' as making the transition from subsonic to supersonic airspeed could cause the bomb to 'tumble' and ruin any real accuracy.

[@bcluett1697]

@@robertf3479 Thanks for the reply, I think I can recall reading something about that from years ago.

[@ethercruiser1537]

Great comprehensive review!

[@SephirothRyu]

Fun fact, German turrets followed this naming convention: Anton. Berta. Caesar. Dora. For these ships at least (most importantly for the Bismark and Tirpitz).

[@patfontaine5917]

Turret ‘B’ was BRUNO, not Berta.

[@yves-noel-mariegonnet1043]

L'incarnation du MAL et cependant une merveille technologique! Hommage et tristesse pour TOUS les morts de TOUTES les guerres! Merci!

[@johnfisher9692]

As always a great video I have previously read that the major reason Tirpitz was so hard to sink was overcoming the advantages of her berth. Narrow twisting fjords combined with heavy nets made torpedoes impossible to use and made dive bombing very tricky and dangerous for the pilots. Add in heavy fighter cover close by, massive shore based AA and shore controlled smoke screen generators, as you pointed out, made getting hits on the ship difficult at best. All these details are too often overlooked by people crowing about "German BB toughness" It seems the US navy had an easier time sinking the two Yamato's at they were at sea where aircraft could get at them easily.

[@dave3682]

I mean, Tirpitz was still a helluva tough but to crack, regardless. Not many other battleships would have fared so well against the damage done by the X-craft and still managed to stay afloat. Being hit by tallboy bombs (and surviving the first round) is no small feat either. Was Tirpitz invincible? No, obviously not. But was her reputation for being tough undeserved? Definitely not. Further, air strikes at sea are not always guaranteed death sentences for battleships either. Tirpitz herself was attacked by carrier-launched torpedo bombers at sea... managed to shoot down 1/4 of her attackers and also evaded all torpedoes (operation Sportpalast).

[@bkjeong4302]

Dave In the case of Kriegsmarine battleships they do have a glass cannon tendency due to bad armour design (which is more an indication of Germany being forced to play catch-up rather than of human stupidity, IMO). But I would argue that despite this huge problem, the four capital ships of the Kriegsmarine, although still a massive waste of resources, were still not as big a waste of resources as their better-designed contemporaries in other nations. Why? Because out of the battleship fleets in WWII, they caused the most damage to the enemy (mostly indirectly) through paranoia.

[@dave3682]

@@bkjeong4302 Care to elaborate specifically on what you mean by bad armor design?

[@bkjeong4302]

Dave WWI-era battleships had armour that was relatively thinly distributed around the entire ship and was mostly located on the sides of the ship, with a low citadel. But later battleships (including all non-German WWII-era battleships) would use all-or-nothing armour schemes that would a) concentrate armour over vital areas, b) increase the height of the citadel so the wiring and such can fit inside, and c) have thicker deck armour. Germany was not allowed to build any battleships after WWI, so they lost all of their battleship design capabilities. So when the Kriegsmarine was building what would become the four Kriegsmarine capital ships, they had no choice but to stick to the outdated WWI-era armor scheme even if they had made big improvements elsewhere. This resulted in the ships having their communications systems outside the citadel, as well as relatively thin turret and deck armour (the former ended up being a huge problem for Bismarck). This isn’t such a problem against WWI vintage battleships, which were also using now-outdated armour layouts, but against their contemporaries the Bismarcks were glass cannons; perfectly able to dish out serious damage or chase down an enemy vessel, but relatively easily disabled. Something like Iowa or Yamato (both of which have all-or-nothing armour designs) would be able to hold up much better in a prolonged slugging match.

[@dave3682]

@@bkjeong4302 A common misconception. A lot of people believe the Germans chose the Incremental armor scheme over the newer all or nothing armor scheme because of the lack of battleship shipbuilding in the interwar period. This is not true. Germany was well aware of the concept of the all or nothing scheme and gave a strong look at using it. However, ultimately the Germans made the choice to stick to the old incremental armor scheme. Their reason for doing so? To put it very briefly... the combat ranges at which the ships were expected to fight at. The Germans believed (and would ultimately be proven correct) that effective naval combat in the conditions of the North Atlantic (where the ships were intended to be deployed) would be impossible beyond 25km. This meant that any German battleships had to have an emphasis on medium-close-range armor. The All or Nothing scheme falls short in this regard as compared to the older incremental armor scheme. You do not need to have a super thick deck if enemy shells will never come in at a steep enough angle to penetrate it anyway. Therefore, you only need to have deck armor thick enough to resist shallow flying artillery shells and known enemy armor-piercing bombs. What you do need, is oodles of armor layers protecting the sides of the ship. I mean, to get to the Tirpitz's magazines through the belt armor a shell would have to pass through a 315mm armor belt, the 120mm deck slopes, a 45mm torpedo bulkhead and a further 57mm magazine bulkhead wall... all that adding up to the equivalent of some 700mm of armor. None of Tirpitz's contemporaries (North Carolina, KGV, Richelieu) had anywhere near that much side armor. Ultimately the German battleships were designed so that their citadel would be protected from battleship calibre weapons between the ranges of 10 and 20 kilometers and the rest of the ship would be protected against cruiser calibre shells at the same ranges. Ultimately history would prove the Germans correct in their prediction of the ranges at which naval battles would be fought. Even in the Pacific theatre artillery combat was not fought beyond 30km like the allies (especially the Americans) had predicted, trained for, and ultimately designed their ships around. As for the turret armor, yes, it should have been thicker but the Germans only armored them enough to resist the 15" shells of the Richelieu class which ultimately ended up having more powerful guns than the German expected them to have. Anyways I digress. Point is the Germans knew of the all or nothing scheme, considered it, but in the end decided that the incremental armor scheme was superior to the all or nothing scheme when it came to what the battleships were intended for.

