Bismarck???

[djcyclone]

Not to get too much into the Battleships again, but I thought I would throw this out there to see where you guys stand.

I was at work today and I was discussing the game fighting steal with a co worker. I have not played the game, but he owns it. Anyway we got to talking about the Bismarck, and he mentioned something vary interesting. He indicated that had he been in command of the Bismarck, he would have ordered the crew to cut the rudder off.

He then would have used the screws to navigate the ship. A bunch of questions come up when I think of this.

Did the crew have the equipment to remove the rudder?
Did they have enough time to complete this operation?
Could the Bismarck have made it home under the circumstances?
If the Bismarck was forced to fight anyway, would they have been more able to fight without driving hoplessly in circles?
How long would the Bismarck have been out of service if this had happened, and she had survivied?

[old_pop2000]

Not to get too much into the Battleships again, but I thought I would throw this out there to see where you guys stand.

I was at work today and I was discussing the game fighting steal with a co worker. I have not played the game, but he owns it. Anyway we got to talking about the Bismarck, and he mentioned something vary interesting. He indicated that had he been in command of the Bismarck, he would have ordered the crew to cut the rudder off.

He then would have used the screws to navigate the ship. A bunch of questions come up when I think of this.

Did the crew have the equipment to remove the rudder?
Did they have enough time to complete this operation?
Could the Bismarck have made it home under the circumstances?
If the Bismarck was forced to fight anyway, would they have been more able to fight without driving hoplessly in circles?
How long would the Bismarck have been out of service if this had happened, and she had survivied?

Well first, it has been determined that part of the stern actually collapsed onto the rudders and therefore would have had to be cut away. Now to your questions:

1. Even if the weather was good enough and it was certainly not since this was the North Atlantic, the crew did not have the equipment or materials necessary to effect repairs. Explosives were considered, had the weather been good enough. But it required the divers to go over the side and inspect the damage to determine feasibility of such an attempt. In the opinion of most naval architects, the damage was too extensive for that. It would have collapsed the stern, she would have flooded and settled by the stern.

2. Time wasn't the issue, it was weather and materials on board.

3. No, not under her own power, a tug woud have to be sent out to tow her to Brest, it was considered, but there was not enough time before the British RN arrived. She was too far out from France for the Luftwaffe to protect her, so this was not really an option.

4. Problematic? While on sea trials in the Baltic, it was found that they could not steer the ship effectively with just the engines.

5. Probably a minimum of a year. The problem for Bismarck is that she would have to go to ST. Nazaire into the Normandie dock and who knows how long the German's would have taken to effect temporary repairs to enable her to sail home. The British RAF bomber command would have made her a bomb sponge by the time the Germans could have accomplished it. She would have been a sitting duck in the Normandie Dock.

Link to drawings and pictures of the stern and rudder assembly of Bismarck.

http://www.bismarck-class.dk/technicallayout/rudders_propellers/rudders_propellers.html

Hope that answers your questions a little.

[djcyclone]

Another thing this guy brought up was the issue of how long the Bismarck took to return fire. I have not heard this version of the story until now.

Aparently the commanding Admiral waited for some unknown reason to return fire. The Captain finally overruled the Admiral and ordered the Bismarck to return fire, but by then it was already too late.

This is the first I have heard of this, but I suppose it could be true. I have no doubt that the Bismarck would lose no matter what, but I wonder if they could have inflicted more damage to the attacking ships if they had fired earlier.

That is if this thing is true at all.

[old_pop2000]

Another thing this guy brought up was the issue of how long the Bismarck took to return fire. I have not heard this version of the story until now.

Aparently the commanding Admiral waited for some unknown reason to return fire. The Captain finally overruled the Admiral and ordered the Bismarck to return fire, but by then it was already too late.

This is the first I have heard of this, but I suppose it could be true. I have no doubt that the Bismarck would lose no matter what, but I wonder if they could have inflicted more damage to the attacking ships if they had fired earlier.

That is if this thing is true at all.
I believe that this is true, Captain Lindemann was not going to have his ship shot out from under him, without returning fire.

[Warship NWS]

Admiral Lutjens was not a typical tactical commander so in two battles he hesitated for about 3-3.5 minutes each.. once when operating the S&G and he encountered the Renown and when the Bismarck/PE engaged the Hood and PoW.

[Ed Rotondaro]

Another thing this guy brought up was the issue of how long the Bismarck took to return fire. I have not heard this version of the story until now.

