Bismarck firing procedures at DS

Discussions about the history of the ship, technical details, etc.

Moderator: Bill Jurens

User avatar
Alberto Virtuani
Senior Member
Posts: 3605
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 8:22 am
Location: Milan (Italy)

Re: Bismarck firing procedures at DS

Post by Alberto Virtuani »

Hi swpz,
the difference between ordered shots (multiple of 4) and fired shells is clear and it was clear to Lutjens too. He would have never said Bismarck ordered 93 shots as this make no sense in gunnery terms, also with a gun unavailable.


I don't think all the British witnesses speak about 5 salvos. Unfortunately all accounts differ a lot. There are some speaking about 5 salvos, but surely among the best placed and authoritative ones from PoW: Rowell account (http://www.hmshood.org.uk/reference/off ... htm#Rowell) points to many more than 5 salvos with a zig-zag ladder methodology applied AFTER the Gabellgruppe. Leach (http://www.hmshood.org.uk/reference/off ... .htm#Leach) speaks of 2 or 3 salvos to start the fire on the boat deck and then he says the forth or fifth salvo caused the explosion, however he give the impression of some time passing between the fire and the explosion.... :think: . Hunter-Terry (http://www.hmshood.org.uk/reference/off ... .htm#Terry) with his precise timings speaks of 3 or 4 salvos that started the fire at 05:57 and then Hood explosion at 6:00, thus implying that Bismarck fired many more than 5 salvos in total.

In gunnery terms the ranging salvos (Vollsalve + Gabelgruppe) are already 4 separate salvos (8+4+4+4) even if the Gablgruppe ones are fired very close one to the other (accounting for 20 ordered shots already) and according to Rowell the third one (Gabelgruppe #2) straddled. Then Bismarck continued firing salvos (plural) using a zig-zag ladder methodology, that implies at least 4 if not 6 salvos of 4 guns at least in order to give the impression of the zig-zag ladder.

My 2 cents opinion of course, but also the sequence of events, with the fire on the Hood boat deck and the subsequent actions to extinguish it (see Briggs and Tilburn accounts too, that albeit confused are accounting for a quite long delay between open fire and the explosion), etc. point to more salvos than only 5 (I would honestly never trust such a "lucky hit" anyway and 5 minutes are too many for 5 semi-salvos only). Possibly the semi-salvos, fired very close for the two groups of turrets, gave the impression of a single full salvo.

My guess is still 8 + 4+4+4 + 4 + 4 + 4 + 4 +4 for 9 salvos and 40 ordered shots.



Bye, Alberto
"It takes three years to build a ship; it takes three centuries to build a tradition" (Adm.A.B.Cunningham)

"There's always a danger running in the enemy at close range" (Adm.W.F.Wake-Walker)
swpz
Junior Member
Posts: 19
Joined: Sat Aug 25, 2018 8:53 am

Re: Bismarck firing procedures at DS

Post by swpz »

Hello,

Hmm yes, there is a difference, what I'm trying to say is that perhaps to explain the odd number of shells fired, Bismarck's guns were having problems at some point during the battle thus leading to that number.

Thanks for the links, so we can summarize the following as:

Rowell: 3-4 salvos before destruction, 3rd salvo hit and started a fire (even though this is almost certain to be a hit from PE), Rowell also believed he observed a double hit
Leach: 3-4 salvos before destruction, 2-3 salvo started a fire
Terry: 3-4 salvos before hit, no observed fall of shot before magazine explosion
Brooks (link below): also observed a double hit
Prince of Wales narrative (http://www.zhanliejian.com/navweaps/INRO_Hood_p1.htm): we have 5 salvos. It is also noted that the rate of fire is comparable with that of the British ships as both Hood and PoW were presumed to have fired 5-6 salvos.

Maybe Bismarck fired many more salvos or maybe, everyone simply didn't fire at their maximum rate at that stage of the battle as simply put, the British were charging in and the change in range would have made gunnery solutions complicated to say the least. If everyone was spotting their fall of shot and correcting based on that then the slow rate of fire makes more sense.

In the PE film where we see Bismarck firing 25 seconds apart; this is obviously when PoW was on a straight course without deviations and as such Bismarck would have indeed fired full salvos without waiting as they had a perfect solution.

