Bismarck firing procedures at DS

[Alberto Virtuani]

Evidence of a witness cannot change what is shown by a film or a photo ....

What Brooke states is another interesting and wrong testimony (as most of testimonies), but I eagerly wait for this guy's reconstruction of the battle showing us when and where the photos and the film has been taken, to laugh at him.


Bye, Alberto

[HMSVF]

Evidence of a witness cannot change what is shown by a film or a photo ....

What Brooke states is another interesting and wrong testimony (as most of testimonies), but I eagerly wait for this guy's reconstruction of the battle showing us when and where the photos and the film has been taken, to laugh at him.


Bye, Alberto

Why is British evidence wrong and German evidence taken as gospel?

Yes there is film but is it definitely timed (same with photo’s)? The film isn’t the whole engagement is it? How is it slotted in?

Just asking (dons tin hat!)


HMSVF

[alecsandros]

Why is British evidence wrong and German evidence taken as gospel?

It's not. For the answer to your questions, you're going to have to go through all the 4 years of debates here on Kbismarck.
OR, better still, just wait for the book.

[wadinga]

Hello Alberto,

Evidence of a witness cannot change what is shown by a film or a photo ..

But when Evidence of a witness confirms what is shown by a film or a photo ..as when Lagemann confirms the shots obviously landing near PG and not near Bismarck, in simultaneously-shot stills and movie footage are from Hood and not PoW at all, it is very powerful.


The mathematically-naïve obsession with a mean value for a variable with a huge standard deviation, ie Bismarck's firing rate, is shown in sharp relief here. It makes no difference if Bismarck did start firing at 05:53, since the mean value is an irrelevant abstract concept in this instance. It's only function in being derived here is to prop up the bizarre and obtuse attempt to prove that Bismarck's gunnery installation was unable to fire faster than PoW's, a concept disproved by the rapid firing seen in the film.


In fact, because there is no sampling of the variable under investigation, ie firing rate, but just a crude estimation based on expended shells over a disputed duration, it is as far from reality as pretending the population of a country really is spread out evenly over its acreage. Since the population density in Italy is only 202 per Km2, the city of Milan and its inhabitants statistically speaking, clearly don't exist. ( ) If one carried out a study to see how many individuals actually existed in every square km of the country, a process which parallels the sampling of PoW's shooting, Milan would suddenly reappear. ( )


In the modern age, McMullen's crude and uninformative study would be replaced by a logging system which would compare the availability of each gun after reloading with the continuously-updated FC solution and its quality based on the latest fall of shot. It may well be that even in 1941 unrecorded on McMullen's simple matrix, reloading time was recorded for each gun, and also its availability to contribute to the salvo when the gunlayer chose to fire it. When the control officer sees the target straddled and he is confident his FC parameters are good, he orders fire for effect, and the gun layer can up the firing rate, reacting as soon as the "Gun Ready" lights illuminate. This rapid fire is what we see against Hood when Lagemann and the PK team shot their film and stills. The idea that M-R heard "Gut, Schnell" and nothing happened is ridiculous.

All the best

wadinga

[HMSVF]

Why is British evidence wrong and German evidence taken as gospel?

It's not. For the answer to your questions, you're going to have to go through all the 4 years of debates here on Kbismarck.
OR, better still, just wait for the book.

I think I would be 75 by the time I had read 4 years worth of threads

[alecsandros]

I think I would be 75 by the time I had read 4 years worth of threads

And by then, the conversations will continue to pile up :)
It will be like in the myth of Sysyphus

[Alberto Virtuani]

Hello everybody,

a couple of denial art masterpieces, from the master of deniers, Mr.Wadinga:

"the mean value is an irrelevant abstract concept in this instance"

A mean value taken over 14 minutes is more than relevant. I would say that a peak value over 2 minutes out o 14 is totally IRRELEVANT.

I see Mr.Wadinga wants to trust that Bismarck fired like a machine gun... and then stopped...: let's see his proposed salvo chart for her to have a laugh together. Oh, sorry, I forget he is UNABLE to do "elementary school calculation" or to draw a map, only very good in his relentless blah-blah ...

"... the bizarre and obtuse attempt to prove that Bismarck's gunnery installation was unable to fire faster than PoW's..."

As theoretical RoF were similar between th two ("green") ships, I don't see a single reason why PoW should have fired much more slowly than Bismarck, except... to provide a solid excuse to his timid commanding officer.....



The only obtuse and bizarre attempt is Mr.Wadinga refusal of incontrovertible average values, that together with a serious analysis of the battle and gunnery facts (http://www.kbismarck.org/forum/viewtopi ... =90#p79686), provide a solid proof that PoW did not fire poorly at all, despite the desperate need of the "RN hooligans" to believe such an old and (intentionally) misleading fairy-tale.



Bye, Alberto

[wadinga]

Hello Alberto,

refusal of incontrovertible average values

based on incontrovertible average values, Milan and therefore you, don't exist.

You can clearly:

do "elementary school calculation"

but

A mean value taken over 14 minutes is more than relevant.

It is only relevant if the distribution is assumed to be a bell-curve with a low standard distribution and limited skewness. Why would that be?

Your lack of understanding of the significance of standard deviation and the inadequate sampling of the variable you attempt to define, proves you don't apparently understand it. This is surprising in view of your stated qualifications, but then surely you are using emotion/intuition here rather than intellect/training.

I see Mr.Wadinga wants to trust that Bismarck fired like a machine gun... and then stopped...: let's see his proposed salvo chart

Why not fire like a machine gun when you are straddling and have a good FC solution? We have film of her firing at maximum rate and I trust that, and we also know she only fired 93 shells.

Because you have invented an imaginary Bismarck salvo chart yourself, you know there is no evidence whatsoever on which to base a credible one.

