HMS Hood (51)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
HMS Hood (51)
Career RN Ensign
Ordered: 7 April 1916
Laid down: 1 September 1916
Launched: 22 August 1918
Commissioned: 15 May 1920
Fate: Sunk during the Battle of the Denmark Strait on 24 May 1941
General Characteristics
Displacement: 1918: 45,200 tons full load;
1940: 48,360 tons full load
Length: 860 ft 7 in (262.3 m)
Beam: 104 ft 2 in (31.7 m)
Draught: 33 ft 1 in (10.1 m)
Propulsion: 24 Yarrow small tube oil fired boilers; 4 Brown-Curtiss geared steam turbines, 4 shafts, 3-bladed propellers - 15 ft (4.6 m) diameter; Power: Designed - 144,000 shp (107 MW); 1920 trials: 151,200 shp (113 MW)
Speed: 1920: 31 knots (57 km/h);
1941: 29 knots (54 km/h)
Range: 1931: 5,332 nmi (10,000 km)
  @ 20 knots (37 km/h)
Complement: 1921: 1,169;
1941: 1,418
Armament (1939): 8 × BL 15 inch /42 naval gun (381 mm) (4×2)
12 × 5.5 in (140 mm) (12×1)
8 × 4 in (102 mm) dual purpose guns (4×2)
24 × 2-pdr (40 mm) pom-pom (3×8)
20 x 0.5 in (12.7 mm) (5×4) Vickers machine guns
4 × 21 in (533 mm) torpedo tubes, above water
Armament (1941, as sunk): 8 × 15 in (381 mm) (4×2),
14 × 4 in (102 mm) (7×2)
24 × 2-pdr pom pom (40 mm) (3×8)
20 × 0.5 in (12.7 mm) (5×4) guns
5 × 20 barrel "Unrotated Projectile" mounts
4 × 21 in (533 mm) torpedo tubes, above water
Aircraft: 1 fitted from 1931–1932,
1 catapult
Badge: A crow bearing an anchor facing left over the date 1859
Motto: Ventis Secundis (Latin: "With Favourable Winds")

This article refers to the 1918 battlecruiser. For other ships of this name see HMS Hood (disambiguation).

HMS Hood (pennant number 51) was a battlecruiser of the Royal Navy. She was one of four Admiral-class battlecruisers ordered in mid-1916 under the Emergency War Programme. Although the design was drastically revised after the Battle of Jutland, it was realised that there were serious limitations even to the revised design; for this reason, and because of evidence that the German battlecruisers that they were designed to counter were unlikely to be completed, work on her sisters was suspended in 1917. As a result, Hood was Britain's last completed battlecruiser. She was named after the 18th century Admiral Samuel Hood.

Contents

[edit] History

[edit] Construction

Construction of Hood began at the John Brown & Company shipyards in Clydebank, Scotland, on 1 September 1916. Following the loss of three British battlecruisers at the Battle of Jutland, 5,000 tons of extra armour and bracing was added to Hood's design. The intention behind this change was to give her protection against 15 inch (381 mm) guns, such as her own— in theory moving her to the status of a true battleship. This led to some describing her as the first fast battleship, since the Hood appeared to have improvements over the revolutionary Queen Elizabeth battleships. To add to the confusion, Royal Navy documents of the period often describe any battleship with a speed of over about 24 knots (44 km/h) or more as a battlecruiser, regardless of the amount of protective armour. [1] [2] Classification as a battlecruiser notwithstanding, she was the largest capital ship in the British fleet at the time of her commissioning; Hood was much longer than any other British capital ship and only marginally lighter (at full load) than Britain's heaviest ever battleship, the HMS Vanguard, which was not commissioned until 1946.

