Bismarck original KTB still existing ?

Discussions about the history of the ship, technical details, etc.
User avatar
Antonio Bonomi
Senior Member
Posts: 3238
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 10:44 am
Location: Vimercate ( Milano ) - Italy

Re: Bismarck original KTB still existing ?

Postby Antonio Bonomi » Thu Oct 05, 2017 10:14 am

Hello everybody,

@ all,

it seems to me that NOT having any arguments like : dementia; brain tumor, heremit lifestyle, poor old sailor writings, propaganda, ... etc etc etc ... there is NO willingness to accept the main bearings as they are on the Official documents.

How the " deniers " can refute after the acceptance what a correct enough map will show us ?

They will be forced to accept it, ... with all the logic consequences, ... and this will only confirm the intentional alteration of the Official document we have already well demonstrated with " The Plot ".

Better to remain silent, ... low profile and let the time pass, ... maybe everybody will forget about it.

NO ! ... not at all, ... :negative: ... no one will forget about it and the silence is speaking loud better than thousand words.

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
Herr Nilsson
Senior Member
Posts: 1073
Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2004 11:19 am
Location: Germany

Re: Bismarck original KTB still existing ?

Postby Herr Nilsson » Thu Oct 05, 2017 10:25 am

@Antonio

Calm down.

In addition I think we should add the 185° at BC1 open fire from a Suffolk message, as well as the 06:20 from Norfolk to Suffolk on WW report that Wadinga loves so much and it is also " half/partially " traced correctly by Pinchin, ... and of course for the same reason the 2 famous D/6 and D/7 between Norfolk and Suffolk at 05:36 and 05:41, ... that Pinchin nicely donated " partially/halfway " to us as well, ... not to forget the 28° on Prinz Eugen battle map for Suffolk at 05:50 ... :wink:

I am OK to put on second reliability position the 350° between PoW and Suffolk, the 18° from PoW to Norfolk and the 3 bearings from F.O. Busch on his 1943 book, ... due to a not 100 % perfect time correlations.

Do you agree ? is it OK this way ?


I agree. Unfortunately I've not much time in the next couple of weeks. :(
Regards

Marc

User avatar
Antonio Bonomi
Senior Member
Posts: 3238
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 10:44 am
Location: Vimercate ( Milano ) - Italy

Re: Bismarck original KTB still existing ?

Postby Antonio Bonomi » Thu Oct 05, 2017 12:12 pm

Hello everybody,

@ Herr Nillson,

never been so calm and relaxed, ... just with no intention to tolerate any further deniers at any cost, ... and just enjoying the modeling of a big Tirpitz for an old friend ... :wink:

I can wait your next map realization according to the above agreed bearings, ... no problems, ... as I told you I perfectly know already what will be the outcome of it, ... and the next steps to be taken after, ... :wink:

Thanks for your agreement anyhow, ... lets wait who will add his agreement now, ...

Now I take 2 days off plus the week end, ... and relax much more as you can imagine, ... :wink:

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: 577
Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2015 9:53 am

Re: Bismarck original KTB still existing ?

Postby Cag » Thu Oct 05, 2017 5:36 pm

Hi All

Hi Antonio, no excuses here, I post as and when I can and being in work and having family it's hard to find time to do everything I'm sure you understand.

Yesterday I began work at six in the morning and got home at just before eight in the evening! My life is not my own at the moment. I will go through everything and post again if I find anything I can add that may help.

I'm not a denying anything my friend, I'm hoping to help!

Best wishes
Cag.

User avatar
wadinga
Senior Member
Posts: 1169
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 3:49 pm
Location: Tonbridge England

Re: Bismarck original KTB still existing ?

Postby wadinga » Thu Oct 05, 2017 5:52 pm

Hello Antonio,

You say:

It should be the first step to stop discussing about what cannot be discussed any longer and agree about a common base, ... enabling further and better analysis from that point onward.


OK. Since you will not tell me what is wrong with the technique of positioning your two vessel tracks as I have done, and you will not tell me whether the distances I derive correspond more closely with Pinchin's map than with yours, I had a bit of a hunt around in previous threads.