Aparently the commanding Admiral waited for some unknown reason to return fire. The Captain finally overruled the Admiral and ordered the Bismarck to return fire, but by then it was already too late.

This is the first I have heard of this, but I suppose it could be true. I have no doubt that the Bismarck would lose no matter what, but I wonder if they could have inflicted more damage to the attacking ships if they had fired earlier.

That is if this thing is true at all.

DJ:

Besides the rudder problem, the Bismarck got her main fire control destroyed at the very start of the battle by I believe HMS Rodney. While her aft fire control was still functional, in just about every capital ship engagement that I have studied, once the main FC is out, the ship is at a severe disadvantage, especially in long range combat because the aft FC is not at the elevation that the main FC is. About the only capital ship engagement in WWII where a battleship lost her main FC and survived was the Second Naval battle of Guadalcanal in November 1942 when the USS South Dakota had hers knocked out by a combination of electrical failure and shellfire. In her case she was fortunate that the USS Washington was in position to clobber the Kirishima and save the day.

[Ed Rotondaro]

Not to get too much into the Battleships again, but I thought I would throw this out there to see where you guys stand.

I was at work today and I was discussing the game fighting steal with a co worker. I have not played the game, but he owns it. Anyway we got to talking about the Bismarck, and he mentioned something vary interesting. He indicated that had he been in command of the Bismarck, he would have ordered the crew to cut the rudder off.

He then would have used the screws to navigate the ship. A bunch of questions come up when I think of this.

Did the crew have the equipment to remove the rudder?
Did they have enough time to complete this operation?
Could the Bismarck have made it home under the circumstances?
If the Bismarck was forced to fight anyway, would they have been more able to fight without driving hoplessly in circles?
How long would the Bismarck have been out of service if this had happened, and she had survivied?

DJ:

Best case for Bismarck would have been for the Prinz Eugen to tow her to port, but Admiral Lutjens didn't want to sacrifice two ships. Even then I'm not sure they could have made Brest before being intercepted.

[old_pop2000]

DJ:

Best case for Bismarck would have been for the Prinz Eugen to tow her to port, but Admiral Lutjens didn't want to sacrifice two ships. Even then I'm not sure they could have made Brest before being intercepted.

Ed:
PE had left the Bismarck on the 24th, heading into the Atlantic while Bismarck was forced to head to Brest after damage from the Battle of the Denmark Straits. She was not in position to tow or assist Bismarck.

[Kyle Holgate]

DJ:

Besides the rudder problem, the Bismarck got her main fire control destroyed at the very start of the battle by I believe HMS Rodney. While her aft fire control was still functional, in just about every capital ship engagement that I have studied, once the main FC is out, the ship is at a severe disadvantage, especially in long range combat because the aft FC is not at the elevation that the main FC is. About the only capital ship engagement in WWII where a battleship lost her main FC and survived was the Second Naval battle of Guadalcanal in November 1942 when the USS South Dakota had hers knocked out by a combination of electrical failure and shellfire. In her case she was fortunate that the USS Washington was in position to clobber the Kirishima and save the day.

I think it was one of the cruisers that KO'd the fire control early, I'd have to check my AAR in Garzke's battleships book to be sure. The Rodney KO'd two turrets with one hit though, I still wonder what exactlyt that round hit - it seems like for an (I assume) AP round it had a huge explosion.

As for Lutjens, I don't remember the specific names of his predicessors but I believe there were two that were both fired for taking too many risks with their ships. Lutjens evidently decided not to follow them into retirement and instead went to the bottom :rolleyes:.

I have wargamed the battle between the twins and Renown (or was it Repulse - I forget right now) MANY times and have almost always managed to destroy or badly damage the British ship with minimal or moderate damage to one or both of the twins. Maybe Lutjens wanted to play fair and give the Brits some advantage as it was two ships to one, after all :rolleyes: (again). 2-3 minutes firing could make all the difference there - I have never tried not firing for 3 minutes to see if the twins can still pull it off.

[Mike Malanaphy]

I think it was one of the cruisers that KO'd the fire control early, I'd have to check my AAR in Garzke's battleships book to be sure. The Rodney KO'd two turrets with one hit though, I still wonder what exactlyt that round hit - it seems like for an (I assume) AP round it had a huge explosion.