However, the reworking was hurried and incomplete and hence flawed. Only the forward cordite magazines were moved below the shell rooms — cordite explosions destroyed the Royal Navy battlecruisers lost at Jutland. The combination of the deck and side armour did not provide continuous protection against shells arriving at all angles. Most seriously, the deck protection was flawed — spread over three decks, it was designed to explode an incoming shell on impact with the top deck, with much of the energy being absorbed as the exploding shell had to penetrate the armour of the next two decks. The development of effective time delay shells at the end of World War I made this scheme much less effective, as the intact shell would penetrate layers of weak armour and explode deep inside the ship. In addition, she was grossly overweight compared to her original design, making her a wet ship with a highly stressed structure. It was seriously suggested that she should be scrapped before she was launched; the post-war economy drive made replacing her impossible, however.

Construction on her sister ships Anson, Howe, and Rodney was stopped in March 1917, although work continued on Hood. Two factors were at work regarding this decision. Firstly, the German ships to which the class were a response were never completed. Secondly, the flaws in her protection and design were apparent: the repeated redesigns of the sister ships did not solve them. Instead, a series of studies leading to the N3 battleship and G3 battlecruiser designs was started.

She was launched on 22 August 1918 by the widow of Admiral Sir Horace Hood, a Jutland casualty and distant relative of the famous Lord Hood for whom the ship was named. After fitting out and trials, she was commissioned on 15 May 1920, under Captain Wilfred Tomkinson, and became flagship of the British Atlantic Fleet's Battle Cruiser Squadron. She had cost £6,025,000 to build. With her conspicuous twin funnels and lean profile, Hood was widely considered a very graceful warship.

[edit] Principal characteristics

Profile drawing of Hood as she was in 1921, in Atlantic Fleet dark grey.
Profile drawing of Hood as she was in 1921, in Atlantic Fleet dark grey.

[edit] Protection

Hood's protection accounted for 33% of her displacement; a high proportion by British standards, although less than was usual in contemporary German designs (for example, 36% for the battlecruiser SMS Hindenburg).[3]

The armoured belt consisted of face-hardened armour (Krupp cemented or KC), arranged as follows:

  • Main belt: 12 in (305 mm) between A and Y barbettes; forward extension 5 to 6 in (127 to 152 mm); aft extension 6 in (152 mm);
  • Middle belt: 7 in (178 mm) between A and Y barbettes; forward extension 5 in (127 mm);
  • Upper belt: 5 in (127 mm) amidships, extending forward to A barbette, with a short 4 in (102 mm) extension aft.

All sections of the belt were angled outwards by 10  degrees, increasing the effective armour thickness by causing incoming shells to strike at a less favourable angle for penetration.

The deck protection was constructed from high tensile (HT) steel, arranged as follows:

  • Forecastle deck: 1.75 to 2 in (44 to 51 mm);
  • Upper deck: 2 in (51 mm) over magazines; 0.75 in (19 mm) elsewhere;
  • Main deck: 3 in (76 mm) over magazines; 1 in (25 mm) elsewhere; plus 2 in (51 mm) slope meeting bottom of main belt;
  • Lower deck (forward and aft): 3 in (76 mm) over propeller shafts; 2 in (51 mm) magazine crowns; 1 in (25 mm) elsewhere.

The 3 in (76 mm) plating on the main deck was added at a very late stage of construction, after live firing trials with the new 15 in APC (armour-piercing, capped) shell in the autumn of 1919 showed that this shell could penetrate the ship's vitals via the 7 in (178 mm) middle belt and the 2 in (51 mm) slope of the main deck. Further trials showed that the additional plating was just adequate to defeat this threat [4]. It was apparently proposed to extend the new plating to the whole of the upper deck, removing the conning tower, torpedo tubes and four 5.5 in guns as weight compensation; in the event, only the areas above the magazines were reinforced. As completed, Hood remained susceptible to plunging fire and bombs, and had no margin of protection against the next generation of heavy guns.

