Jasper, Schmalenbach and 6 salvos...

Discussions about the history of the ship, technical details, etc.
User avatar
Antonio Bonomi
Senior Member
Posts: 2987
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 10:44 am
Location: Vimercate ( Milano ) - Italy

Re: Jasper, Schmalenbach and 6 salvos...

Postby Antonio Bonomi » Thu Mar 02, 2017 8:39 pm

Hello everybody,

@ Dunmunro,

you better read again the Prinz Eugen KTB, her battle map and her Gunnery Officer ( P. Jasper ) Official report :

I received permission to fire at 04.55 ( German time = 05.55 battle time ) ...


If it is still not enough for you, ... there are other German Official documents too ... :wink:

On the British side the Battle Summary Nr. 5 last edition defines the Official position of the Royal Navy Admiralty.

End of the debate ...

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 )

Cag
Senior Member
Posts: 462
Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2015 9:53 am

Re: Jasper, Schmalenbach and 6 salvos...

Postby Cag » Thu Mar 02, 2017 9:17 pm

Hi All

Hi Antonio, this is probably not the place to discuss the cover up theory, as it disrupts the thread, however I will say that although the differences you point out in the boards are definitely there the interpretation of why they are there are not yet facts but again are still opinions (sorry to sound like a broken record but this fact still holds true).

There are still as many explanations against a cover up as there are for one and it cannot be proven certain either way. There are things that need explanation but personally I do not feel a cover up explains them.

Please do not take this as an attack on your work as it is not, I am sure that you have explained that your work is a evidence based opinion and not as factual as there is at present no evidence that proves this without reasonable doubt.

I know you to be a fair honourable man and respect your opinion and your work which is meticulous in its nature. I agree any speculation that the Germans opening fire at 05.53 is similar to your work on the cover up is incorrect, I did not say that it was, my point was that the cover up theory is still not proven.

If we look objectively Wake-Walker was correct in his realisation that the 1st boards approximation of 10nm at 06.00 was wrong. In your reconstruction of the battle map I'm sure you have found, as have I, that a 10nm figure is way too close and it is actually nearer to 13nm which sort of proves Wake-Walker right that it required amendment, unfortunately in the age of DR and such the amendment was also wrong.

Best wishes
Cag.

dunmunro
Senior Member
Posts: 3081
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2005 1:25 am
Location: Langley BC Canada

Re: Jasper, Schmalenbach and 6 salvos...

Postby dunmunro » Thu Mar 02, 2017 10:17 pm

Antonio Bonomi wrote:Hello everybody,

@ Dunmunro,

you better read again the Prinz Eugen KTB, her battle map and her Gunnery Officer ( P. Jasper ) Official report :

I received permission to fire at 04.55 ( German time = 05.55 battle time ) ...


If it is still not enough for you, ... there are other German Official documents too ... :wink:

On the British side the Battle Summary Nr. 5 last edition defines the Official position of the Royal Navy Admiralty.

End of the debate ...

Bye Antonio :D


The same KTB also states that Bismarck opened fire before PE. What documents other than the KTB are you referring to?

It is sad that you believe that a historian in the RN historical branch can dictate Admiralty policy and position.

User avatar
Antonio Bonomi
Senior Member
Posts: 2987
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 10:44 am
Location: Vimercate ( Milano ) - Italy

Re: Jasper, Schmalenbach and 6 salvos...

Postby Antonio Bonomi » Thu Mar 02, 2017 10:40 pm

Hello everybody,

@ Dunmunro,

there are other Kriegsmarine Official documents stating the German Warships almost simultaneous open fire time at 05.55, ... well after the British warships opened fire.

Anyway, Paulus Jasper official report statement is the reference for Prinz Eugen : 05.55 ( 04.55 German time ).

On the other hand, ... Adm Lutjens provided same timing for Bismarck open fire, ... if you subtract from 06.00 ( Hood explosion ) the famous 5 minutes written on his radio message the same day : 06.00 minus 5 = 05.55.

In conclusion, both German warships could have opened fire only after the JD signal ( permission to open fire ) from Adm Lutjens, so we have a perfect match here, ... and a very reliable milestone.

@ CAG,

thanks for your fairness on recognizing the difference between the 2 things, ... and YES, ... this is not the proper place to talk about the Cover Up and all related stuffs about the Court Martial and the Articles of War, ... and we have long discussed about it already.

