Bismarck firing procedures at DS

[Antonio Bonomi]

Hello everybody,

...continue ...

Or you still like Elfrath-Herzog and Santarini ones ...

1975_Elfrath_Herzog.jpg (27.3 KiB) Viewed 1308 times

2013_Santarini_map_page_60_based_Elfrath_1975.jpg (41.84 KiB) Viewed 1308 times

I just like to see where you stand currently ...

Bye Antonio

[alecsandros]

@Antonio,
Many thanks for those wonderfull maps
Never seen them before.

Do you know what info they used for Bismarck's course ? It is drawn as some sinusoid movement around her base course... What would be the primary source for that ? I always imagined it was a good thing to do , to confuse the enemy, but never actualy read about it in PRinz Eugen's or Bismarck's ktb's, nor in British materials I have managed to read so far.

Best regards, and thanks again,
Alex

[Antonio Bonomi]

Hello everybody,

@ Alecsandros,

my pleasure to provide you more " food for thougths " about this battle and the very many battle maps ( those are just few, ... there are many more ) ... that has been created in order to try to explain what happened.

No, I do not know from where they took the inputs in order to create those maps.

I will not comment for the moment on those battle maps, waiting for Sean ( Wadinga ) to tell me now on which of those he likes to believe, ... why, ... and how he can fit the existing original film and photos on those maps timetable.

@ Wadinga,

you wrote :

As I have explained before I am quite happy to believe the Baron and Schmalenbach.
I endorse their maps since they were there.

You now have to tell me which one of the above map you support since you wrote :

Since you have apparently accounted for all the later local control salvoes, have you an insight into why are they so unbelievably accurate compared with that seen in NH 69731 which you believe is PoW salvo 19 falling many hundreds of yards short? Somehow without the benefit of either DCT's elevated sighting position, Aylwin through his Y turret periscope, correctly spots and divines the predicted range and puts his next shot salvo 20, 30 seconds later by your reckoning, within a few tens of metres of PG's starboard quarter, and the next just 20 seconds after that, without even the benefit of spotting the previous fall of shot, a little further adrift off PG's starboard beam. All of which is achieved whilst PoW is twisting and turning like a snipe (a 35,000 snipe that is). BTW since all these salvoes are closer to PG than Bismarck, which ship is he shooting at?

It is interesting that the maps of Paul Schmalenbach in Warship Profile, The Baron in his book and Ulrich Elfrath reproduced in Santarini all ignore the Gefechtschizze for PG's track and depict a double scissor course with PG cutting across from Bismarck's starboard bow to the port bow about 05:55 and then chopping back across the flagship's bows just before 06:00. Elfrath in particular shows a right angle crossing exactly as recorded in the Bundesarchive photo and NH 69729. Schmalenbach actually shows PG stern-on to PoW at 06:00.

According to these gentlemen (well not Elfrath) who were actually at the Battle of the Denmark Strait, (unlike any of us) the positional relationship between BS and PG which most closely fits the film and most of the NH series is between 05:56 and maybe 05:58 only, because PG was always to starboard of the flagship otherwise. BTW since this is moments before Hood's destruction it is no wonder it shows rapid fire. Oh and the shells landing so close to PG's starboard side would be ........ from Hood.
I'm sorry once again to refer to diagrams I cannot reproduce. Elfrath from Santarini should be possible from some other contributors, Schmalenbach from Warship Profile a little harder.

For Alberto: I don't insinuate Antonio's precise salvo timing for BS is unsupportable, I flat out declare it

Drawing a track for Bismarck based on his ordering of the photographs is a theory, no more.
He does not replicate the position shown in the Bundesarchive photo and NH 69729 of 90 degree intersection.

I reproduced everything for you here above, as you can see

If you go above on my photo list, you will find at salvo 24 the precise position of photo Nh 69729 with the 90 degree intersection.

You appear to me a lot confused about Paul Schmalenbach and the Baron von Mullenheim-Rechberg battle maps and publications, ... what they did, how they did it, and when they did it, ... but before explaining once again to you where your above statements are incorrect, ... I like to have your selection on which one of the above maps you referenced to fits your idea of the battle on this moment.