The main armament turrets had a frontal armour thickness of 15 in (381 mm), side armour of 11 to 12 in (280 to 305 mm) and a roof of 5 in (127 mm). For protection against torpedoes she was given an "anti-torpedo bulge", an air-filled space backed by an inner reinforced wall. It was a new and effective solution for World War I ships and a common solution to counteract the weight increases that would be otherwise needed for ships built between the two World Wars.

[edit] Weapons

[edit] Main armament

Hood was fitted with the BL 15 inch Mark I (381 mm) /42 gun of 1912. This was the then standard weapon of British capital ships and was already mounted on the Queen Elizabeth, Revenge, Renown and other classes of ships. Hood was the first, and in the event the only ship to carry these guns in the Mark II twin mounting[5]. The gunhouse for this mounting was larger than the previous mounting, with a flatter roof (less vulnerable to incoming fire) and allowing an extra 10 degrees of positive elevation (-5 to +30 degrees) over the original Mark I mounting.

As completed, Hood’s provision of 15 inch (381 mm) ammunition, nominally 120 rounds per gun, was made up as follows:

  • 289 Common Pointed Capped shells (CPC), weight 1,920 lb (871 kg)
  • 672 Armour-Piercing Capped (APC), weight 1,920 lb (871 kg)
  • 30 shrapnel (forward turrets only), weight 1,920 lb (871 kg)
  • 82 practice rounds.

APC shells were designed for maximum armour penetration, with a relatively small bursting charge; CPC was a general-purpose round for use against cruisers and destroyers. The APC round had an extreme range of 29,000 yards (26,500 m) at 30 degrees elevation, and its armour penetration at 19,700 yards (18,000 m) was equivalent to 11 inches (279 mm) at normal (90-degree) impact.

After her 1929-1931 refit, Hood carried 160 CPC (TNT burster), 640 APC (Shellite burster), 48 shrapnel and 96 practice rounds. A new 15 inch (381 mm) APC round, with improved ballistic shape, was introduced in 1938, but Hood was lost before she could receive the necessary modifications to embark this round [6].

[edit] Secondary armament

The secondary (low angle) guns were BL 5.5 inch Mark I (140 mm) /50. These were designed in 1913 for two modified Town class cruisers being built for the Greek Navy. This gun was 13 cwt (660 kg) lighter than the standard BL 6 inch Mark XII gun and fired a projectile 15 lb (6.8 kg) lighter and therefore easier to handle, allowing for a higher rate of fire. The Greek ships were completed for the Royal Navy as HMS Birkenhead and HMS Chester, introducing this weapon into British service. They were shipped on shielded CP Mark II single mounts capable of elevating from -5 to +30 degrees, and fired 82 lb (37 kg) shells at a rate of 6 to 10 rounds per minute. The muzzle velocity was 2,725 ft/s (830 m/s), giving an effective range of 17,770 yards (16.2 km). The high position of the mountings along the upper deck and the forward shelter deck allowed them to be worked in a seaway, less obstructed by waves and spray.

These guns were removed during the Hood's refit in 1940, after which their magazines were used for 4 inch (102 mm) anti-aircraft ammunition.

According to the official Ascension Island website,[7] two of the guns had been previously removed during a refit in 1934, and were subsequently shipped to Ascension Island where they were installed as a shore battery in 1941.[8] They saw action only once, on December 9th 1941, when they fired on the German U-boat U-124. Because of the island's remoteness and arid climate, the battery still exists today in a largly intact condition. A similar mounting, involving a single gun, survives on the Faroe Islands.[9] Apart from the wreck itself, these guns are the only large surviving relics of the Hood.

