KGV and PoW GAR during Op. Rheinubung

[wadinga]

Hello All,

Let us discuss things in the right places.

It is suggested in other thread that POW's 19th salvo fell short of Bismarck by thousands of yards, but that a single shot (salvo 20) fired only 5 seconds after this fall of shot landed barely short of Bismarck, and that the last local control single shot salvo(21) fell equally short too, fired only 5 seconds after previous fall of shot.


This situation was graphically presented by Antonio to whom I record heartfelt appreciation:





In this graphic form the impossibility of this identification being correct is starkly highlighted. An unbelievably accurate re-assessment and an enormous correction on a turning target done more accurately than any other correction in the shoot. The table includes nebulous spotting information not recorded by PoW for the 19,20 or 21st salvoes. There is nothing in McMullen's report to indicate where these shots actually landed. Claude Aylwin had a periscope located on the Y turret roof at the front centre and since these shots were fired close to "over the stern" cordite and smokescreen smoke would have made sighting fall of shot extremely difficult. The fire control solution from the Transmitting Room would have been rendered obsolete by PoW's extreme turns. The FC facilities within Y turret were described as "rudimentary" by Geoffrey Brooke, and the shots themselves were described by him as being fired "rather wildly".


Instead of accepting this spurious and impossible identification we have the eye witness Lagemann who says (in original photo captions preserved by the Bundesarchiv) the two shots were not near Bismarck at all, but were in fact "overs" on Prinz Eugen, and fired from Hood, much earlier in the fight. Fritz-Otto Busch confirms this in his English language book "The Story of the Prinz Eugen" where the "lively little First Officer" speaks:

And the answer was "no hits, no casualties." It's amazing considering how brilliantly the Hood fired. The Captain told me about it. Anyhow her last shots fell wide according to the Second Gunnery Officer. "Lagemann" he said, turning to the photographer, "you got that too, didn't you?"

The War Reporter put down his cup:

"Yes, Herr Kapitan, I did. They fell to starboard, and not so very far from the ship."

So this source confirms Hood as the source of these shots and renders Antonio's photo identification and entire timetable obsolete and unproven. The photos and film are from a time when Hood was alive and shooting at Prinz Eugen.

All the best

wadinga

[Alberto Virtuani]

Hello everybody,

I have enjoyed a short vacation at the seaside and I must admit that it is now very funny to read the total defeat of the deniers (& Company) here (http://www.kbismarck.org/forum/viewtopi ... 585#p80034).

Wisely changing thread (tactical retreat or "timid" turn away ?):

Wadinga wrote: "The photos and film are from a time when Hood was alive and shooting at Prinz Eugen. "

Sure ! Bismarck tried to escape at 5:55, turning on course 270°, and fired with the turrets bearing aft (as per the whole film and the photos mentioned by Mr.Wadinga), while PG followed the flagship one minute later, at 5:56, as in the film the turn to starboard is well visible after few seconds....
Of course, in 45 seconds (possibly showing 1 full minute) the only splashes we see from the British ships are the ones from Hood (NOTHING at all from PoW, that in the meantime was hitting Bismarck with "well grouped" salvos (Schneider)).....

A pity that NOBODY among the British have noticed and/or reported such a "coward" maneuver of both German ships....

Mr.Wadinga is really ready to publish his fantasy version of the battle of Denmark Strait, supported ONLY by his disbelief about Alwin shooting.


Bye, Alberto

[wadinga]

Hello Alberto,

Welcome back!

Unfortunately despite a break you are still twittering about "defeat". I have moved this here because it is the sensible place, why talk about what is supposedly PoW's shooting on the Bismarck thread?

A pity that NOBODY among the British have noticed and/or reported such a "coward" maneuver of both German ships

.

What would be "cowardly" about such a move, you are still thinking in terms of comic-book heroes! Or perhaps:

Order No. 227 issued on July 28, 1942 was an order issued by Joseph Stalin who was acting as the People's Commissar of Defence. It is famous for its line "Not a step back!" (Russian: Ни шагу назад! / Ni shagu nazad!), which became a slogan of Soviet resistance against the German invasion.

I believe his opponent later started issuing equally stupid instructions, constraining his commanders' freedom of action with his own stupidity and leading to his "Downfall".