From Alberto:
@Wadinga: 40° or 50° DON'T change much (moving Norfolk from 9,8 miles till 11 miles from BS), this is why I have no problem accepting any of them. The "plot" puts Norfolk at 15 miles from BS (absolutely impossible from a geometrical viewpoint) and we can't accept it.


From my map:
The distance from Norfolk to Bismarck at 05:50 is 30,000yds or 15 miles on 280.3T degrees
The distance from Norfolk to Bismarck at 06:00 is 28,300 yds or 14.1 miles on 274.5 degrees. This is the minimum range since both Bismarck and Norfolk turn away from each other. (This conforms with range estimates from Norfolk’s DCT.)


Perfectly geometrically possible.

From Antonio:
... what you are not getting apparently is the 30 % error factor introduced by Pinchin to Norfolk and Suffolk distances from Hood and the enemy.


I suspect my map corresponds very closely with Pinchin, have you considered it is your map which is 30% undersize? :cool:

From Antonio:
The answer is into the Norfolk war diary entry at 05.50, ... when somebody wrote that Hood was at 14 sea miles, ... so they wanted to keep that distance ... and they realize it on that way ... separating Hood from PoW track ... and " moving " Hood closer to Norfolk at 05.50, ... compensating the " battlefield expansion factor " intentionally introduced on that map ... and this is really incredible to be accepted by anybody ...


From my map:
The distance from Norfolk to PoW at 05:50 is 27,100 yds or 13.5 miles on 221 degrees (“Hood and PoW in sight 220T 14 miles.” Norfolk’s Ship’s log)


As was explained previously PoW is plotted twice on Pinchin's map. Once on the dotted track where Hood and PoW could be seen from Norfolk, and PoW additionally where her radio position said she was, over 20 miles away.

Image


Looking in detail at the PoW Action Plan which is the basis of Pitcairn-Jones I find the Norfolk 05:41 Posn is a crude 30 kts for 3 hours straight down 240T (assumed Bismarck Course) from a plotted position at 02:29. 64 28N 28 36W. Since this is a guessed DR course/speed by somebody not aboard Norfolk, from an earlier DR position transmitted by that ship, it is no wonder it is so inaccurate. However it was the basis for one side of the Diamond of Death.

PoW's navigator also drew a straight track for Suffolk from 03:21 on a heading of about 232T for 60 mls (2 hours to 05:37) but his plotting of the 03:21 is good for latitude but further west than she actually reports. There are several MF/DR bearings in this area and presumably he already suspected there was a lot wrong with her position. He does not bother to plot Suffolk's posn at 04:47 but just sticks on the assumed track he has already created. Again the 05:37 position for Suffolk is thus pure guesswork and represented another side of the Diamond of Death.

Consequently these bearings are not 2nd reliability but no reliability at all.

All the best

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

User avatar
Antonio Bonomi
Senior Member
Posts: 3238
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 10:44 am
Location: Vimercate ( Milano ) - Italy

Re: Bismarck original KTB still existing ?

Postby Antonio Bonomi » Fri Oct 06, 2017 1:44 pm

Hello everybody,

@ Wadinga,

here you have what I think is not correct as far as main bearings on your proposed map, ... plus you do not have yet to check distances, ... and you should use the Pinchin tracks for Norfolk and Suffolk and the PoW plan 4 track for Hood and PoW so we have a common reference base.

Our map on Storia Militare does have graphic limits, that is why I like better to use large scale official material.

Here the main correction on you map :

wadinga_111.jpg
wadinga_111.jpg (43.75 KiB) Viewed 301 times


Here how it translates into a comparable one-on-one map with your above one using the material I was referencing above :

Plot_redone_bearing_01.jpg
Plot_redone_bearing_01.jpg (85.66 KiB) Viewed 301 times


We are getting close anyhow, not many differences now, and notice the 350° from PoW to Suffolk being there, as I knew and already told everybody, ... no matter what.

Waiting for Herr Nillson or ...anybody else that would like to join in ...

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: 1169
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 3:49 pm
Location: Tonbridge England

Re: Bismarck original KTB still existing ?

Postby wadinga » Fri Oct 06, 2017 3:33 pm

Hello Antonio,
Once again you have refused to respect the most accurate tie between the tracks of Norfolk and PoW.

