Pages

Pages

Saturday, 24 May 2025

The anniversary of the sinking of HMS Hood

On 24th May 1941, HMS Hood and HMS Prince of Wales intercepted the German battleship Bismarck and cruiser Prinz Eugen in the Denmark Strait … and within ten minutes of the British opening fire, HMS Hood blew up and sank in three minutes. Only three of her crew survived, and soon afterwards HMS Prince of Wales was hit by several 8-inch/20.3cm and 15-inch/38cm and began to experience problems with her main armament. Her captain — Captain John Catteral Leach — decided to break off the action and Bismarck sailed on into the Atlantic, later to be sunk by HMS King George V and HMS Rodney after being damaged by torpedoes dropped by Fairey Swordfish aircraft from HMS Ark Royal.


HMS Hood was intended to be the first of four Admiral-class battlecruisers, which were originally conceived as improved versions of the Queen Elizabeth-class battleships. However, as the Germans were apparently building bigger and better battlecruisers than those available to the Royal Navy's Grand Fleet, it was decided to recast the design so that four fast and heavily armed battlecruisers could be added to the fleets battlecruiser force. The class was to have consisted of HMS Hood, HMS Anson, HMS Howe, and HMS Rodney, but the latter three ships were suspended so that the material needed to build them could be diverted so that higher-priority merchantmen and escort vessels could be built.

As designed, HMS Hood's characteristics were as follows:

  • Displacement 45,470 tons
  • Dimensions:
    • Length: 860ft (262.1m)
    • Beam: 104ft (31.7m)
    • Draught: 31ft 6in (9.6m)
  • Propulsion: 24 Yarrow boilers providing steam to 4 geared turbines, each driving a propeller
  • Speed: 32 knots
  • Range: 7,500 nautical miles at 14 knots
  • Complement: 820
  • Armament:
    • 4 × twin 15-inch/380mm guns
    • 16 × single 5.5-inch/140mm guns
    • 4 × single 4-inch/102mm AA guns
    • 10 × 21-inch/533 mm torpedo tubes
  • Armour:
    • Belt: 5 to 12 inches (127mm to 305mm)
    • Decks: 1 to 5 inches (20mm to 127mm)
    • Barbettes: 12 icnhes (305mm)
    • Turrets: 11 to 15 inches (279mm to 381mm)
    • Conning tower: 9 to 11 inches (229mm to 279mm)
    • Torpedo bulkheads: 0.75 to 1.5 inches (19mm to 38mm)

She was laid down at John Bown's shipyard on the River Clyde on 1st September 1916, launched on 22nd August 1918, and commissioned on 15th May. She looked graceful and menacing, and very soon became the most well-known and admired warship in the Royal Navy.

Shortly after commissioning she became the flagship of the Battlecruiser Squadron of the Atlantic Fleet. She visited Scandinavia towards the end of 1920, and then joined the Mediterranean fleet from 1921 to 1922. HMS Hood then took part in a visit to Brazil and the Caribbean, followed in November 1923 by a world cruise from west to east via the Panama Canal. This cruise lasted ten months and included visits to South Africa, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, and the United States.

HMS Hood in 1924.

On her return to the UK, HMS Hood spent half the year in home waters and the other half in the Mediterranean. She underwent a major refit from 1st May 1929 to 10th March 1931. During this refit a catapult, crane and associated equipment were fitted to the quarterdeck aft of 'Y' turret. She cruised to the Caribbean in early 1932, followed by a short refit from 31st March and 10th May 1932, during which the catapult and other equipment were removed. A further short refit took place from 1st August and 5th September 1934, as a result of which her secondary and antiaircraft fire-control directors were rearranged.

HMS Hood in 1932. At this time she was fitted with a catapult on her quarterdeck.

By this time HMS Hood was spending more time in the Mediterranean, although she did returned to the UK in 1936 for a refit that lasted from 26th June to 10th October. By this time HMS Hood was in need of a substantial reconstruction and renovation to ensure that she would be able to continue in front line service, and this was planned to take place in 1941. The main changes were as follows:

  • The installation of new, lighter turbines and boilers
  • The replacement of her existing secondary armament by eight twin 5.25-inch (133mm) gun turrets.
  • The installation of six octuple 2-pounder anti-aircraft guns
  • The reinforcement of the deck armour.
  • The fitting of a cross-deck aircraft catapult.
  • The removal of the torpedo tubes.
  • The removal of the conning tower.
  • The rebuilding of the bridge superstructure.

As it was, none of this took place, although HMS Hood's secondary armament was replaced. By 1940 the 5.5-inch guns had been removed, as had her 4-inch anti-aircraft guns. In their place, she was fitted with seven twin QF 4-inch Mark XVI dual-purpose guns and five unrotated projectile (UP) launchers, each of which could fire twenty projectiles. It is worth noting that in 1931, a pair of octuple mountings for the 40mm (1.6-inch) QF 2-pounder Mk VIII anti-aircraft guns had been mounted on the shelter deck, abreast of the funnels, with a third added in 1937. In addition, two quadruple Vickers 0.5-inch (12.7mm) Mk III machine gun were added in 1933 and a further two in 1937. She did, however, retain six fixed 21-inch (533mm) torpedo tubes, three on each broadside.