As for Lutjens, I don't remember the specific names of his predicessors but I believe there were two that were both fired for taking too many risks with their ships. Lutjens evidently decided not to follow them into retirement and instead went to the bottom :rolleyes:.

I have wargamed the battle between the twins and Renown (or was it Repulse - I forget right now) MANY times and have almost always managed to destroy or badly damage the British ship with minimal or moderate damage to one or both of the twins. Maybe Lutjens wanted to play fair and give the Brits some advantage as it was two ships to one, after all :rolleyes: (again). 2-3 minutes firing could make all the difference there - I have never tried not firing for 3 minutes to see if the twins can still pull it off.

Hi Guys,

That's fun to do with various combinations of ships. It's just very hard to duplicate weather and other factors in the battle, especially the human factor. Renown spotted Scharnhorst and Gneisenau in a gale off of Norway before they spotted her. She hit effectively first, damaging a turret and Gneisenau's main battery control. The flatter shooting 15" of Renown may have may have helped too. She was originally identified as a Rodney class battleship by German lookouts and the Germans assurredly believed she was not alone. The Germans never opened their A arcs to reply or maneuver for advantage. They accomplished their mission by drawing British forces away from the Norwegian coast, but Renown should have been meat on the table for them. The heavy weather caused Renown's escorts to fall behind though perhaps their gunflashes convinced the Germans that there were more than one British capital ship present.

[Ed Rotondaro]

Ed:
PE had left the Bismarck on the 24th, heading into the Atlantic while Bismarck was forced to head to Brest after damage from the Battle of the Denmark Straits. She was not in position to tow or assist Bismarck.++

Dennis:

I forgot when PE was cut loose from Bismarck. Lutjens should have topped off his fuel in Norway, then he might have continued on with PE, although the ship was still experiencing leaks from the hit by POW. It would have been interesting to speculate if the ship made Brest and was repaired, where would she go? Back out raiding? Attempt to return to Germany via the Channel? Try to return via the Denmark Straits? With the RN totally committed to finding and sinking her, it would have made for even greater drama.

[Kyle Holgate]

Hi Guys,

That's fun to do with various combinations of ships. It's just very hard to duplicate weather and other factors in the battle, especially the human factor. Renown spotted Scharnhorst and Gneisenau in a gale off of Norway before they spotted her. She hit effectively first, damaging a turret and Gneisenau's main battery control. The flatter shooting 15" of Renown may have may have helped too. She was originally identified as a Rodney class battleship by German lookouts and the Germans assurredly believed she was not alone. The Germans never opened their A arcs to reply or maneuver for advantage. They accomplished their mission by drawing British forces away from the Norwegian coast, but Renown should have been meat on the table for them. The heavy weather caused Renown's escorts to fall behind though perhaps their gunflashes convinced the Germans that there were more than one British capital ship present.

The German 11" guns had a higher muzzle velocity than did the old RN 15" - so as far as I know they Germans should have had a flatter trajectory (no gunnery expert here, so someone please correct me - like I need to as any one gets any slack here!). I do wonder how the minutes of not firing impacted the battle. Germans were noted for getting on target pretty fast, a couple of 11 inch hits may have rattled Renown's fire control!
I can't say I blame the Germans too much for departing even if not hit, in weather like that who know's what's lurking in the snow/rain squalls. They could not afford a stand up fight, one thing that is usually overlooked in games when you have few consequences. Once SAS gets out and links up with WCDB and later NAW we'll be able to give this a shot and it will matter if you have the twins later!

[Mike Malanaphy]

The German 11" guns had a higher muzzle velocity than did the old RN 15" - so as far as I know they Germans should have had a flatter trajectory (no gunnery expert here, so someone please correct me - like I need to as any one gets any slack here!). I do wonder how the minutes of not firing impacted the battle. Germans were noted for getting on target pretty fast, a couple of 11 inch hits may have rattled Renown's fire control!
I can't say I blame the Germans too much for departing even if not hit, in weather like that who know's what's lurking in the snow/rain squalls. They could not afford a stand up fight, one thing that is usually overlooked in games when you have few consequences. Once SAS gets out and links up with WCDB and later NAW we'll be able to give this a shot and it will matter if you have the twins later!

Hi Kyle,

I know, it's seems counterintuitive, but the lighter sheel will shed velocity at faster rate and will arc higher to obtain range. One of the rationales for the British going to the heavier 13.5 and 15" shells were their flatter trajectories which increased the danger space on the enemy vessel for more hits. Renown opened at 19,000 yards against the twins.

