Pinned post for Q&A :)

I was leafing through the James Cameron book at work and a co-worker said "Hey! That's my barber." We looked into it and sure enough, the fellow who's non battle station job on the Bismarck was cutting hair, survived the sinking, moved to Toronto and was still cutting hair as of the late 80's.

The TRUTH is that Bismark was sunk by a group of Japanese torpedo boats who had been wandering lost for 40-ish years. Kamtchatka is redeemed ! LOL

My brother once stood 6 hours in Texas on his only break on a business trip to get Bob Ballard to sign a picture of the Bismarck addressed to me then framed it for my birthday present. Still the best gift I've ever received.

Bismarck *faked her own sinking* and is living under an assumed name in Palm Springs.

I once talked to a survivor of the Prinz Eugen. He said that they all cried tears when they parted from Bismarck because they knew they would not see her again.

Around 1990 I was a real estate photographer in the hire of realtors in the Adelaide Hills This day I went to a house in the older German estates of the hills, a house located in open land that looked for all the world like it had been put there from Austria, and that Julie Andrews would make an appearance over the meadow at any instant. The house itself was quite the architectural triumph with splendid indoor/outdoor garden, a number of glazed interior walls, extensive use of interior masonry and timber work. The lady of the house spoke with a German accent and invited me to look around to get my bearings. As I passed one of the glazed walls I passed by a model of a warship in a glass case, an old man spoke to me in a German accent, 'do you know what ship that is?' to which I replied, "I knew her at once, she is unmistakably Bismark". His face filled with joy that I knew his ship. This frail old man was dying of cancer, and he described to me something of his experiences about being crew on Bismark. We exchanged a few questions, I recall he did tell me about being picked up by a British destroyer, and his term as a POW. And that after the war was over he returned to Germany only briefly to bring his wife back to the UK where they lived until emigrating to Australia. In an experience that I found hard to forget, I often wonder how he got on.

The argument that the Royal Navy didn't sink Bismarck because her crew set off scuttling charges has always sounded to me like a defence lawyer trying to argue "yes, my client did stab the victim, shoot him and set him on fire, but it wasn't murder because the victim jumped off the roof to get away and the fall is what killed him."

The sheer amount of passive-aggressive Drachinifel in this episode is as awe-inspiring as it is entertaining.

None of the four Japanese carriers lost at Midway suffered any significant damage below the waterline by U.S. planes, but there's no question the U.S. sank them.

I once rubbed Bill Jurens very badly the wrong way by quoting some of the Channel 4 Hood & Bismark expedition conclusions. Seems he did not agree with the conclusions in question and felt that his professional reputation had been severely damaged by his name being included in the documentary and implying that he agreed with them. So just because a particular person was involved in the programme doesn't mean that they agree what the documentary maker finally puts out.

As a fellow British person, the sarcasm, wit and oh so not veiled putdowns are wonderful. Keep up the superlative work, Drach.

"Did the Royal Navy sink the Bismarck?" Wehraboo: No! "What did the Bismarck do about the Royal Navy trying to sink her?" Wehraboo: Made it easier for them... no, hang on a minute...

"This was revealed to me in a vision" is a great line to end next years april fools day video.

And so, Drach's never ending quest to dispel any and every myth about Bismarck continues...

The main launching point of my love for history was when my librarian in my grade-school saw that I kept checking out the same 3 books about the titanic….and she recommended “here’s another book about a different ship that sank, try this one.” This book included the history and design of the Bismarck, survivor accounts, and info from the Cameron dive research. She had NO idea what she had just set in motion.

Hearing how frustrated Drach sounds early in the video has me chuckling a bit. That tone of voice only ever means one thing: "I am right, and you are wrong. I can prove it, and I'm about to. Also, no; you can't stop me."

Honestly, If Drach says: "This was revealed to me in vision" I would take it at face value

It never occured to me that scuttling should be considered to be a ‘self kill.’ You wouldnt scuttle that large of an investment unless you were defeated. Say if the germans 100% were the reason she sank, how is that not still a british victory? They fought a battle to remove a threat, weither they put a hole that made her sink, or boxed her into a corner that germans had no choice but to sink her themselves is a major strategic victory either way. If the british goal was to protect shipping and open the seas, by removing axis threats, how is this not a clear victory? They went at her and as a result she scuttled herself?

The propaganda armor of the unsinkable Bismarck cannot be penetrated by reality of any caliber.

"There’s no way the Bismarck was damaged by the British. It's impossible." "Oh now you've done it. You summoned the Dark Lord of Naval History."