[edit] Anti-aircraft armament

Hood's original anti-aircraft armament consisted of four QF 4 inch (102—mm) L/45 Mark V guns on mountings HA Mark III. These were joined in 1937 by four twin mountings HA/LA Mark XIX for the 1934 model QF 4 inch L/45 Mark XVI gun and the single guns were replaced with a further three Mark XIX mountings in 1940. The mounting could elevate from -10 to +80 degrees able to engage both aircraft and vessels. This gun fired a 31 lb (15 kg) shell at 2,660 ft/s (811 m/s) for an effective range of 18,150 yd (16.6 km). In 1931 a pair of octuple mountings Mark VIII for the QF 2 pounder Mark VIII (40 mm) gun were added, a third mount being added in 1937. Two quadruple mountings Mark I for the 0.5 inch Vickers Mark III (12.7 mm) machine gun were added in 1933 with a further two mountings added in 1937. To these were added 5 Unrotated Projectile (UP) launchers— 20-barrelled launchers for 3 inch (76 mm) rockets that shot their warheads out on three parachutes on lengths of cable that could snag aircraft.

[edit] Torpedo armament

Two 21 inch (533 mm) torpedo tubes were mounted amidships on either side, a remainder of shorter range engagements expected during the Great War, but augmented with 4 more in 1940.

[edit] Aircraft and boats

Hood carried aircraft for part of her service life. She embarked a flight of seaplanes, initially Fairey Flycatchers, then Fairey F3 Fs from 1929 to 1933. At first there were flying-off platforms fitted to "B" and "X" turrets so that wheeled aircraft could be launched from the ship, but these were soon removed as floatplanes became more reliable. A rotatable catapult was installed at the very rear (quarterdeck) of the ship along with a crane for recovery of the plane in 1929, but it was frequently awash when under way and was removed in 1932.

As befitted a vessel her size, Hood carried a large number of small boats, both sailing boats (a 42 ft (12.8 m) launch, 36 ft (11 m) sailing pinnace, 32 ft (9.8 m) cutter, 30 ft (9.1 m) gig, 27 ft (8.2 m) whaler and a 16 ft (4.9 m) dinghy) and powered boats (50 ft (15.2 m) steam pinnace, 45 ft (13.7 m) steam pinnace, 45 ft (13.7 m) and 35 ft (10.7 m) Admiral's barges, 45 ft (13.7 m) motor launch, 35 ft (10.7 m) and 25 ft (7.6 m) motor- and "fast" motor- boats of hard chine construction and a 16 ft (4.9 m) motor dinghy)

[edit] Inter-war service

In the inter-war years she was the largest warship in the world at a time when the British public felt a close affinity with the Royal Navy. Her name and general characteristics were familiar to most of the public, and she was popularly known as the Mighty Hood. Because of her fame, she spent a great deal of time on cruises and "flying the flag" visits to other countries. In particular she took part in a world-wide cruise between November 1923 and September 1924 in company with Repulse and several smaller ships. This was known as the Cruise of the Special Service Squadron, and it was estimated that 750,000 people visited Hood during that cruise. In 1931 her crew took part in the Invergordon Mutiny.

She was given a major refit from 17 May 1929 to 16 June 1930, and was due to be modernised in 1941 to bring her up to a standard similar to that of other modernised World War I-era capital ships. Ironically, her status as the Royal Navy's finest capital ship meant that her material condition gradually deteriorated due to her near-constant active service, and by the end of the 1930s she was in poor condition and in need of refitting. The outbreak of war made it impossible to remove her from service, and as a consequence she never received the scheduled update. Her condition meant, among other things, that she was unable to attain her top designed speed.

[edit] World War II

Hood was transferred to the Mediterranean Fleet in July 1936. In June 1939, she joined the Home Fleet’s Battle Cruiser Squadron at Scapa Flow; when war broke out later that year, she was employed principally in patrolling the vicinity of Iceland and the Faroes to protect convoys and intercept German raiders attempting to break out into the Atlantic. In September 1939, she was hit by a 250 kg (550 lb) aircraft bomb with minor damage. As the flagship of Force H, she took part in the destruction of the French Fleet at Mers-el-Kebir in July 1940. In August, she rejoined the Battle Cruiser Squadron and resumed patrolling against German raiders. From 13 January to 18 March 1941, she underwent a refit at Rosyth. Even after the refit she was still in poor condition, but the threat from the German capital ships was such that she could not be taken into dock for a major overhaul until more of the King George V-class battleships came into service.