So if we assume that when firing against Hood, Bismarck fired 1 full salvo and 5 semi salvos; we're left with 28 shots leaving the other 65 shots to have been fired against PoW. So from 06:00 to 06:09 65 shots were fired before the false torpedo alarm threw gunnery into the wind. Even with this assumption, it would appear that Bismarck only fired at her maximum rate for a very short duration in the battle as otherwise, her output should have been around ~20 shells per minute total which would have led to roughly 180 shots. However, didn't PoW begin to retreat at around 06:05 as the battle track seems to imply? If so then Bismarck was firing full salvos at an enemy that had deployed smoke and was retreating in the PE film?

That's very strange.

Here's a wild theory; what if the maximum rate of fire was employed for propaganda purposes - as in just for the PE film?

Edit:

This is a very interesting part:
42. In your Captain's report of the action it is stated that "Hood" opened fire at 0552 1/2 and that she blew up at 0600. As you probably assisted in making this report, can you tell us if these times are accurate or not?

They were complied on the following day from the information available. Unfortunately the plot where the narrative was being kept was thrown into some confusion by a large amount of blood that was pouring down from the compass platform on to the track chart and I think it is possible that these times may be in error up to as much as two minutes but I am satisfied that relative to each other they are correct.
Implications?
User avatar
Alberto Virtuani
Senior Member
Posts: 3605
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 8:22 am
Location: Milan (Italy)

Re: Bismarck firing procedures at DS

Post by Alberto Virtuani »

Hi swpz,
you wrote: "both Hood and PoW were presumed to have fired 5-6 salvos"
correct but here you mean full salvos (PoW fired 13 (semi-)salvos before Hood explosion, Schmalenbach in his GAR says Hood fired 4 or 5 salvos before Germans return fire, that points to Hood having fired some 10 salvos in total at least).
In my reconstruction, I used 9 salvos for Bismarck until Hood destruction (1 full + 8 semi-salvos) for a total of 40 ordered shots.

you wrote: "everyone simply didn't fire at their maximum rate at that stage of the battle as simply put, the British were charging in and the change in range would have made gunnery solutions complicated to say the least"
Absolutely correct ! I think this is the key point to explain the fact that no ship was able to fire at her maximum theoretical speed (a circumstance very difficult to achieve anyway, in a real combat situation).

you wrote: "If so then Bismarck was firing full salvos at an enemy that had deployed smoke and was retreating in the PE film?.....didn't PoW begin to retreat at around 06:05 as the battle track seems to imply?"
The film starts at around 6:03:30 (as discussed at length), when PoW was almost at the end of her hard turn and just starting to maneuver more smoothly under smoke (possibly to follow the smoke and hide better). The track chart (and mostly the PoW salvo plot) shows the start of the turn away at 6:01:30 and the end of the 160° turn just before 6:03. Then a "S" shape to follow the smoke and finally another hard turn after 6:05.
In the film we see anyway only one single full salvo of Bismarck (at the beginning of the film) followed by 4 semi-salvos) and I think this full one was a Vollsalve, part of a new ranging group, as both line and range had been lost due to the PoW maneuver and Schneider was desperately trying to get another firing solution. My personal opinion of course, but I can't explain differently that Bismarck was firing fast after 6:03.
Also keep in min that the film can show a marginally faster RoF than the actual one due to increase in speed of the film projection.



Bye, Alberto
"It takes three years to build a ship; it takes three centuries to build a tradition" (Adm.A.B.Cunningham)

"There's always a danger running in the enemy at close range" (Adm.W.F.Wake-Walker)
dunmunro
Senior Member
Posts: 4394
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2005 1:25 am
Location: Langley BC Canada

Re: Bismarck firing procedures at DS

Post by dunmunro »

swpz wrote: Wed Sep 19, 2018 4:17 pm Hello,

Hmm yes, there is a difference, what I'm trying to say is that perhaps to explain the odd number of shells fired, Bismarck's guns were having problems at some point during the battle thus leading to that number.

