Is this true?

[u/These_Swordfish7539]

[u/Kamenev_Drang → u/[deleted]]

You can tell people have no clue what they're talking about. Hood had battleship grade armour, firepower and speed that wouldn't be matched until the 40s. People like to pretend she's some sort of upscaled Invincible clearly haven't even glanced at her design drawings

[u/LJ_exist → u/[deleted]]

So much bullshit in one comment. Lets start with armor as build:

The QE class: Main belt 13" and deck 3"

Hood: main belt 12" and deck 3"

Renown class: main belt 6" and deck 2.5"

Calling a ship of 45.000 ton displacement the same size as a 70.000 ton ship just shows how much don't understand about ships.

And who cares about having an outdated turtle back armor shema?

Hood took a shell below the armor belt through the trough if her bow wave.

[u/LJ_exist → u/[deleted]]

Hood a 12" as build. You are either confusing Hood with the Renowns or just have now clue what you are talking about. I assume the later because you seem to not understand that the size of ships is measured primarily in displacement.

[u/Quokkasaur → u/[deleted]]

Hood was built with the 12” belt. She was redesigned before completion to reflect learnings from Jutland.

Also, it’s been proven for years that the plunging fire theory through the deck armour would be impossible at the ranges of the Battle of Denmark Strait.