Ian B

Thanks everyone, every day is a learning day..I'm definitely going to have it also I will be adding a disguising cable...

I know when she was launched she never had them but had it installed soon after, apparently they made sure any pictures of her out of water never showed the bow or doctored it to disguise its installation. The book on the wreck discovery mentions it's. It is described as schallanage active sonar in AOS. Tirpitz had it fitted post 1940 and in a listing differences wth Bismarck it was not mentioned. So I think the assumption is both Bismarck and Tirpitz had the upgrade..I guess we'll never get a definitive answer 😕

Most of the people in that thread on KBismarck are friends of mine, however that information is nearly 20 years old now, and a lot has happened research wise since then. At that time it wasn’t known if Bismarck and Tirpitz carried S-Anlage, however the information about its installation has been found in German archives, so we have dates and specifications. The surface fleet was equipped with S-Anlage by the end of 1941

Hey DDP, 
 
Here is the photo of the equipment installed on Scheer
 

 
Here we see the oscillators on Gneisenau
 

In this photo of GU, it appears only the side oscillators are recessed. On SC, they installed bump guards, probably to at least alleviate some damage if she was grounded. 
 
Bismarck was run aground just before Rhine Exercise and had to be dry docked. This was to inspect the hull and to inspect her sensors for damage. 

Joe, where were they located on Adm. Scheer, in the bow or on the lower hull sides?
 
"SONAR and hydrophones are seperate technologies. The former is an active detection system using high frequency sound, the other is a passive listening device with directional capabilities. Hydrophones were developed in WW1 and SONAR came along in the interwar years. By the 1930s Germany had its own version of SONAR, called an S-Geraet, which was developed independently of British SONAR (ASDIC) research. The German GHG hyrophone arrays were highly developed and efficient, but like all hyrophones, was effected by sea state and ship speed. To the best of my knowledge, only escort vessels had the S-Geraet, although it appears that most large surface ships in the KM had the GHG as a passive early warning system."
https://www.kbismarck.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=140

DDP,
 
You’ve linked to some very old information there, and the photos of the launch in 1939 predate S-Anlage installation by almost 2 years. When that thread was posted at KBismarck, no one knew sonar had been fitted to Bismarck, this is new information within the past 8 years or so. 
 
The Schallanlage or S-Anlage active sonar was/is an extremely classified piece of equipment due to the fact the US used it as the basis for their submarine sonar after the war. Even today, not a huge amount is known. Research in this area is developing, and I just received the German archive box numbers containing information relevant to S-Anlage for Bismarck. I know someone who has quickly gone through them, and they state that sadly it’s just drawings and technical details, no photos. However this information will pin down dates and other technical details beyond what we already have. 
 
However, we do know Bismarck received her S-Anlage active sonar equipment in December 1940, which postdates the famous dry dock photos from October 1940, which is why the oscillators aren’t seen at the time. Mention is made of it exclusive to the GHG, so we do know it was installed and deployed for Rhine Exercise. 
 
Around this time Adm. Scheer received her S-Anlage sonar system, slightly before Bismarck, and we do have photos of that. I can share if they’re needed. 
 
S-Anlage active sonar had a range of about 9nm, maybe a bit further in colder waters. Few of Bismarck’s sensors were over the horizon, but a skilled GHG operator could and would pin down allied ships right down to the class.
 
In summary, any model of Bismarck in 1941 should carry the 6 S-Anlage oscillators on the bow. 

Whilst waiting for the glue to dry , I have been working on the Bow casting.
1. mooring hole drilled
2.first filing of the sonar sensors
3. drilled the hole for the bugspiere.
 
 

Whilst waiting for the glue to dry , I have been working on the Bow casting.
1. mooring hole drilled
2.first filing of the sonar sensors
3. drilled the hole for the bugspiere.
 
 

Whilst waiting for the glue to dry , I have been working on the Bow casting.
1. mooring hole drilled
2.first filing of the sonar sensors
3. drilled the hole for the bugspiere.
 
 

Whilst waiting for the glue to dry , I have been working on the Bow casting.
1. mooring hole drilled
2.first filing of the sonar sensors
3. drilled the hole for the bugspiere.
 
 

no problem.

Ian, if the middle & stern decks are not glued down to the frames then could put shims in under the decks to build up the right amount of sheer for those 2 deck pieces.

Be careful of using those drawings. Those are first drafts, and not how the ship appeared. I recently used those at a university talk I gave on Bismarck to demonstrate how much was changed.

Super thanks both.i can sort the rear shear and leave the front 😁

slightly confused during dry fit of top decks--- advice anyone?
The hull is perfectly flat and so are the deck main and stern sections  --yet  the bow kicks up quite a bit it seems far to much for just a bit of sanding-- is it supposed to? I cant work out if it is wrong or right (i suspect wrong lol ). I just need to check the whole deck is supposed to be flat before I take lots of corrective action?
 

slightly confused during dry fit of top decks--- advice anyone?
The hull is perfectly flat and so are the deck main and stern sections  --yet  the bow kicks up quite a bit it seems far to much for just a bit of sanding-- is it supposed to? I cant work out if it is wrong or right (i suspect wrong lol ). I just need to check the whole deck is supposed to be flat before I take lots of corrective action?
 

The builds coming along great, I enjoyed Chucks design a lot. There's plenty of good building time ahead 😉
 

The builds coming along great, I enjoyed Chucks design a lot. There's plenty of good building time ahead 😉
 

bumpkins
 
While working on the fore course I realized that the bumpkins were needed now.  Installing as per plans was easy and the shrouds were such fun to set up that I did it twice. In the plans I found no information about their diameter. 1mm seemed logical as this was the same as the tacks. However, finished it looked out of proportion and I reduced to 0,75mm which looked better.  The bumpkins are not lashed to the rail. Lees states that with the introduction of the 2nd shroud (ca 1773) the lashing was omitted.
 

1mm bumpkin shrouds - too fat!
 
 

0,75mm - looking better
 
 

view from above
 
 

the bumpkins are not lashed to the rail

First planking of the hull ticked off

First planking of the hull ticked off

First planking of the hull ticked off

First planking of the hull ticked off

First planking of the hull ticked off

First planking of the hull ticked off