- Joined
- Feb 23, 2019
- Messages
- 404
- Points
- 323
Any body know if there are any real difference between the bismarck and tirpitz your help is much appreciated
Bismarck/tirpitz differences
- Thread starter Peterairfix
- Start date
- Watchers 5
in short: Bismarck had a single aircraft hangar on each side of the funnel and a double hangar at the base of the mainmast. Tirpitz had two dual hangars on each side of the mainmast base. Four minesweeping paravanes were carried, two on either side of the aft superstructure deck.
Bismarck was designed as a fast and powerful battleship, while the Tirpitz was designed as a heavily protected battleship that would be used primarily in defensive operations.
Its mostly a difference in camouflage. The other details that Jim specified are correct, but Tirpitz was slightly longer in length.
A little bit researching:
Differences to Bismarck
There were minor structural differences between the Tirpitz and the Bismarck. The most striking of these was the structure between the two rear towers of the central artillery, which was brought forward to the edge of the upper deck on the Tirpitz. Therefore, unlike on the Bismarck, the main cranes of the Tirpitz could not be set up on the upper deck, but on the deck that was created in this way. In the fall of 1941, additional sets of four torpedoes were installed behind this projection, armament that was not present on the Bismarck. In contrast to the Bismarck, the Tirpitz received protective hoods on the aft range finders of the artillery and u. a. a distinctive 2 cm Flak Vierling 38 on the elevated 38 cm "Bruno" turret, which is also not present on the sister ship. In contrast to the Bismarck, the Tirpitz also received a set of cruising turbines that optimized fuel consumption at partial load (cruising).
After the start of construction work on the sister ship Bismarck, changes were made to the construction, which flowed into the construction of the Tirpitz, which started later. These improvements primarily affected the bunker cells in the ship's hull, which were divided up differently. This allowed the Tirpitz to carry more fuel than the Bismarck. These changes could no longer be taken into account for the Bismarck, since its construction was already too far advanced.
Overall, the changes meant that the displacement of the Tirpitz by 1,200 tn.l. was larger than that of her sister ship and her draft was therefore also somewhat greater. The Tirpitz is the largest German warship ever completed (Bismarck 41,700 tn.l., Tirpitz 42,900 tn.l.).
google translation from:
Somewhere else I was reading, also that there were several other details different, f.e. also partly the location of portholes, cooling inlets, bow, rudder etc.
The difference between Tirpitz and Bismarck can only be described as follows:
Tirpitz was a completely different ship if you take a closer look.
Because, neither porthole positions, cooling water inlets, deck structures, etc. are the same in detail.
Example: the substructure of the upper searchlight deck is designed completely differently in the support to the Admiralsbruch. The hull plating is also completely different in some places.
google translation from:
and it seems, that the ships were also adjusted during their service period, so you have also to decide at which time you want to show the Tirpitz.
The best will be to buy a good set of drawings showing the Tirpitz in detail
www.das-geschichtsbuch.de
www.rc-modellbau-schiffe.de
Differences to Bismarck
There were minor structural differences between the Tirpitz and the Bismarck. The most striking of these was the structure between the two rear towers of the central artillery, which was brought forward to the edge of the upper deck on the Tirpitz. Therefore, unlike on the Bismarck, the main cranes of the Tirpitz could not be set up on the upper deck, but on the deck that was created in this way. In the fall of 1941, additional sets of four torpedoes were installed behind this projection, armament that was not present on the Bismarck. In contrast to the Bismarck, the Tirpitz received protective hoods on the aft range finders of the artillery and u. a. a distinctive 2 cm Flak Vierling 38 on the elevated 38 cm "Bruno" turret, which is also not present on the sister ship. In contrast to the Bismarck, the Tirpitz also received a set of cruising turbines that optimized fuel consumption at partial load (cruising).
After the start of construction work on the sister ship Bismarck, changes were made to the construction, which flowed into the construction of the Tirpitz, which started later. These improvements primarily affected the bunker cells in the ship's hull, which were divided up differently. This allowed the Tirpitz to carry more fuel than the Bismarck. These changes could no longer be taken into account for the Bismarck, since its construction was already too far advanced.