As I have mentioned in comments to a previous video, my late friend Cecil Greenwood of Mytholmroyd, West Yorkshire was present at this engagement on HMS Rodney's deck and hence witnessed the sinking of the Bismarck. He told me about his involvement, what he saw, and his feelings at the time. I clearly recall him telling me about him seeing the hit that disabled Bruno turret and simply feeling very relieved that it wasn't going to shoot at Rodney any more, tempered by his knowing that he'd just seen a lot of young men like himself killed by just that one shell out of the many hits he saw striking the upper works. From his position on deck he could actually see Rodney's shells in flight and estimate where they would hit even before they got there. I doubt he knew what actually sank Bismarck, but he definitely felt great pity for those on board.

This had me howling with laughter at your *barely masked* desire to start ranting and raving at people. This is the most polite, posh, and absolutely thoroughly well done essay of 'get fucked' nerd rage I've ever seen. I love it sir, bravo.

I've never heard those claims. I'm glad I've avoided that part of the internet. My question for those claimants is, why would the Germans scuttle Bismark if the RN was not about to either sink it or capture it?

The fact that anyone can seriously suggest that Rodney's 16' rifles would be unable to penetrate Bismarck's main belt at what was basically Lee-Enfield range is mind-numbingly stupid. I might believe it if they said it about the turtleback, but absolutely not the main belt.

just my two cents. Whether or not the Germans or British delivered the final blow is irrelevant. The actions the British took alone directly caused Bismarck sink other wise it would have made it to France. Whether or not it was guns or charges that delivered the final blow doesn't matter, the British are responsible for Bismarck's lost.

It's somewhat pointless, to be honest. The fact is, after about half an hour, Bismarck's guns were silenced and it was as good as sunk.

Bismarck's main armour belt extended 2.3 meters below and 2.4 meters above the waterline (As can be seen at 6:43). To intentionally & directly strike that long, narrow strake of armour, showing above the water's surface even from the range of sub 3000m that HMS Rodney closed to whilst making headway in a heavy stormy North Atlantic swell would be nigh on impossible. As the report clearly says "the very large number of hits on the main belt WERE MOSTLY IF NOT ALL FROM SECONDARY guns". A number of the major calibre hits that impacted that long narrow main armour belt more than likely ricochetted off the surface of the sea due to the relatively short range and flattened trajectories involved and lost a large part of their momentum as they did so, that is apart from the two penetrations which were probably the only two direct major calibre hits on the 320mm armour belt.. Gun data for Rodney's 16"/45 Mark I main guns shows their penetration ability as 14.4 inches of vertical armour at 15000 yards. She was firing a LOT closer than this for much of the engagement, so even taking into account her shells striking the main belt at a reasonable angle she would have very little problem with penetrating Bismarck's main belt of 320mm (12.6 inches). The principle is the same as arguing a dart cannot penetrate the skin of a balloon from 2 miles away. To which the answer is "of course it can.... if it can manage to hit it". P.S And don't even get me started about Bismarck's wiki page. I've lost count of the exchanges I've had with the page's "self appointed guardian" A.K.A Parsecboy, who polices the page using his jaded, biased agenda, and who when presented with corroborated evidence supporting facts which he doesn't like (such as admiralty reports from the UK national archives), or even correcting blatant errors or misrepresentations on the page, he as a "wiki approved editor" deletes any changes he doesn't like with impunity, and if you've really rubbed his nose in it, will also temporarily ban your IP address from editing wikipedia at all. Not that it "gets my goat"... HONESTLY !!!!

I try to avoid arguments about Bismarck on social media. I've always felt the main lesson learned was, it's unwise to go out unsupported and virtually alone.

I like the logic at play in these arguments: "The German engineering was FLAWLESS, and the Fuhrer's blessing repelled ALL shells no matter how physically impossible, meaning the Bismarck was INVINCIBLE and could have destroyed the entire Royal Navy single-handedly through sheer discipline and good training. It's just that these invincible super-soldiers decided to sabotage their own ship and jump into the sea for literally no reason, that's the only reason they lost!"

I will probably never understand people who insist that a ship which was rendered immobile and toothless by enemy action, and whose crew was in the process of taking to the lifeboats, was "scuttled" instead of "sunk" - and further, that this is somehow *very important.* At best this is a distinction without a difference, as there was zero chance _Bismarck_ was going to reach a friendly shore. Weirder yet, this delusion seems most prevalent in the former _Allied_ nations. All I can conclude is that people who fetishize the WW2 Axis militaries be weird, yo.

