dark light

  • AlanR

HMS Hood

The bell from HMS Hood has just been recovered.

http://www.paulallen.com/News/News-Articles/Hood-Bell-Recovery

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

3,375

Send private message

By: spitfireman - 10th August 2015 at 10:45

Some years ago (1986) I met a Hood sailor who was (lucky) posted dreckly before the ship sailed for Bismark. He told me the ship was at flank speed when hit and as the engines and propellers were undamaged, it propelled the ship (with all of the damage) immediately underwater from which there was no recovery.

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

19,065

Send private message

By: Moggy C - 10th August 2015 at 10:28

Did any Royal navy Capital Ships survive the Second World War, I can’t think of one 🙂

Most of them I think.

Queen Elizabeth
Warspite
Valiant
Malaya
Royal Sovereign
Ramilles
Revenge
Resolution
KGV
Duke of York
Anson
Howe
Nelson
Rodney
Renown

Moggy

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

15,105

Send private message

By: Lincoln 7 - 10th August 2015 at 10:23

Isn’t the current theory that HMS Hood, being a battle-cruiser with very thin deck armour, chose to close Bismark to avoid the plunging fire at longer range?

Warren, Bismark, and Prinz Eugen, were “Broadside on, as Hood, and the Prince of Wales approached head on. The Prince of Wale’s main guns were not in full working order, and indeed had civilian workers on board trying to get them working. Bismark had 15″ guns, that fired amour piercing shells. (Just Google how many guns that Bismark had, it’s staggering the firepower that it had, and all its guns were in working order. I still think that Hood and the Prince of Wales, were A)Only able to fire with their forward facing guns, and B) were head on to the German ships.The range of these 15” guns was roughly the same, 28.000 yds, but I think Bismark had better gun rangefinders.
Jim.
Lincoln .7

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

2,114

Send private message

By: Bruggen 130 - 10th August 2015 at 10:10

Did any Royal navy Capital Ships survive the Second World War, I can’t think of one 🙂

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

12,419

Send private message

By: Creaking Door - 9th August 2015 at 23:44

Even though Bismark could easily have “Stood off” well out of the range of the guns of HMS Prince Of Wales, and HMS Hood both of HMSs ships went in to engage Bismark, knowing they were on a hiding to nothing and out gunned…

Isn’t the current theory that HMS Hood, being a battle-cruiser with very thin deck armour, chose to close Bismark to avoid the plunging fire at longer range?

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

12,419

Send private message

By: Creaking Door - 9th August 2015 at 23:31

I think few will have a clue as to what HMS Hood is or was or, the circumstances of her sinking.

Seriously? On this forum?

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

592

Send private message

By: Richard gray - 9th August 2015 at 21:47

Thought the wreck of HMS Hood was a war grave?

I seem to recall a survivor of the Titanic was taken down to view the wreck that she was too young to remember sailing on and told that in order not to desecrate the site they could not bring up a tea cup that was laying on the sea bed; the remains of HMS Ark Royal is designated a war grave although only one man lost his life. If there is the chance of human remains being found then – usually – permission to dig up aircraft wreckage is withheld.
Yet if you are a multi-millionaire with connections then a little thing like respect for the grave site appears to get forgotten about rather quickly.

The Protection of Military remains Act 1986 is An Act to secure the protection from unauthorised interference of the remains of military aircraft and vessels that have crashed, sunk or been stranded.

So in fact it has nothing to do with a war grave of people.

It also has nothing to do with being a multi-millionaire with connections then a little thing like respect for the grave site appears to get forgotten about rather quickly.

The Bell was also not attached to the main hull of the ship.
and the recovery was Authorised.

Guess there is always someone who wants to muddy the water.

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

2,114

Send private message

By: Bruggen 130 - 9th August 2015 at 21:45

What a fantastic end to a very tragic story. Even though Bismark could easily have “Stood off” well out of the range of the guns of HMS Prince Of Wales, and HMS Hood. both of HMSs ships went in to engage Bismark, knowing they were on a hiding to nothing.and out gunned. It will be nice to see the ships bells finally together for all to see. I don’t honestly think that anyone would consider the taking of the bell as theft from a War Grave in this instance. I think Paul Allen is owed a debt of gratitude, he may well be worth zillions, but it must have cost him a mint in the recovery.

Jim.
Lincoln .7

Why do you say both RN ships were out gunned, Hood had 15in guns, prince of wales had 14in guns, Bismark 15in, so to my mind it was Bismark that should have been out gunned, any way if the bell is to be part of some memorial then I think that’s ok.
I do agree what you say about the debt we owe him for recovering it 🙂

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

15,105

Send private message

By: Lincoln 7 - 9th August 2015 at 21:20

What a fantastic end to a very tragic story. Even though Bismark could easily have “Stood off” well out of the range of the guns of HMS Prince Of Wales, and HMS Hood. both of HMSs ships went in to engage Bismark, knowing they were on a hiding to nothing.and out gunned. It will be nice to see the ships bells finally together for all to see. I don’t honestly think that anyone would consider the taking of the bell as theft from a War Grave in this instance. I think Paul Allen is owed a debt of gratitude, he may well be worth zillions, but it must have cost him a mint in the recovery.

Jim.
Lincoln .7

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

243

Send private message

By: Mike meteor - 9th August 2015 at 21:01

Perhaps the fact that the bell is going to form a memorial, with the sanction of MOD, is relevant.

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

9,042

Send private message

By: TonyT - 9th August 2015 at 20:13

The problem with the Titanic is they never recovered anything, if Ballard had recovered a single item ‘ownership’ of the wreck would have past to him, but because he didn’t it allowed the people that came after him to plunder it.

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

3,597

Send private message

By: snafu - 9th August 2015 at 18:53

Thought the wreck of HMS Hood was a war grave?

The wreck of HMS Hood is designated under the Protection of Military Remains Act 1986. As well as providing a memorial, the recovery has prevented it from being taken by any illegal operation for personal gain.

http://www.paulallen.com/News/News-Articles/Hood-Bell-Recovery

I seem to recall a survivor of the Titanic was taken down to view the wreck that she was too young to remember sailing on and told that in order not to desecrate the site they could not bring up a tea cup that was laying on the sea bed; the remains of HMS Ark Royal is designated a war grave although only one man lost his life. If there is the chance of human remains being found then – usually – permission to dig up aircraft wreckage is withheld.
Yet if you are a multi-millionaire with connections then a little thing like respect for the grave site appears to get forgotten about rather quickly.

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

9,085

Send private message

By: John Green - 9th August 2015 at 18:12

Alan

I think few will have a clue as to what HMS Hood is or was or, the circumstances of her sinking.

Still, you’ve posted a link !

1 2 3
Sign in to post a reply