Overall, the changes meant that the displacement of the Tirpitz by 1,200 tn.l. was larger than that of her sister ship and her draft was therefore also somewhat greater. The Tirpitz is the largest German warship ever completed (Bismarck 41,700 tn.l., Tirpitz 42,900 tn.l.).
google translation from:
Somewhere else I was reading, also that there were several other details different, f.e. also partly the location of portholes, cooling inlets, bow, rudder etc.
The difference between Tirpitz and Bismarck can only be described as follows:
Tirpitz was a completely different ship if you take a closer look.
Because, neither porthole positions, cooling water inlets, deck structures, etc. are the same in detail.
Example: the substructure of the upper searchlight deck is designed completely differently in the support to the Admiralsbruch. The hull plating is also completely different in some places.
google translation from:
Sammlung der bekannten Unterschiede Bismarck/Tirpitz
Sammlung der bekannten Unterschiede Bismarck/Tirpitz
forum-marinearchiv.de
and it seems, that the ships were also adjusted during their service period, so you have also to decide at which time you want to show the Tirpitz.
The best will be to buy a good set of drawings showing the Tirpitz in detail
Koop & Schmolke: Planmappe: Schlachtschiff Tirpitz - Das-Geschichtsbuch.de
Koop & Schmolke: Planmappe: Schlachtschiff Tirpitz: Die Mappe enthält 9 Pläne auf 8 großformatigen Blättern (ca. DIN A1) mit zahlreichen Konstruktionszeichnungen und Detailskizzen. Inhalt: Längsschnitt, Obere Ansicht Oberdeck, Batteriedeck, Zwischendeck Plattformdeck, Mittleres Plattformdeck...
www.das-geschichtsbuch.de
Projekt Tirpitz - RC-Modellbau-Schiffe Forum
Schönen guten Abend,ich plane derzeit das Projekt "Tirpitz" in 1:100. Nun stellt sich mir die Frage, welche Pläne man am besten verwenden sollte. Im Netz habe ich mehrere gefunden und nun wollt ich euch fragen, welche ihr empfehlen würdet. Zum einen habe…
www.rc-modellbau-schiffe.de
Excellent research Uwe, thank you.
It is amazing to me what a wealth of information can come from a single post on these forums. Well done!
- Joined
- Aug 11, 2022
- Messages
- 47
- Points
- 78
Tirpitz (lower drawing) also had a slightly straighter stem than Bismarck (upper drawing). Notice some other differences around the anchors and portholes.
Click here for a site worth bookmarking.
Click here for a site worth bookmarking.
Actually I don't see much difference between the two at all. No matter how you look at it they both are in the same place where they belong.
- Joined
- Aug 11, 2022
- Messages
- 47
- Points
- 78
Look at the stem - the forwardmost knife-edge between the flagpole/bull nose/stem anchor, and the waterline. Bismarck's stem is more curved.
Bismarck was originally built and launched with a differently shaped bow than the one she had at the time of her sortie. The original bow's stem was almost vertical, similar to Graf Spee. However, before completion, the original bow was heavily reconstructed and extended forward into what was called an "Atlantic bow" in order to improve seakeeping. Tirpitz was built from the start with an Atlantic bow.
There are some other very subtle differences, too.
Below is Bismarck as launched with her original nearly vertical bow. Notice the Bismarck family crest just under the bull nose. This bow was heavily reconstructed after launch to improve seakeeping. The new "Atlantic bow" was in place before the ship's construction was completed.
Below is Bismarck with her reconstructed "Atlantic bow". Note that she has conspicuous bulges below the anchors. Those bulges were not present at launch.
Notice the conspicuous "bull nose".
Below is Tirpitz as launched. Notice she already has the very pointy "Atlantic bow" at launch, and that her stem above the waterline is comparatively straighter than Bismarck's Atlantic bow's curvier stem. The difference is subtle but there. Also present at launch, is the Tirpitz family crest, but unlike Bismarck's single crest under the bull nose at launch, there are two crests, one on each side aft of the bull nose. There is also a hawsepipe for a stem anchor visible below the bull nose.
