Jasper, Schmalenbach and 6 salvos...

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

Moderator: Bill Jurens

User avatar
Alberto Virtuani
Senior Member
Posts: 3448
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 8:22 am
Location: Milan (Italy)

Re: Jasper, Schmalenbach and 6 salvos...

Post by Alberto Virtuani » Sat Jul 07, 2018 8:17 am

@HMSVF,
I do agree with you, it looks a bit too much of the ship out of the water....I guess the painter got this impression due to the last part of the sinking, while in the beginning the angle would not have been so extreme (in addition to Barham, please also see this video, of a much smaller ship: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OshdAk4t6UU)


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: 3902
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2005 1:25 am
Location: Langley BC Canada

Re: Jasper, Schmalenbach and 6 salvos...

Post by dunmunro » Mon Jul 23, 2018 11:07 pm

This account was published in the St. Louis Post Dispatch, 31 May 1941. It has been censored and contains no information that would be of vital use to the enemy (such as details of PoW's damage).
Second Hit Blew Up Hood, Sent
Funnels, Masts and Parts of Hull
Bow of British Ship Tilted
Vertically, Vessel Sank
in 4 Minutes in 'Battle
of Giants.'


By J. B. NIXON,
Reuters Special Correspondent
With the Royal Navy.

LONDON, May 31. -I watched
the "battle of giants" which cul-
minated in the sinking of the 35,-
000-ton German battieship Bis-
marck. Standing on the bridge
of one of His Majesty's ships I
saw the 42,100-ton Hood, long the
world's largest warship, go down
only 200 or 300 yards away with
her guns still firing.

The end of the Hood was an al
most unbelievable nightmare.
Shortly after the engagement be-
gan shells hit the 21-year-old bat-
tle cruiser. There was a bright
sheet of flame and it blew up.
Parts of its great hull were thrown
hundreds of feet into the air and
in a few minutes all that remained
was a patch of smoke on the wa-
ter and some small bits of wreck
age.

The battleship Prince of Wales
was hit soon afterward by a 15
inch naval shell but the damage
was slight.

__ The "battle of the giants" was
the climax of a chase by the Hood
| and Prince of Wales and their ac-
companying - destroyers at top
speed to prevent the Bismarck
from breaking out into the Atlantic
to attack convoys.

Pursuit in Arctic Night .

'The pursuit began off Iceland
and continued hour after hour in
the eerie half-light of an Arctic
night. The cruisers Suffolk and
Norfolk, which had been shadow-
ing the Bismarck since the big
vessel left Bergen, Norway, kept
the Hood and Prince of Wales in-
formed of its movements and thus
heiped find the quarry.

We sighted the enemy at 6 a. m.
when a curtain of snow suddenly
lifted. For some minutes our
ships sped on toward the Germans
to shorten the range. They, too,
(the Germans) turned in toward
their pursuers and the world's big-
gest warships were thundering to-
ward each other at a combined
speed of probably more than 60
miles an hour.

The "open fire" order was given
by signal. Almost simultaneously,
orange-gold flame burst with a
roar from the Hood's - forward
guns. Within three seconds puffs
of black smoke shot out from the
Bismarck as it opened fire.

The Prince of Wales' guns then
began firing. Dense clouds of yel-
low cordite smoke enveloped its
bridge. It was to the left of the
Hood, two or three hundred yards
away, and still surging forward on
a parallel course. Fountains of
water shot up in its wake-first
about 100 yards behind and then |
only 50 yards astern.

(my bolding above - DM)
The Hood thundered on and then,
| suddenly, it was hit A shell, or
| shells, appeared to fall just for-
ward of one of its after 15-inch |
gun turrets and great flames and
heavy black smoke burst forth.l
| The Hood continued to fire and
| still raced forward. J
What happened next was a
{strangling, sickening sight. There
was a terrific explosion and the
whole of the vast ship was en-

veloped in a flash of flame and
smoke which rose high into the air

in the shape of a giant mushroom.

Sections of funnels, masts and
other parts of the ship hurtled
hundreds of feet into the air and
some of them fell on our ship.
The Hood's bow tilted verticully
into the air and within three or
four minutes it was gone entirely.
A destroyer was diverted to rescue
work and managed to pick up
three of the ship's company-two
seamen and a midshipman.

