The Court Martial for the Denmark Strait

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

Moderator: Bill Jurens

paul.mercer
Senior Member
Posts: 1223
Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2010 10:25 pm

Re: The Court Martial for the Denmark Strait

Post by paul.mercer »

Sigh! And so it goes on!
Gentlemen,
This debate is rapidly approaching 150 posts, I have the greatest respect for the knowledge and expertise that you have displayed in them, so let me ask a couple of final questions. it is all very well to quote the heroism of other ships captains who sacrificed their ships in one final battle but as you are all pretty expert in your evaluations please tell me how long you think PoW would have survived against two powerful ships with a combined output of 16 guns plus of course PE's torpedoes? There is a fine line between heroism and foolhardiness, it is all very well to sacrifice yourself'and be awarded a posthumous VC but quite another to take another 1400 or so people with you and lose a valuable ship for little result. Personally, I think that once PoW started having gun problems she did not have a chance in hell of defeating the combination of Bismark and PE and Capt Leach knew it, so he made the only the sensible decision available to him and disengaged in order to save his ship and crew. Cowardice? No way! A decision by an experienced Captain? Certainly!
Second question, what do you think the effect on the Admiralty and the population in general if two of their capital ships had been destroyed, so say nothing about the massive publicity Dr Goebbels would have made about it? So in your expert opinions, would it have still been worth it?
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: Wed Aug 22, 2018 7:46 am

Adm.Santarini wrote (quoted by HMSVF): "We shouldn't allow ourselves to be misled by the lack of hits after 06:00,as mechanical breakdowns and violent rudder movements to avoid enemy fire substantially hindered any efforts to hit again"
Adm.Santarini says PoW gunnery performance was excellent (pag.50-54), until the Hood explosion, then it was affected by the violent turns, especially the 160° turn away that put "Y" turret out of action.
Had Leach decided to continue the fight and had he steered an almost parallel course to Bismarck, her gunnery precision could quickly have been restored (as per McMullen opinion, in his interview: "Guns are OK") and PoW was clearly still able to further damage Bismarck (as Pound apparently outlined to Tovey in his May 28 letter, based on Tovey May 31 answer). Whether PoW would have been severely damaged (probably), crippled (possible) or sunk (unlikely) is a matter of speculation, as well as Bismarck possible damages severity.



Bye, Alberto
Santorini expounds on PoW's loss of output:
In fact, apart from Hood blowing up, the loss of efficiency of the PoW's heavy guns was probably the worst event that occurred to the British side.(p.109)
and fully supports Leach's decision to withdraw.

He concludes that after Hood's loss there was a near zero chance for PoW to successfully continue the action.

Santorini's analysis is flawed because he doesn't use the correct open fire times for Bismarck and then gives incorrect times for Bismarck and PE's hits on PoW, which has the effect of minimizing the number of hits scored by the KM side in the interval between Hood's loss and PoW's salvo 18. Regardless his analysis is that after Hood was sunk it was Lutjens who erred in not pursuing and attempting to sink PoW.
HMSVF
Senior Member
Posts: 347
Joined: Sun Jun 17, 2018 10:15 am

Re: The Court Martial for the Denmark Strait

Post by HMSVF »

Had Leach decided to continue the fight and had he steered an almost parallel course to Bismarck, her gunnery precision could quickly have been restored
While POW does this,what’s the Bismarck doing ?
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 »

Paul Mercer wrote: "Cowardice? No way! A decision by an experienced Captain? Certainly!"
Hi Paul,
while I have to accept your personal viewpoint, I have exactly an opposite one.
PoW had gunnery problems but not so serious (please see here if you want to discuss them (http://www.kbismarck.org/forum/viewtopi ... =60#p79609), her heavy damages could have been repaired in Britain while some additional damage to Bismarck could have result in her loss because she was alone with PG. Leach was a senior officer but he had NO action experience at all (at Jutland his ship was not firing nor fired at).



However I agree that there is no point in debating these opinions here, a serious investigation would have been needed , while it was preferred to "sugar-coat" the militarily poor part of the story and to "leave it".



