The Court Martial for the Denmark Strait

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

Moderator: Bill Jurens

User avatar
Alberto Virtuani
Senior Member
Posts: 3605
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 8:22 am
Location: Milan (Italy)

Re: The Court Martial for the Denmark Strait

Post by Alberto Virtuani »

@Wadinga:
Hi Sean,
I'm sorry , I can only confirm that too many "innocent errors" (listed in my previous posts) were lightly accepted to embellish the story, not just the ones you mention.....
All together, these embellishments make clear that the request for a Court Martial (even if abandoned) forced a change in previously released declarations (also to allow some debatable decorations).
Also Phillips removal is more than suspect in this light, after his evident "j'accuse!" to Adm WW.

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)
northcape
Senior Member
Posts: 350
Joined: Wed Mar 06, 2013 6:31 am

Re: The Court Martial for the Denmark Strait

Post by northcape »


In order to honor the Hood crew and ViceAdm L. Holland memory, ... we need to tell the truth : " ... the whole, hard, .. cold truth ".

Until we do that ... we dishonor them ... even if their bell is coming home.

Bye Antonio :D
Honor Holland for two gross tactical blunders - leading with weakly armored Hood into the battle and having PoW following her closely? Seriously??
These blunders cost the live of 1400 men, led to sinking of one capital ship and gravely endangered another. Worse enough for the RN in 1941. If you consider this as a heroic action, then you probably admire Kamikaze warfare too. Bravery is a noble concept, but it can't substitute for rationalism, skills, and tactical mastery of the situation as for example Tovey showed during these days.
User avatar
Antonio Bonomi
Senior Member
Posts: 3799
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 10:44 am
Location: Vimercate ( Milano ) - Italy

Re: The Court Martial for the Denmark Strait

Post by Antonio Bonomi »

Hello everybody,

@ Northcape,

your reasoning is incorrect, from a military stand point.

First of all let me tell you that I do not admire kamikaze or terrorist, … nazis or fascist, ... just like I do not admire cowards and false persons, … brownnosers and recommendations, … racist and homophobes … blue blood idiots making fast military careers ... persons that because of their nationality think they are superior to others ( base of racism and nazism ) … etc etc etc … the list of those low cultural profiles and poor living attitudes is very long …

I do admire courage and bravery, determination and responsibility.

I do admire ViceAdm Lancelot Holland courage and determination showed that morning, while I do not admire Adm Tovey attitudes showed on may 27, but mostly I do not admire him for what he has done after, with the intentional modification of the battle reports.

Ask yourself who ordered Holland to engage Bismarck with Hood and PoW ? The answer is Tovey.

By listening to Colin McMullen IWM interview, you will realize that even Tovey thought he had put Holland in a very critical situation with Hood in there, … and even thought about calling him and asking him to put PoW on the lead of the battlecruiser squadron, … but he did not call him for that reason respecting Holland dignity and role in that position, … he gave him an order, … Holland to execute it.

Holland was an Officer with the best Royal Navy traditions on his blood, … you do not dishonor your flagship and show everybody that you are a coward moving your flag on the more protected PoW, … while you ask them to fight courageously on Hood … you do not escape below on the armored conning tower when shells are falling on your ship while engaged, … you do not delay your engagement when enemy is in sight and every gun can do the difference, … you do not run away when your friends are in trouble under the enemy fire.

To make it simple Holland mindset was according to this phrase : “ England expect that every man will do his D.U.T.Y. “.

Holland did his duty, … the way he thought it was right to do it, … and I agree with his approach.

Others did not do it, … making only a partial effort, … and contributing in this way to that morning total disaster.

This is my opinion …
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: 2471
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 3:49 pm
Location: Tonbridge England

Re: The Court Martial for the Denmark Strait

Post by wadinga »

Hello Antonio,

A few pages ago we discussed:
Are there recommendations for all these honored men in the document from which you have extracted Kelburn and Pinchin’s?
YES, they are all in there, ... listed by rank and order of merit, ... which opens another very interesting set of evaluations to be made ... :think:
Is the document Wake-Walker’s report? Or Phillips' or both ? Can I ask who signed it and when it is dated?
The document is signed by RearAdm W.F. Wake-Walker, Nr. K 856/189 and it is dated June 5th, 1941.
Would you be kind enough to reproduce the citation signed by Wake-Walker for Captain Phillips? :cool: Then we can compare the extremely complimentary things WW said about him when he was leaving the ship, with the presumably also extremely complimentary things said to get him his medal, and see whether one is more complimentary than the other.