Thanks for the links, so we can summarize the following as:

Rowell: 3-4 salvos before destruction, 3rd salvo hit and started a fire (even though this is almost certain to be a hit from PE), Rowell also believed he observed a double hit
Leach: 3-4 salvos before destruction, 2-3 salvo started a fire
Terry: 3-4 salvos before hit, no observed fall of shot before magazine explosion
Brooks (link below): also observed a double hit
Prince of Wales narrative (http://www.zhanliejian.com/navweaps/INRO_Hood_p1.htm): we have 5 salvos. It is also noted that the rate of fire is comparable with that of the British ships as both Hood and PoW were presumed to have fired 5-6 salvos.

Maybe Bismarck fired many more salvos or maybe, everyone simply didn't fire at their maximum rate at that stage of the battle as simply put, the British were charging in and the change in range would have made gunnery solutions complicated to say the least. If everyone was spotting their fall of shot and correcting based on that then the slow rate of fire makes more sense.

In the PE film where we see Bismarck firing 25 seconds apart; this is obviously when PoW was on a straight course without deviations and as such Bismarck would have indeed fired full salvos without waiting as they had a perfect solution.

So if we assume that when firing against Hood, Bismarck fired 1 full salvo and 5 semi salvos; we're left with 28 shots leaving the other 65 shots to have been fired against PoW. So from 06:00 to 06:09 65 shots were fired before the false torpedo alarm threw gunnery into the wind. Even with this assumption, it would appear that Bismarck only fired at her maximum rate for a very short duration in the battle as otherwise, her output should have been around ~20 shells per minute total which would have led to roughly 180 shots. However, didn't PoW begin to retreat at around 06:05 as the battle track seems to imply? If so then Bismarck was firing full salvos at an enemy that had deployed smoke and was retreating in the PE film?

That's very strange.

Here's a wild theory; what if the maximum rate of fire was employed for propaganda purposes - as in just for the PE film?

Edit:

This is a very interesting part:
42. In your Captain's report of the action it is stated that "Hood" opened fire at 0552 1/2 and that she blew up at 0600. As you probably assisted in making this report, can you tell us if these times are accurate or not?

They were complied on the following day from the information available. Unfortunately the plot where the narrative was being kept was thrown into some confusion by a large amount of blood that was pouring down from the compass platform on to the track chart and I think it is possible that these times may be in error up to as much as two minutes but I am satisfied that relative to each other they are correct.
Implications?
I am very grateful to Wadinga for providing the following:

This is from a letter written by Lt Rowell from his hospital bed in Iceland when the action was still fresh in his mind:
copy. SECRET.

26th June, 1941.

Engagement of HOOD and PRINCE OF WALES
with the BISMARCK and PRING EUGEN,
24th May, 1941.
-----------------------------

The following notes represent some impressions of an officer on
the bridge of the PRINCE OF WALES in regard to the tactics employed in
bringing the BISMARCK and PRINZ EUGEN to action.

2. - Before leaving for the operation Admiral Holland discussed with the Captain of the PRINCE OF WALES the tactics he intended to adopt if BISMARCK was met. These were: -

(1) To conentrate with individual control.

(2) to use flank marking if possible.

(3) To employ PRINCE OF WALES aircraft to spot for PRINCE OF WALES.

3. When it was known that NORFOLK and- SUFFOLK were shadowing the
, enemy consisting of the BISMARCK and the PRINZ EUGEN Admiral Holland again
a confirmed the above, and that the PRINZ EUGEN would be dealt with by
our cruisers. - Everything went perfectly and from D/F bearings and the'
reports of NORFOLK and SUFFOLK the enemy was sighted in the most extreme visibility just where plotted.

4. It had been expected that since the intention was to use flank
marking the HOOD and the PRINCE OF WALES would be spread well out. However
on sighting the enemy the ships were still in close order and this
presumably was deliberate as the line of bearing hed been recently
altered to bring it at right-angles to the bearing of the enemy.

5. The Admiral had asked the night before what was the extreme
gun range of PRINCE OF WALES and had been informed 36,000 yards. - This
was about the range on sighting the enemy but fire was not opened until
approximately nine minutes later.
After sighting a turn of 40° was made towards the enemy and then
another turn of 20° towards. As the enemy had also turned towards the range closed rapidly.

