Bismarck second hit on PoW : HACS Director

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

Moderator: Bill Jurens

User avatar
Antonio Bonomi
Senior Member
Posts: 3799
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 10:44 am
Location: Vimercate ( Milano ) - Italy

Bismarck second hit on PoW : HACS Director

Post by Antonio Bonomi »

Hello everybody,

after having analyzed the first Bismarck hit on HMS Prince of Wales, the one on the Compass Platform and port side bridges, it is time to analyze the second one.
bridge_equipment_03.jpg
bridge_equipment_03.jpg (113.46 KiB) Viewed 7591 times
Please note that the hit's order, so first second and so on, are just a reference as time of hit and sequence are NOT fully proven yet.

I am following the order on ADM 267/111 which is the official document of HMS Prince of Wales damage report.

Here Tarrant extract of it from the KG V class book.
PoW_hit_Nr_2_HACS_director.jpg
PoW_hit_Nr_2_HACS_director.jpg (131.92 KiB) Viewed 7593 times
NOTE : ADM 267/111 rated this shell : Probably 8inches, so 203 mm from Prinz Eugen ( but possibly 15 inches, so 381 mm from Bismarck ), anyway it did NOT explode.

Opinions welcome.

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: 2467
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 3:49 pm
Location: Tonbridge England

Re: Bismarck second hit on PoW : HACS Director

Post by wadinga »

Hi Antonio,

I am intrigued. If the Tarrant description is a direct verbatim copy of the dockyard report (again, do you have the typescript?) it is surprising as it is quite definite in saying it was an 8 inch shell, whereas your amplification says it could have been 15". Obviously once again, just like the Compass Platform, there is no neat cookie cutter hole or even windshield or splinter remnants to give a definitive identity.

With regard to timing, it can only have occurred at a very similar time to the CP hit. PoW was not on this course for long. Whereas on the CP hit there are entrance and exit holes to determine angle of impact relative to centre line, it is presumably more speculative here.

Since Woods made no mention of a second hit, after he had been sucked through the hatch, it can hardly have happened much after the CP hit.

All the Best

wadinga
"There seems to be something wrong with our bloody ships today!"
dunmunro
Senior Member
Posts: 4394
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2005 1:25 am
Location: Langley BC Canada

Re: Bismarck second hit on PoW : HACS Director

Post by dunmunro »

The fact that the shell was deflected by the thin plating of the roof seems to me to rule out a 38cm hit. A 20cm hit is more likely, as is a 15cm hit. The large exit hole suggests that the shell tumbled which along with it's ballistic cap, created the large exit opening.
User avatar
Antonio Bonomi
Senior Member
Posts: 3799
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 10:44 am
Location: Vimercate ( Milano ) - Italy

Re: Bismarck second hit on PoW : HACS Director

Post by Antonio Bonomi »

Hello everybody,

@ Wadinga,

Sean, ... you know I have it all ... :wink:

Here it is for everybody.
PoW_hit_nr2_01.jpg
PoW_hit_nr2_01.jpg (117.77 KiB) Viewed 7570 times
PoW_hit_nr2_02.jpg
PoW_hit_nr2_02.jpg (119.11 KiB) Viewed 7570 times
Now you can make your own observations and evaluations.

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: 3605
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 8:22 am
Location: Milan (Italy)

Re: Bismarck second hit on PoW : HACS Director

Post by Alberto Virtuani »

@all:
I fully agree with Dunmunro. If someone would have asked me, I would have said that even a 150 mm shell cannot be deflected by such a thin plating as the roof of the Admiral's charthouse.
However the damage reports that I have seen so far are usually so precise and the conclusions of the experts so carefully weighed that I tend to believe them and consider the hit as an 8" or a 15".

But what is most interesting is point 2 in the second part of the damage report: "2. the bearing and angle of descent are not consistent with those of hit No..1" :shock: :shock: :shock:

I always thought that the 2 hits were received almost together, but while the angle of descent can depend on the calibre (thus a 8" shell fired from (almost) the same distance should have come on board with a larger angle of descent compared with a 15" shell and a 5,9" with an even larger one), the different bearing can only depend on a different battle time (except for the minor 3° difference in the relative bearing of the BS and PG viewed from the PoW at around 6:00 AM).

