May 23/24 night shadowing and interception approach CS1/BC1

Discussions about the history of the ship, technical details, etc.
User avatar
Herr Nilsson
Senior Member
Posts: 1169
Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2004 11:19 am
Location: Germany

Re: May 23/24 night shadowing and interception approach CS1/BC1

Post by Herr Nilsson » Wed Dec 07, 2016 12:36 pm

Alberto,

as I said: there is no DoD. Therefore I have none.
Regards

Marc

"Thank God we blow up and sink more easily." (unknown officer from HMS Norfolk)

User avatar
wadinga
Senior Member
Posts: 1405
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 3:49 pm
Location: Tonbridge England

Re: May 23/24 night shadowing and interception approach CS1/BC1

Post by wadinga » Wed Dec 07, 2016 2:06 pm

Gentlemen,

Maybe I can assist international understanding :angel:

There can be only one Diamond of Death, because only it is designed to accuse (J'Accuse) Messrs Leach, Wake-Walker, Phillips, Tovey, Pinchin, Pound, Churchill et al of lying under oath, falsification of records, etc by selective inclusion of information, some of very doubtful provenance. Any other solution is just a diamond.

Has anybody confirmed the positions for Norfolk and Suffolk submitted on Plan 14 are just the guessed D/R positions for them from PoW's action plot plan 13? Has everybody seen PoW's action plot which has no D/F bearings recorded after 03:36 and uses a straight course D/R plotted from Sufffolk's position report plotted from 03:19 (with her major positioning error). Antonio has a version on tracing paper with the timing annotation hand written (not stencilled for submission in reports) which is his source for the DoD geometry. It has been posted in thumbnail format as "original PoW 0537.jpg and is Plan 13. There is also a fair copy version for submission with the Report. It has stencilled time stamps. Only with these can we comprehend the errors which have led to the creation of the DoD, and the strenuous efforts to justify the over-hasty analysis and the creation of the Ziggurat of Conspiracy.

All the best

wadinga
"There seems to be something wrong with our bloody ships today!"

User avatar
Alberto Virtuani
Senior Member
Posts: 2415
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 8:22 am
Location: Milan (Italy)

Re: May 23/24 night shadowing and interception approach CS1/BC1

Post by Alberto Virtuani » Wed Dec 07, 2016 2:55 pm

Wadinga wrote: "There can be only one Diamond of Death, because only it is designed to accuse (J'Accuse) Messrs Leach, Wake-Walker, Phillips, Tovey, Pinchin, Pound, Churchill et al of lying under oath, falsification of records, etc by selective inclusion of information, some of very doubtful provenance. Any other solution is just a diamond."
Hi Sean,
thanks a lot for clarifying: it was clear to me (but apparently not to everybody despite my clarification.... :think: ) that what I meant for "DoD" was just a snapshot of the ships positions at 5:41 (or 5:35). :wink:

@Herr Nilsson:
Hi Marc,
once clarified that it is simply a "diamond": are you finally able/willing to show us YOUR OWN diamond at 5:35 without using assumptions from Antonio's DoD as disclaimer for the left side (explaining YOUR OWN assumptions for German ships relative position to British ships) ?

Currently the only diamonds available here for discussion are Pinchin's and Antonio's (DoD, with all its limitations (if any) and tolerances) one at 5:41 (see my post above), and among the two of them I'm afraid there is no match.... :D


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

User avatar
wadinga
Senior Member
Posts: 1405
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 3:49 pm
Location: Tonbridge England

Re: May 23/24 night shadowing and interception approach CS1/BC1

Post by wadinga » Wed Dec 07, 2016 3:42 pm

Hi Alberto,

here's a question: Do you have PoW Action Plot in either handwritten or stencil annotation?

All the best

wadinga
"There seems to be something wrong with our bloody ships today!"

User avatar
Antonio Bonomi
Senior Member
Posts: 3479
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 10:44 am
Location: Vimercate ( Milano ) - Italy

Re: May 23/24 night shadowing and interception approach CS1/BC1

Post by Antonio Bonomi » Wed Dec 07, 2016 6:59 pm

Hello everybody,

@ Herr Nilsson,

you wrote :
@Antonio : Well, actually I just wanted to show that the strategical map is much too imprecise due to it's scale.
Sure it is if you measure a bearing on a " collage " of pieces I have made on low resolution to explain a concept and not to measure precisely that particular bearing on the Norfolk strategical original map.

In fact it is not 325° like you measured there on my " collage ", but it is 320° as you can verify yourself on the original map I have posted some time ago many times and also on page 28 of this thread on a couple of images..
Norfolk_bearing_0541_from_own_original_map_grid.jpg
Norfolk_bearing_0541_from_own_original_map_grid.jpg (33.93 KiB) Viewed 1918 times
On "The Plot" the same bearing was traced by Pinchin with a 318° line (D/C or D/6) a bit before the 05.41 Norfolk track marker.

