despite the severe errors pointed out by Antonio,
in my version of your map.
Can you say what they are?
I see these, with no qualifying times against them. Without times these observations are meaningless.
A) 334° PoW to BS, is OK.
B) 350° PoW to SK, is OK.
C) 276° NK to BS, is OK. ( Note that on Norfolk radio message is 280°)
D) 320° NK to SK, is OK.
B) is not OK because I said
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.)
D) is not OK because I said
The distance from Norfolk to Suffolk at 06:20 is 37,200 yds or 18.6 miles on 328.5T
and these are simply wrong on your map:
E) 18° PoW to NK, in your map is 27° ( +9°).
F) 15° BS/PG to SK, in your map is 20° ( +5°).
I have explained why you have been wrong in using the guessed DR positions for the cruisers on the PoW Action map, but you have decided to ignore this.
It looks like you now prefer stick to distances measured by the Norfolk rangefinder (1930 vintage ?) and estimated by W-W at the second board of inquiry (declaration based on Pinchin's Plot ONLY)
You must read what I posted, my friend. The ranges I quoted are derived from the revised map. Therefore they confirm independently what Norfolk measured to Bismarck. W-W was wrong with both 20,000 and 30,000 yds according to the revised map (it says 24,300 yds). But since he was merely guessing at the first enquiry, and Pinchin didn't have the PoW track plot at the second it's not surprising.
Now having published your allegedly definitive map "proving" deliberate distortion by officers and men of the RN, Antonio is talking about starting from scratch using the strategical maps, but distorting them with the incorrect positions from the PoW action plot or mysterious triangle positions for Suffolk based on unrecorded single line of position DF bearings.
Marc/Cag are of course correct. The there is exaggeration of a number of features on the strategical maps to allow them to be represented despite the scale. The track plot of PoW's own movements has been combined with Pinchin's Norfolk track because the latter was traced from the missing tactical plot. Both were created by the ARL Admiralty Research Laboratory automatic plotting machine.
All the bearings I measured between Norfolk and PoW/Hood and Norfolk and Bismarck are true blind trials. The two tracks are linked by the log entry only. All other the bearings are taken from the revised map, then compared with signals and reports. Suffolk's track has been located solely on the Norfolk sighting gunfire bearing and yet the Hood open fire bearing half an hour earlier is spot on.
I have not compared my map with the Plot
It is unavoidable for everybody putting like I did the ships on a map using the correct available bearings, ... to realize immediately that the battlefield becomes much closer when compared to the one showed on " The Plot ".
My map shows Norfolk was never closer to Bismarck than 28,300 yds -is that more or less expanded than Pinchin?
I say "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.) - is that more or less expanded than Pinchin?
You have been repeatedly calling for a map from me for a year and yet you virtually ignore it when it arrives. I am happy for you to pull it apart. It is iteration one. Get to work!
All the best