When the German battleship Bismarck sailed in May, Hood was sent out under the flag of Admiral Lancelot Holland, together with the newly-commissioned Prince of Wales, to intercept the German ships before they could break into the Atlantic and attack the Allied convoys. Holland’s ships caught up with Bismarck and her consort, the heavy cruiser Prinz Eugen, in the straits between Greenland and Iceland on May 24. During the subsequent Battle of the Denmark Strait on 24 May 1941, Hood suffered from a series of events which culminated in her destruction. The Hood was caught in a poor tactical position as she only had her forward two gun turrets pointed at the Bismarck, while the Bismarck and the Prinz Eugen were positioned to fire a full broadside when the engagement began. The first shots were fired at a range of about fourteen miles. The Hood raced toward the Bismarck to reduce plunging fire (high trajectory fire) that would impact on the Hood's weak deck armor (3 inches, 7.62 centimeters thick), while that on the side of the ship was 12 inches, (30.48 centimeters) thick. She first engaged Prinz Eugen instead of Bismarck. The German ships quickly found the range to the Hood and she was hit first by an 8 inch (204 mm) shell from Prinz Eugen on the boat deck which ignited 4 inch (102 mm) ammunition and UP rockets, causing a fire to burn out of control endangering the ship. Shortly after this, the Prinz Eugen shifted her aim to the Prince of Wales, in accordance with a semaphore order from Bismarck [10]. At about 0600 (0601 in German reckoning), as Hood was turning to bring all her guns to bear onto the Bismarck, she emitted a huge jet of flame, reaching skyward from the vicinity of the mainmast. This was immediately followed by an explosion that destroyed the after part of the ship. The stern rose and sank rapidly, while the bows rose clear of the sea as the forepart also sank. The Hood had disappeared within ten minutes of engaging the Bismarck and the Prinz Eugen, and of the 1,418 aboard, only three men (Ted Briggs, Bob Tilburn and Bill Dundas) survived [11]; they were rescued about two hours after the sinking by the destroyer HMS Electra.

The dramatic loss of such a well-known symbol of British naval power had a great effect on many people; some later remembered the news as the most shocking of World War II. Following the loss of the Hood, the Royal Navy concentrated all available resources in pursuit of Bismarck and Prinz Eugen; although Prinz Eugen escaped, Bismarck was eventually sunk after being brought to battle again on 27 May 1941.

[edit] Boards of Enquiry into the sinking

The official Admiralty communiqué on the loss, broadcast on the day of the sinking, reported that: "during the … action, HMS Hood … received an unlucky hit in a magazine and blew up." [12]

The first formal Board of Enquiry into the loss, presided over by Vice-Admiral Sir Geoffrey Blake, reported on 2 June (less than a fortnight after the loss). It endorsed this opinion, stating that:

(c) (The) probable cause of the loss of HMS Hood was direct penetration of the protection by one or more 15 inch shells at a range of 16,500 yards [15 km], resulting in the explosion of one or more of the after magazines. [13]

However, the conduct of the enquiry became subject to criticism, primarily because no verbatim record of witness’ testimony had been kept. Moreover, Sir Stanley Goodall, the Director of Naval Construction (DNC), had come forward with an alternative theory, that the Hood had been destroyed by the explosion of her own torpedoes. As a result, a second Board was convened (under Rear-Admiral Sir Harold Walker), reporting in September 1941[14]. This investigation was “much more thorough than was the first, taking evidence from a total of 176 eyewitnesses to the disaster”, [15], and examined both Goodall’s theory and others (see below). The Board came to a conclusion almost identical to that of the first board, expressed as follows.

That the sinking of Hood was due to a hit from Bismarck's 15 inch shell in or adjacent to Hood's 4 inch or 15 inch magazines, causing them all to explode and wreck the after part of the ship. The probability is that the 4 inch magazines exploded first.

