KGV and PoW GAR during Op. Rheinubung

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

Moderator: Bill Jurens

User avatar
Alberto Virtuani
Senior Member
Posts: 2812
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 8:22 am
Location: Milan (Italy)

Re: KGV and PoW GAR during Op. Rheinubung

Post by Alberto Virtuani » Wed Sep 12, 2018 2:29 pm

Hello everybody,

apparently Mr.Wadinga is unable to read and understand the closure of the distances in McMullen salvo plot http://www.hmshood.org.uk/reference/off ... encIVa.gif (on course 270° the Bismarck would not close BC1), but we had already several proofs that this guy is not particularly strong in geometry and maps..... :kaput:

PoW_Gunnery.jpg
PoW_Gunnery.jpg (60.58 KiB) Viewed 1565 times

How can this extremely fast closure rate happen with Bismarck on course 270° ?

Where are the PoW splashes of the "well grouped" salvos McMullen was firing at Bismarck during the whole duration of the film ? :lol:
Why was Hood firing single shells salvos to PG ? Was her output loss much worse than the one of PoW ? :lol:
Why NOBODY noticed the turn away (50° out) of Bismarck (at 5:55) and PG (at 5:56) from any British ship (PoW, Hood, Norfolk and Suffolk) ?

The poor Mr.Wadinga will have to try another speculation, this one will not work for his agenda. Possibly now he will try to deny also PoW maps, saying BC1 was not on course 300° - 280° (as per his preferred WRONG maps....).
I guess he will have no limit in his fantasy to avoid to accept the only logical reconstruction of this battle: Antonio's one.

Is anybody else willing to expose himself in such a comic way to support his ravings ?


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: 1629
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 3:49 pm
Location: Tonbridge England

Re: KGV and PoW GAR during Op. Rheinubung

Post by wadinga » Wed Sep 12, 2018 5:27 pm

Hello Alberto,
(on course 270° the Bismarck would not close BC1)
Who said anything about 270T? You might guess from M-R/S that course might be true for 2 or 3 minutes max. Bismarck was turning continuously from 05:55 onwards.
Where are the PoW splashes of the "well grouped" salvos McMullen was firing at Bismarck during the whole duration of the film
At 60 seconds duration (approx) only one or maybe two salvoes could possibly be seen. I don't propose to educate you over "well-grouped" and Mean Point of Impact but tight salvoes, or a salvo, might be occurring somewhere behind Bismarck or out of shot to the right.

Why was Hood firing single shells salvos to PG ?

Dear, dear you are as blinkered as Antonio. One splash in the frame does not mean one shot in the salvo. Lagemann identified both the single splashes as from Hood, ask him where the other shells landed.

Why NOBODY noticed the turn away (50° out) of Bismarck (at 5:55) and PG

Who said it was 50 degrees and who said it was sharp enough to spot the inclination change easily? Mullenheim-Rechberg and Schmalenbach noticed it, and put on the map, isn't that enough? As we've established Norfolk and Suffolk were too far away, everybody looking through a telescope in Hood died (plus nearly everybody else- they make poor witnesses), and McMullen kept shooting short, because he didn't notice, and because he was concerned how slow his guns were shooting and how few in each salvo.


McMullen identified three salvoes as straddles, but there is no confirmation from Bismarck as to when the hits happened, whether this identification is correct, or neat shell path orientations as we have with PoW. Here's an example from Georg Herzog:

While I was proceeding to my gun on the aircraft deck a shell hit a launch's bow and burst through it. I don't know where the shell detonated. Splinters flew about [and] one of them hit Bootsmannmaat Zeidler on the head.

Now which boat's bow did it hit? Assuming a low angle of fall. They jut out quite a way over the large hangar front. To carry away only the starboard boat's bow, the shell has to come from forward of the beam, otherwise it would have hit the port boat first. There aren't too many occasions when PoW was forward of Bismarck's beam. However to hit the port boat, but not the starboard on the way out, the shot must have come from aft of the beam, say when Bismarck had turned away at about 05:55.


