~ 'SECRET

Attention is called to .:the penalties attacking to any infraction of -the :

, Official Secrets ~cts.

I

C.B. 04039 (2)' <,

-:

ADDENDUM No. 2

TO

C.B. 04039.,.- ARMOURPROTECTI9N, 1939

1942

I I ,

GUN.NERY AND ANn_~AIRCRAFT WARFAIrE DIVISro~> NAVAL-STAFF,

ADMIRALTY.

\ .

ADMIRALTY, S. w.i.

20th.1uly, 1942.

G.D.O.786/42.

C.B. 04039 (2), Addendum No·. 2 to C.B. 04039-Armour Protection, 1939,

/ . '

having been approved by ¥:r Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty, is pro-

mulgated for information and 'guidance.

This book supersedes C.B .. ~04039 (1) (1942), all : copies of which' should. be disposed of in accordance With C.B. Farm. U.2.D.

, J

'.. ;·'II_1 ~J)!h

V " .. ).; 5)(:

,:,,/1

/ / -,

/ i >

/ I" .

To Flag Officers and ~9mmaii.ding .Officers

of H.M. Ships and Vess~ concerned.

" ",£ [ •• .; \:-

.. i" I:';

I

FIG. I.-Half sections of "Tirpitz '/. and" King George V," to face page 1.

FIG. II.-Annour . ", ~fficien_cy~ diagrams of

"!irpit:~' and :' King George y.-"

FlG. '~~L---Ditto of "Tirpitz" and" Nelson:':

. .

FIG. fV.-Ditto .of "Tirpitz " and .. Queell

- / Elizabeth."

r

/

/

/

. ,:) -~ .. ' .

,.1:

MEMORANDUM ON ATTACK ON "TIRPlTZ"

Certain additional information concerning the constructional features of " Bismarck" and " Tirpitz " has recently become available .as. the result of interrogation of prisoners from the former ship, and also from reliable Russian sources. The recovery of an unexploded 15~in. shell from "Prince of Wale's" has also enabled conclusions to be drawn with regard to the weight and penetrative po;wer of the German 15-in. shelL This information has been ,analysed to ascertain the ranges and inclinations at which British ships should, theoretically, have advantage over "Tirpitz" from the point of view of probable damage from gunfire-in-single ship

engagements. L.

Construction and Armour of. " Tirpitz "

2. Figure Lc-This shows' a half-section of "Tirpitz" and for purposes of comparison a half-section of "King George V" has been drawn alongside it to the same scale. The arrangement ?J~armour shown for" Tirpitz" can be taken as correct, but the thicknesses' are .I:lncert,ain.

3. The most noteworthy' features of the "Tirpitz" construction are the

following :- .,

(a) The armour deck is situated at the bottom of the main belt and not

at the top of it, as-in" King Ge.9rg~""y." ,

(b) The main belt extends a comparatively short distance below the:

waterline. '

(c) The magazines are placed immediately below the armour deck ,_<

German I5-in. Shell

4. It has been established that the German lS:'in. shell weighs approximately 1,764 lbs. Deductions have -been made hom information available and the. following combination is accepted fS most' pr,obable.

~~:~~eight .. _ :/ I ~,764lbS.

1\LV. .. ~.I.. 2,7:l1 ft. per.seer I

/'

Immunity Diagrams / 1 ..... ,

5. Diagrams have be~n prepared .to show immunity . ranges for "Tirpita ' when attacked by "King George V,': 'v Nelson '~or" Queen Elizabeth" class of battleship, and also for these ships when attacked by " Tirpitz " (Figures II,

Ill, IV). ~

6. It follows f{om these diagrams that " King George V." s~oulQ. defeat the German armour at ranges between 22,000 and 31,()00 yards and at the same tune will be immune from German attack. ," Nelson" should defeat the German armour at ranges of 22,OOO-26,OOO.yards 'and at the same time will be immune from German attack. There is no zone in whiqh" Queen Elizabeth " can be certain of defeating' the German armour and. at the same time be immune from German attack.