Bismarck was originally built and launched with a differently shaped bow than the one she had at the time of her sortie. The original bow's stem was almost vertical, similar to Graf Spee. However, before completion, the original bow was heavily reconstructed and extended forward into what was called an "Atlantic bow" in order to improve seakeeping. Tirpitz was built from the start with an Atlantic bow.
There are some other very subtle differences, too.
Below is Bismarck as launched with her original nearly vertical bow. Notice the Bismarck family crest just under the bull nose. This bow was heavily reconstructed after launch to improve seakeeping. The new "Atlantic bow" was in place before the ship's construction was completed.
Below is Bismarck with her reconstructed "Atlantic bow". Note that she has conspicuous bulges below the anchors. Those bulges were not present at launch.
Notice the conspicuous "bull nose".
Below is Tirpitz as launched. Notice she already has the very pointy "Atlantic bow" at launch, and that her stem above the waterline is comparatively straighter than Bismarck's Atlantic bow's curvier stem. The difference is subtle but there. Also present at launch, is the Tirpitz family crest, but unlike Bismarck's single crest under the bull nose at launch, there are two crests, one on each side aft of the bull nose. There is also a hawsepipe for a stem anchor visible below the bull nose.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Aug 11, 2022
- Messages
- 47
- Points
- 78
As others have said in their posts above, one of the more conspicuous differences is the position of the cranes. Bismarck's cranes were located on the main deck, near the edge.
Bismarck:
Tirpitz's cranes were located a deck higher and further inboard and more forward.
Tirpitz:
Below are some photos of models to help show the difference in crane positions, superstructure configuration astride the funnel, and the location of the 105 mm AA guns near the cranes. Positioning the cranes a deck higher and further inboard permitted space to move the twin-gun 105 mm AA guns nearest the cranes on Tirpitz further outboard giving them much better fields of fire than the same AA mounts on Bismarck. The cranes on Tirpitz were positioned more forward too, in order to provide sufficient space for the floatplanes' wings when on the catapult.
Bismarck:
Tirpitz:
As the war progressed, Tirpitz's anti-aircraft armament was significantly increased, namely the 20 mm weapons. Ultimately, she had two conspicuous, circular quadruple 20 mm Flak positions installed, one forward of the bridge, and another, larger tub on top of turret Bruno (turret #2).
Another difference between the ships is the position of the domed searchlight stations on the sides of the funnel. On Bismarck, the domed searchlight station position is 1.5 meters higher than Tirpitz. On Tirpitz, the domed searchlight stations are positioned lower, at or very close to the same height as the platform surrounding the rear of the funnel.
Bismarck:
Tirpitz:
Bismarck:
Tirpitz's cranes were located a deck higher and further inboard and more forward.
Tirpitz:
Below are some photos of models to help show the difference in crane positions, superstructure configuration astride the funnel, and the location of the 105 mm AA guns near the cranes. Positioning the cranes a deck higher and further inboard permitted space to move the twin-gun 105 mm AA guns nearest the cranes on Tirpitz further outboard giving them much better fields of fire than the same AA mounts on Bismarck. The cranes on Tirpitz were positioned more forward too, in order to provide sufficient space for the floatplanes' wings when on the catapult.
Bismarck:
Tirpitz:
As the war progressed, Tirpitz's anti-aircraft armament was significantly increased, namely the 20 mm weapons. Ultimately, she had two conspicuous, circular quadruple 20 mm Flak positions installed, one forward of the bridge, and another, larger tub on top of turret Bruno (turret #2).
Another difference between the ships is the position of the domed searchlight stations on the sides of the funnel. On Bismarck, the domed searchlight station position is 1.5 meters higher than Tirpitz. On Tirpitz, the domed searchlight stations are positioned lower, at or very close to the same height as the platform surrounding the rear of the funnel.
Bismarck:
Tirpitz:
Last edited:
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2022
- Messages
- 123
- Points
- 58
This site has the design prints for both the Tirpitz and the Bismarck:
These drawing are fantastic for checking models details..
These drawing are fantastic for checking models details..
- Joined
- Aug 11, 2022
- Messages
- 47
- Points
- 78
Vielen Dank!!