Those
interesting set of evaluations
:think: will be fascinating to read, especially to see where Able Seaman Disborough fits into the whole "Medals for Perjury" scenario. Unfortunately it will never tell us why the two Paymasters were never rewarded, for their evidence confirming 15 miles and optical effects. Here's a thought.......... maybe they were permitted to embezzle funds from the Ship's accounts, Phillips found out, and was summariy dismissed over 146 days later. Or maybe Wake-Walker decided to punish them for it and witheld their medals. Once you have adopted the principle of
conjecture and inference, without any concrete proof

as evidence, whilst ignoring contradicting real evidence its really easy to make up coincidences.



All the Best

wadinga
"There seems to be something wrong with our bloody ships today!"
User avatar
Antonio Bonomi
Senior Member
Posts: 3799
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 10:44 am
Location: Vimercate ( Milano ) - Italy

Re: The Court Martial for the Denmark Strait

Post by Antonio Bonomi »

Hello everybody,

@ Wadinga,

Sean, I do not care what Wake-Walker had to do on June 5th, 1941 to reward Phillips as well as everybody else, ... that was part of the rewarding plan, ... that was even executed in a ridiculous way by the Admiralty, ... making Adm Tovey becoming really furious about it ... but we can talk about this very funny page of history next time we meet, ... of course with official evidence :wink: .

What I do care, is that somebody ( Pinchin ), ... from Wake-Walker staff ... created an incorrect document, ... " The Plot " ... enlarging the battlefield making ridiculous change/errors that should have been caught at first glance by any rookie Naval Officer having at hand the other produced maps, like the Rowell one given to the same board ... and I care that by submitting this incorrect document RearAdmiral Wake-Walker changed his previous board declaration from 20.000 yards to 30.000 yards.

What I care is that an Official board of Inquiry, ... despite the 2 senior Norfolk Officer confirmation of their previous declarations ... supporting the 20.000 yards, ... disregarded them by the use of a " mirage effect " ... and that Wake-Walker document ( The Plot - A.1 ) and his new declaration has been taken as confident and clear, ... and consequently the Second board changed the evidence from 10 to 15 sea miles distance between Norfolk and Hood, ... saving Wake-Walker.

No more words are necessary, ... we know " The Plot " is incorrect and that the distance was closer to the first declared 20.000 yards when we correct back to reality that map.

As simple as that, ... you to take your considerations now ... I already did and they will never change.

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 )
northcape
Senior Member
Posts: 350
Joined: Wed Mar 06, 2013 6:31 am

Re: The Court Martial for the Denmark Strait

Post by northcape »

Antonio Bonomi wrote:Hello everybody,

@ Northcape,

your reasoning is incorrect, from a military stand point.

...

Ask yourself who ordered Holland to engage Bismarck with Hood and PoW ? The answer is Tovey.
...
By listening to Colin McMullen IWM interview, you will realize that even Tovey thought he had put Holland in a very critical situation with Hood in there, … and even thought about calling him and asking him to put PoW on the lead of the battlecruiser squadron, … but he did not call him for that reason respecting Holland dignity and role in that position, … he gave him an order, … Holland to execute it.
Bye Antonio :D
Antonio, I have to conclude that you intentionally twist facts and also put words in my mouth (and those of others) which never were said. Your reply suggests that I was accusing Holland of going into battle ("Ask yourself who ordered Holland to engage Bismarck with Hood and PoW ? The answer is Tovey."). Of course I was only referring to Holland's tactical error of leading with Hood instead as with PoW.

In your next paragraph, you confirm this as well: "even Tovey thought he had put Holland in a very critical situation with Hood in there, … and even thought about calling him and asking him to put PoW on the lead of the battlecruiser squadron, ". However, in your very next sentence you suggest (despite better knowledge), that Tovey ordered Holland to lead with Hood: "… he gave him an order, … Holland to execute it." This of course is wrong - Holland had all freedom to chose his tactics. Unfortunately for him and for the RN, he chose the wrong one.