This is something really interesting.... ! :think:

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
Dave Saxton
Supporter
Posts: 3148
Joined: Sat Nov 27, 2004 9:02 pm
Location: Rocky Mountains USA

Re: Bismarck second hit on PoW : HACS Director

Post by Dave Saxton »

I agree, the different bearing angle compared to the 38 cm hit strongly indicates it came from PG.
Entering a night sea battle is an awesome business.The enveloping darkness, hiding the enemy's.. seems a living thing, malignant and oppressive.Swishing water at the bow and stern mark an inexorable advance toward an unknown destiny.
User avatar
paulcadogan
Senior Member
Posts: 1148
Joined: Sun Jul 16, 2006 4:03 am
Location: Kingston, Jamaica

Re: Bismarck second hit on PoW : HACS Director

Post by paulcadogan »

Alberto Virtuani wrote:But what is most interesting is point 2 in the second part of the damage report: "2. the bearing and angle of descent are not consistent with those of hit No..1"

I always thought that the 2 hits were received almost together, but while the angle of descent can depend on the calibre (thus a 8" shell fired from (almost) the same distance should have come on board with a larger angle of descent compared with a 15" shell and a 5,9" with an even larger one), the different bearing can only depend on a different battle time (except for the minor 3° difference in the relative bearing of the BS and PG viewed from the PoW at around 6:00 AM).

This is something really interesting.... !
OH...how quickly we forget (or ignore as the case may be! :wink: )
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.

The shot caused the director to jam temporarily in training and the Control Officer of the latter ordered all turrets to go into "aft control".

Prince of Wales' Gunnery Aspects Report.

The 5.25's opened fire just before 0557 according to the salvo plot at a range of 18,600 yards. The HACS hit occurred after they fired only THREE salvos - now 3 salvos from the 5.25's will not take 3 minutes!! The hit seems therefore to have been from Prinz Eugen's ranging ladder salvo which "zeroed her in at 0559" according to Jasper. It was, therefore, the first hit received by PoW - again timing based on McMullen's gunnery report cross referenced to Jasper's report. It should be noted too that Jasper also noted "well placed" 15 cm salvos from Bismarck landing at about the same time.

The suggestion that the shell was from the same salvo as the CP hit was probably made very hastily without careful cross-referencing of all the data.
Qui invidet minor est - He who envies is the lesser man
User avatar
Antonio Bonomi
Senior Member
Posts: 3799
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 10:44 am
Location: Vimercate ( Milano ) - Italy

Re: Bismarck second hit on PoW : HACS Director

Post by Antonio Bonomi »

Hello everybody,

you may like to cross check what has been written on Marinearchiv forum on this thread last page Nr 9.

http://www.forum-marinearchiv.de/smf/in ... 3.120.html

It is of particular interest the Jasper report statements revisited translation about the 150 mm Bismarck secondary salvoes.

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: 3605
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 8:22 am
Location: Milan (Italy)

Re: Bismarck second hit on PoW : HACS Director

Post by Alberto Virtuani »

@all: I have looked into the full damage report documentation and this is the fig. V referenced in the damage report description posted above by Antonio Bonomi . It explains what the sentence I was referring to means exactly :

"2. the bearing and angle of descent are not consistent with those of hit No..1"
IMG_6304.JPG
IMG_6304.JPG (105.22 KiB) Viewed 7480 times
It doesn't look a guess like estimation, it look like they inspected the damage very carefully and that were sure the bearing of this enemy shell was very different from the compass platform one (20° difference , I measured it from 47° to 67°). It is not the difference in bearing between BS and PG that was just 3°......

This means the shell, whatever calibre (15", 8" or 5,9"), came at a different battle time, LATER then the compass platform one and the bearing demonstrates that the ship was already beginning her turn away from the enemy, started at 6:01:30, so the hit arrived at 6:01:40 - 6:01:50 (the time needed to PoW under full rudder to complete a turn of 20° to port, when she was on an absolute course of around 260°.

Please consider that the ship was never on a course of 260° before the hit in compass, just after the turn away she reached that course.......

Any explanation why the hit was always associated with the one in compass platform ? :think:

However all the above is in contrast with the Gunnery report (Paul Cadogan post above) that says the director hit came after 3 salvoes of the 5,9"......... any explanation here as well ? :think:

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
Antonio Bonomi
Senior Member
Posts: 3799
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 10:44 am
Location: Vimercate ( Milano ) - Italy

Re: Bismarck second hit on PoW : HACS Director

Post by Antonio Bonomi »

Hello everybody,

Alberto wrote :
Any explanation why the hit was always associated with the one in compass platform ? :think:
I think that the answer is unique and pretty obvious my friend, ... attached to this ADM 267/111 - HMS Prince of Wales damage report, ... there was an Home Fleet document signed by Adm Tovey on June 11th, 1941, ... which submitted to the Admiralty the Capt. J.C. Leach narrative of June 4, 1941, ... which included this other document :
" Damage sustained in the action against Bismarck " of June 9th, 1941, composed by 3 pages and signed by Capt. J.C. Leach


On the above documents ( both ) Capt. Leach stated that the second hit, which he defined hit " B " was a 15 inches ( 381 mm ) received from Bismarck with the same salvo that hit the Compass Platform ( defined by Capt. Leach hit " A " ).

It is obvious to me that while the analysis conducted demonstrated that it was most likely a 203 mm ( 8 inches ) shell and NOT a 381 mm shell ( 15 inches ) from Bismarck and it was not received with the same salvo that hit the compass platform, ... they had to " save " for diplomacy reasons the possibility that was a 15 inch from Bismarck as declared in writing by Capt. Leach.