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)
HMSVF
Senior Member
Posts: 347
Joined: Sun Jun 17, 2018 10:15 am

Re: The Court Martial for the Denmark Strait

Post by HMSVF »

There is a fine line between heroism and foolhardiness, it is all very well to sacrifice yourself'and be awarded a posthumous VC but quite another to take another 1400 or so people with you and lose a valuable ship for little result. Personally, I think that once PoW started having gun problems she did not have a chance in hell of defeating the combination of Bismark and PE and Capt Leach knew it, so he made the only the sensible decision available to him and disengaged in order to save his ship and crew. Cowardice? No way! A decision by an experienced Captain? Certainly!
Hi Paul,


Absolutely agree. Bearing in mind what was occurring in the Mediterranean as well it would have been disaster if HMS POW had been sunk or severely damaged. The RN situation in WW2 was not that of WW1. Apart from KGV,POW,Rodney & Nelson (the late being relatively old) the rest of the battleships the RN possessed were WW1 vintage. Some had received substantial rebuilds, the rest hadn't, and all of them had been built to WW1 standards. The R's were hopelessly outdated,Malaya had a half reconstruction in the 30's but was otherwise untouched, Barham was pretty much the same as she was in the late 20's and Repulse...

Well Repulse had speed.

And a good crew.


So losing HMS POW Would have been a disaster .To have attempted to have engaged in her condition (she had been hit 7 times?) and re plot the range, with turrets and guns that were causing concern- while the Bismarck is in his stride ,seems lunacy. You could be completely pummelled or worse for no actual result. The RN has numbers, the Kreigsmarine hasn't,nor aircraft carriers. It's not the 18th century, this isn't a duel. You fight to win and if that means pulling back and amassing numbers then thats what you do. Considering the turbulent episode he suffered on the bridge I'm amazed that he was able to do as much as he did. Pure fluke that he wasn't killed, maimed or incapacitated..


Best wishes


HMSVF
Byron Angel
Senior Member
Posts: 1651
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2011 1:06 am

Re: The Court Martial for the Denmark Strait

Post by Byron Angel »

Alberto wrote -
"Hi Byron,
on paper, I'm sure Churchill would have sacrificed PoW in exchange with Bismarck, aren't you ? For sure Pound suggested Tovey that the sacrifice of a heavy cruiser was a light prize to pay for maintaining the contact with Bismarck instead of loosing contact. However the point here is not to blindly sacrifice one ship or the other, but to try to damage Bismarck in order to prevent her from her mission against the British traffic.
Wake-Walker orders were to locate Bismarck. However, once BC1 was in sight, there was no need of explicit orders for a flag officer to engage the enemy and support the action of the battleships (this is also the advise of Adm.Santarini in his book).
Once Holland was killed, Wake-Walker's duty was to try to stop Bismarck, replacing Holland, not to blindly continue his shadowing role, even after having been "solicited" by the admiralty with the "intentions" signal."

- - -

Hi Alberto,
I presented my post as questions because I think the relevant answers are important to properly understanding the sequence of events. When Holland is killed, command responsibility passes to Wake-Walker. At that point what are Wake-Walker's options in the eyes of senior command. Do Holland's orders to engage posthumously remain in effect? Does Wake-Walker have the option to independently re-assess the situation in light of the loss of Hood and damage to PoW? Do Tovey's previous orders to Wake-Walker to locate and maintain contact with Bismarck remain in force? Do Tovey's orders, as the senior office in command of the operation supercede Holland's engagement orders? What degree of independence of action did Leach retain after the mantle of command fell to Wake-Walker? When was Leach able to give Wake-Walker an accurate report of Prince of Wales' condition? Was it physically practicable for Wake-Walker to order a re-engagement at the point when he learned of the degree of damage suffered by Prince of Wales?

I do not know the answers to these questions, but would suggest that they would have a material bearing when judging any command decisions undertaken by Wake-Walker?

B
pgollin
Senior Member
Posts: 382
Joined: Sat Jan 11, 2014 12:01 pm

Re: The Court Martial for the Denmark Strait

Post by pgollin »

.

I'm afraid that I find the idea that everyone should be nice and polite to A & A rather farcical.

They have thrown around the accusations of cowardice almost every opportunity they have - hardly nice and polite.

In addition, they seem to object to the phrase "conspiracy theory" when what they have presented a mish-mash of unsubstantiated claims, cherry-picked data and misunderstood bearings (as well as misunderstanding simple English). Those faults have enabled them to assemble a mess which all but themselves can see is faulty and rightly can be classed as a "conspiracy theory".

A & A seem to be saying that despite their lack of coherent evidence that everyone MUST accept their mish-mash because to do otherwise would be rude, despite their rudeness in constantly accusing people of cowardice and cover-ups.

"What's sauce for the goose, is sauce for the gander".