I'm sure Dennis can explain it better than I. : )

[Ed Rotondaro]

Hi Kyle,

I know, it's seems counterintuitive, but the lighter sheel will shed velocity at faster rate and will arc higher to obtain range. One of the rationales for the British going to the heavier 13.5 and 15" shells were their flatter trajectories which increased the danger space on the enemy vessel for more hits. Renown opened at 19,000 yards against the twins.

I'm sure Dennis can explain it better than I. : )

Mike and Kyle:

Light shells also have a tendency to "wander" near the end of their trajectories due to the influence of wind, etc. That's another reason why the British (and the USN) went to heavier shells. Also the lighter shells are fired at higher velocities and this increases barrel erosion.

[old_pop2000]

Hi Kyle,

I know, it's seems counterintuitive, but the lighter sheel will shed velocity at faster rate and will arc higher to obtain range. One of the rationales for the British going to the heavier 13.5 and 15" shells were their flatter trajectories which increased the danger space on the enemy vessel for more hits. Renown opened at 19,000 yards against the twins.

I'm sure Dennis can explain it better than I. : )
Heavier shells have have more inertia, which means they will maintain more of the initial muzzle velocity than lighter shells. Its actually much more complicated but that's it in a nutshell. It's all about maintaining inertia, or momentum.

[Kyle Holgate]

Which is the more accurate gun/FC system and shell then, do we know enough to be fairly sure? As Mike says, the 15" was fairly flat firing, but it has to be compared to the 11" to be meaningful in this discussion.
I note that the PE got on target faster with 8" shells than did either Hood or Bismarck with their heavier shells.

[Ed Rotondaro]

Which is the more accurate gun/FC system and shell then, do we know enough to be fairly sure? As Mike says, the 15" was fairly flat firing, but it has to be compared to the 11" to be meaningful in this discussion.
I note that the PE got on target faster with 8" shells than did either Hood or Bismarck with their heavier shells.

Kyle:

From all that I've read, the British 15" gun had an excellent reputation for accuracy even when it was first introduced pre-WWI. Improvements to shell design, fire control and even gun mountings all enhanced this. Remember Warspite has the record for the longest ranged hit on a moving target at sea against the Italian battleship Giulio Cesare at approximately 26,000yds (Scharhorst claims a similar hit on the carrier Glorious with her 11" guns in 1940).

I wonder if PE got on target faster simply due to the fact that she could fire salvoes faster than the two larger ships with 15" guns?


The German 11" gun's main claim to fame was its extreme range. It outranged many larger guns. German FC from all accounts was overly complex and was easily knocked out. I believe that sailors on Bismarck tore out miles of wiring during her shakedown cruise to simplify fire control. The optics were superb, but I don't believe the KM had fire control computers as sophisticated as the RN or USN did. I wonder if Friedman's book has much info on the German fire control equipment. By all accounts he devotes most of the book to US and British FC.

[Mike Malanaphy]

Which is the more accurate gun/FC system and shell then, do we know enough to be fairly sure? As Mike says, the 15" was fairly flat firing, but it has to be compared to the 11" to be meaningful in this discussion.
I note that the PE got on target faster with 8" shells than did either Hood or Bismarck with their heavier shells.

Hi Kyls,

Both systems were capable of great accuracy as the twins displayed against Glorious just two months later. Renown had the advantage of surprise and knocked out Gneisenau's forward director at the git, killing her gunner officer. The Germans never did maneuver to maximize their fire power leaving Renown with the initiative throughout the engagement.

[Warship NWS]

Hi Kyls,

Both systems were capable of great accuracy as the twins displayed against Glorious just two months later. Renown had the advantage of surprise and knocked out Gneisenau's forward director at the git, killing her gunner officer. The Germans never did maneuver to maximize their fire power leaving Renown with the initiative throughout the engagement.

Surprise did take place but that is not what caused the critical delay in returning fire. Lutjens had delayed his firing back at the Renown for around 3 minutes allowing for the 15" guns to fire several times, IIRC at least 4+ salvoes, and in turn the G was straddled before Lutjens fired back. Lutjens also delayed during the Bismarck/PE vs PoW/Hood engagement, again, for around 3 minutes. During the Renown vs S&G engagement Lutjens was also dismayed by the oncoming RN DDs escorting the Renown, which in turn effected his decision to withdraw. The Germans were very respectful of what torpedoes could do to their ships and not having effective escorting DDs of their own did not help matters at all.