Look at Antonio's plot, PoW's salvoes are consistently way over or short. With only two salvoes per minute, unlike Bismarck, we might only see one during the film and who knows how far outside the frame that landed? McMullen clearly had his inclination estimation (Bismarck's course) very wrong and he continues to be short from the ninth salvo onwards. Bismarck is indeed steering more westerly than he allowed for, he had failed to see the course change.

I notice you have nothing to say of the German witness who took the photographs and says the shots were Hood's. You are used to putting words into Busch's mouth, maybe you can invent a way for Lagemann to be wrong. Maybe you can imagine a way for Busch to mean PoW when he records the conversation about Hood.


No words of fullsome praise for Claude Aylwin, able to spot from his lowly vantage point just how awful his first local effort was, and miraculously improve for his second and third. He was clearly the best shot on either side. Perhaps in either Navy, or any Navy, ever. Or maybe Antonio is wrong.

All the best

wadinga

[Alberto Virtuani]

Hello everybody,

just two short considerations about Mr.Wadinga fantasy, they don't deserve much attention (even the worst deniers refused to support it.... ):

1) The photos (with a wrong caption) and the film show the same salvos and instants. As the film is proven to have been taken after 6:03 (see railings of PG), there is no chance whatsoever to assign the splashes to Hood shells.

2) nobody among the witnesses (and no official report) states that Bismarck turned away when the British opened fire. Therefore this is just Mr.Wadinga speculation, totally unsupported.

Re.Alwin shooting, I agree it's surprisingly (and annoying for him) precise, but there is no chance that 2 isolated splashes can belong to Hood + PoW combined ones in 45 minutes full battle.....


Bye, Alberto

[Antonio Bonomi]

Hello everybody,

I thought that with the fantasy re-construction of this battle we were done after Robert Winklareth ( the BS reverse photo theory ) and Vic Dale ( the PoW "Crazy Ivan" theory ), ... but evidently someone likes to compete with them and define something absurd on his own, ...

As somebody other than me has written on this forum to blindly believe on photo captions without having a clue of what the photo really shows is absolutely an " high risk " move, ... but when one is cornered and with no way out, ... everything is useful to try to hang on something in order to still have a possibility that somebody else work may have been incorrectly done, ...

Of course also this ridiculous last trial only has one destiny, ... another ( one of the many ) miserable failure.

Having correctly defined the photo NH69731, ... with her PoW salvo 19th in local control, ... as I have explained to Herr Nillson those 2 salvoes of one shells could have been only the 17th or 18th from PoW, ... or the 20th and 21st, ... the last two fired in local control.

It is the Prinz Eugen course direction we can see before those photos and the PG film ( which contains them both one after the other with no interruptions ) and when the photos have been taken that helps us on correctly defining their timing and their numbering, ... and they can be only the 20th and the 21st, ... and not the 17th and the 18th as I have explained to Herr Nillson too.

DS_battle_time_06_03_45_01.jpeg (123.52 KiB) Viewed 1026 times

On the top left of the above collage you can see a Wobek paint that Schmalenbach used on his last book Prinz Eugen under 3 flags.
That is the exact situation captured by the PG film start, with BS having already turned on 270° course ( as demonstrated by several other reports on both sides ) and the Prinz Eugen still on course 220°for some more seconds, just as showed by the previous photo NH 69731 looking at the PG railings vs the horizon to south east.

On the top right we can see the frame showing the Prinz Eugen first turn to starboard, from course 220° to course 270°, following the Bismarck already on a course 270° due west, and in that moment at 06:03 and 45 seconds we can see the PoW salvo 20th of 1 shells landing between Prinz Eugen and Bismarck close to the Bismarck stern.
As a confirmation of the timing of the PG first turn on top of the many report we have 2 maps, ... the PG original battle map ( bottom left mid-corner ) and the PG Torpedo map by Ltnt S. Reimann, showed on the bottom right corner on the collage above.

The timings of the 3 local control PoW fired salvoes by the Y turret are on the bottom left corner and are in sync with both the Prinz Eugen timings as well as with the PoW gunnery timing of McMullen, that is in the center bottom available for you to double check that the 3 local control salvoes have been fired after the minute 06:03, ... when PoW was already sailing away, ... and the marker is an " X " placed on top of the minute 06:03.

Photo, PG film, reports and maps on both sides, ... survivors eyewitnesses interview, ... I have everything on my side confirming the above being the correct way to re-construct that event, ... and I see no room or possibility for a different interpretation having what we have at hand.

But one can still try to beat Robert Winklareth ... and write even a more absurd version of this battle, ... and compete for the Guinness of the biggest flop ever wrote about a naval battle all time.

