Cryhavoc101

A very poor post and exposes your limited understanding of the situation There was no arrogance or over confidence or cockiness involved in Hood's lack of a deep Warspite / Renown style deep refit - it was needed, the British had known pretty much from her launch that she was obsolete but in the 20s and early 30s very little could challenge her no one was building new fast Battleships at the time. The British wanted to give Hood a deep refit in the late 30s (they wanted to give all of their old ships a deep refit) but this was continuously delayed due to the need to have her at sea - i.e. the Neutrality patrol around Spain (its a tough job being the worlds policeman) and then as things went south in 39 she and the other Battle Cruisers Repulse / Renown were needed to respond to the Twins and the impending launch of the Bismarck until such a time as the KGVs could replace her and guarantee a 2 : 1 advantage as the existing 12 British Battleships QEs, Revenges and Nelrods, would have been too slow to catch them. As for scrapping Warspite - the successful Deep refit she got was subsequently used on 2 of her Sisters and HMS Renown - making them very effective ships so Im not sure what your point is?

Bismarck was a poor design Britain, France and America and even Italy got more out of the same sort of tonnage than Germany did. Certainly of the 'Treaty Battleships' the KGVs had the best armour scheme - and it would take the post Treaty design of the much heavier Iowa class to better it. This is simply due to the fact that both Britain and the US benefited from post Jutland experience, experience from working over the captured German ships at the end of the first world war and continued to build ships from 1919 where as Germany pretty much stopped building the ships and had relatively little in the way of retained knowledge from WW1. Bismarck was intended to be a North Sea short range slugger (her armour scheme is very similar to Beyern and Revenge who where built for the same thing) while the British and Americans moved on to build their ships around plunging fire from longer ranges with more efficient all or nothing armour layouts. As for Bismarck "wasn't sunk it was scuttled" - parts of her deck were already awash and given that rounds had penetrated her Engineering spaces I find it hard to believe that what scuttling charges where used did little more than hastened her end We know that 14" shells from POW penetrated her below the water line and damaged fuel tanks as well as hitting part of her Engineering spaces.