6. - The usual gun control signals were made but it was not until
the range had dropped to 25,000 yards that the HOOD opened fire, followed
half a minute later by the PRINCE OF WALES in accordance with the
concentration rules.
BISMARCK opened fire half a minute after the PRINCE OF WALES, before
doing so turning to open her "A" arcs.
The "A" arcs fo the HOOD and PRINCE OF WALES remained closed by the
two turns of 40° and 20° made towards the enemy.

7. The first salvo of BISMARCK was only a few hundred yards short
and the second just over, the spread being very small,. - With the close
formation adopted by HOOD and PRINCE OF WALES it was difficult to take
avoiding action.

Salvoes, 4 and 5 from BISMARCK started a cordite fire on the HOOD's
boat deck. - After this the Admiral ordered 20° turn awey together, thus
opening the PRINCE OF WALES' "A" arcs after the eighth salvo. - The turn
away was never executed as a few seconds later HOOD was hit near the
meainmast by at least one 15" shell and a huge column of flame shot up, - The
ship sank at once.

8. The PRINCE OF WALES put the wheél over and turned away. The
range was now about 14,000 yards. This action was taken as it was obvious
that all the BISMARCK had to do was to train her guns a degree or two to
the left to begin to straddle PRINCE OF WALES, Her proximity to HOOD
meant there was no need for the BISMARCK to find the range again,

Actually three salvos hit the PRINCE OF WALES before she became concealed by a smoke screen laid whilst turning away from the Bismarck.
Rowell gives us precise open fire times for all 3 battleships and an accurate time for Hood's fatal explosion which is fully consistent with PoW's salvo chart:
http://www.hmshood.org.uk/reference/off ... encIVa.gif

which shows the 5.25in guns opening fire at ~0557:30 but only firing 3 salvos (30 seconds or less) before the forward 5.25in HADT's were knocked out of action:
The 5.25-in. armament opened fire at a range of 18,600 yards. After firing a deflection triple, a 15-in. shell passed through the superstructure supporting the H.A. directors.
http://www.hmshood.org.uk/reference/off ... 09guns.htm

PoW's GAR also states:
During the first action after firing salvo 12, a heavy hit was felt on the starboard side and the director setting mechanical pointer was seen to be oscillating violently. At the same time a fuze was noticed to blow at the panel in the 14-in. T.S. The director setting control trigger was used to move off the mechanical pointer. On release, the pointer settled in line with the indicator pointer and no further trouble was experienced.
So we have PoW's GAR recording battle damage well before 0600.
User avatar
Alberto Virtuani
Senior Member
Posts: 3605
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 8:22 am
Location: Milan (Italy)

Re: Bismarck firing procedures at DS

Post by Alberto Virtuani »

Hello everybody,
thanks to Mr.Dunmunro for posting this very interesting letter.

This confirms more salvos than only 5 to sink Hood as the 4th to 5th caused the fire on the boat deck (time for this is clearly around 5:57 as per Jasper GAR and also in my reconstruction of Bismarck salvos).

However Rowell is very confused about the 20° turns to port. He mentions only one turn while the first had been executed and the second was never. He speaks about the fact that PoW arcs got open after 8th salvo (correct) but he says no turn was executed at that time or just before.... :think:

In any case there is here a clear confirmation that PoW turned away just after Hood explosion, with no delay, as per all PoW maps.
No "heroic" resistance alone against Bismarck. as Tovey incorrectly invented and Kennedy repeated and amplified in his novel.
Rowell wrote: "HOOD was hit near the mainmast by at least one 15" shell and a huge column of flame shot up, - The ship sank at once.
8. The PRINCE OF WALES put the wheél over and turned away."