Which Warship profile map by Schmalenbach are you referencing to ? The PG Number 6 of 1971, or BS number 18 of 1972 ?

More, which Baron map are you referring to ? The 1990 version based on Schamlenbach PG of 1971 I posted above ?

I suppose you like the : Schmalenbach PG 1971 used by the Baron on his 1990 book version, based on your statements. Am I correct as it seems to me ? Please confirm.

This is what I realize from you statements, since you stated that : " ... all ignore the Gefechtschizze for PG's track and depict a double scissor course with PG cutting across from Bismarck's starboard bow to the port bow about 05:55 and then chopping back across the flagship's bows just before 06:00. Elfrath in particular shows a right angle crossing exactly as recorded in the Bundesarchive photo and NH 69729. Schmalenbach actually shows PG stern-on to PoW at 06:00. "

I would like to have your obvious confirmation at this point before explaining how far you are from reality.

Continuing you wrote also :

I believe with sufficient time one could insert the photographs and film to match them.

Did you ever realized that somebody did it already ?

I don't believe you could position the maps or events accurate to plus or minus 10 seconds, or build a Conspiracy theory on the back of it.

I believe that it is possible to do it and I did it based on the available evidence you are having hard time realizing and mostly accept, simply because you do not like to enable the logical consequent evaluations to be based on those timings and facts.

Time will tell us who is right and who is incorrect ... no problems ...

Bye Antonio

[Cag]

Hi All,
Thanks Antonio for the maps very helpful as always. May I ask a question to both Antonio and Dunmonro?

Antonio I have read the reversed photo idea thread and agree that it does not appear to be feasable therefore if Bismarck was on course 220 could either the 280 course for Hood/PoW be wrong, or the range plot for PoW salvos 9 and 13 be incorrect to explain the missmatch when drawing in the 3 hits on Bismarck?

Dunmonro in the salvo plot you have 3 guns in action at salvos 11,12,13 could you explain which guns were U/S?

Many thanks in advance
Best wishes,
Cag.

[Antonio Bonomi]

Hello evevrybody,

@ CAG,

please remember that I posted those maps not because I think they are correct, ... but simply to enable Wadinga to tell me on which of those he is still " hang on to " and explain him why it is not correct.

Other than the German ship tracks, ... please look at the Hood+PoW tracks ... and mostly at where they placed Norfolk and Suffolk ...

There are many more maps to be added to those ... a lot of them ... Grenfell, Busch ... etc etc etc

The reversed photo theory was an invention of Mr. Robert Winklareth, due to his insufficient knowledge of Bismarck details, few Bismarck photos available, no correlation with British taken photos and no research done on official documentation.

If you analyze the PoW gunnery plot you will notice a 212 degrees course at the beginning until salvo 6 and a 225 degrees course after even after salvo 13 landed, before the turn to 270 degrees course due west because of the torpedo alarm.

In reality Bismarck was on main course 220 degrees following the Prinz Eugen, ... even if she probably made avoidance manoeuvres.

I think that PoW course 280 degrees is correct too and that the reason for the mismatch should be focused on the salvo 6., ... since 9 and 13 are almost correct for 220 degres of the enemy ... the 6 is not, ... but that, ... at the beginning, ... is where also the precision of PoW data I think was less accurate, ... improving after ... from 9 and after until 13 ...

Of course my personal opinion, ... based on what we have and I can see ...

Bye Antonio

[dunmunro]

Hi All,
Thanks Antonio for the maps very helpful as always. May I ask a question to both Antonio and Dunmonro?

Antonio I have read the reversed photo idea thread and agree that it does not appear to be feasable therefore if Bismarck was on course 220 could either the 280 course for Hood/PoW be wrong, or the range plot for PoW salvos 9 and 13 be incorrect to explain the missmatch when drawing in the 3 hits on Bismarck?

Dunmonro in the salvo plot you have 3 guns in action at salvos 11,12,13 could you explain which guns were U/S?