You used to be interested in investigating such matters before you signed up for this ludicrous jihad.

All the best

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

User avatar
Alberto Virtuani
Senior Member
Posts: 2812
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 8:22 am
Location: Milan (Italy)

Re: KGV and PoW GAR during Op. Rheinubung

Post by Alberto Virtuani » Wed Sep 12, 2018 6:15 pm

Hello everybody,

left completely alone by his fellow deniers in his fantasy version of the battle,
Wadinga wrote: "Who said anything about 270T?
the wrong map of 1990 and Mr.Wadinga who supports this wrong map, being unable to present his own one.
Can Mr.Wadinga post finally his suggested track for Bismarck ? No, he can't of course.... Therefore what is he speaking about here ? Pure denial without any value.....


Wadinga wrote: "Bismarck was turning continuously from 05:55 onwards"
His pure speculation ONLY, based on nothing, as usual. Bismarck was hitting and NOT turning (that would have affected her precision)......


Wadinga wrote: "tight salvoes, or a salvo, might be occurring somewhere behind Bismarck or out of shot to the right."
Sure, but accidentally we just see the 2 single shells from Hood.....so ridiculous that it doesn't deserve further comments. :kaput:


Wadinga wrote: "One splash in the frame does not mean one shot in the salvo"
Separation of shells of more than 500 meters (splashes are more than 50 meters high....) means British were firing with a spread worse than Italians...and with a much worse precision :lol: :lol:


Wadinga wrote: "McMullen kept shooting short"
FALSE, he fired over and short, and he hit three times in the meantime. Simply IMPOSSIBLE that he did not notice Bismarck on course 270° at 5:55 (or a "mistery" course at a "mistery" timing that Mr.Wadinga is unwilling to show us all.....)



ANYBODY ELSE supporting Mr.Wadinga comic ravings ? :lol:



Bye, Alberto
Last edited by Alberto Virtuani on Wed Sep 12, 2018 6:36 pm, edited 8 times in total.
"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: 3738
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 10:44 am
Location: Vimercate ( Milano ) - Italy

Re: KGV and PoW GAR during Op. Rheinubung

Post by Antonio Bonomi » Wed Sep 12, 2018 6:19 pm

Hello everybody,


the knight has been thrown out from the donkey, ... and the noble animal is showing his reaction :

Smiling_Donkey.jpg
Smiling_Donkey.jpg (60.99 KiB) Viewed 1523 times

nothing else is deserved here, ... the level is too low, ...

Bye Antonio
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: 1629
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 3:49 pm
Location: Tonbridge England

Re: KGV and PoW GAR during Op. Rheinubung

Post by wadinga » Wed Sep 12, 2018 7:29 pm

Hello Alberto,


(Antonio is quite self absorbed looking in the mirror)
the wrong map of 1990 and Mr.Wadinga who supports this wrong map,
Endorsed by Mullenheim-Rechberg and Schmalenbach - good enough for me.
post finally his suggested track

Endorsed by Mullenheim-Rechberg and Schmalenbach - good enough for me.
His pure speculation ONLY, based on nothing, as usual.

Endorsed by Mullenheim-Rechberg and Schmalenbach - good enough for me.

Sure, but accidentally we just see the 2 single shells from Hood
No two salvoes, remember there may be shells outside the frame you can't see. Congratulations to Herr Lagemann for his bravery, hearing the tearing scream of incoming over his head and pressing the shutter at the right time. Just lucky we see them in the film sequence as well. Gosh those shots were close to Lagemann, no wonder he discusses them later with PG's senior officers. They want to be sure he did a good job and recorded them.
Separation of shells of more than 500 meters
Can you see 500 metres to the left of the splash on the left of the photo, can you see 500 to the right of the one on the right?
Bismarck was hitting and NOT turning (that would have affected her precision)
I believe Admiral Santarini points out her accuracy was lower than PoW's in terms of hits for number of shells fired, and that is only if you trust the Baron's Boast. If Bismarck was blazing away as fast as the film shows at this time, lower accuracy as you would expect.