[edit] Modern Theories on the Sinking

The exact cause of the loss of HMS Hood remains a subject of debate. The principal theories can be summarised as follows.

A sketch prepared by Captain JC Leach (commanding HMS Prince of Wales} for the 2nd Board of Enquiry, 1941. The sketch represents the column of smoke or flame that erupted from the vicinity of the mainmast immediately before a huge detonation which obliterated from view the after part of the ship. This phenomenon is believed to have been the result of a cordite fire venting through the engine-room ventilators (see article).
A sketch prepared by Captain JC Leach (commanding HMS Prince of Wales} for the 2nd Board of Enquiry, 1941. The sketch represents the column of smoke or flame that erupted from the vicinity of the mainmast immediately before a huge detonation which obliterated from view the after part of the ship. This phenomenon is believed to have been the result of a cordite fire venting through the engine-room ventilators (see article).
  • A direct hit from a shell penetrated to a magazine aft. Such a shell could only have come from the Bismarck, since the Prinz Eugen was no longer firing at the Hood at the time of the explosion. As noted above, this version of events was almost taken for granted at the time of the sinking. Doubt first arose as a result of eyewitness testimony that the explosion that destroyed Hood originated near the mainmast, well forward of the aft magazines (for example the sketch, reproduced here, prepared for the second board of enquiry by Captain Leach of Prince of Wales). At the second Board, expert witnesses suggested that what was observed was the venting, through the engine-room ventilators, of a violent — but not instantaneous — explosion or deflagration in the 4 inch (102 mm) magazines. The same deflagration would have collapsed the bulkhead separating the 4 inch and 15 inch (102 and 381 mm) magazines, resulting very quickly in a catastrophic explosion similar to those previously witnessed at Jutland[16]. This theory was ultimately adopted by the Board.
  • A shell, falling short and travelling underwater, struck below the armoured belt and penetrated to a magazine. During the same action, the Prince of Wales received a hit of this type from a 38 cm (c.15 in) shell, which travelled underwater for about 80 feet (25 m), stuck about 28 feet (8 m) below the waterline, penetrated several light bulkheads and fetched up, without exploding, against the torpedo bulkhead. The second Board considered this theory improbable, arguing that the fuse, had it worked at all, would have detonated the shell before it reached the ship.
  • The ship was destroyed by the explosion of her own torpedoes. According to Goodall’s theory, the ship’s torpedoes could have been detonated either by the fire raging on the boat deck or, more probably, by a direct hit from Bismarck. This would have blown out the side of the ship, destroying the girder strength of the hull; the force of water entering the hole, at a speed of nearly 30 knots, would then shear the stern section from the rest of the hull.
  • The fire on the boat deck penetrated to a magazine. Evidence given to the second Board indicated that the doors for the 4 inch (102 mm) ammunition supply trucks were closed throughout the action. It remains possible that a door or trunk could have been opened up by an enemy shell, admitting flames to the magazine. Alternative routes for admission of flame could have been the ventilation or venting arrangements of the magazines or, as Ted Briggs suggested, through the floor of a 15 inch (381 mm) gunhouse.
  • The explosion was initiated by 4 inch (102 mm) ammunition stored outside the magazines. Writing in 1979, the naval historian Anthony Preston claims that the after magazines of Hood were “surrounded by additional 4 in (102 mm) anti-aircraft outside the armoured barbettes (sic)” [17]. Such unprotected stowage could have been detonated either by the boat-deck fire or by a shell from Bismarck.
  • The ship was blown up by her own guns. At the second board, eyewitnesses reported unusual types of discharge from the Hood’s 15 inch (381 mm) guns, suggesting that a shell could have detonated within the gun, causing an explosion within the gunhouse. It is possible that, under the stress of combat, the safety measures, introduced after the disasters at Jutland to prevent such an explosion reaching the magazines, could have failed.