That is the reason why on my Polygon it is written 318-320°.
That is the top right correct bearing on the snapshot taken at 05.41.

It does not take much at this point, once the all left side of the Polygon is known, the 2 diagonals are known, ... having the right top part bearing ... to calculate the bottom right part.
Norfolk_0541.jpg
Norfolk_0541.jpg (44.76 KiB) Viewed 1918 times
It is just geometry at this point ... and it will be 18°of course.

Are we all in agreement about it now ?
NK_to_SK_bearings_0320_0541_01.jpg
NK_to_SK_bearings_0320_0541_01.jpg (104.55 KiB) Viewed 1917 times
Can I assume that we all agree that at 05.41 the correct BEARING between Norfolk and Suffolk was 320°as showed into the Norfolk strategical map ?

Does anybody likes to use better the 318° from " The Plot " or the 319° I used some time being the average between the 2 BEARINGS ?

Opinions are welcome ... :think:

Bye Antonio :D
In order to honor a soldier, we have to tell the truth about what happened over there. The whole, hard, cold truth. And until we do that, we dishonor her and every soldier who died, who gave their life for their country. ( Courage Under Fire )

User avatar
Antonio Bonomi
Senior Member
Posts: 3479
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 10:44 am
Location: Vimercate ( Milano ) - Italy

Re: May 23/24 night shadowing and interception approach CS1/BC1

Post by Antonio Bonomi » Wed Dec 07, 2016 7:32 pm

Hello everybody,

@ All,

here it is in high resolution, ... so everybody can measure it again, ... it is 320°, ... no doubts.
Norfolk_bearing_Suffolk_0541.jpg
Norfolk_bearing_Suffolk_0541.jpg (89.66 KiB) Viewed 1915 times
0541_Norfolk_map_bearings.jpg
0541_Norfolk_map_bearings.jpg (74.9 KiB) Viewed 1915 times
Taken from this map :
Norfolk_0100_0700_May_24th_1941_0999.jpg
Norfolk_0100_0700_May_24th_1941_0999.jpg (70.99 KiB) Viewed 1915 times
Now you can check everything again.

Bye Antonio :D
In order to honor a soldier, we have to tell the truth about what happened over there. The whole, hard, cold truth. And until we do that, we dishonor her and every soldier who died, who gave their life for their country. ( Courage Under Fire )

User avatar
Alberto Virtuani
Senior Member
Posts: 2415
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 8:22 am
Location: Milan (Italy)

Re: May 23/24 night shadowing and interception approach CS1/BC1

Post by Alberto Virtuani » Wed Dec 07, 2016 11:00 pm

Wadinga wrote: "Do you have PoW Action Plot in either handwritten or stencil annotation?"
Hi Sean,
I'm afraid I don't have the PoW Action Plot document, I know just the related info posted in this forum.

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

User avatar
Antonio Bonomi
Senior Member
Posts: 3479
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 10:44 am
Location: Vimercate ( Milano ) - Italy

Re: May 23/24 night shadowing and interception approach CS1/BC1

Post by Antonio Bonomi » Thu Dec 08, 2016 8:42 am

Hello everybody,

@ All,

after we will be in agreement about the 05.41 checkpoint BEARING of 318-320° between Norfolk and Suffolk, ... only AFTER having agreed this milestone, ... I think we will be ready to discuss and analyze the track situation of the ALL warships involved on that moment, ... with the " snapshot " figure at 05.41, ... the " snapshot " figure at 05.35, ... their difference, ... and some other " snapshot " figures taken after all the way thru.
NK_SK_PoW_at _0541_01.jpg
NK_SK_PoW_at _0541_01.jpg (75.38 KiB) Viewed 1878 times
So my question to you all is very easy now : are we all in Agreement about that 05.41 checkpoint BEARING of 318-320° between Norfolk and Suffolk ?

If anybody disagree, ... I kindly ask everybody to explain us why, ... based on what ... and provide the details of what he thinks the situation was on that moment supported by the related evidence.

Thanks for the cooperation ...

Bye Antonio :D
In order to honor a soldier, we have to tell the truth about what happened over there. The whole, hard, cold truth. And until we do that, we dishonor her and every soldier who died, who gave their life for their country. ( Courage Under Fire )

User avatar
wadinga
Senior Member
Posts: 1405
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 3:49 pm
Location: Tonbridge England

Re: May 23/24 night shadowing and interception approach CS1/BC1

Post by wadinga » Thu Dec 08, 2016 1:40 pm

Hello Antonio,

In case you were at all unclear I do not accept for one instant
we all in Agreement about that 05.41 checkpoint BEARING of 318-320° between Norfolk and Suffolk ?
:negative:

Since there cannot be a correct position for Suffolk at 05:41 on Norfolk's Strat Map there cannot be a correct bearing going to it.