All the best

wadinga

[dunmunro]

Evidence of a witness cannot change what is shown by a film or a photo ....

What Brooke states is another interesting and wrong testimony (as most of testimonies), but I eagerly wait for this guy's reconstruction of the battle showing us when and where the photos and the film has been taken, to laugh at him.


Bye, Alberto

Why is British evidence wrong and German evidence taken as gospel?

Yes there is film but is it definitely timed (same with photo’s)? The film isn’t the whole engagement is it? How is it slotted in?

Just asking (dons tin hat!)


HMSVF

Exactly! Especially when we have multiple independent accounts stating that Bismarck opened fire within one minute of Hood's open fire at 0552:30.

As for the film and photos, rather than analyzing them as a whole, A/A have simply taken a selection of still frames chosen for how each frame independently illustrates their fictional account, starting with their first photo which is stated to be that of Bismarck opening fire after PE, despite the fact the Captain Brinkmann states that Bismarck fired first!!!

[Alberto Virtuani]

Hello everybody,

Wadinga wrote: "Why would that be? "

Why not ? No evidence, therefore let's stay on INCONTROVERTIBLE average values and forget my salvo chart.


Unfortunately for Mr.Wadinga the gunnery facts (http://www.kbismarck.org/forum/viewtopi ... =90#p79686) and the table are here and CANNOT be denied by a RN hooligan whose intent is only to provide a justification to a timid Captain.

PoW_BS_PG_Output_Comparison_McMullen_rounded.jpg (56.43 KiB) Viewed 1024 times

Re. Mr.Dunmunro ravings, he should have the dignity to post them under the hypothetical scenarios....
In the above table his 5:53 will just have the effect of lowering Bismarck RoF and effective # shells by far under PoW ones but he is so in love with his speculation that he cannot avoid to make a fool of himself, once more.



Bye, Alberto

[dunmunro]

Hello everybody,

Wadinga wrote: "Why would that be? "

Why not ? No evidence, therefore let's stay on INCONTROVERTIBLE average values and forget my salvo chart.


Unfortunately for Mr.Wadinga the gunnery facts (http://www.kbismarck.org/forum/viewtopi ... =90#p79686) and the table are here and CANNOT be denied by a RN hooligan whose intent is only to provide a justification to a timid Captain.


PoW_BS_PG_Output_Comparison_McMullen_rounded.jpg




Re. Mr.Dunmunro ravings, he should have the dignity to post them under the hypothetical scenarios....
In the above table his 5:53 will just have the effect of lowering Bismarck RoF and effective # shells by far under PoW ones but he is so in love with his speculation that he cannot avoid to make a fool of himself, once more.



Bye, Alberto

On the contrary your table should be posted under Hypothetical Scenarios because you've simply made it up.

[alecsandros]

On the contrary your table should be posted under Hypothetical Scenarios because you've simply made it up.

Let us see your own version.

[dunmunro]

On the contrary your table should be posted under Hypothetical Scenarios because you've simply made it up.

Let us see your own version.

So your response to A/A's lie is to request that I provide another lie?

Unlike PoW's GAR which states the exact number of seconds that it took to fire 18 x 14in salvos under AFCT control we do not have a precise firing interval for the 28 x 20.3cm salvos since the open fire and ceasefire times are only given as approximations and include 20.3cm control via both the forward and after directors which were linked to separate FC computers. We can gain some insights into Jasper's statement of 28 x 20.3cm salvos while under his control but we cannot state definitively, for example, when firing of those 28 salvos ceased although it is implied to have occurred over ~12.8 minutes nor can we state how many rounds were fired, although this could be approximated by estimating the number of 2 gun salvos that might be fired under after director control in ~1.2 minutes.

However, while we have some data to work with for PE, we have almost nothing for Bismarck except the number of rounds fired and even the open and ceasefire times are disputed via the witness accounts. I will provide a speculative table for PE under the correct thread.

[Alberto Virtuani]

Hello everybody,

Dunmunro wrote: "we cannot state definitively, for example, when firing of those 28 salvos ceased although it is implied to have occurred over ~12.8 minutes "

28 salvos under Jasper control is Mr.Dunmunro's ignorance demonstration. Time ago a denier his friend confirmed (http://www.kbismarck.org/forum/viewtopi ... 420#p69464) clearly that Jasper count of salvos had been ZEROED by the change of target, thus 28+5= 33 (elementary school calculation) were fired from the fore director, the remaining from the aft....
I don't comment about the pure SPECULATION of 12,8 minutes......

Why this guy insists to expose himself in this way ? Why not loosing all this time to reconstruct his own battle scenario as Antonio has done and then come in and.... make us laugh ? Possibly because to (unsuccessfully) try to demolish someone else work is less brain-consuming. Apparently this guy has leaned very well from Wadinga how to troll the forum.

I would recommend him, instead of posting nonsense, to get rid of his bottle of alcohol and, once sober, to read again the full discussion I had with his denier friend and with Alec regarding this aspect and then, as Alec suggested, to try to build his own !



The "very annoying table" is built normalizing salvos to 4-guns-salvos and the key value "effective # shells delivered per minute" is almost independent from the assumption of the number of ordered shots (and as a consequence, not as another assumption as the ignorant Wadinga insisted, from the number of salvos).

In case of Bismeack the 93 fired shells are enough to demonstrate that this key value was LOWER than PoW one. Sorry for Mr.Dunmunro and Mr.Wadinga ! Try another speculation or denial (but after the second-last post of Mr.Jurens, I would avoid carefully the Court Martial story)


Bye, Alberto

[wadinga]

Hello All,

So your response to A/A's lie is to request that I provide another lie?

SNAFU


All the best

wadinga