they suck and so do their fans

  • ultraviolet [she/her]
    ·
    3 years ago

    If you compare Bismarck to similar battleships from its era on paper, it doesn't have anything that's remarkably better:

    (name, displacement, main guns, top speed, main belt armor, turret armor)

    Bismarck Class: 41,000 tons standard, eight 15 inch guns, 30 knots, 320 mm main belt, 360 mm turret

    Littorio Class: 41,000 tons standard, nine 15 inch guns, 30 knots, 280 mm main belt, 380 mm turret

    North Carolina Class 37,000 tons standard, nine 16 inch guns, 28 knots, 305 mm main belt, 406 mm turret

    Richelieu Class: 37,000 tons standard, eight 15 inch guns, 32 knots, 320 mm main belt, 430 mm turret

    King George V Class: 37,000 tons, ten 14 inch guns, 28 knots, 380 mm main belt, 320 mm turret

    • dinklesplein [any, he/him]
      hexagon
      ·
      edit-2
      3 years ago

      Will add some technical details here:

      380mm/45 Calibre mle 1935 Point Blank Penetration (Richelieu): 701 mm

      38cm SKC/34 Point Blank Penetration (Bismarck): 510mm

      APC mle 36 Bursting Charge: 21.9 kg

      APC L/4,4 Bursting Charge: 18,8

      Even in comparison with similar calibre weapons systems, Bismarck's main guns were deficient and built based off of WWI era tech. Richelieu's maligned dispersion issues were a flaw that would have been fixed if France hadn't surrendered, and post-war demonstrates that the Quad-gun system became quite accurate and potent when matured. Very underrated design.

      • ultraviolet [she/her]
        ·
        3 years ago

        Thanks for the info. I always heard the thing where "Bismarck is just a really oversized Bayern" but I didn't know it was that bad lmao.

    • Diogenes_Barrel [love/loves]
      ·
      3 years ago

      im no navy guy but of these, Richeliu (good god is that fr*nch?) is the best on paper? lighter but big turrets and same size guns?

      • ultraviolet [she/her]
        ·
        3 years ago

        You could argue it was theoretically the best. Richelieu put all its guns in the front which allowed the armored citadel to be shorter which meant either a faster ship for the same armor or a more heavily armored ship for the same speed. You don't lose too much because the rear turrets are not as important as the forward turrets in a battle line. (And in Richelieu's case, it was the fastest ship of its day so it also had the initiative of choosing its battles)

        The British Nelson class (which were built in the 1920s) also did the "put all guns in the front" but they had issues with gun blast causing damage to the deck and interfering with each other because the turrets were placed too close together.

        • Diogenes_Barrel [love/loves]
          ·
          3 years ago

          i maintain its cringe to name something after richelieu but that's an impressive boat. of course making the nicest battleship was ultimately completely pointless but nevertheless

            • Diogenes_Barrel [love/loves]
              ·
              3 years ago

              Pirate and the Hammer of the Prots

              Based Battleship Names

              spoiler

              (i know i just said Riche was cringe, christian sectarianism is fun in either direction)

          • ultraviolet [she/her]
            ·
            3 years ago

            It is a French boat so :france-cool: Richelieu was probably the most well balanced battleship of WW2 but Yamato takes home the prize of big gun boat becoming obsolete by the end of the war