Once again you have placed Norfolk further west of PoW to try and shore up your argument.

This is quite clear:

Image

PoW is 1.5 miles directly astern of Norfolk. Leach has manoeuvred to take station. On the bow would mean on the bow but ahead means ahead

You say:

and notice the 350° from PoW to Suffolk being there, as I knew and already told everybody


perhaps you can tell everybody how PoW navigator's derived this position on his action plan so he could get a bearing of 350T? Since he didn't know Suffolk's course after her last transmission he bothered to plot, and used a generic straight course how can it be correct?

I reckon "The distance from Suffolk to Hood at 05:53 is 50,400 yds or 25.2 miles on 185T. (0553 (B). Heavy gun flashes bearing 185°. Half a minute later Bismarck opened fire to port.)" Thus she bore 005T at 05:53 from Hood and could not have lost 15 degrees of bearing in the previous 12 minutes at 25 miles distance!

350 is as wrong as 018 for precisely the same reason. They were pure guesswork by PoW's navigator.

I have no idea what this means:

Our map on Storia Militare does have graphic limits,


All the best

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

User avatar
Antonio Bonomi
Senior Member
Posts: 3238
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 10:44 am
Location: Vimercate ( Milano ) - Italy

Re: Bismarck original KTB still existing ?

Postby Antonio Bonomi » Fri Oct 06, 2017 4:11 pm

Hello everybody,

@ Wadinga,

what does have the position between Norfolk and PoW at 06:34 and 06:40 now with the above discussion about the bearings at a given time we were discussing above ?

No one wants to discuss about that now.

So please stay on the bearings between 05:20 and 06:20 that it is more than enough.

We will have time to discuss about the real tracks of Norfolk and Suffolk and other bearings later.

Please do not change subject now, do you agree that the correct positioning of the Suffolk original track is the one I have showed you corrected on your map and the my other map above ?

There is only one additional question that do make sense now : using Pinchin map track, as you can see above, it is correct the bearing of 220° at 05:50 to BC1 on Norfolk war diary, or the 230° to Hood at 06:00 according to WW report ?
As one can easily see, both cannot be real using Pinchin original track as reference, so one of the 2 data is clearly incorrect.
If we use the 220° at 05:50 ( Marc suggested ) being correct and disregard the WW 230° to Hood as input at 06:00, than the Pinchin track will go a bit back and probably under the PoW after as you mentioned and requested above.
This analysis and decision do make sense now.
Now there is just a small movement we can make on the Pinchin map original track to respect the main bearings.

After we position " the best as possible " Pinchin original tracks on a map, only the tracks small adjustements will improve the whole map.

Please confirm that the Suffolk " circle " is now correctly positioned thereand you agree about it, being at 28° from Prinz Eugen at 05:50; having PoW opening fire on 185° at 05:53; being at 318° from Norfolk at 05:41.
The Suffolk track there now is starting being very close to reality and her " circle " almost correctly positioned.

NOTE : The 350° from PoW at 05:35 is a " gift " that comes automatically and only confirmng Pitcairn-Jones, just for the record.

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: 1169
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 3:49 pm
Location: Tonbridge England

Re: Bismarck original KTB still existing ?

Postby wadinga » Fri Oct 06, 2017 5:25 pm

Hello Antonio,

I understand perfectly why you are not interested in

the position between Norfolk and PoW at 06:34 and 06:40


:cool:

On my map:
The distance from Norfolk to PoW at 05:50 is 27,100 yds or 13.5 miles on 221 degrees (“Hood and PoW in sight 220T 14 miles.” Norfolk’s Ship’s log)


The distance from Norfolk to Hood at 06:00 is 24,300 yds or 12.1 miles on 237T. (“At 05:59 Hood blew up. She was bearing 230T 15 miles from Norfolk.” Wake-Walker’s report)


The latter is a large bearing discrepancy. Maybe the bearing taker was a little shocked by seeing Hood and 1415 men killed. Maybe they were fixated by the burning oil patch and not the actual wreck site. We know Norfolk was making a high speed turn to port about this time. We know W-W sent two positions for the destroyers.

the correct positioning of the Suffolk original track is the one I have showed you corrected on your map


No I do not agree.