All this time the Prince of Wales
continued pouring shells at the
Bismarck. More than once spurts
of water showed it was straddled.
Again shells from the Bismarck

crashed near the Prince of Wales,
but it came out of the battle with
little damage. Then the Bismarck
turned away, to be pursued all that
day and night and the next day
over the Atlantic at top speed.
Twice during the night the
Prince of Wales fired salvoes and
aircraft made attacks. Finally
there came the dramatic message
that the cruiser Dorsetshire had
torpedoed the Bismarck.
This story or parts of the same story were published around the world in various papers.
This website has lots of interesting stories that were published in wartime:

http://www.thewarillustrated.info/93/fo ... smarck.asp including a slight variation of the above story.

User avatar
Antonio Bonomi
Senior Member
Posts: 3800
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 10:44 am
Location: Vimercate ( Milano ) - Italy

Re: Jasper, Schmalenbach and 6 salvos...

Post by Antonio Bonomi » Tue Jul 24, 2018 6:45 am

Hello everybody,

this version of the facts with the related timing was declared by LIEUTENANT COMMANDER ANTHONY HUNTER TERRY, ROYAL NAVY, " H.M.S. PRINCE OF WALES. " during the Hood Board of Inquiry.

http://www.hmshood.org.uk/reference/off ... .htm#Terry

Board of Inquiry NOTE : WITNESS'S EVIDENCE WAS LARGELY TAKEN FROM NOTES WRITTEN AT THE TIME OF THE ACTION AND THE TIMES TAKEN WERE ON THE SPOT.
53. Will you describe what you saw of the action particularly with reference to the "Hood", from the time "Hood" opened fire ?

"Hood" opened fire with foremost turrets, that is "A" and "B", at 05:52.
"Prince of Wales" opened fire with "A" and "B" turrets shortly afterwards.
"Bismarck's" first salvo straddled the "Hood", apparently no hits.
One or two more salvos fell close to the "Hood".
One salvo which fell astern of "Hood" I took to be 8" H.E.
The splashes were considerably smaller than the previous ones and apparently burst on striking the water.
There was a flash and black smoke when it burst.
At 05:57 "Hood" was hit amidships by "Bismarck's third or fourth salvo.
A big fire started just before the main-mast and a lot of black smoke was given off.
The fire appeared to die down slowly and then increase again, flames were a dull red colour.
The flames did not reach high but appeared but appeared (sic) to be burning just forward, around the foot of the main-mast.
"Hood" continued to fire and fired one salvo from the after group on the foremost bearing.
At 06:00 there was a heavy explosion at the after end of the "Hood", no actual fall of shot was observed at that time.
A column of smoke rose above the ship and completely enveloped her.
It formed into a mushroom at the top. I thought she had blown up completely but shortly afterwards the smoke cleared sufficiently for me to see her.
She was apparently still moving ahead and turning to port.
She was down at the stern and listing heavily to port and the after part of the ship appeared to be a mass of twisted framework, as though the plates of the side had been blown out leaving only the frame.
The part of the ship which I saw was just forward of "X" turret.
At this time we were turning to port between the "Hood" and the enemy and I observed debris falling towards "Prince of Wales", in particular one large piece that looked like the main-mast or a derrick.
06:01, "Prince of Wales" was hit by a shell in the after funnel and this obstructed my attention.
Shortly after this I observed "Hood's" bows sticking vertically out of the water and sinking rapidly, I think on an even keel.
This was about 06:03 and after that I saw nothing but black smoke hanging over the scene of the wreck.
With Paulus Jasper ( Prinz Eugen gunnery Officer ) this is one of the most accurate timing re-construction of the events with many common events timing right " on the spot " to use the Board of Inquiry definition of the accuracy of the whole story.

Of course having aside a midshipman with a clock and a block notes surely helped Ltnt Cdr Hunter-Terry on doing it so precisely.

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 )

dunmunro
Senior Member
Posts: 3902
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2005 1:25 am
Location: Langley BC Canada

Re: Jasper, Schmalenbach and 6 salvos...