Regarding the old and stale speculation about Hood sunk before 6:00, here is exhibit B at the second board, signed by ....GWRowell (http://www.hmshood.org.uk/reference/off ... encIVb.gif)

ExhibitB.jpg
ExhibitB.jpg (19.31 KiB) Viewed 935 times

Hood explosion is marked at what time ? Whose is this signature ? Was Rowell a conspirator against Leach ? :lol: :lol: :lol:



Bye, Alberto
Last edited by Alberto Virtuani on Wed Sep 19, 2018 8:36 pm, edited 2 times in total.
"It takes three years to build a ship; it takes three centuries to build a tradition" (Adm.A.B.Cunningham)

"There's always a danger running in the enemy at close range" (Adm.W.F.Wake-Walker)
dunmunro
Senior Member
Posts: 4394
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2005 1:25 am
Location: Langley BC Canada

Re: Bismarck firing procedures at DS

Post by dunmunro »

Alberto Virtuani wrote: Wed Sep 19, 2018 8:02 pm



Regarding the old and stale speculation about Hood sunk before 6:00, here is exhibit B at the second board, signed by ....GWRowell (http://www.hmshood.org.uk/reference/off ... encIVb.gif)


ExhibitB.jpg


Hood explosion is marked at what time ? Whose is the signature? :lol: :lol: :lol:



Bye, Alberto
Rowell was told that Hood exploded at 0600 (and the BofI wasn't really that concerned with exact timing) and then drew the chart above to match the time given to him. It's pretty obvious that this is not what he would have drawn from his hospital bed. Regardless we have the timing data from the PoW GAR telling us when PoW was receiving 15in hits.
User avatar
Alberto Virtuani
Senior Member
Posts: 3605
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 8:22 am
Location: Milan (Italy)

Re: Bismarck firing procedures at DS

Post by Alberto Virtuani »

:lol: :lol: :lol:

Rowell declaration at board:
42. In your Captain's report of the action it is stated that "Hood" opened fire at 0552 1/2 and that she blew up at 0600. As you probably assisted in making this report, can you tell us if these times are accurate or not?

They were complied on the following day from the information available. Unfortunately the plot where the narrative was being kept was thrown into some confusion by a large amount of blood that was pouring down from the compass platform on to the track chart and I think it is possible that these times may be in error up to as much as two minutes but I am satisfied that relative to each other they are correct.
Full stop ? End of these speculation ?


These sentences are a masterpiece of this VERY imaginative Mr.Dunmunro : :negative:
"we have PoW's GAR recording battle damage well before 0600....PoW GAR telling us when PoW was receiving 15in hits" .
What battle damage ? A concussion ? Where is written it was a 15"? Maybe a HE 8" or a HE 6" .... :lol: :lol: :lol:


Bye, Alberto
Last edited by Alberto Virtuani on Wed Sep 19, 2018 8:47 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"It takes three years to build a ship; it takes three centuries to build a tradition" (Adm.A.B.Cunningham)

"There's always a danger running in the enemy at close range" (Adm.W.F.Wake-Walker)
dunmunro
Senior Member
Posts: 4394
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2005 1:25 am
Location: Langley BC Canada

Re: Bismarck firing procedures at DS

Post by dunmunro »

Alberto Virtuani wrote: Wed Sep 19, 2018 8:35 pm :lol: :lol: :lol:

Rowell declaration at board:
42. In your Captain's report of the action it is stated that "Hood" opened fire at 0552 1/2 and that she blew up at 0600. As you probably assisted in making this report, can you tell us if these times are accurate or not?

They were complied on the following day from the information available. Unfortunately the plot where the narrative was being kept was thrown into some confusion by a large amount of blood that was pouring down from the compass platform on to the track chart and I think it is possible that these times may be in error up to as much as two minutes but I am satisfied that relative to each other they are correct.
Full stop ? End of these speculation ?


Bye, Alberto
"...I think it is possible that these times may be in error up to as much as two minutes..."
Note that the chart above is dated 20 August 1941 and doesn't form part of PoW's GAR which was submitted 12 June 1941.