This is the only reason I see for them to write : probably a 203 mm shell from Prinz Eugen, ... but possibly a 381 mm shell from Bismarck.

The direction from where the hit came from and the associated possible timing demonstrate that it was NOT within the same salvo : 20 degrees bearing difference !

The second ( B or 2 ) hit arrived LATER than the one on the compass platform ( A or 1 ), ... with PoW already turning away to port ... :wink:

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: 2467
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 3:49 pm
Location: Tonbridge England

Re: Bismarck second hit on PoW : HACS Director

Post by wadinga »

All,

These statements:
came at a different battle time, LATER then the compass platform one
and
The second ( B or 2 ) hit arrived LATER than the one on the compass platform ( A or 1 ), ... with PoW already turning away to port
They fail to allow for the much more likely scenario described by Paul. Namely, that as described by several witnesses, PoW turned after Hood, achieving the 260T course, and then taking the HA/DCT hit from PG first, the loud noise heard by Leach, before turning toward Bismarck again to avoid the Hood wreck.

It is of course, almost impossible that the HA/DCT was after the CP, because Woods would have noticed being showered with further splinters causing further casualties.

The latest version of Antonio's scenario has become even more untenable recently as he has reduced the timing from 50 to 38 seconds between the Hood explosion and the CP hit, which after deducting 22 seconds of shell travel time gives Bismarck's command chain just 16 seconds to realise that Hood is doomed and switch the next salvo to a new target.

All the best

wadinga
"There seems to be something wrong with our bloody ships today!"
User avatar
Alberto Virtuani
Senior Member
Posts: 3605
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 8:22 am
Location: Milan (Italy)

Re: Bismarck second hit on PoW : HACS Director

Post by Alberto Virtuani »

Wadinga wrote: "... as described by several witnesses, PoW turned after Hood, achieving the 260T course, and then taking the HA/DCT hit from PG first, the loud noise heard by Leach, before turning toward Bismarck again to avoid the Hood wreck. "
Hi Sean,
unfortunately this scenario is contradicted by the most reliable and authoritative witness re. PoW manoeuvring, her navigating officer (Rowell, not yet "hurt" at that time.....) who clearly describes the intention of Adm. Holland to turn again 20° to port (after the first turn from 300° to 280°), with the blue 2 flag hoisted but, due to the flagship explosion, NEVER executed. There is no evidence that can deny his first hand account as navigating officer in compass together with Leach (who btw never mentioned the turn to port as well.....).
Lieutenant Commander G.W.Rowell: "The Vice-Admiral hoisted a second signal for another turn of 20 deg. away but before it could be executed the "Hood" was hit by another salvo."
Therefore, PoW was never on a 260° course before she started her turn away and the hit n.2 arrived later than hit n.1.
Wadinga wrote: "It is of course, almost impossible that the HA/DCT was after the CP, because Woods would have noticed being showered with further splinters causing further casualties"
It is even "more" impossible that the hit happened before, as all the personnel on the bridge would have noticed this hit, the splinters and most of all the hot and cold water tanks that flooded the bridge. E.g. Esmond Knight never mentioned the hit to the directors (at few meters from his position) because it happened when he was already wounded by the CP hit......

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
RNfanDan
Supporter
Posts: 424
Joined: Mon Apr 24, 2006 4:06 pm
Location: USA

Re: Bismarck second hit on PoW : HACS Director

Post by RNfanDan »

The water from the tanks never flooded the compass platform. The section flooded was at a different level and location.
Image
User avatar
Alberto Virtuani
Senior Member
Posts: 3605
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 8:22 am
Location: Milan (Italy)

Re: Bismarck second hit on PoW : HACS Director

Post by Alberto Virtuani »

@RNfanDan:
hi Dan, you are right, it never flooded the CP, however it flooded the bridge (where E.Knight was at his ADO position). The tanks were above the charthouse (on the same level as the bridge), therefore they were over the bridge. The compass platform is a few steps higher than the bridge itself (so no water could possibly reach the CP). For sure the water went down to other levels as well.

Please see what Antonio has posted above (here below for your convenience):
PoW_hit_nr2_02.jpg
PoW_hit_nr2_02.jpg (121.22 KiB) Viewed 7285 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)
User avatar
Dave Saxton
Supporter
Posts: 3148
Joined: Sat Nov 27, 2004 9:02 pm
Location: Rocky Mountains USA

Re: Bismarck second hit on PoW : HACS Director

Post by Dave Saxton »

16 seconds is ample time for Bismarck to shift targets.
Entering a night sea battle is an awesome business.The enveloping darkness, hiding the enemy's.. seems a living thing, malignant and oppressive.Swishing water at the bow and stern mark an inexorable advance toward an unknown destiny.
Post Reply