Anyone can have its own opinion of course, the reference are out there now and here in are available on the proper threads.

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
Alberto Virtuani
Senior Member
Posts: 1687
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 8:22 am
Location: Milan (Italy)

Re: Jasper, Schmalenbach and 6 salvos...

Postby Alberto Virtuani » Thu Mar 02, 2017 11:19 pm

Dunmunro wrote: "This is just another example of trying to make the facts fit your theory rather than the making the theory fit the facts."

Hi Duncan,
that's why I repeatedly "invited" you to produce a theory based on your supposed "facts"..... but apparently you just want to impose something that you consider a "fact" and that is simply impossible due to all the other evidences of the battle (like the theory of BS opening fire at 5:53, being incompatible with her RoF during the battle, as well as with the German official documents......).

If you can produce a better salvo plot than mine, I will be happy to say you are right, but just saying that the PG turrets were not wooded (based on which battlemap ? We know PG battlemap, a very good reference for German courses, is not reliable for British courses and bearings) is simply not enough..... I have more than one indication that the fore turrets of PG were wooded (or anyway in their "danger" sectors) at around 6:04:40 (Antonio's battlemap geometry, PoW turn, PG being ahead of BS and even the PG film), but I can be wrong of course.

My salvo chart differs from Antonio's one as in 2005 he said (as you do) that fore turrets were wooded by the third turn (not by the first), and due to a different switch fire timing from Hood to PoW (from PG KTB and not from Jasper report).

I don't say that my one is the right one, but I think it is the only way to fit a fact (Jasper report, including the max RoF achieved by PG) into a complete scenario. When I will see your proposed complete salvo chart, we will be able to discuss who is right.....


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

dunmunro
Senior Member
Posts: 3081
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2005 1:25 am
Location: Langley BC Canada

Re: Jasper, Schmalenbach and 6 salvos...

Postby dunmunro » Fri Mar 03, 2017 9:22 pm

Alberto Virtuani wrote:
Dunmunro wrote: "This is just another example of trying to make the facts fit your theory rather than the making the theory fit the facts."

Hi Duncan,
that's why I repeatedly "invited" you to produce a theory based on your supposed "facts"..... but apparently you just want to impose something that you consider a "fact" and that is simply impossible due to all the other evidences of the battle (like the theory of BS opening fire at 5:53, being incompatible with her RoF during the battle, as well as with the German official documents......).

If you can produce a better salvo plot than mine, I will be happy to say you are right, but just saying that the PG turrets were not wooded (based on which battlemap ? We know PG battlemap, a very good reference for German courses, is not reliable for British courses and bearings) is simply not enough..... I have more than one indication that the fore turrets of PG were wooded (or anyway in their "danger" sectors) at around 6:04:40 (Antonio's battlemap geometry, PoW turn, PG being ahead of BS and even the PG film), but I can be wrong of course.

My salvo chart differs from Antonio's one as in 2005 he said (as you do) that fore turrets were wooded by the third turn (not by the first), and due to a different switch fire timing from Hood to PoW (from PG KTB and not from Jasper report).

I don't say that my one is the right one, but I think it is the only way to fit a fact (Jasper report, including the max RoF achieved by PG) into a complete scenario. When I will see your proposed complete salvo chart, we will be able to discuss who is right.....


Bye, Alberto


To produce a salvo time/output chart I would need a gunnery report with at least some details of salvo timing and number of guns fired per salvo...and this info doesn't exist for PE (or at least it is not available to me) and is not explained in sufficient detail in her Ktb. The information that does exist for PE via the Ktb is contradictory and/or at least not agreed upon such as:

Jasper:
...As was the case earlier, I commenced the second firing with a full salvo followed by a ranging
group [straddle ladder] which zeroed me in as of 0559. Firing for effect was then initiated. The
distance at that time was 160 -170 hectometers [16,000-17,000 meters]. During the completion
of ranging fire’s effectiveness, I observed two well-placed simultaneous portside strikes which
again were fired by the secondary artillery of the "Bismarck". At around the 8th salvo, the
opponent turned at first hard toward (us)...

At the twenty eighth salvo, the ship had turned so far away that our view of the target from the
foretop was obscured by stack exhaust fumes. Simultaneously, the forward turrets were in their
extreme turning position [at maximal rotation]. I gave the order to transfer fire control to
Oberleutnant zur See z.Vl [1)] Albrecht in the aft gunnery position, who continued to fire wellplaced,
rapid partial salvos keeping the battery on target with minor range corrections until
cease-fire...

