[ Post a Response | The SteelNavy.Com Message Board ]
Posted by George Elder on November 3, 2018, 19:40:15, in reply to "Re: Oh, and...
rah...Should I disparage the British over the fate or the Glorious or Royal Oak or Barham or Courageous or Ark Royal or Eagle or Galatea or Edinburgh or South Hampton or... Oh, you get the idea. Those people you claimed were failed certainly succeeded in laying a lick on the Royal Navy in practice. At times, they displayed excellent gunnery, tactics, etc., at least enough to give as well as to take. It was a close fought thing and to disparage one side or the other seems pointless. It does no credit to those who served and died...however dubious or good their cause might have been. I just don't get the need to do that, but to each her/his own.
there is theory and practice and Germany failed miserably with the practice! radar, gunnery, tactics and politics!
S and G were faced with RENOWN and R CLASS separately and ran! Hipper and Scheer faced very inferior forces and failed miserably
The Italians were no better! vastly superior Litorrio vs QE class RUN!
and now the biggie BISMARCK, her gunnery against HOOD was brilliant but later with just hull damage it was RUBBISH to be polite! or was it, and all the damage was caused by the PRINZ EUGEN??? and Bismarck was rubbish all the time?
And how do you explain then with all this progress that German ships were repeatedly surprised by British ships? E.g. Hipper and Scharnhorst? And that their shooting at night was not impressive at all? Was that before these radars were developed? Or where they not sufficient to direct guns (as you indicate with "close to").
And that they were surprised is even more interesting because of the focus on radar detectors. Such detectors were used also early in the war, e.g. Bismarck misinterpreted her detection of British radars with being still detected by them and therefore made that long radio message.
SteelNavy.Com Home Page