McMullen kept shooting short on 10 through 18 apart from a straddle on 13 (apparently) according to Antonio's table. He had adjusted the rate for his own turn at 05:55 and that probably meant he missed Bismarck's gradual turn.


All the best

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

User avatar
Alberto Virtuani
Senior Member
Posts: 2812
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 8:22 am
Location: Milan (Italy)

Re: KGV and PoW GAR during Op. Rheinubung

Post by Alberto Virtuani » Wed Sep 12, 2018 7:43 pm

Hello everybody,
Wadinga wrote: "Who said anything about 270T? ......good enough for me...good enough for me...."
therefore (if good enough for this guy) Bismarck on course 270° from 5:55 until 6:00, I guess Mr.Wadinga has to make up his mind. Either he supports a wrong map or he MUST propose an alternative.
IMPOSSIBLE , just looking at McMullen salvo plot, with its extreme closure rate. Try again Mr.Wadinga ! Good luck ! :lol: :lol: :lol:



Wadinga wrote: "Can you see 500 metres to the left of the splash on the left of the photo, can you see 500 to the right of the one on the right? "
I can see 500 meters to the left of the splash to the right of the photo and viceversa......I can see at least 200 meters in the other directions, but accidentally :shock: the camera doesn't show what DOES NOT EXIST (except in Mr.Wadinga mind :lol: ). Pitiable. :kaput:

Here a couple "well grouped" splashes from Hood to PG (from higher distance), to show how fortuities are happening only in Mr.Wadinga ill fantasy:

nh69723.jpg
nh69723.jpg (36.52 KiB) Viewed 1483 times


Wadinga wrote: "McMullen kept shooting short on 10 through 18 apart from a straddle on 13"
FALSE ! Over at salvo 14 (http://www.hmshood.org.uk/reference/off ... encIVa.gif). Despite the desperation excuse and the fact he is unable to read a chart, shame on Mr.Wadinga for intentionally lying in front of everybody !

There is NO WAY a battleship "continuously turning" (his speculation) can hit anything. :negative:



Why doesn't Mr.Wadinga recognize he has been left alone in his fantasy by everybody ?
Does he think he can be credible posting these nonsense ?

Better to admit his total defeat, I 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)

dunmunro
Senior Member
Posts: 3631
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2005 1:25 am
Location: Langley BC Canada

Re: KGV and PoW GAR during Op. Rheinubung

Post by dunmunro » Wed Sep 12, 2018 10:29 pm

Alberto Virtuani wrote:
Wed Sep 12, 2018 10:32 am
Hello everybody,

back we are to the intentional LIES:
Wadinga wrote: "They are clearly closer to PG than to Bismarck"

PoW_Salvo_21.jpg


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) !
:lol: :lol: :lol:



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...... :stop:



Bye, Alberto
At 3:07-3:08 of this film:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XHL7zkA4Zbg&t=253s

you can see where the 2nd shell splash is just collapsing, and it shows that it struck just to the left of the frame shown above.

Go to 3:05 and set the speed to .25x

User avatar
wadinga
Senior Member
Posts: 1629
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 3:49 pm
Location: Tonbridge England

Re: KGV and PoW GAR during Op. Rheinubung

Post by wadinga » Thu Sep 13, 2018 2:40 am

Hello Alberto,
FALSE ! Over at salvo 14 (http://www.hmshood.org.uk/reference/off ... encIVa.gif). Despite the desperation excuse and the fact he is unable to read a chart, shame on Mr.Wadinga for intentionally lying in front of everybody
Now you accuse Antonio of lying and you misquote me.
McMullen kept shooting short on 10 through 18 apart from a straddle on 13 (apparently) according to Antonio's table.

Read what he has written on the table for salvo 14 then apologise nicely. To both of us. If you are always going to sing from Antonio's hymn sheet you must learn to parrot his words precisely. What you read off McMullen's map is clearly wrong as Antonio says so.


Image


but then you've never been very good on getting quotes right. You keep leaving bits of the sentence out so as to change the meaning.
Here a couple "well grouped" splashes from Hood to PG (from higher distance), to show how fortuities are happening only in Mr.Wadinga ill fantasy:
Who took this picture? Probably Lagemann. Who says they are shots from Hood? Probably Lagemann. Who says the other splashes are from Hood? Lagemann.

" intentional LIES", "Mr.Wadinga's ravings", "intentionally lying", and pictures of donkeys- your puerile behaviour is the reason why there are few posters. Even if they agreed with you, who would want to be associated with your antics, borne of desperation as your fabricated evidence and inaccurate conclusions are highlighted.


All the best

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

User avatar
Antonio Bonomi
Senior Member
Posts: 3738
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 10:44 am
Location: Vimercate ( Milano ) - Italy

Re: KGV and PoW GAR during Op. Rheinubung

Post by Antonio Bonomi » Thu Sep 13, 2018 5:54 am

Hello everybody,

somebody suggested above to go and take a look at something into the PG Rheinubung film pretending that to be a shell comparable to the other 2 single shell falling that we can see on the film one after the other :
At 3:07-3:08 of this film:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XHL7zkA4Zbg&t=253s

you can see where the 2nd shell splash is just collapsing, and it shows that it struck just to the left of the frame shown above.

Go to 3:05 and set the speed to .25x
I have done it and I saw what Herr Nillson discussed with me many years ago while we were doing the single film frame analysis, I mean a strange vertical visual effect on the film to the left of Bismarck bow just on few film frames.

So I suggest everybody to do the above suggested exercise and make up your impression.

But immediately after, please do the same exercise with speed settings at 0.25 ( the slowest anyway ) and do again the same exercise, and watch the same effect in comparison to the same occurrence on the 2 previous shells surely falling close to Bismarck.

Do it few times and watch carefully how the shells are collapsing to their base once the water column is disappearing progressively.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pPmkOtSveXY

Did you notice a difference like I did many times years ago on a frame to frame analysis comparison ?

Of course you did, ... and it is clear from the previous collapsing of the 2 shells that the last part of the white water to disappear is the base as it obvious being a collapsing of water event, ... and it is a vivid white base, ... so not the top part of the water column that in the last effect is not even as white as it is on the 2 previous shells we can look at.

This said and demonstrated, lets go back for a second on something real and mechanic, ... a 50.000 tons visible warship, ... and not a film effect on few frames.

It is clear from the film that Bismarck was on course 270° due west from her extreme forward turret rotation backwards to port while she fired to the POW on the south east of her position, ... being her target there as we all know.

Now, the solution of this already resolved enigma is exactly on the Bismarck course and firing solution, on something real and very solid, ... not liek a rock, ... but like a German Wotan Hard steel material, ... because she could have that sailing direction and firing solution only after the Prinz Eugen torpedo ALARM issued by Kpt Brinkmann at 06:03 battle time, as all the German documents are stating being the only reason for that Bismarck turn to starboard, ... and exactly as Capt Leach reported too on his report.

To make a long story short, ... those 1 plus 1 landing salvoes from PoW directed to Bismarck can only be the 20th and the 21st ( and last ) for that very simple reason, ... because they surely have been fired after 06:03 and not before, ... otherwise the Bismarck cannot be seen on that course and firing solution.

It is a very simple situation to be analyzed and associated to a proper timing as demonstrated above.

Who is pretending to use a very old and incorrect map ( started by F.O. Busch on 1943 and used by several authors until 1990 ) and overcome the official Kriegsmarine documents and the original PG battle map we have now available, ... is just making a wrong assumption that is historically incorrect, ... it is very simple.

But we know why he is trying to do this, ... because his only goal is to try to demolish everything he can, ... hoping that the confusion will stay as it was when his " loved novel " was written, ... and nobody should or can make any step forward about those events re-construction.

I am sorry for those poor guys, ... you have already lost this battle, ... you have lost your war, ... and the truth is already out.

Now just try to save your personal dignity, ... if you are able to.

Bye Antonio
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: 3738
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 10:44 am
Location: Vimercate ( Milano ) - Italy

Re: KGV and PoW GAR during Op. Rheinubung

Post by Antonio Bonomi » Thu Sep 13, 2018 6:38 am

Hello everybody,

here for you to see the differences.

The images are better than thousand words :


Collapse_shell_20th.jpg
Collapse_shell_20th.jpg (23.07 KiB) Viewed 1407 times
Collapse_shell_21st.jpg
Collapse_shell_21st.jpg (22.39 KiB) Viewed 1407 times
Not a shell collapsing.jpg
Not a shell collapsing.jpg (21.16 KiB) Viewed 1407 times

It is self evident, ... that it is not a shell collapsing.

To be noticed that even if that can be considered a shell, ... and I personally NEVER considered that visual effect being a shell from PoW, ... it would only mean that PoW gunnery report about local fired shells by PoW was incorrect and it was not a 2 + 1 + 1 shell sequence, ... but a 2+ 1+ 2 sequence so 5 instead of 4 shells from Y turret fired in local control, ... and nothing else.

This because as stated above, ... the Bismarck turned to starboard because of a 06:03 Torpedo ALARM from Prinz Eugen ,... so those shells landed on her after that turn as it is self evident on the movie, ... and not before the Bismarck turn to starboard.

Elementary Watson, ... simple and elementary, ... :wink:

Bye Antonio
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: 2812
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 8:22 am
Location: Milan (Italy)

Re: KGV and PoW GAR during Op. Rheinubung

Post by Alberto Virtuani » Thu Sep 13, 2018 7:07 am

Hello everybody,
Wadinga wrote: "Now you accuse Antonio of lying and you misquote me. "
So, being wrong in everything relevant that he tried to propose, like Bismarck turning on course 270° at 5:55 :shock: or the 2 single shells in the film coming from Hood (already exploded since 3+ minutes, and firing 2 shells at once) :shock: , or the correct battlemap being the old Schmalenbach 1971 one :shock: , Mr.Wadinga is happy to point out that I misquoted him.

I'm happy too to apologize (opposite of Mr.Wadinga who insists in his errors), as well to say that Antonio was wrong in his table and that McMullen was short and over from salvo 10 to 18. Of course the battle reconstruction is still the same, but Mr.Wadinga is unwilling to admit his TOTAL DEFEAT and the end of his loved fairy-tale !


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: 3631
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2005 1:25 am
Location: Langley BC Canada

Re: KGV and PoW GAR during Op. Rheinubung

Post by dunmunro » Thu Sep 13, 2018 7:51 am

Antonio Bonomi wrote:
Thu Sep 13, 2018 6:38 am
Hello everybody,

here for you to see the differences.

The images are better than thousand words :



Collapse_shell_20th.jpg


Collapse_shell_21st.jpg


Not a shell collapsing.jpg


It is self evident, ... that it is not a shell collapsing.

To be noticed that even if that can be considered a shell, ... and I personally NEVER considered that visual effect being a shell from PoW, ... it would only mean that PoW gunnery report about local fired shells by PoW was incorrect and it was not a 2 + 1 + 1 shell sequence, ... but a 2+ 1+ 2 sequence so 5 instead of 4 shells from Y turret fired in local control, ... and nothing else.

This because as stated above, ... the Bismarck turned to starboard because of a 06:03 Torpedo ALARM from Prinz Eugen ,... so those shells landed on her after that turn as it is self evident on the movie, ... and not before the Bismarck turn to starboard.

Elementary Watson, ... simple and elementary, ... :wink:

Bye Antonio
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XHL7zkA4Zbg&t=253s

It is a shell collapsing but the camera didn't catch the exact instant of impact, but the camera crew obviously panned the camera to include the splash in the frame. This particular recording is the best I've seen of this film clip in terms of resolution, and you can see that the splash remains in one location as the camera moves, so it's not a camera lens artifact.

User avatar
Antonio Bonomi
Senior Member
Posts: 3738
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 10:44 am
Location: Vimercate ( Milano ) - Italy

Re: KGV and PoW GAR during Op. Rheinubung

Post by Antonio Bonomi » Thu Sep 13, 2018 10:36 am

Hello everybody,

once again, ... it cannot be a shell because is baseless.
There is NO white base into the water, just as we can see on the other 2 shells once they are collapsing.
The white large base into the water is the LAST thing to disappear and it is not what we can see happening in that particular case.
It is enough to compare the images and it is easy to realize it, because on the other 2 shells we can see it, and it is always there.
That image can be everything, surely it is not something that can be associated for similarity to what we can see on the previous 2 shells collapsing.

In any case, as written above this discussion can only drive toward the evaluation of 4 vs 5 shells fired by the PoW in local control from the Y turret after having been turned away and generate a footnote on the re-construction ( NOTE : there is an image effect into the film that seems not to confirm what PoW Gunnery report stated).

Here what has been stated by PoW Gunnery report :
When the Fore Director was wooded during the turn away after salvo 18, the main switch in the T.S. was put over to after director.
This director was also unable to see the enemy due to the ship's smoke screen, and the Officer of "Y" turret, using his own initiative, went into local control and fired three ( 3 ) salvoes as he was able to see under the smoke.

The fall of shot of these three salvoes is uncertain.

Notes : 2 - In addition "Y" turret fired four ( 4 ) rounds in local control after 18th salvo: shell ring then jammed.
2 of those rounds ( salvo 19th of 2 shells ) we see on the photo NH 69731, one each ( salvo 20th of 1 shell and 21st of 1 shell ), are into the film.

No one in fact can demonstrate that Bismarck turned away on course 270° due west before the Prinz Eugen TORPEDO ALARM issued by Kpt Brinkmann at 06:03, as all the German Official documents do demonstrate, and that provides the timing of this film sequence having been taken after that event, so well after 06:03 and consequently correctly associate those falling single shells to the Y turret of PoW firing in local control her last ( 1 + 1 ) shells.

Who will try to state that the timing is not reliable because there is an English warship view inside the Bismarck sailing sequence, is just missing the fact that this film is a propaganda sequence obtained by cut and paste the original film ( unavailable so far ) and they have intentionally inserted that part by cutting the Bismarck taken sequence.

In this case, it is enough to analyze the last Bismarck view before the English ship sequence, and the first Bismarck view taken immediately after it, and everyone will easily realize that they go in continuity, .. frame after frame, ... so they just cut it and inserted the few English warship sequence in the middle of the Bismarck firing view.

With reference to the Prinz Eugen TORPEDO ALARM well documented and clearly reported on her battle map, we can state when this film sequence started, since we can see the Prinz Eugen first turn, ... and it was at 06:03 and 40 seconds, ... with due tolerances ( some seconds inside that minute ).

It is very simple, ... and well demonstrated already since years.

Bye Antonio
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
Herr Nilsson
Senior Member
Posts: 1282
Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2004 11:19 am
Location: Germany

Re: KGV and PoW GAR during Op. Rheinubung

Post by Herr Nilsson » Thu Sep 13, 2018 11:24 am

Antonio Bonomi wrote:
Thu Sep 13, 2018 10:36 am
There is NO white base into the water, just as we can see on the other 2 shells once they are collapsing.
I see a faint white base. It's just a bit closer to the horizon.
Regards

Marc

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

User avatar
Antonio Bonomi
Senior Member
Posts: 3738
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 10:44 am
Location: Vimercate ( Milano ) - Italy

Re: KGV and PoW GAR during Op. Rheinubung

Post by Antonio Bonomi » Thu Sep 13, 2018 11:33 am

Hello everybody,

@ Herr Nillson,

how come, on the NH 69731 you cannot see the much more easily visible 3 Bismarck shells, and here you can see the white base I cannot see ... :think:

You have several questions to be answered, ... on a couple of threads, ... before opening this additional debate.

Unless you only like to put out your doubts, ... and never take a defined position yourself, ... as it seems currently.

We wait your opinion, ... and your position, ... about this point as well as on the other now, ... :think:

Bye Antonio
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 )

Post Reply