Quote:
|
Originally Posted by sparten
I don't doubt that. However the fact that the Nelsons were built under Treaty limits caused several design compromises which severely affected her performance. Not being able to fire dead on is a very big disadvantage.
|
Overall the Nelsons weren't perfect but when compaired to their closest counterparts of the day they faired well. Flaws can be found in any warship. When dealing with the Washington Treaty ships one has to balance out the desired atributes, dispite cheating on the treaty the Bismarcks had their own serious flaws.
Again the brits closed on the Bismarck which resulted in the straight trajectory of the shells, which did little against the low belt of Bismarck, most shells striking the portion above the belt. The killer for Bismarck was that this low belt meant a greater risk of progressive flooding. That and the fact that the main guns were taken out rather quickly meant she was doomed early, the controversial scuttling issue is a moot point in my veiw, even if she wasn't scuttled she would have sunk eventually due to the level of damage she recieved.
She had no guns no, command structure and damage control was pointless with two virtually unscathed BB's and their escorts circling like sharks.