.
Reubs64
Junior Member
Posts: 12
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 9:26 pm

Re: The Court Martial for the Denmark Strait

Post by Reubs64 »

I find it ludicrous that Leach was a coward for not behaving to some sort of Monty Pythonesque criteria, where "heroes" are men who shrug off the loss of a limb.." only a flesh wound " etc. Every poster who disagrees with these ridiculous theories are labelled " hooligan/deniers " loosers (sic) etc and are only civil if they agree with their assertions. Iam sure there will be some cranks and crackpots that will lap up the bilge that has been served up as fact but you only have to read through this thread to see the revulsion and disgust at the way two brave officers have been disrespected in such a "cowardly" manner. The sooner this tripe gets published and consigned to the dustbin the better.
User avatar
wadinga
Senior Member
Posts: 2467
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 3:49 pm
Location: Tonbridge England

Re: The Court Martial for the Denmark Strait

Post by wadinga »

Hello Reubs 64,

Your unparalleled use of the apposite adjectives "Tripe" and "Bilge" for the very first time, to describe the Conspiracy Theory, gains you automatic induction into the Worshipful Company of hooligan/deniers " loosers (sic). Congratulations and welcome! :D

If you would like to give us your nationality too, so we can add it to the international listing, that would be helpful. We may be able to convene a new Chapter.

All the best

wadinga
"There seems to be something wrong with our bloody ships today!"
Reubs64
Junior Member
Posts: 12
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 9:26 pm

Re: The Court Martial for the Denmark Strait

Post by Reubs64 »

Hi Wadinga, many thanks for the induction 😊, nationality is English/French. I personally can't wait for the aforementioned book to be published as whilst I don't feel a Pulitzer will be forthcoming Iam sure it will be available in all toilets worldwide shortly after release :)
paul.mercer
Senior Member
Posts: 1223
Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2010 10:25 pm

Re: The Court Martial for the Denmark Strait

Post by paul.mercer »

Byron Angel wrote: Wed Aug 22, 2018 7:16 pm Alberto wrote -
"Hi Byron,
on paper, I'm sure Churchill would have sacrificed PoW in exchange with Bismarck, aren't you ? For sure Pound suggested Tovey that the sacrifice of a heavy cruiser was a light prize to pay for maintaining the contact with Bismarck instead of loosing contact. However the point here is not to blindly sacrifice one ship or the other, but to try to damage Bismarck in order to prevent her from her mission against the British traffic.
Wake-Walker orders were to locate Bismarck. However, once BC1 was in sight, there was no need of explicit orders for a flag officer to engage the enemy and support the action of the battleships (this is also the advise of Adm.Santarini in his book).
Once Holland was killed, Wake-Walker's duty was to try to stop Bismarck, replacing Holland, not to blindly continue his shadowing role, even after having been "solicited" by the admiralty with the "intentions" signal."

- - -

Hi Alberto,
I presented my post as questions because I think the relevant answers are important to properly understanding the sequence of events. When Holland is killed, command responsibility passes to Wake-Walker. At that point what are Wake-Walker's options in the eyes of senior command. Do Holland's orders to engage posthumously remain in effect? Does Wake-Walker have the option to independently re-assess the situation in light of the loss of Hood and damage to PoW? Do Tovey's previous orders to Wake-Walker to locate and maintain contact with Bismarck remain in force? Do Tovey's orders, as the senior office in command of the operation supercede Holland's engagement orders? What degree of independence of action did Leach retain after the mantle of command fell to Wake-Walker? When was Leach able to give Wake-Walker an accurate report of Prince of Wales' condition? Was it physically practicable for Wake-Walker to order a re-engagement at the point when he learned of the degree of damage suffered by Prince of Wales?

I do not know the answers to these questions, but would suggest that they would have a material bearing when judging any command decisions undertaken by Wake-Walker?

B
Hi Byron,
Thanks for your evaluation, the trouble was that Wake-Walker was a long way behind PoW and could not have known what the conditions were like on her, Capt Leach had to make an on-the-spot decision and that was to disengage.
I go back to one of my previous posts where I described the possible scenario on PoW after her bridge had been hit and ask all who are debating this accusation of cowardice -What would you have done if you were Capt Leach, fight on and risk losing you ship and all her crew or disengage and fall back on friendly forces and regroup? I also repeat another question, how long do you think that PoW could have survived against the combined firepower of Bismarck and PE and was she in a position to cause serious damage to either of them?
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 »

Hello everybody,

here again some people confirming their insults ("I'm afraid that I find the idea that everyone should be nice and polite to A & A rather farcical") or mocking at a serious historical reconstruction (recognized since 2005 as the best possible one and further refined) that they are UNABLE to counter with ANY argument ("I personally can't wait for the aforementioned book to be published as whilst I don't feel a Pulitzer will be forthcoming Iam sure it will be available in all toilets worldwide shortly after release") .