I am also frankly stunned :shock: by Alberto's admission that his staunch and aggressive defence of every groundless assertion you have made over the last several years has happened despite the fact you have shown him, as with the rest of us, only the very southernmost part of PoW's Action Plot (AKA Plan 13), so as to conceal how flimsy is the evidence for Norfolk and Suffolk's relative positions on this document. They are the very foundation of the DoD. You know the tracks on this are merely D/R extrapolations of their reported courses from their inaccurate radioed positions from much earlier in the night. Those of us who already have access to the Action Plot know it too. I have given assurance I will not distribute it, but it is accessible at Kew, and I will have more time on my hands next year :wink: so expect it to be photographed and distributed freely. It would be interesting to hear which other contributors have it currently, so I can prepare my mailing list.

You have tried to handcuff dissention from your assertion with
and provide the details of what he thinks the situation was on that moment supported by the related evidence.
But I would quote one of your wisest observations...............
I would agree with you : a non solution is better than an incorrect solution.
:D

All the best

wadinga
"There seems to be something wrong with our bloody ships today!"

User avatar
Alberto Virtuani
Senior Member
Posts: 2415
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 8:22 am
Location: Milan (Italy)

Re: May 23/24 night shadowing and interception approach CS1/BC1

Post by Alberto Virtuani » Thu Dec 08, 2016 2:08 pm

Wadinga wrote: "I am also frankly stunned :shock: by Alberto's admission that his staunch and aggressive defence of every groundless assertion you have made over the last several years has happened despite the fact you have shown him, as with the rest of us, only the very southernmost part of PoW's Action Plot (AKA Plan 13),"
Hi Sean,
I'm stunned as well that your attack against Antonio's reconstruction is based on the fact that he has so kindly shown us the relevant info, while the "defense" side has shown NOTHING yet.....


BTW, I have here the confirmation that, despite the wisest and most knowledgeable people in this forum are very good in finding the smallest defect/approximation/wording error in Antonio's reconstruction, NOBODY here has been able/willing to build a "diamond" (or snapshot, or DoD, or DoS (Diamond of Salvation), or whatever we like to call it) alternative to his one....except... the poor Pinchin who, 75 years ago, when ordered to produce an intentionally incorrect map with an enlarged battlefield, drew it the night before the second board of inquiry, not being able (of course) to fit all available info in a credible battlemap.

My request to all (and to you) still stands unanswered from my above posts: please show an alternative, (or plainly have at least the courage to admit they/you prefer Pinchin's battlemap) if desperately wanting to deny Antonio's reconstruction:
as I asked to Herr Nilsson: "Are you finally able/willing to show us YOUR OWN "diamond" at 5:35 without using assumptions from Antonio's DoD as disclaimer for the left side (explaining YOUR OWN assumptions for German ships relative position to British ships) ?"
Apparently not.... :negative: ....and I do prefer Antonio's one to Pinchin's one .

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

User avatar
wadinga
Senior Member
Posts: 1405
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 3:49 pm
Location: Tonbridge England

Re: May 23/24 night shadowing and interception approach CS1/BC1

Post by wadinga » Thu Dec 08, 2016 3:42 pm

Hi Alberto,

How do you know
based on the fact that he has so kindly shown us the relevant info
what's relevant and what isn't :D

I think if you were to see what is concealed of the Action plot, Plan 13 you would change your mind. :cool:

I guess my best move would be to see if hmshood.com will display the Action Plot along with the other PoW material when I get it from Kew.

All the best

wadinga
"There seems to be something wrong with our bloody ships today!"

User avatar
Antonio Bonomi
Senior Member
Posts: 3479
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 10:44 am
Location: Vimercate ( Milano ) - Italy

Re: May 23/24 night shadowing and interception approach CS1/BC1

Post by Antonio Bonomi » Thu Dec 08, 2016 4:01 pm

Hello everybody,

@ Wadinga,

what the HMS Prince of Wales Plan 13 has to do with the 318-320° BEARING between Norfolk and Suffolk is not clear to me so far, we will have lot of time for that as well, do not worry.

Please explain your point more clearly if you want a response about it.

But this was not my question anyhow.
Norfolk_0100_0700_May_24th_1941_0988.jpg
Norfolk_0100_0700_May_24th_1941_0988.jpg (85.03 KiB) Viewed 1851 times
My question is if you agree with that BEARING being between 318° as showed by Pinchin on " The Plot " and 320° as showed into the Norfolk Strategical map.

