Mr.Jurens, thanks for your explanations. I have to accept your opinion above, even if I (humbly) disagree.Bill Jurens wrote: "I.... concluded that anything other than an approximate reconstruction of the Denmark Strait action was probably impossible."
However, forced to choose, wanting to publish an overall interesting book on the "Geant de l'Atlantique", Patrick Toussaint in 2018 (http://www.kbismarck.org/forum/viewtopi ... 795#p80577) chose Antonio's 2005 one, as his reconstruction puts together all the available info in a far better way than anyone else up to now (including Mr.Toussaint himself, who after having chosen the "best" available map, in the text has done some trivial mistakes....).
Of course he could not use Tovey version of facts (or Kennedy's happy novel) to draw a map (as at 06:13 PoW would have possibly rammed Bismarck ), or Pinchin's "Plot" (with its bearing left intentionally "cut" in the middle of the sea...) or the 1990 Baron's map (respecting neither PG battlemap nor PoW salvo plot) as they are proven totally wrong already.
He could have chosen the Baron 70's one (decently correct) but he was able to see the value of Antonio's work (even without recognizing it among his "acknowledgments" )
I'm curious to see what map will be published in your next book on Bismarck, as I'm sure you will not avoid to depict a map of the Denmark Strait battle at all just because only an "approximate reconstruction" of it is possible.....
Bye, Alberto