HMS Hood, a British battleship, was the pride of the Navy. It had been launched in 1918 and had seen no combat but had sailed around to British colonies showing the flag for twenty years, a public icon. She was old but powerful and efficient and carried a symbolic charge. The Hood's chief weakness was her deck armor. There was plenty of steel around her hull, useful in containing damage from torpedoes or flat fire. But over the years naval weaponry had evolved.
Unlike the pirate ships of the movies, ships no longer had to be close to each other to do damage. Shells could be fired from miles away. This took the shells into a high trajectory so when they reached the target they were coming down at an extreme angle. This was called "plunging fire" and made the decks vulnerable. Realizing this, the British halted the Hood's construction midway and armored the forward part of her deck. The armor wasn't extended aft for fear of cutting down the ship's speed with the extra weight.
The German battleship, KMS Bismark, was newer, launched in 1939, and was the most powerful warship afloat at the time, along with her sister ship, Tirpitz. But the Bismark was more than just an instrument of war. It was beautiful in its lines and overall design. Bismark looked as if she had been built by an architect who happened also to be an engineer. She carried eight 15-inch guns that fired a shell weighing nearly half a ton at almost twice the speed of sound. She also had superior optical instruments and fire control.
Bismark slipped out of port and into the north Atlantic, a major threat to the convoys from North America that were quite literally Britain's lifeline. Bismark and the heavy cruiser, Prince Eugen, were spotted and pursued by Hood and the new, untried battleship, Prince of Wales. Hood's Captain Holland knew about the problem with his weak deck armor and, finally catching up to the enemy, proceeded at flank speed to close the range and avoid plunging fire.
But now the problem was that since Hood and Prince of Wales were heading directly for the target, only their forward guns could be used, while Bismark was able to fire broadsides with all of her guns. This and other details were omitted from the popular British feature film, "Sink the Bismark." Holland had almost reached the point at which he was safe enough from plunging fire to turn broadside and engage all of his guns, but he began the turn a few seconds too late.
The Bismark fired a salvo that had to travel about ten miles and did so in only thirty seconds. One of the shells apparently struck the underarmored rear deck covering the magazines. The Hood blew up with a tremendous explosion, began to sink immediately, and took almost all her crew with her. There were three survivors, only one now left alive, Ted Briggs.
It's an epic story, filled with tragedy and eventual triumph. It's periodically interrupted by one of those "discovery" expeditions that the Titanic was subjected to a few years ago. I suppose if you're an experienced oceanographer you know what you're looking at and are thrilled by it. To at least one viewer, namely me, they all look pretty much the same, like some moss-hung haunted mansion in Louisiana after it has been blitzed by the Civil War.
The first half of the film is mostly narrated historical newsreel and combat footage. There are reenactors and some workable visual effects. The last twenty minutes are touching but a little out of synch with the story itself. The expensive project was funded by Britain's Channel 4. It's not bad.
Unlike the pirate ships of the movies, ships no longer had to be close to each other to do damage. Shells could be fired from miles away. This took the shells into a high trajectory so when they reached the target they were coming down at an extreme angle. This was called "plunging fire" and made the decks vulnerable. Realizing this, the British halted the Hood's construction midway and armored the forward part of her deck. The armor wasn't extended aft for fear of cutting down the ship's speed with the extra weight.
The German battleship, KMS Bismark, was newer, launched in 1939, and was the most powerful warship afloat at the time, along with her sister ship, Tirpitz. But the Bismark was more than just an instrument of war. It was beautiful in its lines and overall design. Bismark looked as if she had been built by an architect who happened also to be an engineer. She carried eight 15-inch guns that fired a shell weighing nearly half a ton at almost twice the speed of sound. She also had superior optical instruments and fire control.
Bismark slipped out of port and into the north Atlantic, a major threat to the convoys from North America that were quite literally Britain's lifeline. Bismark and the heavy cruiser, Prince Eugen, were spotted and pursued by Hood and the new, untried battleship, Prince of Wales. Hood's Captain Holland knew about the problem with his weak deck armor and, finally catching up to the enemy, proceeded at flank speed to close the range and avoid plunging fire.
But now the problem was that since Hood and Prince of Wales were heading directly for the target, only their forward guns could be used, while Bismark was able to fire broadsides with all of her guns. This and other details were omitted from the popular British feature film, "Sink the Bismark." Holland had almost reached the point at which he was safe enough from plunging fire to turn broadside and engage all of his guns, but he began the turn a few seconds too late.
The Bismark fired a salvo that had to travel about ten miles and did so in only thirty seconds. One of the shells apparently struck the underarmored rear deck covering the magazines. The Hood blew up with a tremendous explosion, began to sink immediately, and took almost all her crew with her. There were three survivors, only one now left alive, Ted Briggs.
It's an epic story, filled with tragedy and eventual triumph. It's periodically interrupted by one of those "discovery" expeditions that the Titanic was subjected to a few years ago. I suppose if you're an experienced oceanographer you know what you're looking at and are thrilled by it. To at least one viewer, namely me, they all look pretty much the same, like some moss-hung haunted mansion in Louisiana after it has been blitzed by the Civil War.
The first half of the film is mostly narrated historical newsreel and combat footage. There are reenactors and some workable visual effects. The last twenty minutes are touching but a little out of synch with the story itself. The expensive project was funded by Britain's Channel 4. It's not bad.