"Saying the Royal navy did not sink the Bismark because it was scuttled, is like saying the allies did not win WW2 because Hitler committed suicide." - I can't remember who

Dear Drach, Excellent review of the Cameron Expedition Report. Your careful citation and refutation of the claims made in Wikipedia, etc. indicate that you are a first-class scholar of the sort who can state specific views in a way that can be supported. Perhaps the only reason you couldn’t wear the cap and gown to teach at Cambridge or Oxford is that you are *not* a bore *nor* full of yourself, which is an automatic disqualification if one is to be considered for professorship. * 😉 PS I always look for your new posts as s breath of fresh air soon as I open YT. Your precision as an engineer and dry British wit, along with commentary such as that presented in the bit bout the "Mark XIV: Failure is like Onions," is just what I need before looking at Fake News of all sorts. (In my future InfoSec assignments, I'll make sure my team watches that 45 minutes of "failure Analysis" *before* a single line of code/test script is written.) The last reliable news we had in the USA was when we lost Edward R Murrow, "The Voice of London," reporting during the "Blitz" (and after), along with the last of his “Boys,” Andy Rooney and Walter Cronkite. If you want to see a *REAL* documentary, watch Murrow's *Harvest of Shame* on YT. * Note: I have "Been there/Done that," which I why, after 5 *frustrating* years as an associate professor in Higher Education and Statistical Measurement, including being a Dean/VP of Administrative Services for a small college, and a reviewer of papers for publication for the National Council on Measurement in Education (NCME), I quit, to pursue Computer Science--*0s* and *1s* don't give a damn about the politics of currently fashionable theories of education!

So, the Bismarck was scuttled by the British using special 14 & 16" demolition charges flung from a distance 😉

I feel it's an odd insult to the crew to say the Bismarck was mostly intact and went down entirely because it was scuttled. As this would mean the crew failed to fight the ship to her limit.

In which Drach does an excellent job of stretching "read the bloody report before hitting the Keyboard Warrior button you dumbarses" out past the crucial ten-minute mark in his signature dry and understated style. Informative, interesting and entertaining, as always. The warship guides are still great "meat and potatoes" content for the channel but the historical retrospectives, analyses and lore lessons really guarantee that the likelihood of me unsubscribing is about as small as the chance that Bismarck was sunk by scuttling charges alone. Thanks for the excellent content once again mate!

My Father was involved in this action, commanding the secondary Port side forward turrets of the KGV (140 shells fired), he always said the the vessel was smoking from stem to stern at the end of the action and that much of that came for "below decks" rather than burning superstructure, he doubted the survival of those members of the crew who had not reached the deck and adamantlyrefuted the ship sunk because she was "scuttled"...

Drach in rant mode.. we are in for a fun Friday

I've always been annoyed by the Bismarck myth. Good on you for setting some things straight!

Weather or not the crew of Bismarck set off scuttling charges or not, He was sunk by the Royal Navy. The torpedo that took out the steering guaranteed his death, because there was no chance of the Kriegsmarine could get out to save him. Even if they had run out of ammunition, Admiral Tovey would have let the planes and destroyers have a go at him, and would have called for more ships to bombard the hulk. I strongly believe that Admiral Tovey would have not settled for anything less than the sinking of Bismarck. I don't think the option of capturing Bismarck was in his vocabulary at that time. The crew setting off scuttling charges only saved the Royal Navy fuel and ammunition. He was going down no matter how long it took. Excellent video Drach. Thanks and thank you for the copy of the report to read for myself.

I have to admit I find the whole discussion as to who sank the Bismark puzzling. If Bismark had scuttled herself before the RN even caught her that would definitely not have been seen as in any way a "victory" for the KM. Likewise the scuttling of Graf Spee was not seen as a "victory" in Germany - Hitler refused to allow Langsdorf's body to be repatriated. Likewise no-one (apart from maybe the crew of Renown) felt they had been cheated of a fight by Graf Spee being scuttled. At the end of the day the job of a battleship is to destroy enemy ships, not to valiantly scuttle itself.

Who in their right mind would believe, that a ship, hailed as the miracle of technological advances, got scuttled by it's crew. Imagine the scene, the ship is fine, torpedo defences are all right, armor belt and deck intact, not a single torpedo hit, you are being tailed by a vicious Royal Navy fleet, keen to avenge Hood, you are aiming straight for a French shore, yet despite all of this, you decide to scuttle the ship and drown in the icy cold water, just because some airplanes spotted you.

Well done Drach. Truly a pity there are those who parse words to the point of denying history. There are none so blind as those who will not see.

Bismarck suffered no damage.... in fact she was a giant submarine and merely submerged and left the area unscathed. She sailed South East towards the Bahama's where she still hunts ships for resupply today in the Bermuda Triangle. The Allied nations know this and but cover it up as if she weren't sunk it would be a national embarrassment. It's true, I swear daily.