Regardless we know from her GAR when PoW was being hit by 38cm fire. We know that there was much confusion regarding the precise timing of the fatal explosion, but we can reconstruct the timing from the GAR data, which is fully consistent with Rowell's Iceland letter.
Last edited by dunmunro on Wed Sep 19, 2018 8:49 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Alberto Virtuani
Senior Member
Posts: 3605
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 8:22 am
Location: Milan (Italy)

Re: Bismarck firing procedures at DS

Post by Alberto Virtuani »

Dunmunro wrote: "when PoW was being hit by 38cm fire."
FALSE!
38 cm or HE 20,3 cm or HE 15 cm or just a concussion from a near miss or...the Hood deflagration vibration transmitted under water...... No mention what caused this "tremor" in ANY place, but this guy is VERY imaginative, always "pro domo sua", defining it "battle damage". :lol:



Luckily we have almost all witnesses and official reports from British and German side that Hood exploded at 6:00 or slightly after as already collected by Antonio here: http://www.kbismarck.org/forum/viewtopi ... 120#p59524 when he counted the reports and witnesses reporting the time of Hood explosion in this clear and easy to understand chart. Good Luck Mr.Dunmunro in case he wants to re-open a closed discussion in the right thread ! :stop:

Hood_sinking _time.jpg
Hood_sinking _time.jpg (24.17 KiB) Viewed 910 times



Bye, Alberto
"It takes three years to build a ship; it takes three centuries to build a tradition" (Adm.A.B.Cunningham)

"There's always a danger running in the enemy at close range" (Adm.W.F.Wake-Walker)
dunmunro
Senior Member
Posts: 4394
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2005 1:25 am
Location: Langley BC Canada

Re: Bismarck firing procedures at DS

Post by dunmunro »

Alberto Virtuani wrote: Wed Sep 19, 2018 8:48 pm
Dunmunro wrote: "when PoW was being hit by 38cm fire."
FALSE!
38 cm or HE 20,3 cm or HE 15 cm or just a concussion from a near miss or...the Hood deflagration vibration transmitted under water...... No mention what caused this "tremor" in ANY place, but this guy is VERY imaginative, always "pro domo sua", defining it "battle damage". :lol:



Luckily we have almost all witnesses and official reports from British and German side that Hood exploded at 6:00 or slightly after as already collected by Antonio here: http://www.kbismarck.org/forum/viewtopi ... 120#p59524 when he counted the reports and witnesses reporting the time of Hood explosion in this clear and easy to understand chart. Good Luck Mr.Dunmunro in case he wants to re-open a closed discussion in the right thread ! :stop:


Hood_sinking _time.jpg




Bye, Alberto
The size of the entry hole in the base of the HACS precludes a 15cm hit and seems most consistent with a 38cm hit. However, we know that the 5.25in control was switched aft very shortly afterwards but the aft director was also knocked by a 38cm splinter. However the heavy hit aft recorded by the AFCT team at salvo 12 was undoubtedly the 38cm UW hit.
swpz
Junior Member
Posts: 19
Joined: Sat Aug 25, 2018 8:53 am

Re: Bismarck firing procedures at DS

Post by swpz »

I'd actually take all records with a grain of salt mainly because these are battle conditions; humans are prone to extreme stress during such conditions and minute details, like the exact time aren't of relevance at the time. I singled out question 42 as I found it very interesting, PoW's records must be taken with a grain of salt due to the bridge hit which left pretty much everyone dead, as mentioned in Q42, blood was flowing down from the carnage above and had actually blotted out the track chart. This alone tells you that the chart may or may not be 100% accurate and as such, there is room for leeway. Rowell saying he was satisfied does not imply it is 100% accurate, it was simply accurate enough for him to be satisfied. The concept of "give or take a few" comes to mind.

There are indeed a number of questions that simply haven't been answered but I suppose the answers will never truly be found as the men who would know them took that knowledge to the grave. From British observations we have anywhere between 2-3 salvos for the first hit and 3-5 salvos for the killing blow. Whether or not Bismarck fired more inbetween is uncertain but I'd lean on not mainly because it would be very strange for the British to observe all the salvos and note when Hood was struck but somehow omit the other salvos that were possibly fired. PoW records give 2 or 3rd salvo straddled, the first fell ahead and was "absolutely correct for range", by the 5th Hood was no more. So the chances of Bismarck having fired more in between seems low given that the British counted a maximum of 5 prior to the killing blow.