The level of these people is blatant and the pity is that (except Paul Mercer) NO OTHER person here has condemned their poorly-educated approach. :kaput:


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
wadinga
Senior Member
Posts: 2467
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 3:49 pm
Location: Tonbridge England

Re: The Court Martial for the Denmark Strait

Post by wadinga »

Hello Alberto,

"partner in crime" with them and he will be treated as they all deserve
I hold the internet truth "I Ain't Yo Mamma" to be true of the postings and attitudes of those who happen to be broadly of a like mind to myself. Shrugging shoulders emoji

The "refining" of some truly useful work done in 2005 consists of it being perversely turned into a threadbare Conspiracy Theory besmirching the courage, reliability and truthfulness of the Royal Navy in 1941, based on fabricated "evidence" inspired by the CMDS myth, itself recently shown to be false.


This is the Court Martial thread and you and your co-author claim to hold significant information, which you are withholding against the principles of this forum, until you can monetize it. Is that an insult or the truth?

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: The Court Martial for the Denmark Strait

Post by Alberto Virtuani »

Hello everybody,
Wadinga wrote: "The "refining" of some truly useful work done in 2005 consists of it being perversely turned into a threadbare Conspiracy Theory"
The "useful work" was acceptable for Mr.Wadinga ONLY until it was not rubbishing his loved fairy tale. Then it became a perversion. What an historical approach ! Congratulations.


Now the true story is available for everybody including the "sugar-coating" of reports instead of proceeding with an Inquiry and a Court Martial for clear timid militarily attitudes.
Mr.Wadinga seems to be sincerely happy that this facts alteration was (shamefully) done by Tovey.....I'm not and I will be happy when TRUTH will be restored about these officers in a publication that will be based on facts, not on invented mechanical failures, timing and distances. Insults will not stop this work! :negative:


Bye, Alberto


P.S. Mr.Wadinga had withhold the crystal clear ADM 205/10 pages 331,332,333 and 334, saying it contained "no relevant information" (against Roskill judgement) and now he shamelessly accuses us to hide info... :lol: :lol: :lol:
"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: The Court Martial for the Denmark Strait

Post by Antonio Bonomi »

Hello everybody,

@ Alberto Virtuani,

you are too kind with those ignorant and incompetent " hooligan/deniers ", ... they do deserve a much worst type of treatment than the one a gentlemen like you are is proposing here in.

When someone is unable to read official documents written at the time and available on the UK archives, ... it is not only ignorant and incompetent, ... is something much worst than that, .. it is a living example of a " ... beep beep ... " ( I let you imagine what I wanted to write :wink: ).

When someone does not like to accept what the most important British historians wrote on their publications and books and likes to invent that it is a new " theory ", ... is either a pure " ... beep beep ... ", ... or a very limited brain persons.

The fact that many of them are grouping here in under a shepherd does not make them more intelligent, ... just the opposite.

It was not me or you that wrote the shame contained into the May 31st, 1941 letter, ... it was Adm Tovey writing to Adm Pound.

It was not me or you that altered the available reports and intentionally declared false statements, ... it was Adm Tovey on his dispatches.

It was not you or me that accepted them being the real version of the facts, ... this shame entirely belongs to the Royal Navy Admiralty Board.

It was not you or me that wrote " Leave it ! " and enabled the King recognition, ... the shame of this action belongs to, ... " ... xxx ... ".

It was not me or you that retreated the newest RN battleship after 1 minute alone against the enemy he was supposed to damage and sink, ... it was Capt Leach.

It was not you or me to go in front of the Hood Second board with a false " Plot " to change a distance from the enemy avoiding personal problems, ... it was RearAdm Wake-Walker.

It was not you or me to release the truth about what he really did and falsely declared on his report, ... it was Capt Ellis.

It was not me or you that revealed what Adm Pound wanted to do with the 2 coward RN officers, ... it was Adm Tovey, ... the C in C Home Fleet at the time of those events, ...and he wrote it to the RN official historian, ... Stephen Roskill.

They have definitively lost this historical discussion since a lot of time, ... surely after the main new documents has been disclosed.

I know it is hard to accept to be a " looser " ... but that is how life goes, ... even if you try to avoid what geometry and trigonometry shows you, ... what a clearly written statement means.

But those poor ignorant and incompetent " humans ", ... can still avoid to see the reality and keep on reading the facts as Sir Kennedy wrote them on Pursuit, ... can change their nicknames more often and enroll again and again more than one time trying to stop us with offenses, ... wasting their time anonymously here in, ... as pure cowards, ... just like the ones they try to defend, ... unsuccessfully, ... as it is not possible anymore.

Bye Antonio
Last edited by Antonio Bonomi on Thu Aug 23, 2018 4:47 pm, edited 1 time in total.
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 )
Locked