# Why was HMS Hood special? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [June 16, 2023, 2:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-hms-hood-special/985626 "2023-06-16T14:00:40Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Sailboat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sailboat/32/461_2.png) [@Sailboat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sailboat)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2024, 9:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-hms-hood-special/985626/61 "2024-09-04T21:35:09Z")
YouTuber Drachinifel has a video suggesting an alternative theory of the cause of _Hood’s_ demise: [Sorry, apparently I can’t link to YT] It’s been some time since I watched it, but as I recall, he posits she heeled during a turn, lifting the belt to expose the bottom, and a shell went through…something like that. ---
**Author:** ![JRDelirious](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jrdelirious/32/9531_2.png) [@JRDelirious](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JRDelirious)\ **Post date:** [September 5, 2024, 1:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-hms-hood-special/985626/62 "2024-09-05T01:45:38Z")
> [@Sailboat](#): > > YouTuber Drachinifel has a video suggesting an alternative theory of the cause of _Hood’s_ demise: > > [Sorry, apparently I can’t link to YT] Won’t necessarily let you live-link but it will let you copy the link to YT [The Loss of HMS Hood - But why did it blow up?? (youtube.com)](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CLPeC7LRqIY) ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [September 5, 2024, 1:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-hms-hood-special/985626/63 "2024-09-05T01:51:03Z")
Also (same link): [![](https://img.youtube.com/vi/CLPeC7LRqIY/maxresdefault.jpg "The Loss of HMS Hood - But why did it blow up??") ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CLPeC7LRqIY) ---
**Author:** ![Dissonance](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/85f322/32.png) [@Dissonance](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dissonance)\ **Post date:** [September 5, 2024, 4:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-hms-hood-special/985626/64 "2024-09-05T04:22:12Z")
> [@Sailboat](#): > > [Sorry, apparently I can’t link to YT] The workaround that’s always worked for me is to take the raw link that gives you the error message and add a / to the end of it. It fixes it (at least for me), don’t ask me why. Example, link deliberately broken with a space after www. : [https://www](https://www). [youtube.com/watch?v=CLPeC7LRqIY](http://youtube.com/watch?v=CLPeC7LRqIY) And to get it to actually link and embed [https://www](https://www). [youtube.com/watch?v=CLPeC7LRqIY/](http://youtube.com/watch?v=CLPeC7LRqIY/) ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [September 9, 2024, 7:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-hms-hood-special/985626/65 "2024-09-09T19:21:42Z")
“Blown Up, Sir!”. ---
**Author:** ![Capn\_Carl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/838e76/32.png) [@Capn\_Carl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Capn_Carl)\ **Post date:** [September 10, 2024, 1:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-hms-hood-special/985626/66 "2024-09-10T01:44:45Z")
It’s been a long time since I watched that Drachinfel video but IIRC such a hit doesn’t align well with the condition of _Hood_’s wreck. Un-modernized WW1 battleships were not well protected against gunfire from a 1940’s battleship. The new armor-piercing shells were harder, the guns fired at higher velocities, and the fire control system could allow more hits at longer ranges. At the moment _Hood_ was hit, there were multiple trajectories that a German 15” shell could penetrate to a magazine. ---
**Author:** ![Earl\_Snake-Hips\_Tucker](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/earl_snake-hips_tucker/32/3269_2.png) [@Earl\_Snake-Hips\_Tucker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Earl_Snake-Hips_Tucker)\ **Post date:** [September 10, 2024, 3:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-hms-hood-special/985626/67 "2024-09-10T15:36:47Z")
Going from memory here. . . In addition to whatever else disadvantages Hood might have had in the shooting match, it certainly didn’t help that a) They were firing on PoW instead of Bismarck at first, and b) even with that, Bismarck either had better optics or ranging, because they were straddling Hood practically at the get-go. ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2024, 5:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-hms-hood-special/985626/68 "2024-09-16T17:17:52Z")
> [@Earl\_Snake-Hips\_Tucker](#): > > a) They were firing on PoW instead of Bismarck at first Hood did not fire at Prince of Wales. That would have been an effectively impossible error to make, as they were in formation. She first fired at Prinz Eugen, so maybe you mixed up your princes. Bismarck was more accurate than Hood likely because Hood was trying to maneuvre closer while also firing; her captain knew his ship was in danger if hit with a plunging shot and wanted to narrow the range. Prince of Wales actually landed the first hit. ---
**Author:** ![Earl\_Snake-Hips\_Tucker](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/earl_snake-hips_tucker/32/3269_2.png) [@Earl\_Snake-Hips\_Tucker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Earl_Snake-Hips_Tucker)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2024, 5:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-hms-hood-special/985626/69 "2024-09-16T17:37:43Z")
Right. And by the way, for those who don’t know, one of the mods here was related to Prinz Eugen commander Helmuth Brinkmann, although I don’t recall how distant. ---
**Author:** ![Capn\_Carl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/838e76/32.png) [@Capn\_Carl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Capn_Carl)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2024, 1:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-hms-hood-special/985626/70 "2024-10-04T01:54:14Z")
In addition to having their rear guns masked, the British had other disadvantages. They were going into the wind which kept spraying their optics, _Prince of Wales_’ crew was green, and _Hood_ had a 20 year old fire control system. _PofW_ was first to hit, but she’d been firing for longer than the German ships. IIRC, it took her 5 or 6 salvoes to get on target. On the other side, _Prinz Eugen_’s first salvo straddled and may have hit _Hood_. Her 3rd salvo definitely hit. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2024, 4:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-hms-hood-special/985626/71 "2024-10-04T04:53:33Z")
> [@Capn\_Carl](#): > > It’s been a long time since I watched that Drachinfel video His recap of [www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Mdi\_Fh9\_Ag&t=167s](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Mdi_Fh9_Ag&t=167s) is amazing, with so much dry humor. ---