On another note, I'm at a loss as to explain how anyone can tell whether or not Bismarck fired a "full salvo" or a "semi salvo". From the British perspective, Bismarck would have been over 20km away; as seen in the PE film the blast of those guns is truly something to see, but I reference a very specific portion of the PE film where we see PoW firing. How many guns did she fire? There is no way to know, we only know of the brilliant flash that one could easily see even tens of kilometers away. With this in mind, how can anyone be sure if Bismarck fired 4 guns or 8 guns? From the observations and on the film, it seems that Bismarck indeed only fired 4 gun salvos. But this is debatable as one can contest as to just what is a salvo to begin with?

When the British say that Bismarck fired a salvo, do they mean full salvo? Semi salvo? It wouldn't look any different at 20km away.

Now, if we presume that the timing is off and Hood may have been destroyed before 06:00 - maybe the battle didn't even start at 05:52 for all we know - then well, this shortens the battle time significantly - to about 10 minutes from 15. A shortened time would explain the seemingly absurdly low rate of fire observed in both British and German ships that day.
User avatar
Alberto Virtuani
Senior Member
Posts: 3605
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 8:22 am
Location: Milan (Italy)

Re: Bismarck firing procedures at DS

Post by Alberto Virtuani »

Hello everybody,
Dunmunro wrote: "the heavy hit aft recorded by the AFCT team at salvo 12 was undoubtedly the 38cm UW hit"
Undoubtedly when Mr.Dunmunro will be able to present his own battlemap + BS salvo plot containing all his fantasies: BS open fire at 5:53, only one turn to port (as per Rowell letter), Hood sunk at 5:58, etc. :lol:

The UW hit was a dud that did not explode at all, what can be heard of such a hit traversing only mild steel underwater when even the exploding shells are not always noticed in other areas of a ship (e.g. see Bismarck hits not heard by the Baron) ?... :negative:
The other two 15" hits are timed precisely (especially by Hunter-Terry for the crane one as the compass platform was another not exploding), no way it was a 15" hit that was heard at salvo 12, as logical because, according to almost everybody, at that time Bismarck was firing her main guns against Hood. If it was real, it was a 8" or 6", possibly a near miss or possibly the concussion of Hood deflagration start.


swpz wrote: "if we presume that the timing is off and Hood may have been destroyed before 06:00 - maybe the battle didn't even start at 05:52 for all we know"
Hi swpz,
there are several accounts contradicting themselves. We need to start from the officially reported facts (and for Germans Hood exploded at 06:00, as well as for British) and not trust to all the voices. Also Hood open fire at 05:52:30 is recorded by British and confirmed by Germans (PG KTB).

There is no way to move these milestones, except in the mind of people who have one only objective: counter at any cost the precise and solid reconstruction done by Antonio Bonomi questioning everything (without being able to propose an alternative, of course :negative: ) with the intention to protect the reputation of the two officers who were hesitant during the battle.

Those people main problem is that they are very good at outlining the minimum discrepancy/contradiction in reports (e.g. see the last posted letter of Rowell when in hospital, VERY different from his declarations at the official board), but they are UNABLE to build a credible complete scenario (tracks, maps, timings, salvo charts) putting together all evidences and selecting what can be and what cannot be. They dared even to deny what is visible in the photos and in the film just to accomplish their "destructive" mission. :negative:



Bye, Alberto
"It takes three years to build a ship; it takes three centuries to build a tradition" (Adm.A.B.Cunningham)

"There's always a danger running in the enemy at close range" (Adm.W.F.Wake-Walker)
User avatar
wadinga
Senior Member
Posts: 2471
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 3:49 pm
Location: Tonbridge England

Re: Bismarck firing procedures at DS

Post by wadinga »

Hello swpz,
We need to start from the officially reported facts (and for Germans Hood exploded at 06:00, as well as for British)
Actually the original German typescript of the PG KTB, eventually posted on this very website, despite considerable lengthy obstruction and downright refusals by those who had it in their possession all along, says 06:01:20.

As you have clearly understood the
the precise and solid reconstruction done by Antonio Bonomi
is nothing but a dogmatic and obsessional attempt to steamroller through one controversial interpretation of events actually recorded with very limited precision which often contradicted one another. The objective is to sell a Conspiracy theory based on defamation of several persons now long deceased.