Both documents being used and/or attached to RearAdm Wake-Walker official documentation.
Norfolk_bearings_to_Suffolk.jpg
Norfolk_bearings_to_Suffolk.jpg (67.42 KiB) Viewed 1851 times
I am sure you will agree that the attached documents BEARING were the ones RearAdm Wake-Walker was referring to.

A simple anwer YES or NO willl be sufficient in this regard.

Thanks in advance for your kind response.

Bye Antonio :D
In order to honor a soldier, we have to tell the truth about what happened over there. The whole, hard, cold truth. And until we do that, we dishonor her and every soldier who died, who gave their life for their country. ( Courage Under Fire )

User avatar
wadinga
Senior Member
Posts: 1405
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 3:49 pm
Location: Tonbridge England

Re: May 23/24 night shadowing and interception approach CS1/BC1

Post by wadinga » Thu Dec 08, 2016 7:31 pm

Hello Antonio,

There are no bearings on the Norfolk strategical map. There are no bearings recorded in W-W's narrative or the ship's log.

There are two impossible triangles for Suffolk's position with no explanation of their origin. You have derived a/some bearings and decided they are important. If there were representations of D/F bearings on the NSM, as there are radar and visual on the Suffolk SM you would have something, but you don't.

Despite W-W talking loosely of positions the only value in taking bearings was to find out if Norfolk or Suffolk were ahead in their race after the Bismarck. He discovered Suffolk's reported position was hopelessly inaccurate when she failed to appear on his starboard side, but since she added the rider about no fix since 11:00 yesterday morning he knew her position would be incorrect. Since Norfolk doesn't and cannot have enough information to derive a position for Suffolk, the triangles are purely speculative.

So in binary terms No. No .NO
Please explain your point more clearly if you want a response about it.
OK please publish the action plot Plan 13 from the point where PoW's navigator plotted Suffolk's inaccurate radio position, 03:21 and then drew a track based on her reported course for the duration which resulted in an incorrect position at 05:37. The same example will show Norfolk arriving at an incorrect position at 05:41. These incorrect positions are the basis of the DoD.

Or if you won't publish it, send it secretly to Alberto. After years of loyal service and support he deserves not to be kept in the dark any longer.

All the best

wadinga
"There seems to be something wrong with our bloody ships today!"

User avatar
Antonio Bonomi
Senior Member
Posts: 3479
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 10:44 am
Location: Vimercate ( Milano ) - Italy

Re: May 23/24 night shadowing and interception approach CS1/BC1

Post by Antonio Bonomi » Thu Dec 08, 2016 8:29 pm

Hello everybody,

@ Wadinga,

your position is finally clear and it is a NO about recognizing the obvious under our eyes, ... both on the Norfolk Strategical map ... as well as on " The Plot " by Pinchin we have long discussed about, ... apparently.

So why on " The Plot " thread on many post's your recognized the 318° BEARING traced by Pinchin and ending on the water ?

It seems you are the only one not accepting this fairly easy available evidence now.

When I will have the need to work on the PoW Plan 13, I will use it.

Bye Antonio :D
In order to honor a soldier, we have to tell the truth about what happened over there. The whole, hard, cold truth. And until we do that, we dishonor her and every soldier who died, who gave their life for their country. ( Courage Under Fire )

User avatar
Alberto Virtuani
Senior Member
Posts: 2415
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 8:22 am
Location: Milan (Italy)

Re: May 23/24 night shadowing and interception approach CS1/BC1

Post by Alberto Virtuani » Thu Dec 08, 2016 10:24 pm

Wadinga wrote: "I guess my best move would be to see if hmshood.com will display the Action Plot along with the other PoW material when I get it from Kew"
Hi Sean,
while I'm really interested in seeing the "scoop" contained in PoW plan 13, that will dismantle Antonio's DoD at 5:41, while I understand (and sincerely do respect) your decision not to reveal what you have promised not to show, I'm ready to accept the description of its content from your words.

However, based on this document (that you consider a key one to calculate the bearings and positions at 5:41, the time of the DoD ), it should be very easy for you to plot the CORRECT positions of the ships at 5:41, confuting the wrong Antonio's ones, without failing the word given.

Where is your "diamond" ?
Where is ANY other diamond from ANYBODY in this forum ?

I'm still waiting for an answer from Marc and from you to my question........ :think:
No answer means that nobody can produce a different realistic picture at 5:41, being just able to criticize someone else work because unwilling to accept the evidences (the ones confirmed by ALL HMS Norfolk witnesses at the first board of inquiry and by Capt. Ellis, HMS Suffolk, in his autobiography)...... sic stantibus rebus, I still consider Antonio's DoD as the reference, nobody being able to show a different one to be compared with it.


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

Post Reply