Overlooked in the discussion of false claims about Bismarck's demise is that the report backs Lutjens decision to disengage. With flooding forward and in the engineering spaces Bismarck no longer had the speed to close the range on Prince of Wales and was one more 14" round from certain destruction. she was already mission killed so the correct decision was to break off and attempt to return to a friendly port.

Thank you Drach for a valiant effort in correcting "common knowledge" on the internet. I also have a spare broom if you'd like some help beating the ocean back. Seriously, though - thank you for your usual excellent and well researched job.

As a US Naval vet of 10 years, (74-84) I would like to comment. First of all, I was not on the Bismark nor was I on any of the British ships on that fateful day. Second, I have not gown down to see the remains of the Bismark nor would I if I had the chance. Third, I can only view the pictures / video that has been taken by someone else AND read / hear what has been reported. SO, having said that, my answer to what sank the Bismark would logically be, I truly do not know nor would I have any way of definitively knowing until such time, if at all, some one raises her and takes an in-depth look at the entire ship. NO ONE today really knows. If the ship was sunk by the British OR it was scuttled OR a combination of the two, it really does not matter except for pride. By the way Drac...as always a great / insightful and interesting presentation...thank you. Now I will shut up.

Stuff found by Ballard RMS Titanic, KMS Bismarck, USS Yorktown and the 50cents I lost in the Glenwood Springs Pool when I was Nine.

A new Drachinifel video is one of the few where I give it a thumbs up before I watch it. Fascinating as always.

It's always bizarre to me the claim of the scuttling. Like, I was already under the impression that, like a lot of sinkings, it is generally a mixture of factors, but the ferventness of people defending the German scuttling is surprising. It can be an inoffensive thing to look at in the academic sense, not so much when people get emotional since it probably matters little to the over 2,000 sailors who were killed aboard Bismarck and in the water afterwards.

Drach spitting facts and angering the wehr-aboos, what a glorious early start to the weekend!

Excellent job very well done. The way you explained everything makes perfect sense.

Longest 'well actually' video I've seen, keep up the great work Drach!

My boss has working in video and audio wiring for years, and he told me that he worked on Ballards expedition to find the titanic, helping to run the remote submarines.

Nice I was just watching a Bismarck documentary for the 10th time and this popped up, thanks Drach for something new as always

Fantastic rebuttal to these rumors! Your obvious disdain for rubbish claims and "history" reporting were priceless! Keep up the phenomenal work!!!

Thanks for another awesome video Drach. In a world where the prevailing attitude appears to be never let the facts get in the way of a good story it is great to have someone who won’t let a (good, bad or indifferent) story get in the way of the facts.

I think the discussion is kind of moot. Regardless of the mechanism of the sinking, it sank. It wouldn't have if the British hadn't been there. So... the interaction between the Brits and the Nazis generally and specifically caused the Bismark to sink. -.-

Ohhh F. ya! an unexpected awesome Drachinifel Fun-Friday video!

Idk if anyone else has taken the time to say so, but the quality of your advertisements for your sponsors have improved dramatically in quality as of late. Particularly the squarespace series where you build or edit your website. No lie, they are some of the most engaging, well thought out and informative. You can tell that you actually put some thought into them, all that to say your sponsors are really getting their monies worth when the ad is done as well as the rest of your content. Top notch as always Drach! Much love from Oregon

Great content. Thanks. Keep up the great work Drach.

Fundamentally, those ridiculous claims all still confirm ----- the Bismark sank ---- which was the outcome the Royal Navy wanted. Any ship facing the fire-power that Bismark faced would have suffered damage.

“This was revealed to me in a vision.” Best dry humor one liner I’ve heard this year. Hat’s off sir, I just spit a mouth full of beer out on the floor laugh/choking on that sarcastic gold.

Well presented! Thanks Drachinifel! :D

Thank you for enclosing the report. I will look forward to reading it. And once again thank you for such a well-documented video. I really appreciated it. ^^

I would interpret the section on Page 42 to mean that the armoured deck was not damaged by the outburst rather than checking for shell holes. It does seem a bit ambiguous.

"Don't let facts get in the way of a good story". Well done Drach, thank you for the facts that most seem to ignore. Bravo Zulu

Beautifully done. Thank you so much for your typical attention to detail and close scrutiny. An honest appraisal.

This was a fascinating video. Could we get some more videos on underwater archeology at some point?

This will be interesting haha! I'm looking forward to this! I always here people making outrageous claims about this dive

Drach letting his LaserPig out. Love it

I normally don't touch debunking videos of any sort with a barge pole, but since it was you I made an exception. Good job Drach.