As you perceptively observed, many of even the basics are in question. A salvo is just a number of guns, normally more than one, fired at the same time to make spotting of their mean point of impact easier to estimate. Typically a ship may fire half her available guns so as to shorten the time between these estimation opportunities, but there is fixed rule. As one of the most respected former posters observed there is no such thing as a "semi-salvo". A salvo may also be all guns fired together, also called a broadside. Once a suitable firing solution is found, based on spotting, the opportunity is usually taken to fire as quickly as reloading will allow, so as to cause maximum damage and suppression of effective return fire, until it becomes obvious that the firing solution has drifted off from hitting the target.


These simple principles have been ignored by those who present entirely fabricated listings of Bismarck's shooting, dressed up by Excel as if they were based on real observations and generating all manner of spurious statistics.


We do have very good, but not complete reports of PoW's shooting and know exactly what her "rate" was. Nobody has the faintest idea what Bismarck's "rate" was, because no records have survived, and the crude averaging employed is of no value whatsoever. The film from PG, whenever it was shot, proves Bismarck shot considerably faster at some times than the irrelevant average. The low number of overall shots, 93, contrasted with a notional duration of the action, suggests there were periods within that duration when Bismarck fired no shots at all, that is the gaps between salvoes was deliberately elongated to avoid wasting ammunition. .



All the best

wadinga
"There seems to be something wrong with our bloody ships today!"
alecsandros
Senior Member
Posts: 4349
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 2:33 pm
Location: Bucharest, Romania

Re: Bismarck firing procedures at DS

Post by alecsandros »

swpz wrote: Wed Sep 19, 2018 10:04 pm There are indeed a number of questions that simply haven't been answered but I suppose the answers will never truly be found as the men who would know them took that knowledge to the grave. From British observations we have anywhere between 2-3 salvos for the first hit and 3-5 salvos for the killing blow.
3rd Artillery Officer on board Bismarck wrote that Bismarck consumed 40 shots to destroy Hood. That means 5 full salvos (5 x (4+4)).
Bismarck's firing procedure is well known and thoroughly discussed in other parts of the forum. Bismarck fired semisalvo1 with Anton+Bruno and semisalvo2 with Caesar/Dora, at an interval of perhaps 2 seconds between them (semisalvo1 took about 1 second to fire, then pause 2 seconds, then semisalvo2 took about 1 second to fire). Observations for fall of shot, corrections, and waiting for automatic realigning of the guns, as well as waiting for the target to cross the designated field of fire , took time between successive salvos to develop.
User avatar
Alberto Virtuani
Senior Member
Posts: 3605
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 8:22 am
Location: Milan (Italy)

Re: Bismarck firing procedures at DS

Post by Alberto Virtuani »

Hello everybody,
Wadinga wrote (my Italic): "As you have clearly understood the "precise and solid reconstruction done by Antonio Bonomi" is nothing but a dogmatic and obsessional attempt to steamroller through one controversial interpretation of events actually recorded with very limited precision which often contradicted one another."
As everybody has understood since a while, the obstinate denial of Mr:Wadinga to accept facts and data is nothing but an extremist attempt to defend the honor of a couple of officers who acted timidly in action..... :lol:
Antonio's 2005 reconstruction was ok for him (as well as the Court Martial request that he wrote in his article http://www.hmshood.com/history/denmarks ... olland.htm) until Antonio highlighted an evident "sugar-coating" of the reports done by Tovey vs the RN Admiralty and the PM.
Suddenly they became "conspiracy theories"..... what a coherence and consistency.


Wadinga wrote: "the crude averaging employed is of no value whatsoever"
:lol:
During a 14 minutes engagement averaging is VERY VALUABLE: Mr.Wadinga imagines a battle of 3 hours, where we averaged the rate of fire of a ship that ceased fire and re-opened fire several times: it was NOT the case of Bismarck at Denmark Strait as we have proof that Bismarck fired just more or less fast according to circumstances, never ceasing fire (no witness). :lol:
I fully understand his anger and his total IMPOTENCE to counter the statistical data of Bismarck vs PoW firing: his problem, not an Excel limit !



Bye, Alberto
"It takes three years to build a ship; it takes three centuries to build a tradition" (Adm.A.B.Cunningham)

"There's always a danger running in the enemy at close range" (Adm.W.F.Wake-Walker)
Post Reply