[eabinga]

I believe this aired on the Discovery Channel in the US a few months ago.

This probably refers to a UK airing.

[okie01]

If I am not mistaken, the general understanding has always been that the Germans set scuttling charges -- insuring that the Bismarck would sink.

[Don W]

If the ship WERE scuttled, the captain would have to be a bloody-minded incompetent with no regard for his crew. Highly unlikely, as far more of the crew would have survived with the flotilla of British warships there.

Cameron is yet another trying to alter history.

[Nov3]

My father was a Korean era Naval Aviator (47-57). He said the Iowa class battleships at speed were an AWESOME sight. Too bad we didn't build the Montanas!

[niteowl77]

It was an interesting documentary. Whether she was scuttled by her crew or not, the Brits shot the hell out of that ship and deserve all the credit they have been given over these many years.

[Nov3]

The Iowa class would have raped the Bismark. These babys would have totally humbled the Bismark

Here is the LINK

Return to Naval Historical Center home page. Return to Online Library listing

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY -- NAVAL HISTORICAL CENTER
805 KIDDER BREESE SE -- WASHINGTON NAVY YARD
WASHINGTON DC 20374-5060

Online Library of Selected Images:
-- U.S. NAVY SHIP TYPES -- BATTLESHIPS --

Montana Class (BB-67 through BB-71)
1941 Building Program. Construction cancelled 1943.

The five battleships of the Montana class, authorized under the 1940 "Two Ocean Navy" building program and funded in Fiscal Year 1941, were the last of their kind ordered by the U.S. Navy. With an intended standard displacement of 60,500 tons, they were nearly a third larger than the preceding Iowa class, four of which were the final battleships actually completed by the United States. The Montanas were intended to carry twelve 16"/50 guns, three more than the earlier class. Protection against underwater weapons and shellfire was also greatly enhanced. They would have been the only new World War II era U.S. battleships to be adequately armored against guns of the same power as their own. To achieve these advances, the Montana class was designed for a slower maximum speed than the very fast Iowas and had a beam too wide to pass through the existing Panama Canal locks.

Completion of the Montana class would have given the late 1940s U.S. Navy a total of seventeen new battleships, a considerable advantage over any other nation, or probable combination of nations. The Montanas also would have been the only American ships to come close to equalling the massive Japanese Yamato. However, World War II's urgent requirements for more aircraft carriers, amphibious and anti-submarine vessels resulted in suspension of the Montanas in May 1942, before any of their keels had been laid. In July 1943, when it was clear that the battleship was no longer the dominant element of sea power, their construction was cancelled.

The Montana class would have consisted of five ships, to be constructed at three Navy Yards:

• Montana (BB-67), to be built at the Philadelphia Navy Yard, Pennsylvania;
  

• Ohio (BB-68), to be built at the Philadelphia Navy Yard;
  

• Maine (BB-69), to be built at the New York Navy Yard, Brooklyn, New York;
  

• New Hampshire (BB-70), to be built at the New York Navy Yard; and
  

• Louisiana (BB-71), to be built at the Norfolk Navy Yard, Portsmouth, Virginia.

Montana class design characteristics:

• Displacement: 60,500 tons (standard); 70,965 tons (full load)
  

• Dimensions: 921' 3" (length overall); 121' 2" (maximum beam)
  

• Powerplant: 172,000 horsepower steam turbines, producing a 28 knot maximum speed
  

• Armament (Main Battery): Twelve 16"/50 guns in four triple turrets
  

• Armament (Secondary Battery): Twenty 5"/54 guns in ten twin mountings (ten guns on each side of the ship)

This page features all our images related to the Montana class battleship design.

For coverage of other classes of U.S. Navy battleships, see: Battleships -- Overview and Special Image Selection.

If you want higher resolution reproductions than the digital images presented here, see: "How to Obtain Photographic Reproductions."

Click on the small photograph to prompt a larger view of the same image.