Again, from this and from many of your other postings, I have the impression that you don't phrase your arguments clearly - is it either unintentionally, or with the purpose of sublime manipulation of the facts.
User avatar
Antonio Bonomi
Senior Member
Posts: 3799
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 10:44 am
Location: Vimercate ( Milano ) - Italy

Re: The Court Martial for the Denmark Strait

Post by Antonio Bonomi »

Hello everybody,

@ Northcape,

it is not my fault/problem if you are not able to understand what I mean.

I never wrote that Tovey ordered Holland to lead with Hood, in fact he never did, and my above reasoning referring to the Colin McMullen IWM interview clearly explains it all in full details.

Tovey ordered Holland to go, intercept and engage the enemy with Hood and PoW.
By doing this he put Holland in a critical situation because of the Hood presence with her very poor protection he knew very well.

What Tovey realized is that with Hood and PoW, most likely Holland was going to lead with his flagship, the Hood, just as Holland did, being the Vice Admiral of the Battlecruiser squadron ( BC1 ).

Tovey wanted to call Holland to suggest him not to do it and put the PoW on the lead, but than he did not call Holland that day and left the decision to Holland, correctly, from a military stand point.

But probably you did not have enough time before responding to me to listen to the IWM Interview, or do I have to conclude that you are not able to understand that very simple concept.

I will not comment your conclusions and statements, you seem to me enough confused already.

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 )
Guest

Re: The Court Martial for the Denmark Strait

Post by Guest »

Dear all,
firstly i must congratulate all who have contributed to this subject and hope my post is of some help. If we go back to the origional question there is as far as I can research so far only anecdotal evidence of a threat of Court Martial of Capt Leach or Wake-Walker post the BS actions however there are plenty of instances of historical evidence that rely solely on anecdotal testomy (Hence this debate) and so it cannot be dismissed. There is a War Cabinet Meeting paper (CAB 66/22/20) that discusses the battle of the Denmark Strait and the breaking off and re-engagement of the PoW but there is nothing that shows Churchill's response. However although Churchill was a great Prime Minister he was not infalable and did on occaision make errors of judgement. During the Blitzkrieg campaign he did call for a trench cutting tank (Cultavator No6) and gave the Royal Navy Operation Catherine, the forced passage of the Baltic by heavy naval forces with the intent to maintain a fleet there. I believe it was Churchill who wanted Sommerville Cunningham and Holland investigated after the Cape Teulada action and who thought that the £7 million battleship KG V should be allowed to run out of fuel and be towed home during the chase of the BS. And of course we cannot forget that he did think that the whole of the Japanese Empire could be persuaded not to go to war by the use of a single battleship and a battlecruiser. Churchill was a great man but was a little over the top at times but perhaps it was this trait that helped win the victory.
Thank you for the chance to put forward my 'two pennies worth'
Cag
northcape
Senior Member
Posts: 350
Joined: Wed Mar 06, 2013 6:31 am

Re: The Court Martial for the Denmark Strait

Post by northcape »

Antonio Bonomi wrote:Hello everybody,

@ Northcape,

it is not my fault/problem if you are not able to understand what I mean.

I never wrote that Tovey ordered Holland to lead with Hood, in fact he never did, and my above reasoning referring to the Colin McMullen IWM interview clearly explains it all in full details.

Tovey ordered Holland to go, intercept and engage the enemy with Hood and PoW.
By doing this he put Holland in a critical situation because of the Hood presence with her very poor protection he knew very well.

What Tovey realized is that with Hood and PoW, most likely Holland was going to lead with his flagship, the Hood, just as Holland did, being the Vice Admiral of the Battlecruiser squadron ( BC1 ).

Tovey wanted to call Holland to suggest him not to do it and put the PoW on the lead, but than he did not call Holland that day and left the decision to Holland, correctly, from a military stand point.

But probably you did not have enough time before responding to me to listen to the IWM Interview, or do I have to conclude that you are not able to understand that very simple concept.

I will not comment your conclusions and statements, you seem to me enough confused already.

Bye Antonio :D
Antonio,

It really seems that you are not able or willing to correctly understand and consequently address simple questions posed to you, but instead create a cloud of confusion by deviating from these simple questions.

The question is and always was, why should Holland be awarded or should be considered as a great admiral / war hero after making gross tactical blunders which caused his defeat, and the loss of one battle cruiser and 1400 souls?
It was his wrong decision to lead with Hood and have PoW following closely.