Bye Antonio

[dunmunro]

This film clip:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pPmkOtSveXY&t=340s

shows single RN shell splashes at 05:58 and 06:16 (film time) and shows Bismarck's forward turrets on an extreme aft bearing. However it is not until 06:49 that we see PoW alone, but not yet having passed the smoke from Hood's explosion.

[Alberto Virtuani]

So what ? .... Antonio has analysed the film and he has always said that the film frames showing Hood and PoW were cut/pasted for propaganda reasons, while the Bismarck firing sequence is consecutive.......

If someone wants to support Mr.Wadinga fantasy, please be explicit and dare to say that Bismarck turned away at 5:55. We want to laugh at this new battle reconstruction.


Bye, Alberto

[wadinga]

Hello All,

As a confirmation of the timing of the PG first turn on top of the many report we have 2 maps, ..

Where is Bismarck shown on these "worthless and useless" maps? There is a lengthy admonition and an instruction for PG to do better and submit replacements. It is alleged this is solely in reference to the British tracks, but how would their masters know whether the representation was correct or not?

and maps on both sides

I thought all the British maps were allegedly lies? Bismarck's track on the PoW maps is a meandering mess, despite his hits McMullen/Rowell had no idea of Bismarck's true course and the former's inadequate corrections (his closing rate was always too high) prove this in contrast to the unbelievable abilities ascribed to Aylwin.


The true maps for Bismarck are provided by Schmalenbach and M-R in their latest 1990 version based on their memories as gunnery officers who were there. They show a gradual turn away from the onrushing British capital ships perfectly in line with Lutjens' orders. He was specifically ordered to avoid such a conflict. After Schneider delivered his stunning gunnery victory over Hood, all this changed and Bismarck swings back towards the hard pressed PoW. PG, creates confusion by turning hard across the flagship's bows (too close) avoiding imaginary torpedoes. At this point the competing demands of obeying orders and exploiting an advantageous situation are resolved by Bismarck returning to the strategic course.

but there is no chance that 2 isolated splashes can belong to Hood

They are clearly closer to PG than to Bismarck. Nobody ever says any ship other than Hood fired at PG. Pieces of her shell were picked up on board. The man who was being shot at says they were. Danger sharpens the perceptions. The conversation reported by Busch ( The Story of Prince Eugen) says they were.

survivors eyewitnesses interview

Georg Herzog: I saw a piercing flame (a flash) astern of port as I came topside; I later found out was from the sinking "Hood".

Thanks Marc

But one can still try to beat Robert Winklareth ... and write even a more absurd version of this battle, ... and compete for the Guinness of the biggest flop ever wrote about a naval battle all time.

I thought you had already marked out that role for yourself.

[Antonio Bonomi]

Hello everybody,

lets cut this ridiculous attempt short.

@ Herr Nillson,

since your statements and last doubts seems to have been used to sustain this absurd trial of a work or map or I do not know how to call it for somebody unable to do a map or a geometrical easy work, ... let me make a straight forward question to you.

Do you believe on what this guy is writing above ?

Do you believe a single statement or a way to read what he is writing above, ... and if so, ... which one and why ?


@ all,

to be fair, ... I like to ask all this forum members who is believing on what has been written here above, on those absurd statements.

And in case somebody does, ... on what, ... and why.

Thanks and Bye Antonio

[Alberto Virtuani]

Hello everybody,

back we are to the intentional LIES:

Wadinga wrote: "They are clearly closer to PG than to Bismarck"

PoW_Salvo_21.jpg (43.85 KiB) Viewed 998 times

Everybody can make his own opinion about such an enormity looking at this frame and (mostly) at the whole film (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pPmkOtSveXY) where, according to Mr.Wadinga's ravings, we see ZERO splashes from PoW shells in a period when McMullen was firing at Bismarck "well-grouped" (Schneider) salvos (and he was even hitting her) !




The idea that Bismack turned to 270° at 5:55 UNNOTICED by anybody is so poor that it does not deserve further comments.
This guy would be able to say that the battle never happened, in order to pursue his agenda, denying anything to avoid to recognize the truth......



Bye, Alberto

[Antonio Bonomi]

Hello everybody,


@ Alberto Virtuani,

you are absolutely right, ... and in fact I wait to see who will join this guy on this absurd adventure that does have only one destiny, ... and it is another miserable failure, ... much bigger and ridiculous than ever before.