Photo #: NH 61246 Montana class (BB-67--71) battleship Artist's conception of this abortive class, whose construction was cancelled on 21 July 1943. This artwork depicts the ship fitted with a heavy battery of anti-aircraft guns, as would have been the case had she been completed. U.S. Naval Historical Center Photograph. Online Image: 64KB; 740 x 300 pixels
Photo #: NH 44529 Montana class (BB-67--71) battleship Model representing the preliminary design, circa 1940-41. Photographed circa 1943. U.S. Naval Historical Center Photograph. Online Image: 61KB; 740 x 550 pixels
Photo #: NH 93912 Montana class (BB-67--71) battleship Model photographed at the New York Navy Yard, 26 November 1941. It represents the ship with details somewhat changed from the preliminary design seen in Photo # NH 44529. Copied from the Bureau of Ships monograph "United States Battleship Designs for World War II", dated 1 June 1946. U.S. Naval Historical Center Photograph. Online Image: 55KB; 740 x 350 pixels
Photo #: NH 93913 Montana class (BB-67--71) battleship Model photographed at the New York Navy Yard, 26 November 1941. It represents the ship with details somewhat changed from the preliminary design seen in Photo # NH 44529. Note rough finish of this model. Copied from the Bureau of Ships monograph "United States Battleship Designs for World War II", dated 1 June 1946. U.S. Naval Historical Center Photograph. Online Image: 73KB; 415 x 765 pixels
Photo #: NH 93914 Montana class (BB-67--71) battleship Model photographed at the New York Navy Yard, 26 November 1941. It represents the ship with details somewhat changed from the preliminary design seen in Photo # NH 44529. Note rough finish of this model. Copied from the Bureau of Ships monograph "United States Battleship Designs for World War II", dated 1 June 1946. U.S. Naval Historical Center Photograph. Online Image: 77KB; 410 x 765 pixels
Photo #: USN 1144964 Montana class (BB-67--71) model Large official model of this abortive class of battleship, photographed at the New York Navy Yard, 7 October 1944. Construction of the five ships of the class had been cancelled in July 1943. Official U.S. Navy Photograph. Online Image: 60KB; 740 x 405 pixels Reproductions of this image may also be available through the National Archives photographic reproduction system as Photo # 428-N-1144964.

The following images represent preliminary design plans prepared in early 1940 as part of the Montana class design development process. At that time, it was intended that the first ship of this class would have hull number BB-65. None of these plans represent the design finally adopted for the Montana class.

Photo #: S-511-11 Battleship Design Study, BB-65 - Scheme 3 Preliminary design plan prepared for the General Board as part of the process leading to the Montana class (BB-67--71) battleship design. This plan, dated 6 February 1940, is for a ship of 52,500 tons standard displacement and 64,500 ton trial displacement, with a main battery of twelve 16"/50 guns, a secondary battery of twenty 5"/38 guns and a 130,000 horsepower powerplant for a speed of 28 knots. Ship's dimensions are: waterline length 860'; waterline beam 114'; draft 36'. Scale of the original drawing is 1/32" = 1'. Port side 5" gun arrangement is labeled "previous secondary battery arrangement". Starboard side has a "proposed secondary battery arrangement." The original plan is in the 1939-1944 "Spring Styles Book" held by the Naval Historical Center. U.S. Naval Historical Center Photograph. Online Image: 75KB; 740 x 380 pixels
Photo #: S-511-12 Battleship Design Study, BB-65 - Scheme 4 Preliminary design plan prepared for the General Board as part of the process leading to the Montana class (BB-67--71) battleship design. This plan, dated 14 February 1940, is for a ship of 54,500 tons standard displacement and 64,500 tons trial displacement, with a main battery of twelve 16"/50 guns, a secondary battery of twenty 5"/54 guns and a 150,000 horsepower powerplant for a speed of 28 knots. Ship's dimensions are: waterline length 870'; waterline beam 114'; draft 36'. Scale of the original drawing is 1/32" = 1'. Port side 5" gun arrangement is labeled "previous secondary battery arrangement". Starboard side has a "proposed secondary battery arrangement." The original plan is in the 1939-1944 "Spring Styles Book" held by the Naval Historical Center. U.S. Naval Historical Center Photograph. Online Image: 64KB; 740 x 425 pixels
Photo #: S-511-13 Battleship Design Study, BB-65 - Scheme 8 Preliminary design plan prepared for the General Board as part of the process leading to the Montana class (BB-67--71) battleship design. This plan, dated 15 March 1940, is for a ship of 70,000 tons standard displacement and 82,000 ton trial displacement, with a main battery of twelve 16"/50 guns, a secondary battery of twenty 5"/54 guns and a 320,000 horsepower powerplant for a speed of 33 knots. Ship's dimensions are: waterline length 1050'; waterline beam 120'; draft 35'. Scale of the original drawing is 1/32" = 1'. Port side 5" gun arrangement is labeled "previous secondary battery arrangement". Starboard side has a "proposed secondary battery arrangement." The original plan is in the 1939-1944 "Spring Styles Book" held by the Naval Historical Center. U.S. Naval Historical Center Photograph. Online Image: 56KB; 740 x 375 pixels

