This because Suffolk communicated at 04:56 the enemy on her bearing 195°, so the perfect opposite of 15°, and confirmed it at 05:22 with a "no change" communicaton, so enemy still at 195°from her. Very likely at 05:35 we can assume that 195° was still there too,
The 15° between Prinz Eugen/Bismarck to Suffolk ( ref. F ) is defined by F.O. Busch book on 1943,
Wadinag wrote: "the only person to so identify Suffolk is A. Virtuani. Busch says "a mast"."
Dunmunro wrote: "How do we know that Busch wasn't using data provided by the B-Dienst intercept"
Antonio Bonomi wrote:@ Wadinga,
now you are evaluating the unexpected moment that closed the battlefield, the " S " turn ordered by Adm Lutjens which occurred between 05:20 when PG started it turning 50° degrees to port followed by the Bismarck, ... from course 220° to 170°, .... and 05:35 when Bismarck closed the " S " manoeuvre turning back from course 170° to course 220°again.
This manoeuvre was observed by the Suffolk which communicated by radio at 05:33 the beginning of it and at 05:38 the end of it, ... only incorrectly evaluated it being 30°, ... in reality it was 50° as said.
Antonio Bonomi wrote:Now, in order to correctly realize our 3 snapshot figures I have suggested, at 05:35; 05:37 and 05:41, ... we need to carefully take in consideration all those course changes by every warship.
I suggest everybody to consider the following :
- On Norfolk, the use of her strategical map track for her and the consideration of the 2 different bearings PInchin drew on "The Plot", which in my opinion should be correlated to the Suffolk 05:33 ( 314°) and 05:38 ( 318°) radio transmission, and not at 05:36 and 05:41 like it is showed on the map.
Antonio Bonomi wrote:
- On Suffolk the starting figure I posted years ago, with her track correlation with the German warships at 04:47 and 04:56, with her confirmation at 05:22 of her course and the enemy bearing from her, which I assume being the Bismarck because the Prinz Eugen was just starting the " S " manoeuvre ahead of Bismarck.
Starting from there we must evaluate the information we have after in order to realize when and where the Suffolk changed course after and made her " circle ". In this case we have the 2 bearings above from the Norfolk at 05:33 and 05:38, the 350° from PoW at 05:37 ( in my opinion it was 05:38 as well as for Norfolk ) and 2 bearings from Prinz Eugen we have of her on this period, the 15° from Busch ( the mast at 175 hectometers ) and the 28° from the Prinz Eugen map taken at 05:50 on her " Starboard achteraus Schwere Kreuzer ", clearly recorded on the Prinz Eugen battle map we have. In this way we should be able to correctly locate the Suffolk " circle " because it ended at 05:50 and we do have a bearing of her from the Prinz Eugen.
Also in the case of Suffolk I suggest to " freeze " the Pinchin drew track on " The Plot " and use her strategical map track with minor adjustments, ... just like for the Norfolk.
Summarizing 2 notes for you, ... first I know you have still some doubts about that mast being the Suffolk, ... but I can hardly imagine another ship in between the Germans and the Suffolk at 175 hectometers behind Prinz Eugen on that moment, ... second the time you refer to, ... on Busch 1943 book he used German times, ... as you can very easily verify on his book maps too, ... so an hour before the time reference I choose to use for all my re-construction and everybody always refer to, ... so do not get confused by the timing, ... especially on German documents, ... often written 1 hour before our used time. In conclusion that 04:30 must be read 05:30, no doubts.
Once you will correctly position all the above Suffolk reference on a precise in scale map, ... I like to have your comments about where Suffolk track and her " circle " are going to be evaluated by you, ... and a comparison with " The Plot " positioning by Pinchin.
Antonio Bonomi wrote:
@ Herr Nillson,
I know you are very precise and I agree with what you wrote above.
Any idea on how to proceed from your side and not be stopped by those differences ?
In order to make our re-construction exercise we must use something, ... of course the most precise the better, ... knowing that we will never be 100 % perfect which is impossible, ... but we will accept among us known agreed tolerances we can put in writing on the final map.
Actually....well, actually I think that the tracks of the cruisers in the plot are quiet correct.
Antonio, I consider your theory as possible, but also think that it is just one particular reading. I also think that (a lot of) other interpretations are reasonable.
Possibly it would be wise not to try create a DoD for a certain point in time at all costs but just to accept a sequence of bearings. I see no reason why this would stop anyone's efforts.
Maybe we should also try to categorize bearings in reliable and not so reliable anyway. I mean to say all problems we had in the discussions are caused by not agreeing about the simplest issues. I'm afraid we will not agree in most issues, but maybe it's possible to find a "common denominator" at least. Perhaps this helps not to go over the same issues again and again. If it turns out that the differences are still too big, we should even consider not to discuss any further until new sources arise.
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 4 guests