[@Norman92151]

A testament to the total asseninity of war.

[@spetsnatzlegion3366]

It’s like the RAF took a machine gun loaded with bombers and combined with a few magazines of mini subs, pelted the Tirpitz with everything they had until it finally sank.

[@Lord_Foxy13]

17 more ships/classes till the Royal Canadian Navy gets a lil love :)

[@artificernathaniel3287]

Precision bombing, developed to hit smol targets, not cause less casualties

[@gadac94]

Just found your channel. It's all I ever needed. Thanks !

[@gings4ever]

and then you can hear a certain aircraft carrier go "did someone say... OPERATION TUNGSTEN?!"

[@leroyholm9075]

Just the Best!

[@StoryboardMindset]

Can you please add HMS Nabob to the list of ships to cover? Great video as always.

[@TheMasterHackUS]

Not a Tirpitz question per se, but about salvaged warships. Are the remains of any of the sailors ever recovered in these operations? If so what are the protocols or actions that take place? In an instance as the Tirpitz, were any remains identified and given military honors?

[@1Korlash]

Even though they had some of the worst battleship designs of WW2's great navies, I have to admit that in terms of their impact on the war, the Germans probably got more bang for their buck out of their battlewagons than any other navy. Scharnhorst and Gneisenau bagged a carrier and did some successful commerce raiding. Bismarck traded itself for another capital ship. Tirpitz never engaged a worthy foe, but her presence in Norway as a fleet-in-being indirectly contributed to the destruction of convoy PQ-17 and diverted a significant number of Allied escorts and bombers away from other, arguably more useful duties. Of course, none of this ultimately made Germany's battleship fleet worth their cost in money, resources, and manpower, but that's true for every nation's battleship fleet, not just Germany's. And while some other battleship fleets accomplished more overall, they also had a *lot* more invested into them. But in terms of a pure (and completely retrospective) cost-benefit analysis of their impact on the war, I think the German battlewagons win out. At the very least, they beat out the Italian and Japanese battleships in this regard. Please keep making naval history fun!

[@bkjeong4302]

1Korlash Agreed. Despite being horrible glass cannons, the four German BBs got more done than contemporary Japanese, American, Italian, French, and British BBs. While they are nowhere near the best BBs ever in terms of design, in terms of how much damage they actually did, they have to rank at or near the top. In fact, I would wager that the whole hype around Bismarck is mostly due to the fact she actually sank something her own size, which is far more than Iowa or Yamato (two more powerful and much better-designed ships) ever achieved. Those two are technologically superior by a huge amount, but have no comparable feats to back up their reputation. That said, more U-boats would still be a better idea. The cruisers by themselves may have been a good fleet-in-being.

[@SAarumDoK]

@@bkjeong4302 I don't get it why you are comparing Iowa and Yamato to Bismarck. Bismarck is clearly out of the debate here as far as the 2 later are concerned.

[@bkjeong4302]

S'Aarum ...you missed the point. We are not talking about design, we are talking about what the ships achieved. The point is that Bismarck is a badly designed BB that actually got something done (if only via luck), while the other two are far better designs but never even got to fire at a worthy target. Thus the Germans got a better deal out of their BB in the end than the Americans or the Japanese despite having a far less powerful or durable vessel. Not that ANY battleship was worth her costs in the 1930s/40s, but still, a badly designed ship that does have one achievement is better than two well-designed ships that do nothing of note.

[@greenfingernaildirt356]

@@bkjeong4302 Please elaborate on your point of Bismarck being a "glass cannon". You ever read about her sinking? The ship took around 700 she'll hits and 16 torpedo and still was only sinking slowly which was accelerated by the scuttling. I bet Bismarck is tougher than any North Carolina and South Dakota class. Only in the Atlantic though where the engagements tend to be in closer range in which Bismarck Turtleneck works wonders.

[@greenfingernaildirt356]

@@bkjeong4302 Bismarck may not win a fight with Iowa or Tomato but dammit she would've given either a run for their money...

[@SephirothRyu]

In the end, I have to give it to the Lancaster. You go, Lancaster.

[@peterthooft3823]

I thought it was pronounced Tear-pitz cause you cry every time someone pronounces it Ter-pitz.

[@vkkoorchester666]

it's mor like Ter-pitz, otherwise it would have been Tihrpitz to be pronounced like Tear-pitz

[@RayyMusik]

It‘s a German i, pronounced roughly like the English ea in tear, but shorter.

[@timgosling6189]

I think 'broken up' would be a better description of her fate than 'salvaged'. One piece of bulkhead was 'salvaged' by 617 Sqn and became the subject of multiple thefts and re-acquisitions as 617 and 9 Sqn argued over who really sank her.