Many thanks in advance
Best wishes,
Cag.

here's my analysis:

[Cag]

Hi All,
Thank you Antonio, I have read the reverse photo theory and agree that it is unlikely, I am sorry to bring that up it must have been very frustrating and I will look into the 6th salvo thank you.

Thank you also Dunmonro, I've found where I must be mistaken, I thought that due to the flash door damage at salvo 12, Y2 would have fired at salvo 12 and missed 14,16,18,20. And Y3 due to ammo hoist cordite failure at salvo 11 would have been able to fire in salvo 11 and 13 but missed 15,17,19 and fired again at 21. But as you have shown it seems more likely that those would have been lost too which means I have been trying to find three missing salvos from A turret that may have not have actually been lost!

Thanks all again,
Best wishes
Cag.

[Cag]

Hi All,

Thanks Dunmonro I have altered my own salvo chart for PoW to fall in line with yours.

I would like also to say thanks again to all of you for your free advice, help, and for all the information freely posted.
Best wishes to all,
Cag.

[Antonio Bonomi]

Hello everybody,

@ Wadinga,

you wrote :

He does not replicate the position shown in the Bundesarchiv photo BA 146_1990_061_27 and NH 69729 of 90 degree intersection.

Here you go Sean, ... now I wait your answers and your positioning of those photos on the map you are supporting.

BA_146_1990_061_027.jpg (30.52 KiB) Viewed 1091 times

BS_photos_from_0606_until_0609.jpg (45.07 KiB) Viewed 1091 times

BS_DS_salvo_23_to_27_ver02.jpg (66.89 KiB) Viewed 1091 times

Bye Antonio

[Herr Nilsson]

@ Antonio

Sean is right, the geometry on your map does not correlate with the pictures

If you analyze the PoW gunnery plot you will notice a 212 degrees course at the beginning until salvo 6 and a 225 degrees course after even after salvo 13 landed, before the turn to 270 degrees course due west because of the torpedo alarm.

In reality Bismarck was on main course 220 degrees following the Prinz Eugen, ... even if she probably made avoidance manoeuvres.

I think that PoW course 280 degrees is correct too and that the reason for the mismatch should be focused on the salvo 6., ... since 9 and 13 are almost correct for 220 degres of the enemy ... the 6 is not, ... but that, ... at the beginning, ... is where also the precision of PoW data I think was less accurate, ... improving after ... from 9 and after until 13 ...

Of course my personal opinion, ... based on what we have and I can see ...

Who knows what it's good for, but it's quite interesting what happens, if one relies on Rowell's arrows on the map and his narrative and not the track.

[Alberto Virtuani]

@Herr Nilsson:
Hi Marc,
a question, as I'm afraid I don't have any graphical instrument on my PC.....

What is the course (degrees) you have shown in green in the gunnery plot above and that is fairly (not perfectly) matching the hitting salvos ?

Bye, Alberto

[Herr Nilsson]

220°

[Alberto Virtuani]

Hi Marc,
I'm surely missing something.
It looks like this straight course 220° perfectly matches the gunnery plot (Enclosure IV) in terms of overs and shorts (despite the different track), except salvo 18 that was "not certain" (as per "Gunnery Narrative of Events") , as well as it fairly matches the straddles too.... What is not matching ? What's the meaning of the different colors in your plot ?

Bye, Alberto

[Herr Nilsson]

Alberto,

it's was just a quick try to find out what happens, if PoW changes her course when she opens her A Arcs according the salvo plot and not minutes before. The different colors do not mean very much. Red are the straddling salvos, blue are not changed at all and only the black lines (and salvo six) are affected by the different course during that time in relation to the original PoW-track (red part of PoWs track). The distances of the length of all salvos should be the same like in the original Rowell plot (as I said, I made it very quick, so it's possibly not 100% accurate).

[Alberto Virtuani]

Hi Marc,
thanks, it's clear now (I did not notice the altered PoW track with the 20° turn at 5:57 instead of 5:55..... )
Bye, Alberto