😂 Drachy, is FIRED UP! Love ya work mate

This is just more of the idea that WW2 equipment was so advanced that nothing could touch them. Think Tiger tanks.

Thank you so much! It drives me crazy what passes for research these days. Cherry picking a few sentences out of context has become an art form... Great video more please!!!

Excellent analysis! Well done.

Love seeing this in-depth discussions on specific naval topics. One I'd really like to see you talk about is the single ship action between HMAS Sydney and the Raider Kormoran. You mentioned it in your video on HMAS Sydney, but if you've discussed it already, I've sadly missed it.

The story of premature torpedo explosions probably was confused with an earlier involving a flight of swordfish torpedo bombers mistaking a British cruiser for the Bismarck their attack failed because they were using magnetic detonators causing it explode immediately after hitting the sea, the silver lining from this incident, when the they did find and attack the Bismarck they used contact detonators that did work.

If a ship has already been damaged beyond any chance of staying afloat by enemy action how could it possibly be considered to have been intentionally scuttled? Scuttling involves a deliberate attempt to cause a ship to sink the ship by its own crew a choice that the British had already taken out of their hands.

As always, great stuff! Thank you!

Well done! An excellent summary of the conclusions from the 2001 expedition. Thank you for shedding some well needed light on the source material regarding the loss of the Bismarck.

After looking extensively into my sources (this video), I can be almost certain, that it is quite probable, perhaps even likely, that The Bismarck did indeed, sink. I'm still looking for absolute confirmation, but once, if, and when I find it, I shall contact the press, and Mr. Cameron out of courtesy.

A friend of mine said that the Bismarck was scuttled in the act of sinking. Really with all the damage she'd taken and the asymetrical flooding, she'd have sunk of progressive flooding regardless of anything else. And we've got examples of scuttlings that took a damn sight longer and were better prepared and planned. The scuttling of the HSF shows that even with the bilge pumps open, the watertight doors removed and judicious use of charges, it took ages for a capital ship to sink. The scuttling charges on Bismarck, if they were fired would have been in a delusatory and not organised way. And unless they blew the bottom out which they didn't then yeah, she's already going down due to flooding from god knows how many holes and dents in her sides, and the scuttling may have helped it along a bit.

Such a great presentation as always. AND a fantastic comment about doing your own research and drawing your own conclusions instead of just parroting what someone else said.

A Drach mic drop video never fails to bring a smile to my face.

I do have to wonder what these people think Bismarck is made out of, they seem to think that saying turtle back is enough, it's baffling. I imagine they think that it must have had thicker armour because it was like the biggest.

The just below surface seething anger, at times, bubbles forth in this subject by Drac, almost comical. I can just imagine the pain of being asked the same question, with expected erroneous held conclusions, over and over again. A true ground hog day. But deep down everyone wants the Bismarck to have survive the pounding given and it was the crew who sank her. Obviously that's not the case, as just watching a few minutes of the films of her final moments smoldering in frame will show, she was done.

Another Excellent Video! I wish someone would have written such copious notes about the Tirpitz when SHE was dismantled.

Thanks for a wonderful rebuttal video.

Drach sir, just to let you know, notifications are AOK got here pdq

Oooo. Interesting video today. I watched the expedition. It was amazing. Crazy to think about what it shows.. Seeing the sailors remains when they looked at the seaplane launcher was.. Haunting..

It appears the Amazon link in the description section of the video is broken. Also, thank you for this helpful video.

Superbly done and an excellent point made.

Great summary! As my grandma used to say: "People who are able to read have a clear advantage". But of course this will not keep many id..ts from further perpetrating their alternate facts...

I refuse to accept this. The Bismarck was the greatest ship to ever sail the seas, and could not have possibly been damaged by such trivial matters as being hit at close range by 16” AP shells. What truly sank the ship is clear as day to me…. When travelling through the Danish Straits to enter the North Sea, she must have unknowingly crossed paths with the ghost of the Kamchatka and was then cursed by that most vile plague of a ship. From that moment forward, the ship was doomed.

Well this was nice timing, almost 8h ago i watched your video about how hood sunk/exploded and now this video related to Bismarck in same day. I absolutely love this information from both your videos!

Another great, interesting and entertaining video.

There is something Ironic about Prince of Wales scoring a hit that affected the boilers and propulsion on Bismarck.

Now lets be honest, everyone knows the real ship that sunk the Bismark was the ORP Piorun. The crew had to scuttle the ship out of pure embarrassment for not being able to score any hits while being taunted by the enemy crew for over an hour. ^this is a joke

What is truly sad is the sheer number of people who seem to be incapable of reading and comprehending a report paper.