[Mike Malanaphy]

I think it was one of the cruisers that KO'd the fire control early, I'd have to check my AAR in Garzke's battleships book to be sure. The Rodney KO'd two turrets with one hit though, I still wonder what exactlyt that round hit - it seems like for an (I assume) AP round it had a huge explosion.

As for Lutjens, I don't remember the specific names of his predicessors but I believe there were two that were both fired for taking too many risks with their ships. Lutjens evidently decided not to follow them into retirement and instead went to the bottom :rolleyes:.

I have wargamed the battle between the twins and Renown (or was it Repulse - I forget right now) MANY times and have almost always managed to destroy or badly damage the British ship with minimal or moderate damage to one or both of the twins. Maybe Lutjens wanted to play fair and give the Brits some advantage as it was two ships to one, after all :rolleyes: (again). 2-3 minutes firing could make all the difference there - I have never tried not firing for 3 minutes to see if the twins can still pull it off.

Hi Kyle,

That was Admiral Marschall. He was the squadron commander on the cruises that sunk HMS Rawalpindi and HMS Glorious. Raeder was not happy with his failure to follow orders on the cruise that cost the British Gorious, her two escorts, and several other ships. and several other ships. He was replaced by Lutjens.

[Kyle Holgate]

Hi Kyle,

That was Admiral Marschall. He was the squadron commander on the cruises that sunk HMS Rawalpindi and HMS Glorious. Raeder was not happy with his failure to follow orders on the cruise that cost the British Gorious, her two escorts, and several other ships. and several other ships. He was replaced by Lutjens.

I think he was the second admiral replaced IIRC.

Ed, Warspite did hit from long range but I have seen it argued well that the twins hit from similar or perhaps longer range - so some sources call them a tie. Since we're comparing both guns here at shorter range, I'm not sure it applies.
I think the 3 minute wait before returning fire (4-5 salvo's probably for the British) was a big help - but without knowing the shot fall it's hard to tell.

[Warship NWS]

I think he was the second admiral replaced IIRC.

Ed, Warspite did hit from long range but I have seen it argued well that the twins hit from similar or perhaps longer range - so some sources call them a tie. Since we're comparing both guns here at shorter range, I'm not sure it applies.
I think the 3 minute wait before returning fire (4-5 salvo's probably for the British) was a big help - but without knowing the shot fall it's hard to tell.

Considering that the G was straddled within 3 minutes in horrible weather and while possibly firing only 4 forward guns.. I would say that was pretty good shooting for the Renown.

As to the Warspite.. she was shooting at a 25+ knot target at over 12 miles and I believe it was with only 4 forward guns also. The target also had a smaller vertical danger zone then a big fat carrier not moving very fast or maneuvering being fired at by a flatter trajectory 11" gun. I would give the benefit of the doubt to the Warspite in this case for better gunnery. Just my opinion of course. ;)

[Kyle Holgate]

Considering that the G was straddled within 3 minutes in horrible weather and while possibly firing only 4 forward guns.. I would say that was pretty good shooting for the Renown.

As to the Warspite.. she was shooting at a 25+ knot target at over 12 miles and I believe it was with only 4 forward guns also. The target also had a smaller vertical danger zone then a big fat carrier not moving very fast or maneuvering being fired at by a flatter trajectory 11" gun. I would give the benefit of the doubt to the Warspite in this case for better gunnery. Just my opinion of course. ;)

Glorious wasn't exactly a sitting duck either and was running like hell trying not to get hit as well as was the Warspite's target. In any case good shooting by the old lady, no doubt about it. Too bad Hood wasn't more on target!

[Warship NWS]

Glorious wasn't exactly a sitting duck either and was running like hell trying not to get hit as well as was the Warspite's target. In any case good shooting by the old lady, no doubt about it. Too bad Hood wasn't more on target!

Glorious was not even up to speed during the engagement and it would have been impossible in any case.. the first hit damaged her capacity to produce full speed. She also did not turn away from the attackers.. she was in essence a sitting duck with a very large vertical danger space for targeting. The end result is that the German ships had a far easier target to hit then the Warspite had to shoot at.

Thanks.

