Search found 344 matches

by northcape
Mon Feb 17, 2020 9:45 pm
Forum: Bismarck General Discussion
Topic: A correct attribution for the "Flash Effect" photo?
Replies: 328
Views: 11223

Re: A correct attribution for the "Flash Effect" photo?

Post deleted due to inappropriate personal commentary directed at other contributors.

Northcape is cautioned.



Bill Jurens
by northcape
Fri Feb 14, 2020 2:32 am
Forum: Bismarck General Discussion
Topic: A correct attribution for the "Flash Effect" photo?
Replies: 328
Views: 11223

Re: A correct attribution for the "Flash Effect" photo?

That is not circular logic. It is no logic at all.
This statement/reasoning is perfectly valid as an expression of what one believes, or as an opinion. But of course it is without any significance for a fact-based historical evaluation.
by northcape
Wed Feb 12, 2020 7:18 pm
Forum: Bismarck General Discussion
Topic: A correct attribution for the "Flash Effect" photo?
Replies: 328
Views: 11223

Re: A correct attribution for the "Flash Effect" photo?

In short, the photo can be 'interpreted' so as to support almost any pre-determined theory or, conversely, almost any theory can be successfully generated from the photograph. More work, of course, can be done analytically, but in this case it's probably futile because, in essence, in this case the...
by northcape
Fri Jan 31, 2020 6:12 pm
Forum: Bismarck General Discussion
Topic: A correct attribution for the "Flash Effect" photo?
Replies: 328
Views: 11223

Re: A correct attribution for the "Flash Effect" photo?

Dear Mr. Zurbriggen/Virtuani There was nobody capable to propose another different map matching available evidences. This means to me that the built map is more than sufficient to describe what actually happened, lacking another. I've created a theory, that based on the measurement of the temperatur...
by northcape
Wed Jan 29, 2020 5:31 am
Forum: Bismarck General Discussion
Topic: A correct attribution for the "Flash Effect" photo?
Replies: 328
Views: 11223

Re: A correct attribution for the "Flash Effect" photo?

Oh no, there we go again. So be it. 1) The statement (or impression) that the interpretation "is consistent" with photos (or films) is non-sensical. We don't have any timing or other relevant AND robust meta-information on the photos and films, so it is not possible to make any judgment on the consi...
by northcape
Sun Jan 19, 2020 6:45 am
Forum: Bismarck General Discussion
Topic: A correct attribution for the "Flash Effect" photo?
Replies: 328
Views: 11223

Re: A correct attribution for the "Flash Effect" photo?

I think it is very easy to overthink the images and use them to create a variety of highly imaginative narratives. The question at heart, though, is does any of this cast any useful light on the action itself, historically? Would establishing the precise positions of all ships in the action on a se...
by northcape
Thu Jan 16, 2020 6:16 am
Forum: Bismarck General Discussion
Topic: A correct attribution for the "Flash Effect" photo?
Replies: 328
Views: 11223

Re: A correct attribution for the "Flash Effect" photo?

I think there is a lot of interpretation for just one photo where only short parts of two barrels are visible. Of course it is possible, but as for other reconstructions, there is not really any hard evidence to make this possibility significantly more likely than others. Looking at the PE deck plan...
by northcape
Sun Dec 29, 2019 6:31 pm
Forum: Bismarck General Discussion
Topic: A correct attribution for the "Flash Effect" photo?
Replies: 328
Views: 11223

Re: A correct attribution for the "Flash Effect" photo?

, therefore he will need to wait until 2022, when a new super-detailed map will be published by Antonio, addressing all residual "issues". As simple as that. Bye, Alberto Just to mention that "super-detailed" and "accuracy" are two fundamentally different things, where one does not automatically im...
by northcape
Thu Dec 19, 2019 5:24 pm
Forum: Bismarck General Discussion
Topic: A correct attribution for the "Flash Effect" photo?
Replies: 328
Views: 11223

Re: A correct attribution for the "Flash Effect" photo?

Q.E.D.: even physical objects shapes cannot be accepted as a "fact"(http://www.kbismarck.org/forum/download/file.php?id=3611, http://www.kbismarck.org/forum/download/file.php?id=3612).... no surprise the " regrettable aftermath " of the Bismarck operation is indigestible for "someone". You don't ha...
by northcape
Wed Dec 18, 2019 4:31 pm
Forum: Bismarck General Discussion
Topic: A correct attribution for the "Flash Effect" photo?
Replies: 328
Views: 11223

Re: A correct attribution for the "Flash Effect" photo?

Thank you Herr Nilsson, but I prefer to see this as one speculative interpretation, e.g. far from being strong evidence. There is nothing wrong with being in the realm of speculation (which might or might not be a correct guess of reality), one just has to be aware of the differences between evidenc...
by northcape
Tue Dec 17, 2019 5:06 pm
Forum: Bismarck General Discussion
Topic: A correct attribution for the "Flash Effect" photo?
Replies: 328
Views: 11223

Re: A correct attribution for the "Flash Effect" photo?

Apart from multiple other criteria: The dawn engagement was at extreme range, but Bismarck fires her secondaries in this picture. It's very safe to say NH 69730 is from the Denmark Strait Battle. How can you interpret this picture such that the secondary armament was fired? In my view, the only sol...
by northcape
Thu Dec 12, 2019 9:06 am
Forum: Bismarck General Discussion
Topic: A correct attribution for the "Flash Effect" photo?
Replies: 328
Views: 11223

Re: A correct attribution for the "Flash Effect" photo?

a) Based on your own battlemap (http://www.kbismarck.org/forum/download/file.php?id=3593) and assuming (as logical) that you have considered it as being the most accurate possible one, and the one that give to readers the best possible overview of the battle development (having signed and published...
by northcape
Sun Nov 10, 2019 11:05 pm
Forum: Bismarck General Discussion
Topic: The Bismarck surrender option
Replies: 96
Views: 4409

Re: The Bismarck surrender option

Lutjens was not such a commander, merely a unsympathetic automaton incapable of thinking beyond Well, I think it is very easy (and wrong) to judge persons based on their actions 80 years later, when we have little to no knownledge about the situation (and the persons themselves). In particular, if ...
by northcape
Wed Nov 06, 2019 7:13 pm
Forum: Bismarck General Discussion
Topic: The Bismarck surrender option
Replies: 96
Views: 4409

Re: The Bismarck surrender option

Mr. Virtuani: Please read some of the previous posts. If you do so, you will note that it was primarily Wadinga's commentary that was deleted/modifed, not your own, and that he was the one who was cautioned, not yourself. Bill Jurens. "Wie der Schelm denkt, so ist er." (my german-speaking colleague...
by northcape
Tue Oct 08, 2019 9:44 pm
Forum: Bismarck General Discussion
Topic: bismark-after torpedo hit
Replies: 90
Views: 4237

Re: bismark-after torpedo hit

However getting 2000 men transferred in gale force conditions in the North Atlantic would be no mean feat. And you would have to get Donitz' U-boats and the Luftwaffe to play nicely as well. wadinga You are of course right here. And with hindsight, I think it can be stated that the British commande...