...The heavy artillery attained a salvo rate of 27-28 seconds...



However, if I take Jasper at his word:



He fired the 8th salvo at PoW just as PoW appeared to turn toward the KM ships (IE to avoid the sinking Hood) about 4 minutes after opening fire on PoW.

He fired the 28th and last salvo under forward director control 770 seconds or 12:50 after opening fire. According to PE's battlemap it was not until ~0607 that PE's forward turrets were wooded. This gives me an open fire time well before Jasper's stated 0555. (and Bismarck opened fire before that, according to PE's KTB.)

To produce a salvo table I need to incorporate all these details into the chart.

This will give me an open fire time for PE of 0554:10 and an even earlier open fire time for Bismarck:
The enemy opened fire even while closing in. Bismarck was the first to answer [their] fire and shortly thereafter Prinz Eugen, and the battle developed as described above. (PE Ktb p.35)


So we have PE opening fire at Hood at 0554:10

We have PE firing 3 salvos at Hood, and then a change of target to PoW:

0554:10 -> Hood
0554:38
0555:05 -> Hood
(from fleet change target left)

0555:33 -> PoW
0556
0557:28
0557:55
0558:23
0558:50 (Hood explodes)
0559:18 PoW begins to turn
0559:45 8th salvo PoW appears to turn toward KM ships

17 further salvos until 0607 -> PoW.

User avatar
Antonio Bonomi
Senior Member
Posts: 2987
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 10:44 am
Location: Vimercate ( Milano ) - Italy

Re: Jasper, Schmalenbach and 6 salvos...

Postby Antonio Bonomi » Fri Mar 03, 2017 10:43 pm

Hello everybody,

@Dunmunro,

as I told you already, ... you appear confused to me about the orders received by PG available on her battle map.

Here for you the evidence / translated so you can refer to the proper correct sequence and timing :

PG_change_targets.jpg
PG_change_targets.jpg (42.28 KiB) Viewed 355 times


Never forget that you have the synch milestone time between the open fire and the Hood explosion ... at 05.57, ... when on both sides ... they recorded the Hood being hit by PG on the mainmast base ... starting the fire aft.

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
Alberto Virtuani
Senior Member
Posts: 1687
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 8:22 am
Location: Milan (Italy)

Re: Jasper, Schmalenbach and 6 salvos...

Postby Alberto Virtuani » Fri Mar 03, 2017 10:47 pm

Hi Duncan,
Jasper gunnery report alone is not contradictory at all, and IMO is more than enough to build a sufficiently precise salvo chart.


My proposed one incorporates all the details given by Jasper. Of course, if you want to fit your "facts" (like open fire at 5:54, or Hood explosion at 5:58:50), you will never be able to build a realistic one, respecting Jasper.
The list of the most severe errors in you post:

you wrote: "He fired the 8th salvo at PoW just as PoW appeared to turn toward the KM ships (IE to avoid the sinking Hood) about 4 minutes after opening fire on PoW."

Why 4 minutes ? In my salvo chart, based on Jasper report and not on PG battlemap, they are 2 minutes (switch fire at 5:58:14, 8th salvo at 6:00:14).

you wrote: "He fired the 28th and last salvo under forward director control 770 seconds or 12:50 after opening fire. "

No, after 6,5 minutes after switching fire, or 9,5 minutes after open fire. Salvos are counted from switch fire as at long discussed in the thread http://www.kbismarck.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=5752&start=360. Please take the time to read at least from pag.25 till 29.....

you wrote: "We have PE firing 3 salvos at Hood"

No, 5 salvos to Hood : have you read Jasper (and the above thread) or not ?


You need to put together the RoF, the expended shells (157) and the ordered ones (184), all clear facts, and build a salvo by salvo chart that fits your theory, and, for your own admission, you are not able to do so starting from your assumptions, because
you find that: "...The information that does exist for PE via the Ktb is contradictory and/or at least not agreed upon..."

Stay to Jasper report and you will see that there is no contradiction in it. :negative:


In the same way, when establishing PoW salvo chart you take McMullen, not Leach narrative. :negative:
If you look at McMullen salvo plot (PoW turn away started at 6:01:30 and thus ordered at 6:01) you may say it is "contradictory" with Leach narrative (CP hit at 6:02 and turn away ordered after that time), but we know very well who is right among them.....