I have made a "traverse" in surveying terms going from Suffolk at 06:20, to Norfolk's track, along that to Norfolk at 05:50, then across to Hood/PoW and then at 05:53 back to Suffolk's track. With excellent blind trial match with observed bearings. I have closed the loop unlike your "single bearing equals a position" fixation which insists an unexplained line D6 on Pinchin means something. Now I believe you are trying to use a PG bearing with D6 to shift bits of Suffolk's track.

As a further blind trial:

not to forget the 28° on Prinz Eugen battle map for Suffolk at 05:50


A new measurement on my map says:
PG to Suffolk at 05:50 024T 32,800 yds or 17.4 mls
024T vs 028T is not great correlation but not bad. Suffolk had completed her circle in the last few minutes moving right to left from PG POV, so if this log time is slightly off...............and who is looking at a cruiser astern when there are two ships charging in to port?

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

User avatar
Antonio Bonomi
Senior Member
Posts: 3238
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 10:44 am
Location: Vimercate ( Milano ) - Italy

Re: Bismarck original KTB still existing ?

Postby Antonio Bonomi » Fri Oct 06, 2017 6:29 pm

Hello everybody,

@ Wadinga,

No Sean, ... I am interested about that 06:34 and 06:40 positions, ... but in order to correctly position those 2 plotted positions, ... we need first to realize the previous ones thu the most correct bearings, ... understand and agree that something on the Pinchin orgnal map track is surely not correct, ... agree to modify a bit it ... and jointly agree about many original track small modifications including the above 2 ones at 06:34 and 06:40 you are now referring to.

We need to preceed carefully step by step in joint agreement among us, ... it is only for this reason that I postpone those 2 ones, ... I have nothing against them ,... otherwise we put to much meat on the fireplace now.


I understand your distances, ... but as I wrote above, ... for the moment just bearings, ... the distances we will fix them jointly in agreement after, ... wih the tracks most accurate small adjustement modifications,... in joint agreement hopefully.
So, just wait a bit now, with the distances.

That mismatch you are realizing too between 220° at 05:50 to BC1 and 230° at 06:00 to Hood is one of the most critcal problem we jointly have to agreed as I said.
It can be fixed after we agree about 05:41 being a correct plotted position and bearing between Norfolk and Suffolk and all the other ships, ... the BC1 and the German ships.
After this we can fix Suffolk track from 05:50 with her bearings to the German ships, ... just as Marc suggested respectin 06:00 and 06:16 to the German ships, ... until the 06:29 one, ... and at 06:20 we take the crucial next bearing with the Norfolk track at 06:20 the one you surely agree with must be the famous 335° from Norfolk to Suffolk, declared by WW report and only partially traced by Pinchin on his map :wink: , ... just like the D/6 and D7/ ones.

This should close the battlefield main perimeter in the correct way, ... between Norfolk and Suffolk and their main plotted positions at 05:41 and 06:20.
Suffolk track needs very small adjustements from the orginal, while Norfolk track was modified and adjusted more by Pinchin in order to satisfy what he needed to do for " The Plot "

At that point we will modify Norfolk track a bit in order to respect the 05:50 bearing of 220° to BC1 and 230° to Hood exploding the best we can using the strategical Norfolk plot inputs and comparison with the orginal Pinchin track, and it will be easy to respect more your distances as well as the Norfolk gunnery, ... very likely.

In order to fix the Suffolk " circle " and Norfolk at 05:41 and after at 06:20, ... we need to fixt their tracsk compared to BC1 and the German ships sure positions first, ... not moving them around based only on their tracks, ... otherwise we will always fail their main plotting correct positioning which are 05:41 and 06:20, ... we use Pinchin tracks first, ... and we change a bit after, ... this is the best process we can execute.

The 05:41 Suffolk plotted point is the first one to be fixed, ... since we have other 2 secure bearings very close, at 05:50 from Prinz Eugen 28° ( German ships ) and at 05:53 from Suffolk to PoW 185° ( BC1 ). That is the starting point, ... and fixes the Norfok at 05:41 as well with 318° Norfolk to Suffolk and 276° Norfolk to the German ships.
The next ones, ... please read above my explanations.