The following image represents a preliminary design plan prepared in mid 1940, comparing the Montana class hull profile with that of the Iowa (BB-61) class.

Photo #: S-511-21 Battleship Study, BB 65 - Scheme 1 and BB 61-64 (Inclusive) Preliminary design plan prepared for the General Board comparing the outboard profile (including superstructure) of the Iowa (BB-61) class battleships with the hull profile of the Montana class. This plan is dated 9 July 1940 and shows the Iowa class outboard profile in solid lines and the hull of the Montana class in dashed lines. At the time, the Montana class was planned to begin with hull number BB-65, rather than BB-67 as it became after two more Iowas were ordered as BB-65 and BB-66. Scale of the original drawings is 1/32" = 1'. The original plan is in the 1939-1944 "Spring Styles Book" held by the Naval Historical Center. U.S. Naval Historical Center Photograph. Online Image: 57KB; 740 x 400 pixels

For coverage of other classes of U.S. Navy battleships, see: Battleships -- Overview and Special Image Selection.

If you want higher resolution reproductions than the digital images presented here, see: "How to Obtain Photographic Reproductions."

Return to Naval Historical Center home page.

Page made 28 January 2000
Coding updated 26 March 2001

[jlogajan]

Whether they skuttled it or not, it was "sunk" by the actions of the British Navy -- just as Captain Langsdorff's sinking of the Graf Spee was due to actions of the British Navy.

[Amerigomag]

An older documentary series which aired again recently on PBS indicated that the ship was scuttled but that she was already headed to the bottom as a result of the Brits attacks.

The failure to retrieve all survivors was attributed not only to the report of enemy submarines but a general attitude of revenge by the Brits which even manifested itself in a purposeful, friendly fire incident based on inter service rivalries during the pursuit.

[stevem]

This is one of those arguments that piques emotions, but is really quite meaningless. The sinking of the Bismarck started with a lucky break akin to winning the lottery. It took incredible courage and trust to luck for the British to begin the attack with the Swordfish biplanes. If they were sailing into the wind, the Bismarck may have outrun those obsolete planes.

Then, the torpdoes they shot would likely have failed if one hadn't hit the rudder. From that point the Bismarck was through. Whether she was scuttled or sunk by attack really matters not at all. Either way she wound up exactly in the spot she was meant to rest.

It's the same kind of argument as whether Davy Crocket died in the attack on the Alamo or was later executed by Santa Ana. What difference does it make? These arguments neither add nor detract from the wrenching story of what the men went through.

I always thought of Naval battles as something that can barely be imagined. So many of these throughout history have been true and absolute fights to the death. Since the advent of the ironclads you seldom even get close enough to put out the white flag, so no prize at all for second place.

I, too, have heard and read that the British had to leave the scene due to reports of U-boats in the area.

[The Toad]

This is old news. I watched it on Discovery a while ago. A good program to watch though when it comes around again.

[Axenolith]

Thats news? I read that the Germans had popped the drain plugs on it 20 some odd years ago after their pounding by the Brits...