The Bismarck was a state of advanced technology for its era built with steel imported from Austria with such advanced systems that the alias had even contemplated not bombing it to try and stealing it from the Germans. There can be no doubt that the Bismarck is unsurpassed by all others for its time. Some of its technology is even still used on the advanced warships of today.
I’m sorry, what planet are you on? There’s loads of doubt, notably in the fact that it was mission-killed by a faulty battleship with dockyard workers aboard, crippled by an aircraft that wouldn’t have looked out of place over the trenches, then shot to pieces by a 20 year old relic and another faulty battleship.
And the technology argument is specious too - some of the technology of HMS Victory is still in use by modern navies, and Victory was still in commission during WW2, but claiming that “Some of its technology is even still used on the advanced warships of today” would rightly get me laughed at.
If the Bismarck was so faulty then why were the British so fearful of it?. Why were the railroads leading from Austria to Germany bombed, during the time the enriched ore was transported to the ship yards?. The technology on the Bismarck was so advanced that the crew had difficulty working with it which caused much of the chaos and downfall of the Bismark. The navigation system utilized on the Bismark is nothing to laugh at. Re: Wartime archive files on the Bismarck. The Bismarck was something to fear!
Reason wise,… German has few capital ships,… and Bismarck and her sister are the biggest of the lot,… so they are making center page stories over British papers.
and on the top,… it was not the ship itself feared by the british,. but the threat against allied merchants convoys does really matters,…
However,… i must agree, Bismarck should be one of the most outstanding battleships of its time,.
Cheers
G
However,… i must agree, Bismarck should be one of the most outstanding battleships of its time
In what way, if I may ask?
Well no, I´d rather propose a worldwide ban on mentioning “Bismarck” in WW2 forums as it always brings the worst up in people!
- those who thinks it´s the most crappy ship ever and can´t understand that it didn´t sink prior to its launch
-and those who think she´s beyond the state of art as of 2008 and actually invincible, (the Germans just felt like scuttling her that day)
Bismarck and Tirpitz did offer a wet foreship (as did many BB´s), a question of low freeboard, a shallow belt, tripple propellers (which rarely does a ship any good vibration-wise (they were better than the South Dakota class though), a range that worked out less than designed and the best armour quality (quality of the metal, not extent or lay-out), (followed closely by the British), by far the highest metacentric height of any WW2 BB (slower roll, easier to capsize -a deliberately chosen feature of German BB´s since the dawn of dreadnoughts), main caliber guns effective against belt armour at short range, but much less so against deck at long range, a high rate of fire from the main guns (a feature not useful in fx. the Denmark Strait engagement as time between firing at that range was determined by other factors than loading time).
A fault, design-wise was the weight consuming (and old fashioned) twin main gun turrets and seperate batteries for anti-DD and AA work. Like the Mediterrean powers and Japan the Germans could contemplate neither their BB´s working out of range of enemy DD´s, nor that dual purpose weapons could offer adequate protection.
Nor was the dedicated AA armament of 105/65´s adequate against aircraft and Tirpitz lived long enough to have 150mm and 380mm AA shells delivered (none of which could do much to protect the ship from aircraft). How many 128mm weapons they could have carried instead of the 150- and 105mm mix would be a question of space, not weight. A trippling of the main battery (3x3) could have bought a smaller (thus cheaper ship, thus more of them), a faster one, or a better armoured one.
At any rate the value/ton wasn´t good.
I have to say my favorite would the the Queen Anne’s Revenge. But for the purposes of the 20th century I would go with the Pennsylvania. Having planes fly off her at the end of WWI and then being instrumental in the start and for the duration of another war puts her memory in probably more then just my heart.
i have to admit,. that i like bismarck was due to the fact,. like the reason on why bismarck and tirpitz made headlines over british papers,. they are the biggest of what Germans could throw,.
about technological aspects, designs and so forth,. i was quite ignorant about it at first,. I was tried to find facts on what the ship all about,. i must admit i found that compare to King George V, Iowa, Yamato or other biggest’,. Bismarck was quite an average battleship.,.
However my choice was went to Yamato,. 
The Bismarck.
She was brave and is a legend, but I will also go with the Yamato and Iowa.
the “super Yamato” looks pretty cool.
pretty much the same except that the triple 46cm were replaced by 2 500mm guns.
I would go with the Iowa’s. Had the Montana’s been built they would have been most impressive.
Digger
Historically, England had seen other nations rowing boats as a “threat to their maritime security”…
When you Army has been pushed off the continent, your air force getting shot down and wasting it’s bombs, when you get a naval victory in the only service that the British could make a significant contribution to the war effort at that stage of the war…
You make the most of it…
Yamato, but I rather prefer the Japanes fast destroyers. They ambushed and destroyed a couple American destroyers at Guadalcanal. Tokyo Express!!!
there wasn’t much to ambush. we went there with very little to start with.
would say yamato taht was one mean SOB! 
I would have to go with the Mighty Hood, I think she deserves recognition.
The Hood gets my vote on this one.
That it isn’t beaten by a wood & canvas biplane ?
Although an Aircraft Carrier is a Warship, it is not a Battleship. The term is short for “Line of Battle ship” due to their method of tactical deployment in the old days. Might also be referred to as a “Ship of the Line” for the same reason.
I never could figure out why they didn’t convert the Iowa class to nuke propulsion. they spent all that money from the main deck up. but not below. in Nam the NJ cost a million bucks a day to keep it afloat and operational. especially fuel !!! they were built for a wartime economy. that’s one of the reasons they sent her home.
I suspect that’s your very reason there - “main deck up”. If you work below that, you have to cut whacking great big holes in the armoured citadel, shift whatever you’re working on through then repair the holes again. That is going to be very, very expensive, and if you’re planning to do it every few years to refuel the reactors then that will squash all your fuel savings instantly.
you could be right. but they had to have a way to remove the engines for repair replacement or overhaul. could the reactors go in they same way the engines came out ??? that could be a large hatch on the main deck.