An extensive review of each of these theories (except that of Preston) is given in Jurens [18]. Its main conclusion is that the loss was almost certainly precipitated by the explosion of a 4 inch (102 mm) magazine, but that there are a number of ways in which this could have been initiated. Jurens rebuts the popular image of “plunging fire” penetrating Hood’s deck armour; the angle of fall of Bismarck’s 38 cm shells at the moment of the loss would not have exceeded about 14 degrees, an angle so unfavourable to penetration of horizontal armour that it is actually off the scale of contemporary German penetration charts. Moreover, computer-generated profiles of the Hood show that a shell falling at this angle could not have reached an aft magazine without first passing through some part the belt armour. On the other hand, the 12 inch (305 mm) belt could have been penetrated, if the Hood had progressed sufficiently far into her final turn.

A more recent development is the discovery of the Hood’s wreck (see below). Inspection of the wreck has confirmed that the aft magazines did indeed explode. The stern of the Hood was located, with the rudders still in place, and it was found that these were set to port at the time of the explosion.

To summarise: the evidence of the wreck refutes Goodall’s theory, while the eyewitness evidence of venting from the 4 inch (102 mm) magazine prior to the main explosion conflicts with the theory that the Hood was blown up by her own guns. The other theories listed above remain valid possibilities; Preston’s theory would be particularly attractive if it could be shown exactly where the “additional 4 inch (102 mm) stowage” was located.

[edit] Wreck

The wreck of Hood was discovered in 3,000 metres of water in July 2001 by an expedition funded by UK-based Channel Four Television and ITN and led by shipwreck hunter David Mearns. In 2002, the site officially became a war grave by its designation the British government as a protected place under the Protection of Military Remains Act.

Hood's wreck lies on the seabed in pieces among two debris fields. The eastern field includes the tiny amount of the stern which survived the magazine explosion as well as the surviving section of the bow and some smaller remains such as the screws. The 4 inch (102 mm) fire director lies in the western debris field. The heavily armoured conning tower is located by itself a distance from the main wreck. The amidships section, the most massive part of the wreck to survive the explosions, lies south of the eastern debris field in a large impact crater. The starboard side of the amidships section is missing down to the inner wall of the fuel tanks; this has been interpreted as indicating the path of the explosion through the starboard fuel tanks. It is further supposed that the small debris fields are the fragments from the after hull where the magazines and turrets were located, since that section of the hull was totally destroyed in the explosion. The fact that the bow section separated just forward of A turret provoked the suggestion that a secondary explosion might have occurred in this area; however, the forensic assessment by Jurens has dismissed this theory [19].

The forward section remains upright on the seabed, with the amidship section keel up. Of interest is the stern section which actually rises from the seabed at an angle. This position clearly shows the rudder locked into a port turn, confirming that orders had been given (just prior to the aft magazines detonating) to change the ship's heading and bring the aft turrets 'X' and 'Y' to bear on the German ships.

[edit] See also

  • See HMS Hood for other ships of this name.