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

Cag
Senior Member
Posts: 462
Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2015 9:53 am

Re: Jasper, Schmalenbach and 6 salvos...

Postby Cag » Sat Mar 04, 2017 2:47 pm

Hi All

From my pigeon German the three phrases read

From Fleet : On the opponent the farthest to the left

On the right opponent

Change to left opponent

Obviously a native German speaker will be able to explain it better but the only time change 'Wechsel' is used is in that last phrase. The other phrase appears to be running battle on port side (Bb).

Hope this helps
Best wishes
Cag.

User avatar
Antonio Bonomi
Senior Member
Posts: 2987
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 10:44 am
Location: Vimercate ( Milano ) - Italy

Re: Jasper, Schmalenbach and 6 salvos...

Postby Antonio Bonomi » Sat Mar 04, 2017 5:01 pm

Hello everybody,

@ CAG,

you are making a very good point, ... and I was expecting somebody to notice my " mismatches " on my very old ( 2004 ) translation / interpretation.

Of course we need a German native Language interpretation now, but here the way I currently see them :

1) at 05.55 :

" Von Flotte ( Adm Lutjens = Flotte ) : Auf den Gegner am wei festen Links."


Hoping my interpretation of what is written in German language is correct, ... it seems an order received on Prinz Eugen from Adm Lutjens ( Flotte ), ... to fire to the enemy ( Gegner ) on the left ( Links ), ... so to the PoW.

2) still at 05.55 :

" Auf Rechten Gegner. "


It is not written being an order like the statement before, ... so it can be just a note written by Brinkmann ... to state that they were opening fire to the enemy on the right ( it can be on their own initiative ), ... in fact Jasper explains on his report why he did so NOT having received in time a target selection from his own bridge, ... before the authorization to open fire at 05.55.
As we can see above in fact, ... the target selection was just given on same time, ... almost simoultaneously ... :think:

3) at 05.59 :

" Wechsel Auf Linken Gegner. "


This was surely another order ( Wechsel = change ), ... and in fact it was recorded being received on several other reports and documents, ... to change target from Hood ( rechten = right ) to the left enemy ( linken = left ), ... so to the PoW.

Opinions welcome ... as well as a German native Language interpretation of what was written by Brinkmann, ... and its correct translation and meaning.

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 )

Cag
Senior Member
Posts: 462
Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2015 9:53 am

Re: Jasper, Schmalenbach and 6 salvos...

Postby Cag » Sat Mar 04, 2017 8:31 pm

Hi All

Hi Antonio, I'm not sure exactly who notated the map or to be honest what it exactly means!

If you follow the lines that seem to connect to the notations then the wechsel or change note seems to be just before 06.00 and it also notes what seem to be shell splashes between 05.58 and 05.59.

The Vom Flotte: Auf den Gegner am weitesten Links and Auf rechten Gegner seem to be both around 05.55 but I'll have to re read the PG ktb and Jasper/Schmalenbach accounts again to find out when the change over order was given and when the actual change took place if that is ok (memory is going!).

Best wishes
Cag.

dunmunro
Senior Member
Posts: 3081
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2005 1:25 am
Location: Langley BC Canada

Re: Jasper, Schmalenbach and 6 salvos...

Postby dunmunro » Sat Mar 04, 2017 9:25 pm

Cag wrote:Hi All

Hi Antonio, I'm not sure exactly who notated the map or to be honest what it exactly means!

If you follow the lines that seem to connect to the notations then the wechsel or change note seems to be just before 06.00 and it also notes what seem to be shell splashes between 05.58 and 05.59.

The Vom Flotte: Auf den Gegner am weitesten Links and Auf rechten Gegner seem to be both around 05.55 but I'll have to re read the PG ktb and Jasper/Schmalenbach accounts again to find out when the change over order was given and when the actual change took place if that is ok (memory is going!).

Best wishes
Cag.


See the bottom of page 20:

0555 hours-
"Prinz Eugen" and "Bismarck" return fire. Both ships shoot initially at "Hood". The semaphore
order from Fleet: "Engage opponent farthest to the left," was not instituted until after the 6th
salvo, with a target shift to King George. Both ships are on target after the first salvo. After the
impact at 0557 of the 2nd salvo from "Prinz Eugen," a rapidly spreading fire at the level of the
aft mast was observed, apparently involving the aircraft hangar or petrol storage [gasoline


The timings are problematic, since it suggests that PE took nearly two minutes to fire two (four gun?*) salvos. The more one looks at the PE Ktb the more problematic it becomes.

