Charges to scuttle a ship

Discussions on the equipment used by the Axis forces, apart from the things covered in the other sections. Hosted by Juha Tompuri
User avatar
Andy H
Forum Staff
Posts: 15095
Joined: 12 Mar 2002 20:51
Location: UK and USA

Charges to scuttle a ship

Post by Andy H » 28 Feb 2003 01:40

there are several threads doing the rounds on several boards regarding the Bismarcks sinking-Be it by the RN or the ship being scuttled by the crew.

I'm yet to be convinced by the latter since at present I've seen no evidence to support that theory, rather that since they couldn't find a torpedo hole within the Torpedo B/H (Yes they found 1 hit out of the three confirmed hits) they thought it was proven by disproving the the other and not going beyond that.

To try and understand this, what actually are the charges used for scuttling a ship like the Bismarck-Weight of charge, placement of charge and what physical evidence is left to say-Yes that ship shows signs of being scuttled?

Andy

User avatar
admfisher
Member
Posts: 645
Joined: 30 Mar 2002 01:38
Location: Toronto

scuttled or not

Post by admfisher » 28 Feb 2003 06:22

Many charges are placed at the sea cocks and any other areas that would allow a quick influx of water. Say the propeller shaft seals, this is what doomed the POW.

Bismarck was most likely scuttled, but the RN argues that the bulkheads were not all shown and the ones that were show showed signs of buckling in places.

Either way the ship was going down slowly then suddenly she dived under in just a few minutes this points to a massive influx of water that was not previously making it's way into the ship.
Draw your own conclusions.

admfisher

User avatar
Xavier
Financial supporter
Posts: 3242
Joined: 12 Nov 2002 02:01
Location: Swedish guinea

according to

Post by Xavier » 01 Mar 2003 01:27

according to the documentary on the Bismark (disc. channel) only about 7 shells (out of some 4000, yes four thousand) penetrated the armor belt....
below waterline it would have been more difficult, due to sea surface slowing shells a little. superstructure (captains bridge) was blown on one of the side, the other was prisitne.

as in the previous post, make your own conclusions, this will be a never ending debate.

xavier

User avatar
admfisher
Member
Posts: 645
Joined: 30 Mar 2002 01:38
Location: Toronto

Bismarck

Post by admfisher » 01 Mar 2003 13:43

Yes the documentry showed only seven hits had penatrated the side belt.

But in the finall battle KGV sat further from Bismarck to get the plunging fire effects, and Rodney fire at Bismarck till she was at the 3000 yard mark.

All of the main ships were rolling around so the hits on the belt don't really surprise me.

admfisher

varjag
Financial supporter
Posts: 4431
Joined: 01 May 2002 01:44
Location: Australia

Post by varjag » 03 Mar 2003 13:17

Scuttling charges on 'any' ship are usually located on the ribs between steam/engine rooms, above 'deep-tanks' in cargo-holds and in 'the church' where propeller-shaft joins the ocean - to achieve the speediest demise of the ship. With a warship - I do not intimately know but from experience assume that deep joints between boilers/engines/electrical generation that would achieve rapid flooding - would be the obvious 'targets' to render any salvage difficult and an eventual sinking most certain.

User avatar
admfisher
Member
Posts: 645
Joined: 30 Mar 2002 01:38
Location: Toronto

Graf Spee

Post by admfisher » 04 Mar 2003 14:40

The charges set on the Graf Spee were to sink the ship, and most important, break the ship up.
When she scuttled in shallow water the idea was to sink and break up the ship.
So in scuttling there is no set way, it usually depends on the job you wanted done. The Graf Spee stayed in place for four years, her fires lasted for three to four days as well.

User avatar
Andy H
Forum Staff
Posts: 15095
Joined: 12 Mar 2002 20:51
Location: UK and USA

Post by Andy H » 05 Mar 2003 02:32

Thank you for the responses, much appreciated, still not convinced the B was scuttled.

Andy

User avatar
admfisher
Member
Posts: 645
Joined: 30 Mar 2002 01:38
Location: Toronto

Scuttled or not

Post by admfisher » 05 Mar 2003 15:31

If you are not convinced then it is up to you to find the truth on your own. I am friends with one of the people who went on the dive and he was even lucky enough to go down for one dive himself.

What exactly is it that makes you think that the RN sunk the Bismarck with torpedoes?

amfisher
:)

Return to “Other Equipment”