Post by dunmunro » Tue Jul 24, 2018 9:18 am

Unfortunately Hunter-Terry doesn't note when Bismarck opened fire, although he implies that Bismarck opened fire well before PE:
"Hood" opened fire with foremost turrets, that is "A" and "B", at 05:52.
"Prince of Wales" opened fire with "A" and "B" turrets shortly afterwards.
"Bismarck's" first salvo straddled the "Hood", apparently no hits.
Hunter-Terry implies that Bismarck's first salvo landed not long after PoW fired her first salvo. He (along with all other RN observers) doesn't note any delay in Bismarck opening fire. He appears to count each Bismarck salvo as being composed of two 4 guns salvos.



Hunter-Terry's view of the battle would have been obstructed when Y turret opened fire and may have suffered somewhat when A and B turrets fired.

User avatar
Alberto Virtuani
Senior Member
Posts: 3448
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 8:22 am
Location: Milan (Italy)

Re: Jasper, Schmalenbach and 6 salvos...

Post by Alberto Virtuani » Tue Jul 24, 2018 10:50 am

Hello everybody,

Hunter-Terry timings are perfectly in synch with Antonio's reconstruction. Hood hit on the boat deck at 5:57 (5:57:30 in Antonio's reconstruction), Hood exploded at 6:00 (6:00:+ few seconds in Antonio reconstruction), Crane hit at minute 6:01 (6:01:20-6:01:30 in Antonio's reconstruction), Hood completely sunk at around 6:03.

A pity that he did not register the exact Bismarck open fire time.... but for this we have all German G.O.'s (+ PG KTB) giving us the timing, and in no way Bismarck could have opened fire at 5:53 firing only 5 salvos at Hood by 6:00......


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)

Ata
Junior Member
Posts: 4
Joined: Fri Jun 21, 2019 6:52 pm

Re: Jasper, Schmalenbach and 6 salvos...

Post by Ata » Sun Jun 23, 2019 4:21 pm

Alberto Virtuani wrote:
Tue Jul 24, 2018 10:50 am
Hello everybody,

Hunter-Terry timings are perfectly in synch with Antonio's reconstruction. Hood hit on the boat deck at 5:57 (5:57:30 in Antonio's reconstruction), Hood exploded at 6:00 (6:00:+ few seconds in Antonio reconstruction), Crane hit at minute 6:01 (6:01:20-6:01:30 in Antonio's reconstruction), Hood completely sunk at around 6:03.

A pity that he did not register the exact Bismarck open fire time.... but for this we have all German G.O.'s (+ PG KTB) giving us the timing, and in no way Bismarck could have opened fire at 5:53 firing only 5 salvos at Hood by 6:00......


Bye, Alberto
Hi everyone in this very interesting conversation,

Brooke, in POW, reports Bismarck opening fire just prior to observing POW fall of shot of first salvo, and before second salvos by Hood and Prince of Wales.

dunmunro
Senior Member
Posts: 3902
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2005 1:25 am
Location: Langley BC Canada

Re: Jasper, Schmalenbach and 6 salvos...

Post by dunmunro » Wed Jun 26, 2019 10:00 pm

Ata wrote:
Sun Jun 23, 2019 4:21 pm
Alberto Virtuani wrote:
Tue Jul 24, 2018 10:50 am
Hello everybody,

Hunter-Terry timings are perfectly in synch with Antonio's reconstruction. Hood hit on the boat deck at 5:57 (5:57:30 in Antonio's reconstruction), Hood exploded at 6:00 (6:00:+ few seconds in Antonio reconstruction), Crane hit at minute 6:01 (6:01:20-6:01:30 in Antonio's reconstruction), Hood completely sunk at around 6:03.

A pity that he did not register the exact Bismarck open fire time.... but for this we have all German G.O.'s (+ PG KTB) giving us the timing, and in no way Bismarck could have opened fire at 5:53 firing only 5 salvos at Hood by 6:00......


Bye, Alberto
Hi everyone in this very interesting conversation,

Brooke, in POW, reports Bismarck opening fire just prior to observing POW fall of shot of first salvo, and before second salvos by Hood and Prince of Wales.
Yes, we have multiple observers on the RN and KM side stating that Bismarck opened fire nearly simultaneously with Hood and PoW. None of the RN and civilian observers noted a delay in Bismarck opening fire.

User avatar
Alberto Virtuani
Senior Member
Posts: 3448
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 8:22 am
Location: Milan (Italy)

Re: Jasper, Schmalenbach and 6 salvos...

Post by Alberto Virtuani » Thu Jun 27, 2019 7:10 am

Hello Ata,

yes, we have several observers not noticing the delay of BS answering fire (as we have observers who said Hood exploded after a salvo from BS and others stating that no salvo was falling when Hood exploded....). Accounts are interesting but not sufficient.

All the German offcial documents: PG KTB (Brinkmann), PG GAR (Schmalenbach), Lutjens message timings (5 minutes) and battle opening distance (202 hm) confirm that Bismarck opened fire at minute 5:55, after 2-3 minutes from Hood open fire (05:52:30). The delay is accounted in detail by the Baron in his book.

I don't think it is worth to open again such discussion, as a BS open fire at 05:53 would never match any credible battle reconstruction.


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: 3902
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2005 1:25 am
Location: Langley BC Canada

Re: Jasper, Schmalenbach and 6 salvos...

Post by dunmunro » Fri Jun 28, 2019 12:36 am

Battle reconstructions should be based upon the preponderance of evidence.

0552 - Lutjens to Fleet - "Am engaging heavy units"
0553 - Multiple independent observers on both sides state that Bismarck opens fire
0555 - PE opens fire and Brinkman states and Jasper implies, in the PE War Diary, that Bismarck opened fire previously; no precise time is given for Bismarck's open fire which is highly problematic given that it's such a key moment. A couple of scattered references exist, that imply a similar open fire time for Bismarck and PE.

The overwhelming preponderance of evidence states that all 3 battleships opened fire within a 30-45sec time frame. The idea that Hood and PE fired without reply for 2 or more minutes with no comment from the RN side is not tenable, IMHO.

If the reconstruction doesn't match the evidence then the reconstruction is most likely wrong.


Confirmation Bias is a really big pitfall when doing research and formulating theories. It is especially problematic when the theory is formed and promulgated before all the facts are assembled since even the most even handed researchers (which may not be the case here) want to prove their theory correct, and they tend to reject data that doesn't fit the theory even when it can be shown that that data is most likely correct.

Algonquin-R17
Junior Member
Posts: 18
Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2018 6:40 pm
Location: Canada

Re: Jasper, Schmalenbach and 6 salvos...

Post by Algonquin-R17 » Fri Jun 28, 2019 3:34 am

dunmunro wrote:

If the reconstruction doesn't match the evidence then the reconstruction is most likely wrong.


Confirmation Bias is a really big pitfall when doing research and formulating theories. It is especially problematic when the theory is formed and promulgated before all the facts are assembled since even the most even handed researchers (which may not be the case here) want to prove their theory correct, and they tend to reject data that doesn't fit the theory even when it can be shown that that data is most likely correct.


Your 88 word synopsis is brilliant.

Bob

Bill Jurens
Moderator
Posts: 620
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 4:21 am
Location: USA

Re: Jasper, Schmalenbach and 6 salvos...

Post by Bill Jurens » Fri Jun 28, 2019 4:28 am

This sort of situation -- i.e. confirmation bias -- is exacerbated when some sort of cover-up conspiracy is postulated. All evidence which fits the desired theory can then be taken as reliable and indicative, whereas any contradictory evidence can be easily dismissed as constituting part of the attempt at a 'coverup'.

Bill Jurens

User avatar
Alberto Virtuani
Senior Member
Posts: 3448
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 8:22 am
Location: Milan (Italy)

Re: Jasper, Schmalenbach and 6 salvos...

Post by Alberto Virtuani » Fri Jun 28, 2019 7:14 am

Hello everybody,

"overwhelming" official documents point to BS and PG having opened fire almost together at minute 05:55:

1) PG KTB, both Brinkmann and Schamlenbach independently clearly report BS and PG open fire together at 05:55
2) PG KTB Jasper account implies no BS fall of shells observed before PG open fire at 05:55
3) Lutjens message (5 minutes engagement to sink Hood and open fire distance = 202 hm, not possible at 05:53).

+ there is the detailed Baron account that explains what happened on board of the German flagship.



When a full credible reconstruction will be presented, based on British accounts and far observations instead of official German documents, with Bismarck open fire imagined at 05:53, we will be able to confront and discuss.
Until then, please feel free to imagine whatever you want, even... that the battle started at 06:06 as per Norfolk GAR...or that the cease fire of PoW 14" was at 06:11 as per her log....


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)

Post Reply