**Author:** ![Capn\_Carl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/838e76/32.png) [@Capn\_Carl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Capn_Carl)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2024, 1:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-hms-hood-special/985626/72 "2024-10-31T01:48:45Z")
Back to the OP, _Hood_ was special because she had a rare combination of 3 characteristics: —Battleship armor —Battleship armament —Capable of 30+ knots How rare was this combination? Well, until the new battleships showed up in 1940, _Hood_ was the only battleship in any navy with these features. ---
**Author:** ![Alessan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alessan/32/465_2.png) [@Alessan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alessan)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2024, 9:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-hms-hood-special/985626/73 "2024-10-31T09:00:15Z")
I think our conclusion is that it only _thought_ it had battleship armor. ---
**Author:** ![Gordon\_G](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/3da27b/32.png) [@Gordon\_G](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gordon_G)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2024, 12:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-hms-hood-special/985626/74 "2024-10-31T12:05:28Z")
Wikipedia tells us: " By early 1940, _Hood_ 's machinery was in dire shape and limited her best speed to 26.5 knots (49.1 km/h; 30.5 mph); she was refitted between 4 April and 12 June." This is unclear: What was her best speed _after_ the refitting? Wikipedia also shows " Despite the appearance of newer and more modern ships, _Hood_ remained the largest warship in the world for 20 years after her commissioning, and her prestige was reflected in her nickname, “The Mighty Hood”. _Hood_ was involved in many showing-the-flag exercises." As for the sudden sinking of this historic ship, wasn’t that mainly due simply to bad luck, rather than being overmatched? ---
**Author:** ![John\_DiFool](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_difool/32/19543_2.png) [@John\_DiFool](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_DiFool)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2024, 12:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-hms-hood-special/985626/75 "2024-10-31T12:20:09Z")
She reached 32 knots on her trials, note. Any competent engineer would sigh at your last comment. Luck is the residue of design, c.f. a certain engineer named Murphy. Whether it was from her weak deck armor or inadequate belt (vs. Bismarck’s 15 inchers), something _did_ go wrong there. [In the other thread there was a link to how her hydrodynamic profile may have caused a dip in the water level near the C turret magazines.] This also helped doom Scharnhorst when a shell hit her exposed boiler which had to bulge above the level of the belt armor, tho [there is some uncertainty there apparently](https://www.kbismarck.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=6790). Said design flaw remains one way or another. ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2024, 9:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-hms-hood-special/985626/76 "2024-10-31T21:01:59Z")
> [@Capn\_Carl](#): > > Battleship armor This is a tricky one. Where is the armor? IIRC Hood had weak deck armor which was her Achilles’s Heel. By comparison, the US Iowa class battleships had an all-or-nothing armor scheme. Armor the hell out of the important bits and (mostly) ignore the rest. There are other armor schemes of course. As with most warship designs the armor was a balancing act. ---
**Author:** ![Capn\_Carl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/838e76/32.png) [@Capn\_Carl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Capn_Carl)\ **Post date:** [November 1, 2024, 12:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-hms-hood-special/985626/77 "2024-11-01T00:10:52Z")
_Hood_’s armor was absolutely battleship armor. At completion she was the most heavily armored battleship in the RN. Her side, deck, and turret armor was better than all existing RN battleships. The ‘fatal flaw’ story about her deck armor makes for good drama but she was just old by 1941, and all the unmodernized WW1 BBs had comparatively thin deck armor by then. ---
**Author:** ![Ludovic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/7ab992/32.png) [@Ludovic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ludovic)\ **Post date:** [November 1, 2024, 12:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-hms-hood-special/985626/78 "2024-11-01T00:27:12Z")
Plus the Wikipedia page at least says that deck armor penetration doesn’t figure into a lot of the sinking theories and people are not sure that the deck armor was susceptible to plunging fire at that range anyway. So even if it was weak, it wouldn’t be the “Achilles’ Heel” in the sense of a directly-fatal vulnerability. ---
**Author:** ![Capn\_Carl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/838e76/32.png) [@Capn\_Carl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Capn_Carl)\ **Post date:** [November 1, 2024, 12:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-hms-hood-special/985626/79 "2024-11-01T00:31:01Z")
Agreed. By the time she took the fatal hit, she was technically too close for _Bismarck_’s fast and flat-trajectory shells to penetrate her deck armor. There are several ways they could punch through her side armor, though. ---
**Author:** ![LSLGuy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lslguy/32/5813_2.png) [@LSLGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LSLGuy)\ **Post date:** [November 1, 2024, 1:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-hms-hood-special/985626/80 "2024-11-01T13:15:45Z")
> [@Capn\_Carl](#): > > Back to the OP, _Hood_ was special because she had a rare combination of 3 characteristics: > —Battleship armor > —Battleship armament > —Capable of 30+ knots > > How rare was this combination? Well, until the new battleships showed up in 1940, _Hood_ was the only battleship in any navy with these features. > [@Capn\_Carl](#): > > but she was just old by 1941, The latter is really the point. What you said in the first snip I quoted was all totally true. At the time Hood went on her first patrol. By the time of her final battle the list looked more like > —Obsolete amounts of Battleship armor > —Obsolete amounts & kinds of Battleship armament > —Capable of ~~30+~~ 26 knots on a good day in favorable conditions. My bottom line: Lots of military hardware retains a mystique of greatness long past its practical sell-by date. Witness the current enthusiasm for the A-10 Warthog or the long fight the Navy had to go through to get permission to scrap the grossly obsolete CVN-65 _Enterprise_. HMS _Hood_ was another such example. One that had the misfortune to go out in especially spectacular fashion. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-hms-hood-special/985626.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-hms-hood-special/985626.md?page=5)