Here we can see the bow of HMS Hood, which was - long and fine:
This was for one simple reason - speed. Without a bow that was long, fine and sheared, Hood could not have attained her top speed of 32 knots. Only the hull form in the vicinity of A turret aft, would have been armoured - with the bow being soft. In retrospect, this arrangement was not adequate. Specifically, the deck area around the base of the two gun turrets and barbettes, was regarded as too thinly armoured, and was not thick enough to guard against plunging shellfire (although plans had been made, to thicken the armour in this area). Another point of interest, are Hood's breakwater arrangements - which were designed to protect the forecastle deck, from bow spray (as was encountered, when she pitched into heavy seas).
I've always found it interesting, that HMS Hood had three anchor chains:
When it comes to ships, the heavier they are (in terms of displacement), the more anchor chain you need, to keep your ship from moving, when laying anchor. Granted, it's the anchor that digs into the sea bed, but the chain also lays on the bottom - thereby resisting the movement of the ship. In 1937, Hood had three anchor chains - but by 1940, the closest anchor chain (shown above) had been removed. Yet here do I find a paradox! For HMS Hood's displacement, gradually increased over time (through various overhauls and refits) - so surely she would need the safety-net, of a third anchor and chain, even more?
3D Modellers, with a passion for preserving the past, particularly pertaining to Battleships :) The Pride of the Royal Navy herself, HMS Hood (as she appeared in 1937):
Battleships were the Greatest Warships of their time, and to the Men that served on them, they lived a way of life, that now no longer exists ... Our Military Artwork, aims to help preserve these bygone times, and it is hoped, that it shall be of interest to Military Museums, and to other such areas of public interest (e.g. education) - together with private collectors.