Bye Antonio

[wadinga]

Hello Antonio,

Thank you for reproducing a frame showing a shot which has clearly passed low straight over Prinz Eugen and landed well out of line for Bismarck. The enormous relative size of the splash shows the shell is nowhere near the flagship. The picture directly links with Lagemann's "testimony" in the original caption he wrote and is preserved by the Bundesarchiv, and reinforced in the conversation reported by Busch between the "lively little First Officer" and Lagemann and apparently echoing comments made by Schmalenbach at the time. They, unlike you, knew when this had happened, when their interest was on Bismarck, not on the British, indistinct dots on the distant horizon, and their cameras were turned to starboard. Only later did they swing round to port to record Hood's demise.

lets cut this ridiculous attempt short.

Yes you better had try to, otherwise your entire tottering Ziggurat of Supposition comes crashing down. You know how fragile the miasma of "evidence" you have accumulated is. You could try and find some real evidence rather than citing things you can't see like splashes you don't see from PoW in a very limited POV and timeframe. Or artist's impressions from imaginary viewpoints off Prinz Eugen's port bow.

Thank you also for reminding us:

as well as with the PoW gunnery timing of McMullen, that is in the center bottom available for you to double check that the 3 local control salvoes have been fired after the minute 06:03

That your obsession with these singular shots which you simplistically identify in the photos are a miracle performed by Saint Barbara (the patron saint of gunnery) means you cannot contemplate them being anything other those particular shots no matter how impossible their apparent accuracy. There is no claim from Claude Aylwin that he achieved what you have ascribed to him. How could he know in five seconds after fall of shot what correction to apply? Do you think if he was able to see what you claim he could see and responded to, he would have kept quiet?


I am much heartened by your attempt to get one of your most damaging critics to support you over this. He might agree with me (and Schmalenbach and Mullheim-Rechberg) or not, but your appealing to him for support is a clear measure of your desperation.

All the best

wadinga

[Alberto Virtuani]

Hello everybody,

is anyone else supporting this new Mr.Wadinga fantasy version of the battle, with Bismarck turning away at 5:55 and PG following at 5:56 (as per film) with NOBODY noticing or reporting this maneuver , with ZERO PoW splashes visible around Bismarck for 45 seconds, while 2 erratic splashes from Hood well visible close to Bismarck ?

Is anyone else thinking that Leach lied (against his interest) when he said Bismarck turned away at almost the same time as PoW ? Or that McMullen was firing at (and hitting) a ship on estimated course 220° (as per his salvo plot) while the enemy was on course 270° ?

Thanks for a direct answer.


Bye, Alberto

[Antonio Bonomi]

Hello everybody,

@ Alberto Virtuani,

it even more simple than that Alberto.

This absolute ignorant and incompetent I have listed also in the acknowledgment of my 2005 article work ( what an error ) is going totally out of mind now ...

It is enough to look ate the PoW gunnery plot and connect together the 3 Prince of Wales straddle and hit with their distance and bearing from the well known PoW course track, ... making a simple line and the above absurd imaginary theory has blown up from the water.

It is enough to look at the Prinz Eugen original official battle map and the Prinz Eugen torpedo map by Reimann, ... and the Prinz Eugen own track contained on both maps, ... to realize that the above guy does not have a minimum idea of what he is trying to talk about, ... confirming his absolute incompetence when it is the time to talk about maps, bearings, distances, angles, and associated geometry among warships firing each others.

He would like now to put in our mouth that we defined Rowell and McMullen being liars : NO !

The intentional liars were others, ... Tovey, Wake-Walker, Ellis, Pinchin, ... etc etc and we have long listed their names already.

I am really curious to see how many will jump of this poor donkey now ...

Bye Antonio

[wadinga]

Hello Antonio,

Where exactly did I:

He would like now to put in our mouth that we defined Rowell and McMullen being liars

I've suggested nothing of the sort. Are you calling Mullheim-Rechberg and Schmalenbach "liars" because they put their names to a map showing a turnaway by Bismarck at 05:55?


As for this incomprehensible:

Is anyone else thinking that Leach lied (against his interest) when he said Bismarck turned away at almost the same time as PoW ?

I thought you were alleging Leach was the biggest "liar" from the start? Through her smoke screen and the splashes and as M-R/S show Bismarck turning to starboard at that time, and the fact Bismarck never intentionally closed the range again, his impression was close.

All the best

wadinga