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

Re: The Court Martial for the Denmark Strait

Post by Antonio Bonomi »

Hello everybody,

@ Northcape,

you asked :
... why should Holland be awarded or should be considered as a great admiral / war hero ...
Simply because when you are ordered to raise your flag on one battleship and taking another one go and engage an enemy, … you are supposed to stay on the lead … and with no fear.

Otherwise it can be considered being a misconduct in presence of the enemy.

http://www.pdavis.nl/NDA1866.htm

Adm Tovey realized this was going to happen, … just as it happened, … obviously.

Any Officer can easily realize this, ... maybe a bit difficult if you have never wear an uniform.

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 )
dunmunro
Senior Member
Posts: 4394
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2005 1:25 am
Location: Langley BC Canada

Re: The Court Martial for the Denmark Strait

Post by dunmunro »

Antonio Bonomi wrote:

Simply because when you are ordered to raise your flag on one battleship and taking another one go and engage an enemy, … you are supposed to stay on the lead … and with no fear.

Otherwise it can be considered being a misconduct in presence of the enemy.

http://www.pdavis.nl/NDA1866.htm
Where does it state that?

In what way can the armour and other protection of Hood be considered the equal of PoW's? Do you really think that the RN blindly considered any two battleships as being completely equivalent? :stubborn:
User avatar
Alberto Virtuani
Senior Member
Posts: 3605
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 8:22 am
Location: Milan (Italy)

Re: The Court Martial for the Denmark Strait

Post by Alberto Virtuani »

Hi Duncan,
I would say here (article 2 "Misconduct in presence of the enemy" paragraph 4) :
Article2.4.jpg
Article2.4.jpg (30.52 KiB) Viewed 1672 times
I fully agree with you regarding Hood protection, and it was Adm.Tovey responsibility the decision to send her against BS and to explicitly order to Holland to raise his flag on Hood. As you correctly said, the 2 ships should not have been considered equivalent and Tovey could have ordered Holland to raise his flag on PoW and just use Hood as scouting ship and to support PoW with her guns once the latter had engaged BS, but he did not.
8 PM, May 21
" Flying your flag in Hood and taking Prince of Wales, Achates, Antelope, Anthony, Echo, Icarus and Electra under your orders sail at 0001 on May 22 and proceed with moderate dispatch to Hvalfiord."
Holland, being an officer, had to obey, so no question about that. He could have asked Tovey to change his mind of course, but he did not. :clap: Tovey later "idea", to suggest Holland to send PoW ahead, sounds much like a late afterthought due to hindsight only......


Whether sailing with PoW as leading ship, keeping the flagship closely behind, would have saved the Hood, I'm not sure about that anyway.
In addition to be a military very debatable behavior, we don't know what Lutjens decision would have been. BS was the second of the German line, so Lutjens could have decided to open fire anyway on Hood, being the second of the British line. More, as Alecsandros has written on another thread, German fighting instructions (with which Lutjens was not always in line on May 24, so we will never know for sure) were requesting to open fire on the ship carrying the heaviest guns.....
In this sense, IMHO, Hood was doomed when decision was taken to use her as a battleship in a gun duel against a modern ship against which she had limited (or no) immunity, even if I still evaluate that the probabilities to have her straightly blown up were not so high.


Regarding another critic moved to Holland, I kindly suggest to northcape to read the excellent Wadinga's and Tim Woodward's articles on Hood's site (http://www.hmshood.com/history/denmarks ... olland.htm, http://www.hmshood.com/history/denmarks ... .htm#endon) to understand why Holland decided to keep PoW close to Hood.

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)
dunmunro
Senior Member
Posts: 4394
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2005 1:25 am
Location: Langley BC Canada

Re: The Court Martial for the Denmark Strait

Post by dunmunro »

Alberto Virtuani wrote:Hi Duncan,
I would say here (article 2 "Misconduct in presence of the enemy" paragraph 4) :
Article2.4.jpg
I fully agree with you regarding Hood protection, and it was Adm.Tovey responsibility the decision to send her against BS and to explicitly order to Holland to raise his flag on Hood. As you correctly said, the 2 ships should not have been considered equivalent and Tovey could have ordered Holland to raise his flag on PoW and just use Hood as scouting ship and to support PoW with her guns once the latter had engaged BS, but he did not.
8 PM, May 21
" Flying your flag in Hood and taking Prince of Wales, Achates, Antelope, Anthony, Echo, Icarus and Electra under your orders sail at 0001 on May 22 and proceed with moderate dispatch to Hvalfiord."
Holland, being an officer, had to obey, so no question about that. He could have asked Tovey to change his mind of course, but he did not. :clap: Tovey later "idea", to suggest Holland to send PoW ahead, sounds much like a late afterthought due to hindsight only......