Best Fighting Range

7. Within the , zone when neither ship can defeat the other's protection, advantage can be taken of the constructional features of " Tirpitz " referred to in para. 3 (a), (b) and (c) above. If British capital ships engage" Tirpitz " at say 22,000 yards, the angle of descent of the shell will be about 18°. The shell will then be (( lobbing" into the weU formed by the side armour and the armour deck, and even when they-do not perforate the armour deck, they will wreck large volumes of the ship above that deck and may cause some damage in the region of the waterline, The relative volumes of "<Tirpitz " and " King George V" which are susceptible to this type of attack are hatched with-sloping. lines in Figure I.

'2

At thisrange of 22,000 yards: none of the British shell will ricochet water and there is a good-chance of II near shorts II getting into the ship armour .belt and causing! s.erious under-water damage;"

, -It-is to be noted that t 'Tirpitz " magazines are situated il~:m;,~!~~rJt~

the armour deck (the magazines of the .two ships are ie

Figure I),~Thus flash and splinters can enter the .German deck is penetrg,Je4, whereas in the Britishships this can only is perforated: Even then the British ships enjoy further splinter p~otilc~ion with whi~~h their, magazines arefitted.

, , R In FigureI is indicated the percentage of-total target represented

deck, upper belt, main belt gnd under-water structure of "Tirpitz" at yards, It will be seen that the.main belt forms. a very small portion of the target, The greater parLQ:! the target consists of the vulnerable" well" and

under-water structure.· Y<' .' J.

Thus. from general material corisiderations 22,000 yards is a g96d fighting conilition for the' attack of "Tirpitz." ' "<KingGeorge V ,,' can, heavier pnniShrn,t/by engaging ,at a??ut 28,000 yards. '

9. Having discussed the question- .of range, consideration can be given inclinations, at which British ships would app~ar to have the advantage, ,

" King. George V ". class are very well protected in accordance .... ,u , •• uv~",

standards 'anJi_:should be relativelysafe at' 'ariy inclination at the .'

but from the point of view of getting all gnns to bear witha reasonable in order to avoid risks due to super armour-pier.cing performance of theshell, it is considered that a bearing of ·abo~t~90r is ~est.

For" Nelson" class also, :a: bearing of about 60° is best; very. fine entail the. possibility of splinters from a-lucky' shot from right ahead

the vicinity of the magazines. + 1 /

In .. Queen Elizabeth" class, although the armour', protection over magazines is adequate, .the umbrella effect is moderate only in II Queen "Warspite Wand 'i Valiant" and not so good in .. Malaya." Thus when of ship is fighting on bearings appreciably off the beam, there is soine risk' passing in~o. the rPiI: just ~lear of the main. ~~gazine protection and .

such a position Yl~t Its splinters reachthe vtcmrty of a magazine. For beam bearings i'ppear best although this increase~the.r.ange at which the

gives compley"protection. '. I,

" Reno:wnF~'is not protected u~ to the standard necessary to/engage" successfully> Her de._ck armour is relatively stronger than her side she is therefore more, favourably .placed at fine bearings, when the side

will give J;rot~:tiori against IS-i,\: attack,' ,

10, Action is being taken as-opportunity offers to improve the all our Capital Ships 'by the addition of splinter protection to magazines

them a higher qegree of immunity- from the lucky shot which passes in inclinations or otherwise avoids. the main protection originally provided . ma~azine/sJ;pd's? may' send its splinters into the ~cinity of the magazines.

11. 'f~om Figure I and for rea:so~s si~ilar to those given above, " is far more susceptible to serious damage ,from S.A.P. type bombs than is George V" class.

, .

12_ All the abov~ remarks are based purely on materiaCand, in partie'mar pro_tection considerations. They take ?W ·account. whatever 'of operational or considerations. .

TIRPITZ

KI NG GEORGE 11:

.-'

HALF - SECTIONS THROUGH MAIN MAGAZINES

ARMOUR EFFICIENCY DL

TIRPITZ

Against 14 inch British Attack

INCLINATION OF SHIP TO LINE OF FIRE

-50· 60· 70°80. 90· 100· 110· 120·'130·

IO'OOOf~;l~iiii'~~1

12,000 ---~---p L __ -L __

I I 13, in. B~lt

14,000 -~-+---~---, - --- --- ,---1----:--':'

I I ,1 I . I I I

16,000 - - -,--- '---i -: -:r- - -"1----I--.-i -1- -;- --,---

: : :Pertod of ImmunIty 1 1 I

I~,OOO - --,---, - - i- - - i -- + --I - --I - - - ~ ---:- --

. I 1 I I I I 1. I I

20,000 ---j-- --1--- -1- - -t--- -f- - - _,- --j- - --1- - --,- ---

, : I . I 1 1 I 1 1 3·2 in. Deck

22,000'

24,000 26,000 28,000 30,000 32})00

34,000

38,000

'e5l1H,wr2l.J3OjPr1077,150.7..fZ.