Once the Second World War had broken out, HMS Hood joined the Home Fleet, and took part in operations in the North Sea, during which her port torpedo bulge and freshwater condensers — which were already seriously malfunctioning — were damaged by 250kg (550lb) bomb dropped by a Junkers Ju88 bomber. By early 1940 her propulsion machinery was in very poor condition and her maximum speed was 26.5 knots. As a result, HMS Hood underwent some remedial repairs during a refit that lasted from 4th April to 12th June 1940.

HMS Hood then joined Force H in the Mediterranean and in July 1940 she took part in Operation Catapult, the Royal Navy's attempt to neutralise the French fleet moored at Mers-el-Kébir. She returned to the UK in August 1940 and in January 1941 she underwent yet another refit that lasted until March. Despite this, HMS Hood remained in a very poor condition, and she underwent no further refits before she was sunk on 21st May 1941.

Captain Leach's sketch of the explosion that caused HMS Hood to sink.

So, why did she sink?

At the time, the Admiralty Board of Enquiry reported 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 (15,100m), resulting in the explosion of one or more of the aft magazines.'

The Director of Naval Construction — Sir Stanley V. Goodall — proposed an an alternative theory. He argued that HMS Hood had been destroyed by one of the warheads of her torpedoes exploding. This led to the convening of a second Board of Enquiry which concluded 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.'

The wreck of HMS Hood was found in 2001, and the images showed that the aft magazines had exploded and that the bow forward 'A' Turret was missing. The most recent evidence suggests that the initial explosion took place in the aft section of the ship — probably a German 15-inch shell exploding in the 4-inch magazine which caused a fire and cordite explosion that spread to the neighbouring 15-inch magazine — and that the resulting rapidly expanding combustion gases caused the hull to experience structural failure and to break into two at the aft armoured bulkhead.


Captain John Catterall Leach, DSO, MVO was the father of Admiral of the Fleet Sir Henry Conyers Leach, GCB, DL (18th November 1923 to 26th April 2011), who served as First Sea Lord during the Falklands War

6 comments:

  1. I couldn't resist the temptation:
    https://youtu.be/M1Ufc2hI4FM?si=5TH_E6eauXb9xXnZ

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ross Mac,

      Cheers! I'd never heard this before ... and now that I wish that I hadn't! ;^)

      All the best,

      Bob

      Delete
  2. Bob -
    It seems surprising to read that the weakness in 'Hood's' construction was the same that led to the destruction of three British battlecruisers at Jutland. Was it not corrected, or was it a case of the correction being insufficient?
    The other surprise is to discover that the Hood was bally near as big as Bismarck, and with the same kind of armament. Mind you, Bismarck's victory, with the help only of a single heavy cruiser, over two British battleships was a feat in itself.

    The song, 'Sink the Bismarck' was fairly popular in 1960. About then (I was 9) I recall playing the paper game 'Battleships and Cruisers'. The flagship was called the Bismarck.
    Cheers,
    ion

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Archduke Piccolo (Ion),

      C S Forester summed up the situation regarding the Hood and the Bismarck very well in his book SINK THE BISMARCK! when a fictional conversation takes place between a senior naval officer and an RAF officer. The former asks the latter how he would feel facing a modern fighter if he was flying a 1918 biplane. The Hood’s design was based on pre-Jutland thinking, and although it was improved during the building process, it was still essentially flawed. The basic structure was weak in several places, especially where the long forecastle broke aft of the funnels and ahead of the rear turrets. It was notoriously wet, even at low speed and this is one reason why the catapult etc., was removed.

      HMS Prince of Wales was still not fully serviceable at the time of the battle and still had some dockyard workers aboard trying to fix various problems, including a faulty quadruple turret. Needless to say, it didn’t function properly during the battle and was one reason why her shooting was inaccurate and why her captain broke off the action. Mind you, the hit on the bridge also contributed to the decision. Again, as Forester pointed out, the POW was too new and Hood was too old.

      All the best,

      Bob

      Delete
  3. Epic story .. I agree the 15" shell hitting 4" magazine with sympathetic explosion of the main magazine .. viz Bill Jurens .. even though a naval academic paper suggested HMS Hood had internal structural issues .. here is that particular rabbit hole or looking glass .. https://historyfirst.com/hms-hood-sunk-by-mechanical-failure-not-bismarck/

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Geordie an Exile FoG,

      Reading some of the design notes about HMS Hood, the weakness of the hull structure, particularly where the long forecastle met the quarterdeck. I understand that attempts were made to strengthen the ship’s structure, but what was really needed was a complete rebuild. If that had happened as planned, she would have had her service life extended to at least 1950.

      All the best,

      Bob

      Delete

Thank you for leaving a comment. Please note that any comments that are spam or contain phishing messages or that come from Google Accounts that are 'Unknown' will be deleted.