[edit] Further reading

  • Bradford, Ernle (1959). The Mighty Hood. Cleveland: World.  An overall history, including her peace-time career.
  • Coles, Alan; Briggs, Ted (1985). Flagship Hood: The Fate of Britain's Mightiest Warship. London: Robert Hale. ISBN 0-7090-2024-4.  Ted Briggs was one of the three survivors of Hood's loss.
  • Northcott, Maurice P. (1975). Hood: Design and Construction. London: Bivouac Books Ltd. ISBN 0-85680-009-0.  A shorter work giving technical details of her construction.
  • Roberts, John (1989). Anatomy of the Ship: The Battlecruiser Hood. London: Conway Maritime.  A lengthy work giving great detail on her construction.
  • Taylor, Bruce (2005). The Battlecruiser HMS Hood: An Illustrated Biography, 1916-1941. London: Chatham.  The complete history of her career, functioning and people based on in-depth research from original sources.
  • Kemp, Paul J. (1991). Bismarck and Hood: Great Naval Adversaries. London: Arms and Armour Press.  Includes pictures of the Hood, and description of the Battle off Iceland.
  • Lt Cdr. Timothy J. Cain (1959). HMS Electra. London: Frederick Muller, LTD.. ISBN 0-86007-330-0.  Includes accounts of the survivor rescue effort.
  • Breyer, Siegfried (1973). Battleships and Battlecruisers 1905-1970. Garden City, New York: Doubleday and Company.  (originally published in German as Schlachtschiffe und Schlachtkreuzer 1905-1970, J.F. Lehmanns, Verlag, Munchen, 1970). Contains various line drawings of the ship as designed, as built, in her final (as sunk) configuration, and the proposed 1941 refit.
  • Mearns, David; White, Rob (2001). Hood and Bismarck: The Deep Sea Discovery of an Epic Battle. London: Channel 4.  Describes the expedition to find the wreck of the Hood, as well as its current state.
  • Steve Wiper, Warship Pictorial #20: H.M.S. Hood (Classic Warships Publishing, Tucson, Arizona, 2003), Contains pictures of the Hood during construction, including pictures of the launching.
  • Antonio Bonomi, Stretto di Danimarca, 24 maggio 1941, printed on "Storia Militare" magazine, December 2005.
  • Norman Friedman, Battleship Design and Development 1905-1945, Conway Maritime Press 1978; ISBN 0-85177-135-1.
  • VE Tarrant, King George V Class Battleships, Arms and Armour Press, 1991. ISBN 1-85409-524-2.

[edit] References

  1. ^ "Origins and Development of the Battlecruiser". Great War Primary Documents Archive. Retrieved on 2006-06-25.
  2. ^ "Battleships, Battlecruisers & Monitors". Naval-History.net. Retrieved on 2006-06-25.
  3. ^ Friedman, pp. 168-9, 171-72.
  4. ^ William J. Jurens, The Loss of HMS Hood: A Re-Examination (originally published in Warship International No. 2, 1987). A modern technical analysis of Hood's loss.
  5. ^ John Roberts Battlecruisers. Caxton Editions 2003. ISBN 1-84067-530-6
  6. ^ www.navweaps.com British 15in-42 (38.1 cm) Mark I.
  7. ^ HMS Hood guns on Ascension Island
  8. ^ It is more probable that these guns came from those removed in 1940. According to the HMS Hood Association website, two guns were removed in 1938 (not 1934) but were subsequently remounted, the ship's outfit then remaining at 12 guns until all were removed in the 1940 refit.
  9. ^ Ibid
  10. ^ Helmut Brinkmann, et al., “Kriegstagebuch des Kreuzers Prinz Eugen” War Diary of the cruiser ‘’Prinz Eugen’’.
  11. ^ HMS Hood Association Website: Frequently Asked Questions. The HMS Hood Association has established that the often-quoted complement of 1,419 is incorrect (as are occasional claims of there being a fourth survivor). It has also compiled a definitive list of casualties.
  12. ^ kbismarck.com
  13. ^ (Admiralty record ADM116-4351, London, 1941)
  14. ^ Report on the Loss of H.M.S. Hood (Admiralty record ADM116-4351, London, 1941)
  15. ^ Jurens, op cit
  16. ^ Jurens, op cit
  17. ^ Anthony Preston et al, Sea Power: A Modern Illustrated Military History, Phoebus Publishing Company, 1979. ISBN 0-89673-011-5. (for a more accessible source, see also Anthony Preston, The World’s Worst Warships, Conway Maritime Press 2002; ISBN 0-85177-754-6, p 109)
  18. ^ Jurens, op cit
  19. ^ kbismarck.org

[edit] External links

Wikimedia Commons has media related to:


Admiral-class battlecruiser
HMS Anson | HMS Hood | HMS Howe | HMS Rodney

List of battlecruisers of the Royal Navy
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../h/m/s/HMS_Hood_%2851%29_3c89.html"