You have no way in my opinion not to agre about 05:41 Suffolk and Norfolk positions, because PG bearing to Suffolk is a fact and Norfolk D/6 bearing to Suffolk is a fact, ... and they both match with BC1 and German ships available bearings.

Here you have the 28° ( can be 29° ) from Prinz Eugen to Suffolk from the Prinz Eugen original battle map.

Prinz_Eugen_bearing_to_Suffolk_0550_01.jpg
Prinz_Eugen_bearing_to_Suffolk_0550_01.jpg (61.61 KiB) Viewed 281 times


Here you have the 185° from Suffolk to BC1 at 05:53 ( open fire ) and the timing when the 2 bearings D/6 and D/7 on Pinchin plot were taken from Norfolk to Suffolk trasmitting at 05:33 and 05:38, as you can read.
In the middle the " circle " that is perfectly positioned where I plotted above in this way.

Reports.- Made reports at 0447, 0456, 0522, 0533 and 0538 during the above phase.

17. 0542 (B). Received Norfolk's 0541 reporting sighting enemy, followed by Prince of Wales' 0537 and Hood's 0543. The mean of these placed the enemy some 280°, 14 miles from Suffolk's plot position, and sights obtained shortly afterwards confirmed this. As, however, the Battle Cruiser Squadron was now in touch with the enemy, no amending position report was made at this point.

Enemy appeared to be approaching, and in case he had reversed course at 0538 (being "turned" by the Battle Cruiser Squadron), Suffolk circled to keep northward of enemy. It was soon realised, however, that the enemy was not approaching, the appearance being due to mirage, which also explains the similar (false) appearances at 0325.

Phase 0550 (B) to 0851 (B)

18. 0550 (B). Suffolk's course 220°, 29 knots, following the enemy.

0553 (B). Heavy gun flashes bearing 185°. Half a minute later Bismarck opened fire to port.


As I wrote you, ... you have no way to refute this now, ... :wink:

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: 1169
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 3:49 pm
Location: Tonbridge England

Re: Bismarck original KTB still existing ?

Postby wadinga » Wed Oct 11, 2017 5:40 pm

Hello Antonio,

To continue your cooking analogy,

otherwise we put to much meat on the fireplace now


We need to barbeque the very best cuts first and that is the intersection of the two tracks, then if other bearings match so much the better. We have a very reliable range of 3,000 yds and an accurate bearing between them. We can go backward in time and check earlier relationships. I believe have already demonstrated very good correlation including the 05:50 bearing as a result. If the bearing on Hood's wreck is not good, well there are possible reasons.

You have some bone and gristle to cook- D6 and D7 and want to waste time on them, when no-one wants to eat them. The first course is to get Norfolk and PoW/Hood positioned well. We are fairly confident on the final gunnery-measured bearings to Bismarck's track.

On my map:

The distance from Norfolk to Bismarck at 05:41 is 31,000 yds or 15.5 miles bearing 280T. (“At 05:41 Norfolk sighted the enemy at 16 miles. Wake-Walker’s report. “05:41 Enemy in sight 276T” Norfolk’s ship’s log)


So now another point on Norfolk's track matches quite well to Bismarck, as a blind trial, since we have only been cooking with Norfolk and PoW.

Just because Pinchin had, apparently, no access to PoW's track and little accurate information on Bismarck, his chart is about Suffolk and Norfolk only. Its only purpose was to give an idea where the witnesses were for the Hood Second Technical Enquiry.

Despite your attempts to spoil the dish with D6 & 7 we have several bearings which might help us with deriving a good track for Suffolk- BTW thanks for superior segment of PE's Map.

Suffolk is the dessert. We can cook it up when the main course is finished.

Buon Appetito!

All the best

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

User avatar
Antonio Bonomi
Senior Member
Posts: 3238
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 10:44 am
Location: Vimercate ( Milano ) - Italy

Re: Bismarck original KTB still existing ?

Postby Antonio Bonomi » Wed Oct 11, 2017 6:17 pm

Hello everybody,

@ Wadinga,

I repeat to you : please do not use distances trying to diverge the discussion here.

Just as you suggested me long time ago, ... only the bearings are valid at this point.