* There is no consistency as to what constitutes a salvo as Jasper states that he fired 3 salvos before changing targets:

The bearing range-finding station reported 2 contacts off the right bow bearing 20º [2 Dez.] at 25
knots, distance 210 hectometers [21,000 meters]. I received "permission to fire" from the bridge
at 0455 hours and immediately commenced firing a full salvo at 202 hectometers [20,200
meters]. The full [8-gun] salvo was fired using nose fuzed rounds which were stored behind the
gun barrels as ready-to-use ammunition. The observable impacts [shell splashes] could not be
ascribed with certainty as belonging to our own [shells] because of [key punch] perforation
failures in the firing calculator [and thus no range correction report could be made]. Therefore, I
repeated [firing] a full salvo, which turned out to be observable and formed a straddle ladder of
which I could only observe two brief impacts from the lower limiting [rounds of the] salvo, while
the higher and middle [rounds] had to be called questionably too far. The distant impacts were
not visible, since they were concealed by the target. By contrast, [after firing] the bracketing
group
an extraordinarily bright fire flash appeared on the enemy ship's aft section at the level of
the aft mast. The fire developed on the portside of the opponent, since the superstructures
stood out as sharp silhouettes. Immediately thereafter I received the order from the ship's
command to "Change target to the left"
toward the second opponent [the Prince of Wales],
whereby the fire of "Bismarck" and "Prinz Eugen" now crossed. I was unable to observe
"Bismarck's" decisive salvo because I was no longer in a position to do so. I ordered the
targeting officer [target designator] to acquire the second target and thus lost the first [target]
from the [range finder's] visual field of action. Consequently, I did not perceive the detonation of
the first target [Hood].


This is what Koop&Schmolke in Heavy Cruisers of the Admiral Hipper class has to say:

At 0552 Hood opened fire on Prinz Eugen in error instead of Bismarck. This first salvo dropped well abeam and in the cruiser's wake. Admiral Holland was advised of his mistake and shifted target. By 0553 all three capital ships had Fired. Between 0555 and 0559 Prinz Eugen fired six 4-gun salvos from her main armament at Hood. AP ammunition was not employed. The fall of the first salvo was not observed, the second straddled and a shell from the third hit the boat deck, striking a ready-use locker for the UP rocket projectors, and a massive fire began to spread aft. After the sixth salvo Prinz Eugen was ordered to shift fire to Prince of Wales because Bismarck s gunnery officers could not distinguish between the two ships' fall of shell for ranging purposes. At 0601 a shell from Bismarck's fifth salvo hit near the base of Hood's mainmast and a few seconds afterwards the British battlecruiser blew up.

User avatar
Antonio Bonomi
Senior Member
Posts: 2987
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 10:44 am
Location: Vimercate ( Milano ) - Italy

Re: Jasper, Schmalenbach and 6 salvos...

Postby Antonio Bonomi » Sun Mar 05, 2017 8:55 am

Hello everybody,

the timing of those events is pretty clear and defined with acceptable tolerances, ... never to forget that when you state 05.55, ... it can be 05.55 and 01seconds, ... as well as 05.55 and 59 seconds, ... so there is almost one entire minute tolerance between the 2 statements, ... but on the reports they were going to be recorded as 05.55 anyway,... and the same concept of course does apply to every minute before and after ... :wink:

The only statement that has been recorded with the seconds is the very famous 06.00 for the Hood explosion where the 20 seconds was written between the minutes 06.00 and 06.01 on PG KTB.

Like I did and Alberto Virtuani is correctly doing lately for the PG firing sequence, ... it is necessary to put one event after the other and realize the correct events scenario, ... taking in account the timing milestones, ... like the 05.57 for the boat deck hit recorded into that minute on both sides ... as well as the photograpic and fim evidences, ... and in this case the photos NH 69722 ( Bs open fire ) ... the NH 69724 ( Hood explosion with PoW salvoes 13th and 14th in the air ) ... and NH 69731 ( PoW salvo 20th landing on PG not turning to starboard yet ) ... are a fundamental help to correctly better define the timings available on reports and maps on both sides.

