I am sorry if some of you think I am repeatedly raking up such issues
jason spurr wrote:Come on RF, I thought that would be obvious. Once again does anyone wish to comment on my questions about photos 0007, 0008, 0010 and who is walking with the King in photo 0003?
tommy303 wrote:It is interesting, but the Germans seemed of the opinion, at least Muellenheim-Rechberg, that it took KGV and Rodney some time to find the range, although once they did, they began to hit regularly.
jason spurr wrote:300 hundred or so survivors left behind!.. They estimated around 800 to 1000 survivors were in the water after the Bismarck went down.. It seems like the British didn't want the rest of the world knowing how many men were left in the water to die. This is quite obvious as the British censor has blotted out most of the faces in a photo Im sure you are all familiar with. Why did the censor do this?
Im glad you agree RF that the british found there range on the forward part of the ship reasonably quickly. This just reemphasises my point. Why were all the British shells well off target at this stage in the battle where the Dorsetshire was less then 2 miles away.. To me this only means one thing, after well and truly putting the bismarck out of action they changed there aim to the survivors in the water.. Maybe if the Bismarck hadn't taken the lives of so many of there fellow countrymen 3 day before they would have concentrated more on rescuing men to gather intelligence like you said rather then making the Germans pay for all there mates that were lost.. Thats just my opinion.
jason spurr wrote:
Anyway this is not why I have come to this Forum. The reason why is to try and make sense of what my Grandfather said to me before he died, "Don't believe the stories you hear about the Bismarck, we were there and we helped sink it" and to share with you the photos that were left to me.. I have been enlightened by all your comments stating that the Victorious was somewhere else and not present on that final day and that photo 0010 was taken from a plane and not the Victorious itself. However as you believe this photo was taken on the 24Th it should so rightly take its place in the history books as well as photo 0007 and 0008.
jason spurr wrote:
For me the hugh hole on the port side of the catapult still seems to be a mystery. I don't believe it was caused by one of the Dorsetshire's final torpedos. Something just doesn't seem right with this whole Bismarck story. Even one web master said to me, they will never tell it how it happened...
jason spurr wrote:Why were all the British shells well off target at this stage in the battle where the Dorsetshire was less then 2 miles away.. ...
Dave Saxton wrote:
At very short ranges very small variations in the elevation of the guns, or the angle of departure, can produce wide variations to where the shells fall. A shell that passes over the Bismarck by a few meters may well travel some distance before it hits the water. Also at short ranges the amount of scatter for range can be very great. Shells falling within a couple of hundred yards of Bismarck is well within the margin of error for the range and the shooting conditions at that stage of the battle.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests