That 0555 turn....

Discussions about the history of the ship, technical details, etc.
User avatar
Alberto Virtuani
Senior Member
Posts: 1682
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 8:22 am
Location: Milan (Italy)

Re: That 0555 turn....

Postby Alberto Virtuani » Mon Jan 16, 2017 11:42 am

Hi Marc,
I have read questions, not yet seen your view (since a while now....) .

I'm NOT interested at all in your personal fights with other members. Here we are hot in defending our view but we are all respectful, open and clear when we have a position. You ask questions, that is allowed, but answering is just a free choice.....

I will answer when you will have detailed and explained your opinion or your doubts, not anymore to "one-line" cryptic questions......

Bye, Alberto
"It takes three years to build a ship; it takes three centuries to build a tradition" (Adm.A.B.Cunningham)

User avatar
Herr Nilsson
Senior Member
Posts: 1025
Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2004 11:19 am
Location: Germany

Re: That 0555 turn....

Postby Herr Nilsson » Mon Jan 16, 2017 12:36 pm

Alberto,

I have no fights, but I have no interest in doing other peoples work.
My approach is asking myself questions. Sometimes questions are even more important than answers. And good questions are in any case more useful than wrong answers.
However, I've learned that my kind of contribution is not compatible and/or not welcome. So it's wasted effort and wasted time. I think you will agree.
Regards

Marc

User avatar
Alberto Virtuani
Senior Member
Posts: 1682
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 8:22 am
Location: Milan (Italy)

Re: That 0555 turn....

Postby Alberto Virtuani » Mon Jan 16, 2017 1:01 pm

Hi Marc,
I totally disagree: I did appreciate your contributions several times on this forum, each time you have provided very valuable information and interesting documents / interpretations (thanking you even when our interpretations were different).

I just agree that only asking cryptic questions, avoiding to explain what is your opinion (with the excuse of doing "homework" for others), is a waste of time. :clap:


Bye, Alberto
"It takes three years to build a ship; it takes three centuries to build a tradition" (Adm.A.B.Cunningham)

User avatar
Herr Nilsson
Senior Member
Posts: 1025
Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2004 11:19 am
Location: Germany

Re: That 0555 turn....

Postby Herr Nilsson » Mon Jan 16, 2017 1:12 pm

Alberto,

I usually do not speculate, therefore I have nothing else to offer, but questions. So we finally agree. :ok:
Let's leave it at that.
Regards

Marc

alecsandros
Senior Member
Posts: 3990
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 2:33 pm
Location: Bucharest, Romania
Contact:

Re: That 0555 turn....

Postby alecsandros » Mon Jan 16, 2017 1:16 pm

If I may be allowed to formulate an idea:
Marc does not have a fixed opinion formed, but he has a plurality of pieces of a large puzzle, most of wich do not fit together.
Is that correct ?

User avatar
Herr Nilsson
Senior Member
Posts: 1025
Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2004 11:19 am
Location: Germany

Re: That 0555 turn....

Postby Herr Nilsson » Mon Jan 16, 2017 1:36 pm

Alecsandros,

basically yes. I have an idea and I'm working on it, but it's mere speculation. My questions were an approach to solve the puzzle, without pushing anyone into one particular direction.
If I can't solve a problem, I always think I'm the one who makes an mistake or is too stupid. It's not the fault of the source, but mine. So if I can't get the puzzle fit together, it's because of missing information and wrong assumption. In this case possibly a fundamental wrong assumption. Possibly the puzzle can be solved.

Whatever, I'm out of this topic now.
Regards

Marc

alecsandros
Senior Member
Posts: 3990
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 2:33 pm
Location: Bucharest, Romania
Contact:

Re: That 0555 turn....

Postby alecsandros » Mon Jan 16, 2017 1:46 pm

Much of world's written history appears to be ... speculation...

Best,

User avatar
paulcadogan
Senior Member
Posts: 1095
Joined: Sun Jul 16, 2006 4:03 am
Location: Kingston, Jamaica

Re: That 0555 turn....

Postby paulcadogan » Mon Jan 16, 2017 1:48 pm

Hmmm... Herr Nilsson's question on McMullen got me thinking... and now I have questions:

The AFCT would require the input of the ship's course, speed and that of the target for every salvo. It is supposed to have a paper plot that:

which could plot both own ship and target ship movement and record the mean point of impact of the salvoes fired.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Admiralty ... trol_Table

So..... shouldn't the salvo plot diagram we have reflect the actual course of PoW? And if it does, then why aren't the A-arcs open at 0555? And if it doesn't, couldn't the AFCT info have been used to determine the ship's course - especially when the ship's plot had been ruined by blood running down the voice pipe?

Questions to which I doubt we'll ever know the answers....missing pieces of the puzzle :think:
Qui invidet minor est - He who envies is the lesser man

User avatar
Alberto Virtuani
Senior Member
Posts: 1682
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 8:22 am
Location: Milan (Italy)

Re: That 0555 turn....

Postby Alberto Virtuani » Tue Jan 17, 2017 8:46 am

Hi Paul,,
my 2 cent opinion here is that the AFCT data should be the most precise source for the ship course, as guns were trained to the target and they were straddling (at least from 5:56 till 6:00).
In the absence of the AFCT source data, we have the salvo plot (that "should" reflect the AFCT data, if correctly built from it), the Plan 4 and the other maps presented by Rowell all showing the turn at 5:55..... :think:
It can be just a "copied and repeated" error, but I agree there aren't many chances of being able to be sure of it, except we can find the original AFCT data plot.

BTW, also Schmalenbach puts the 20° turn to port before the German ships answered fire (thus at 5:54:30 or 5:55 max) in his report attached to the PG KTB.


Bye, Alberto
"It takes three years to build a ship; it takes three centuries to build a tradition" (Adm.A.B.Cunningham)

alecsandros
Senior Member
Posts: 3990
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 2:33 pm
Location: Bucharest, Romania
Contact:

Re: That 0555 turn....

Postby alecsandros » Tue Jan 17, 2017 10:06 am

FWIW,
First salvo fired by Prince of Wales turret Y (the stern turret) is recorded at salvo9, in PoW Gunnery aspects report, and just before 5:58 on the Prince of Wales fall of shot map.

However, that doesn't mean that turret Y was wooded before 5:58...

The GAR can be seen here:
http://www.kbismarck.org/forum/viewtopi ... 210#p67385

The fall of shot map (also indicating "target" - Bismarck - moving at 28kts- possibly speed inputed in the AFCT)
http://www.hmshood.org.uk/reference/off ... encIVa.gif

User avatar
Alberto Virtuani
Senior Member
Posts: 1682
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 8:22 am
Location: Milan (Italy)

Re: That 0555 turn....

Postby Alberto Virtuani » Tue Jan 17, 2017 10:39 am

Hi all,
please remember that the PoW plane was being refueled just before the battle (and it was ready for launch after fire had been opened,as per Leach narrative, point 9). This means that the crew was on the deck during the delicate operation of refueling the Walrus and that Y turret flashes could come directly over them, if fired without any advise.

I can just speculate that McMullen decided to be precautionary and delayed Y turret firing at 5:58 to allow the crew on the deck to get shielded from the heavy gun flashes.....


Bye, Alberto
"It takes three years to build a ship; it takes three centuries to build a tradition" (Adm.A.B.Cunningham)

User avatar
paulcadogan
Senior Member
Posts: 1095
Joined: Sun Jul 16, 2006 4:03 am
Location: Kingston, Jamaica

Re: That 0555 turn....

Postby paulcadogan » Tue Jan 17, 2017 2:26 pm

Alberto, I really doubt that the aircraft handlers, well sheltered behind the aft superstructure were at issue from Y-turret. The fact is the salvo plot puts the A-arcs opening at just before 0558...

Unfortunately the salvo plot we have doesn't indicate who drew it. But its track obviously has basic similarities to the Rowell track chart, minus the slight deviation to starboard around Hood's wreck in the latter.