{Machinery Spaces &} Magazines penetrated _ through Belt. '.

{Machinery Spaces } penetrated through _ - 14 in. Belt. .

Machinery Spaces } penetrated through - Deck.

{Machinery Spaces &} Magazines penetratedthrough Deck.

EFFICIENCY DIAGRAM.

K),OOO
{Machinery Spaces &
--:::- Magazines penetrated 12000
through Belt. , 14.000
{MaChinery Spaces 16000
penetrated through 18,000
14 in, Belt, .
20,()(X)
22000
-1Machinery Spaces 24,000
penetrated thrpugh 26000
Deck, ~.
28,000
30,000
{Machinery Spaces 32,000
- Magazines 34,000
through Deck.
36,000
38,000 ARMOUR EFFICIENCY

TIRPITZ

Against 16 inch British Attack

INeLiNA TION OF SHIP TO LINE OF FIRE

~ ~ ~ ~ ~IO~I~Q~~~

'IO'OOOf2~iilii~M~{MaChinery. Spaces &}

1 Magazines penetrated _

12,000 ---j-- -1---::" through Belt

14,000 ---:--'- 1 1,_~3~l~e~' <,

___ !- : __ _ ---l---.L__ {Macbinery Spaces '}

16,000 ; I I I 1 1 penetrated through -

1 1 I I 1 I 1 I I 13 in. Belt,

18,000 - --r---I- --1-- - -j- --1----1 -- -I- -r -,4-- - -1--

: : tperiod of Immunity: .l . :

20,000 - -,---T ---1----1---+ - --1---1- - -+ - - -j---

I 1 1 I I 1 I 13'2 in, Deck

22,000 l--r-r-:f--r-rl-,-r+--r7+"'T7+T7-7--T77"';::....;-7--'T-7~

24,000 26,000

30,000 32,000

34,000

36,000

38,000

{Machinery Spaces }

, penetrated through - Deck,

{Machinery Spaces & } Magazines penetrated - through Deck,

R EFFICIENCY DIAGRAM.

NELSON

Against 15 inch German Attack

20,000 22000

{Machinery Spaces } --: penetrated through Deck.

{Machinery Spaces & } - Magdzines penetrated through Deck.

26,000 28,000 30,000 32,000 34,000

ljlllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll1l36000

I 38£X)0

1

I·

ARMOUR EFFICIENCY [

10'OOO!~I~~~llililli;~~J~j~

I' ... {Machinery Spaces & ~

12,000 ~ - '::: Magazines penetrated

1 through 13 in. Belt.

14,000 -1-- -} --

I • I"

16,000 -1- - - ~ _- - -1 _

IB,OOO

20,000 1=-=;..=:.:;=-ry....::;H-=r=-r--:Ji..=--:rc...::;-±'F-'i4-=r=7-'=-r=-=,..:::Ij=....::;-=:";;;'=-';-::';:"":;":..:;:.:.:.;! 22,000 24,090

28,000 30,000

32,000

34,000

36,000

38,000

6/!H". W! 21.3J()/ PH{)77.160, 7.1i.

INCLINATION OF SHIP TO LINE OF FIRE

50° 60° 70° 80° 90° 100° 110° 120° 130°

TIRPITZ

Against 15 inch British Attack

{Machinery Spaces } penetrated through - Deck.

-

{Machinery Spaces & 1 Magazines penetrated - through Deck.

EFFICIENCY DIAGRAM.

QUEEN ELIZABETH Against 15 inch German Attack

INCLINATION OF SHIP TO LINE OF FIRE

50° 60° 70° 80° 90° 100° 110° 120° 130°

- Mdgdzines penetrated through Deck.

10,000
l. __ 12.000
I
I
---\--- 14,000
16,000
18,000
20,000
22000
24,000
26,000
28,000
30,000
32,000
34,000
36,000
38,000 {MdChinery Spaces } - penetrated through Deck.