Whether sailing with PoW as leading ship, keeping the flagship closely behind, would have saved the Hood, I'm not sure about that anyway.
In addition to be a military very debatable behavior, we don't know what Lutjens decision would have been. BS was the second of the German line, so Lutjens could have decided to open fire anyway on Hood, being the second of the British line. More, as Alecsandros has written on another thread, German fighting instructions (with which Lutjens was not always in line on May 24, so we will never know for sure) were requesting to open fire on the ship carrying the heaviest guns.....
In this sense, IMHO, Hood was doomed when decision was taken to use her as a battleship in a gun duel against a modern ship against which she had limited (or no) immunity, even if I still evaluate that the probabilities to have her straightly blown up were not so high.


Regarding another critic moved to Holland, I kindly suggest to northcape to read the excellent Wadinga's and Tim Woodward's articles on Hood's site (http://www.hmshood.com/history/denmarks ... olland.htm, http://www.hmshood.com/history/denmarks ... .htm#endon) to understand why Holland decided to keep PoW close to Hood.

Bye, Alberto
Holland was ordered by Tovey to "...proceed with moderate dispatch to Hvalfiord...". How does this get turned into Tovey ordering Holland to commit suicide? :stubborn:

Hood was outfitted as a flag ship. Holland's decision to lead with Hood was his alone. Gaming the DS combat using Holland's tactics usually results in Holland winning, See Santorini. IMHO Holland should have put PoW in the van, but I have no problem with his other tactics.
Francis Marliere
Senior Member
Posts: 276
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2010 3:55 pm

Re: The Court Martial for the Denmark Strait

Post by Francis Marliere »

northcape wrote:The question is and always was, why should Holland be awarded or should be considered as a great admiral / war hero after making gross tactical blunders which caused his defeat, and the loss of one battle cruiser and 1400 souls?
It was his wrong decision to lead with Hood and have PoW following closely.
Northcape,

I am not at all a big fan of the "cover up" theory, but this time I would rather stand with our friend Antonio. I don't say that Holland should be considered as a great admiral or a hero, but I don't think he should be blamed for his conduct during the battle of Danemark Strait.

It seems to me that you are too harsh when speaking of tactical blunder, and that Adm Holland was right to lead with HMS Hood. I agree that HMS prince of Wales was better armoured and may have resisted better than Hood, but you should consider other arguments.

We're speaking here with a lot of hindsight. We know that HMS Hood blew up, but Admiral Holland did not know what would happen when he made his decision. In his mind, battleships were resistant ships that rarely blew up after a few hits, and he probably estimated, like any admiral of the time, that his ship could stand up German gunfire for a while.

In this logic, keeping HMS Hood in the lead made sense. It was a reliable and proven unit, unlike HMS Prince of Wales, that could easily loose part of his armament by light damage. Moreover, moving HMS Hood in the rear would make command of the division uneasy.

Best regards,

Francis
User avatar
Alberto Virtuani
Senior Member
Posts: 3605
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 8:22 am
Location: Milan (Italy)

Re: The Court Martial for the Denmark Strait

Post by Alberto Virtuani »

Dunmunro wrote: "Holland was ordered by Tovey to "...proceed with moderate dispatch to Hvalfiord...". How does this get turned into Tovey ordering Holland to commit suicide?"
Sorry Duncan, I disagree.
8 PM, May 21
" Flying your flag in Hood and taking Prince of Wales, Achates, Antelope, Anthony, Echo, Icarus and Electra under your orders sail at 0001 on May 22 and proceed with moderate dispatch to Hvalfiord."
He was ordered to fly his flag on Hood, and I can't imagine Adm.Tovey was meaning to keep the flagship carefully behind in case of battle.... PoW was later used as a flagship by Adm.Phillips and Tovey could clearly have ordered Holland to fly his flag on the brand new PoW if this was considered wiser by him since the beginning.....

For the other considerations (from military and tactical viewpoint, whether Holland could have decided to send PoW leading keeping his flagship behind and whether this could have saved Hood), please see my previous post plus Francis post above.

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)
Locked