Last but not less important are the closing distances, ... and I think CAG already realized it from what I have read above, ... because some are available on the gunnery reports and are associated to precise events, ... and by correctly placing the map with they closing rate distance, ... one can see and verify if it fits with due tolerances, ... or it is absolutely not correct.

Basically one needs to do what we have been doing for the Bismarck firing sequence :

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=5752&start=300

BS_DS_Firing_April_4_2016_correlation.jpg
BS_DS_Firing_April_4_2016_correlation.jpg (118.28 KiB) Viewed 269 times


It is mandatory to have the correct event sequence, timing milestones, distances, photos and film all in synch and aligned, ... in order to realize what really happened.

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: 905
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 3:49 pm
Location: Tonbridge England

Re: Jasper, Schmalenbach and 6 salvos...

Postby wadinga » Sun Mar 05, 2017 2:09 pm

Hello Antonio,

It is also mandatory to record that in the original typescript of the PG KTB, the unredacted version of the 06:01 entry which I have now seen:

The only statement that has been recorded with the seconds is the very famous 06.00 for the Hood explosion where the 20 seconds was written between the minutes 06.00 and 06.01 on PG KTB.


The description of Hood exploding aligns with the 06:01 timing, not with 06:00, which relates only to weather report, because it happened after 06:01, and it is clear that somebody put the paper back in the typewriter subsequently, to add the poorly-aligned 20 seconds annotation. They did this because they wanted to accurately record the instant when the Kriegsmarine scored what may have been their most significant victory. Yes, it is the only report timed to the second, yet perversely you choose to ignore it because it thwarts your purpose in denigrating Leach's courage and devotion to duty. You choose to ignore this documentation in favour of Lutjens' vague description which could equally have said "Early this morning" and "a few minutes" without detracting from the purpose of his message.

The translation of the KTB on this website clearly accepts the recorded timing and pre-empts your speculative identification you have applied to individual gunflashes or watersplashes and used to generate your timetable.

You were kind enough to supply some translations from the PG battle map recently. What does the annotation "Gegner fliegt in die luft" mean when Hood is graphically depicted being destroyed after 06:01?

Therefore the "Leach Panics" theory is also "fliegt in die Luft" :cool


All the best

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

User avatar
Antonio Bonomi
Senior Member
Posts: 2987
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 10:44 am
Location: Vimercate ( Milano ) - Italy

Re: Jasper, Schmalenbach and 6 salvos...

Postby Antonio Bonomi » Sun Mar 05, 2017 3:11 pm

Hello everybody,

@ Wadinga,

I see that now you are " fliegt in die Luft " ... from the 05.58 Hood explosion " what if " scenario support ... of course without providing any evidence support about it from your side last time I asked you about it, ... back to the 06.01 from PG KTB we have discussed long enough already on some other threads.

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=6314&start=225

In reality for you none of the 2 is important, ... like it is not important for you the truth about this battle, ... but only to try ( always unsuccesfully ) to challenge anything I produce lately, ... on the useless effort to try to denigrate my works in line of principle, ... and in this way to try to protect some RN Officers credibility.

Unfortunately for you the poor credibility of those Officers have been demonstrated by the RN/Admiralty Official documents.

I have just showed you them, ... and showed you the way to read them correctly, ... but they do exist and everybody could have done what I did, ... just like Graham Rhis-Jones did too long before I did it more deeply and accurately.

A good summary of those documents is available now on the Storia Militare Nr. 281 article, published on last February.

If you like to challenge my battle timetable, ... and the available milestones, ... please be so kind to produce your own one, ... including the reference to the official documents, the maps, the distances, the photos and the film, ... and so on, ... of course.

But please, do something better than last time when you tried to challenge my battle map, using the old Schmalenbach one, ... :shock:

To describe Adm Lutjens official radio message to SKL, ... a " vague description " ... of the MAIN event he was talking about on that dedicated radio message, ... is simply ridicolous.

Adm_Lutjens_radio_msg_Hood_explosion.jpg
Adm_Lutjens_radio_msg_Hood_explosion.jpg (53.99 KiB) Viewed 246 times


As you can read : Hood exploded at 06.00, after almost ( innerhalb ) 5 minutes engagement with Bismarck.

I have some other Official documents that can be defined a " vague description " of the events, ... but they have been written intentionally in that way for a well known reason now, ... and I am sure you know which documenys and Officers I am talking about in this case.

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 )


Return to “Bismarck General Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Antonio Bonomi and 1 guest