You cannot disregard D/6 and D/7 as well as you cannot disregard the same bearing of 335° similarly only partially traced by PInchin at 06:20 between Norfolk and Suffolk.

You cannot disregard now the Prinz Eugen original map available bearing of 28° to Suffolk at 05:50 and the 185° bearing between Suffolk and PoW at 05:53 at open fire.

You can only agree about them now, ... or disagree by providing other bearings with the associated evidence.

Plot_redone_bearing_01.jpeg
Plot_redone_bearing_01.jpeg (85.66 KiB) Viewed 251 times


Buon appetito, ...

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: 1169
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 3:49 pm
Location: Tonbridge England

Re: Bismarck original KTB still existing ?

Postby wadinga » Thu Oct 12, 2017 8:35 am

Hello Antonio,

Just as you suggested me long time ago, ... only the bearings are valid at this point.


Surely you must accept that the error bar on a distance of 3,000 yds is tiny, compared with that on say "enemy in sight 17 miles". Station keeping rangefinders work very well at such small distances. You already have accepted even long baseline rangefinders are imprecise at over ten times that distance. Therefore using the PoW log entry which Leach took station astern of Norfolk is the best linking device for Norfolk and PoW tracks.

There is no need to proceed chronologically from some scrappy unexplained lines (D6 & D7) early in the action because we can proceed backwards through time from a point where the ship's tracks are closely linked. The orientation of the tracks generated by the Admiralty Research Laboratory automatic plotting table come directly from the gyro compass so are likely to be very good.

Also can you explain what relevance the distance or relative position between Suffolk and Norfolk has for you? Your objective has always been to prove W-W was closer to Bismarck than he said he was. It is difficult to position these ship's tracks directly, relative to each other, so you tied them together using W-W range to Hood, as shown on the Diagram B. I believe you have now accepted this range was guessed, not measured. You also used the position shown for Norfolk shown on PoW's action plot which does not respect Norfolk's actual track and is clearly a crude DR estimate. Neither of these are therefore valid.

You were the first to show Norfolk's recorded measured ranges to Bismarck, which do not support your thesis, and I have now seen the same document at the National Archives. Although they cannot be accurate, given the ranges involved, they do not support your proposition at all.

Suffolk's position is irrelevant to your proposition, and looking at the blind trial bearings and generated distances from my version of your map, W-W's report that he was never within effective gun range and Tovey's report that says the cruisers were 15 miles away and the Baron's observation that the cruisers were 12=15 miles away are all respected.

All the best

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

dunmunro
Senior Member
Posts: 3248
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2005 1:25 am
Location: Langley BC Canada

Re: Bismarck original KTB still existing ?

Postby dunmunro » Thu Oct 12, 2017 9:20 am

Antonio Bonomi wrote:0553 (B). Heavy gun flashes bearing 185°. Half a minute later Bismarck opened fire to port.


As I wrote you, ... you have no way to refute this now, ... :wink:

Bye Antonio :D[/quote]

At least you know admit that Bismarck opened fired at ~0553.

User avatar
Antonio Bonomi
Senior Member
Posts: 3238
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 10:44 am
Location: Vimercate ( Milano ) - Italy

Re: Bismarck original KTB still existing ?

Postby Antonio Bonomi » Thu Oct 12, 2017 9:56 am

Hello everybody,

@ Dunmunro,

as I wrote you several times, the German open fire sequence is clearly defined and you need to study it starting from the photo Nh 69722. We have a thread about it, ... this thread is currently covering the battle main bearings, ... and that 185° bearing was between Suffolk and PoW at PoW opening fire at 05:53, ... no doubts about it.

@ Wadinga,

once again, ... not distances, ... bearings !

I do not care at all at what distance they will end up being at the end, even if I realize with satisfaction that they are moving closer as it was obvious for me since the beginning looking at " The Plot " intentionally enlarging the battlefield as we all know now.

Distances and tracks will be adjusted later, ... do not worry about it.

Unless you have some new and different bearings to propose changing or adding the ones on the map I have attached above, ... I will consider your silence about it a clear admission of them being correct and move ahead.

Waiting your confirmation that all the above bearings are OK, ... since I do not see what else you can say about it, ... and consequently move ahead on a teamwork approach, ...

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: No registered users and 2 guests

cron