[Warship NWS]

Some further notes about the Glorious vs S&G engagement,

The S&G spotted Glorious around 35 minutes before Glorious spotted them in return. This gave time for S&G to increase speed from 19 knots to 29-30+ knots. Glorious, if at typical cruising speed, would have only been doing around 20 knots AT BEST, and would not have had enough time to increase speed fast enough to get away before being fired upon... her only chance was to sail away from the attackers under cover of smoke.. the smoke was laid by the DDs but the CV did not turn away, for that matter, for 27 minutes AFTER spotting S&G, and 15 minutes after started to being fired upon, she stayed on the same course.

Thanks.

[Kyle Holgate]

Some further notes about the Glorious vs S&G engagement,

The S&G spotted Glorious around 35 minutes before Glorious spotted them in return. This gave time for S&G to increase speed from 19 knots to 29-30+ knots. Glorious, if at typical cruising speed, would have only been doing around 20 knots AT BEST, and would not have had enough time to increase speed fast enough to get away before being fired upon... her only chance was to sail away from the attackers under cover of smoke.. the smoke was laid by the DDs but the CV did not turn away, for that matter, for 27 minutes AFTER spotting S&G, and 15 minutes after started to being fired upon, she stayed on the same course.

Thanks.

Digging through my books - seems I don't have the exact situation of the Warspite's hit. How fast was the target going, was it closing or opening range, etc. Sounds like Warspite's hit was probably the more difficult but we only have one description, we really need both to make judgement calls. Hmm, I need more books, I am lacking in my info on the Italian navy!

[Warship NWS]

Digging through my books - seems I don't have the exact situation of the Warspite's hit. How fast was the target going, was it closing or opening range, etc. Sounds like Warspite's hit was probably the more difficult but we only have one description, we really need both to make judgement calls. Hmm, I need more books, I am lacking in my info on the Italian navy!

Caesar dropped to 18 knots after the 15" hit was scored. Stating this one can assume that Caesar and Cavour were not moving at less then typical battle speed, plus there was no surprise on either side to take effect as the capital ships were firing at each other for around 7 minutes before the severe hit was scored and around 40 minutes after the cruisers were already engaged and spotting of forces on both sides took place.

Thanks.

[Mike Malanaphy]

I think he was the second admiral replaced IIRC.

Ed, Warspite did hit from long range but I have seen it argued well that the twins hit from similar or perhaps longer range - so some sources call them a tie. Since we're comparing both guns here at shorter range, I'm not sure it applies.
I think the 3 minute wait before returning fire (4-5 salvo's probably for the British) was a big help - but without knowing the shot fall it's hard to tell.

Hi Kyle,

Your right, the first squadron commander was Admiral Boehm, but he didn't last long.

M. J. Whitley's account in "German Capital Ships of World War Two" ascribes the delay to poor visibility and Lutjen's 40 degree starboard turn which "wooded" both ships forward turrets. Whitley says her first salvo was 200-300 meters short and she hit on her 16th salvo. Peter C. Smith's account in the "Great Ships Pass" cites Renown's advantage of having the Germans silhouetted against the eastern horizon. He adds that Renown had her A arcs open when she fired her intial salvoes.

[Mike Malanaphy]

Digging through my books - seems I don't have the exact situation of the Warspite's hit. How fast was the target going, was it closing or opening range, etc. Sounds like Warspite's hit was probably the more difficult but we only have one description, we really need both to make judgement calls. Hmm, I need more books, I am lacking in my info on the Italian navy!

Hi Kyle,

The battleships were on parallel, but converging course as the Italians came up to support their cruisers. The Cavour's are generally credited with being capable of 28 knots, so they had a realistic four knot advantage over Warspite. Malaya, behind Warspite, was never able to close the range to get into the fight. Cesare opened fire at 27,400 yards. Warspite hit her on her 16th salvo at the base of her after funnel on the starboard side. The shell penetrated the boat deck, an AA ammunition room below and exploded in the petty officers quarters, but did not penetrate any armor. Smoke and fumes from the explosion were sucked into the ventilation fans for four of her eight engine rooms causing the loss of speed. This account from Massagnani and Greene in "The Naval War in the Mediterranean 1940-1943" mentions that the hit was felt throughout teh ship and stated a large, smokey fire. Admiral Campioni turned away believing she was more severely damaged that she was. The two photos I've seen of the hit show extensive slinter damage to the area and one of the portside secondary turrets.

In return, the Italians straddled Warspite several times, but the spread in each salvo was around a thousand yards, the closest shell hitting the water about 400 yards shot of her.