manicmartyr (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

Funny that some antiquated biplanes would doom the mighty Bismarck.

misterpeaky (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

Fuck you too!

robinhood48 (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

Did anybody ask you, asshole?

misterpeaky (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

FUCK GERMANY!

jers59 (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

The Courageous was sunk by sub in 1939. It was her sister ship Glourious and 2 destroyers that was sunk by scharnhorst. One destroyer the Acasta manage to torpedo the scharnhorst before it sank, then why being escorted to drydock by her sister ship gneisenaue that BC was torpedo by british sub, putting 2 modern german BC out of action for the loss of one overage carrier and 2 destroyers not great victory

ravilob246 (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

Siempre los britanicos pelean dos o mas contra uno,sigan todos los conflictos y se daran cuenta,como hienas son traicioneros.

Froobner (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

naval warfare isnt as intense as ww2 anymore its all about long range missles and air craft carrier...

robinhood48 (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

Just read again:"...would have become a `Fleet in being`as it was the lonely queen of the north.". Clear?

desert3fox (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

The lonely queen of the north was not the Bismarck, it was its sister ship Tirpitz ho was "named" the lonley queen of the north.

robinhood48 (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

Maybe Lindemann tried to avoid a direct hit into bow due to 400 ts water in it after hit from POW. The risk was to loose two further boilers reducing speed below 24 kn. Anyway in stern B had another 300 ts (my estimation). What Lindemann should have done was to order rudder midship before estimated hit of torp. But with rudder 15 degree port side B could not be steered by propellers.