I suspect that the person was given a track on which he drew the salvos and made the annotations, hence the discrepancy with the time of the turn and the opening of a-arcs.

Paul
Qui invidet minor est - He who envies is the lesser man

User avatar
Alberto Virtuani
Senior Member
Posts: 1682
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 8:22 am
Location: Milan (Italy)

Re: That 0555 turn....

Postby Alberto Virtuani » Tue Jan 17, 2017 2:53 pm

Hi Paul,
if the Walrus was being refueled at the time fire was opened, as per Leach narrative, I would have been careful to avoid flames over it (even if somehow sheltered behind the superstructures.....).
In addition, the catapult control platform is on the boat deck, in front of the aft funnel, therefore not sheltered by the superstructure (see photo below taken from the hangar looking aft, within the orange circle).

Walrus_HMSPrinceofWales.jpg
Walrus_HMSPrinceofWales.jpg (127.91 KiB) Viewed 202 times


Re. salvo plot, it's true that it is very similar to the Rowell maps, but, if it was just a "copy" (with the actual fired salvos just added on it) then it should necessarily show also the avoiding maneuver, shouldn't it ?
That's the reason why I think that the salvo plot is more reliable, as it is IMO directly derived from the AFCT data of PoW course, while the avoiding "maneuver" (that was marginal and never affected Y turret arcs, just triggering a noticeable roll) is not reported on it (however, it is on Rowell maps, as he was sure about the turn and counter-turn ordered in rapid sequence from the bridge)...... This is just my opinion, of course, and you may be right........I'm afraid we cannot know for sure......


Bye, Alberto
"It takes three years to build a ship; it takes three centuries to build a tradition" (Adm.A.B.Cunningham)

alecsandros
Senior Member
Posts: 3990
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 2:33 pm
Location: Bucharest, Romania
Contact:

Re: That 0555 turn....

Postby alecsandros » Tue Jan 17, 2017 5:16 pm

Wasn't Littorio the one that set her floatplane in flames, during battle for Sirte ? One of the aft-turret's salvos destroyed the plane, IIRC...

User avatar
paulcadogan
Senior Member
Posts: 1095
Joined: Sun Jul 16, 2006 4:03 am
Location: Kingston, Jamaica

Re: That 0555 turn....

Postby paulcadogan » Tue Jan 17, 2017 6:11 pm

Hi guys,

Here is the quote from Leach''s narrative re the aircraft:

Visibility continued to improve and by 0430 was about 12 miles. Consequently orders were given to refuel the aircraft. Owing to delays, principally on account of water in the fuel, aircraft was not ready until after fire had been opened on the enemy and it was damaged by shell splinters before it could be flown off. As the petrol constituted a danger, the aircraft was jettisoned into the sea.


He does not say that the aircraft was being refueled when fire was opened, but that it was not ready until that time. I really don't think McMullen, faced with Bismarck, would have held Y turrets fire because a plane was on the catapult. But this is all speculation still.

Also Leach's words:
A turn of 2 blue at 0555 opened "A" Arcs at "Prince of Wales" ninth salvo.


One thing I've kept emphasizing is the events do not take place instantaneously. An order is given, it has to be passed to the signalmen on the flag deck who have to select the correct flags, and hoist them. Then when the commander is ready to execute, another order has to be communicated to them and the flags are hauled down. The order is then passed to the helm to execute the turn, then the ships' rudders have to be turned to the requisite angle and the ships have to respond and attain the new course.

Therefore for Hood and PoW to be on course 280 at 0555, the order for the turn would have to have been given at least, IMHO, when they opened fire. If it was given at 0555, then it is perfectly feasible that the a-arcs would open at the time indicated on the plot.

@Alecsandros:

Littorio's aircraft were on the quarter deck right under the guns of C-turret! Blast damage was almost a given!

Paul
Qui invidet minor est - He who envies is the lesser man


Return to “Bismarck General Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests