The Norfolk and Suffolk tracks at Denmark Strait

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

Moderator: Bill Jurens

User avatar
wadinga
Senior Member
Posts: 2467
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 3:49 pm
Location: Tonbridge England

Re: The Norfolk and Suffolk tracks at Denmark Strait

Post by wadinga »

Hello Antonio,

Do you ever read what you write?
The triangle and the square are radio D/F bearings too, taken at given time from HMS Prince of Wales

You still don't apparently understand that a bearing is not a position, and even a bearing cutting an entirely speculative track does not make a position and that an entirely imaginary bearing not drawn on the chart like other bearings is just wishful thinking.


The tracks for Norfolk and Suffolk are straight line dead reckoning guesswork and the positions at their ends are therefore guesswork too. You have been going wrong since you first drew the Diamond of Death using them, and you have never accepted your error.

he lied....that is is my theory and my conspiracy...he lied intentionally....just ridiculous and pathetic

This ranting and universal allegations of lying are becoming extremely tedious.


All the best

wadinga
"There seems to be something wrong with our bloody ships today!"
User avatar
Antonio Bonomi
Senior Member
Posts: 3799
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 10:44 am
Location: Vimercate ( Milano ) - Italy

Re: The Norfolk and Suffolk tracks at Denmark Strait

Post by Antonio Bonomi »

Hello everybody,

someone that tried to challenge my works with an old and very poor Schmalenbach 1970' s map should not even think to tell me the difference between a bearing and a geographical position.

A bearing is a precious information for someone having more competences and knowledge of the poor " deniers " writing here in.

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 )
northcape
Senior Member
Posts: 347
Joined: Wed Mar 06, 2013 6:31 am

Re: The Norfolk and Suffolk tracks at Denmark Strait

Post by northcape »

wadinga wrote: Sat Aug 04, 2018 5:46 pm
You still don't apparently understand that a bearing is not a position, and even a bearing cutting an entirely speculative track does not make a position and that an entirely imaginary bearing not drawn on the chart like other bearings is just wishful thinking.
More exactly, it is a bearing (with its error) from a speculative position (observer's track) cutting another speculative track.

The phrase "shooting at the moon" seems appropriate.
User avatar
Antonio Bonomi
Senior Member
Posts: 3799
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 10:44 am
Location: Vimercate ( Milano ) - Italy

Re: The Norfolk and Suffolk tracks at Denmark Strait

Post by Antonio Bonomi »

Hello everybody,

the incompetent ignorant often writing on this forum should try to learn some base concepts :

SK_NK_PoW_at_0320_011.jpeg
SK_NK_PoW_at_0320_011.jpeg (76.43 KiB) Viewed 2921 times


For them it was surely useless to explain it time ago :

http://www.kbismarck.org/forum/viewtopi ... 005#p73005


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 )
pgollin
Senior Member
Posts: 382
Joined: Sat Jan 11, 2014 12:01 pm

Re: The Norfolk and Suffolk tracks at Denmark Strait

Post by pgollin »

Antonio Bonomi wrote: Sat Aug 04, 2018 6:21 pm
...... A bearing is a precious information for someone having more competences and knowledge of the poor " deniers " writing here in.

Bye Antonio


Almost everyone here KNOWS the problems of nautical bearings and their inherent inaccuracies. The two (?) people with all of 18 months experience in a navy seem never to have worked with WW2 era navigational problems. They live in a world where what they imagine is automatically correct.

.
User avatar
Alberto Virtuani
Senior Member
Posts: 3605
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 8:22 am
Location: Milan (Italy)

Re: The Norfolk and Suffolk tracks at Denmark Strait

Post by Alberto Virtuani »

Hello everybody,
pgollin wrote: " The two (?) people with all of 18 months experience in a navy seem never to have worked with WW2 era navigational problems"
It would be funny to learn how long this insulting guy has served at sea (surely as part of the "lower deck", as he seems to be very poorly educated....).


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)
pgollin
Senior Member
Posts: 382
Joined: Sat Jan 11, 2014 12:01 pm

Re: The Norfolk and Suffolk tracks at Denmark Strait

Post by pgollin »

.

Your ignorance regarding WW2 era navigation problems has been trumpeted in this thread. You don't even try to deny it.

.
User avatar
Alberto Virtuani
Senior Member
Posts: 3605
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 8:22 am
Location: Milan (Italy)

Re: The Norfolk and Suffolk tracks at Denmark Strait

Post by Alberto Virtuani »

Hello everybody,

I do recognize my ignorance (I would never have been able to reconstruct the battle as Antonio did), but I can understand its value and mathematically demonstrated precision.

This poor insulting guy (embarrassed in answering a question about HIS own experience at sea in the lower deck and contributing NOTHING to the reconstruction of the battle in 5 years infesting presence here) is not even able to admit his blatant defeat about the WWII RN disciplinary rules (his pretended expertise)...... :lol: :lol: :lol:


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)
pgollin
Senior Member
Posts: 382
Joined: Sat Jan 11, 2014 12:01 pm

Re: The Norfolk and Suffolk tracks at Denmark Strait

Post by pgollin »

Alberto Virtuani wrote: Mon Aug 06, 2018 6:23 am
.... I do recognize my ignorance (I would never have been able to reconstruct the battle as Antonio did), but I can understand its value and mathematically demonstrated precision. ...


No you can't, that is the whole point. You live in a theoretical (as you say "mathematical") world, not the real world. Do you know how lookouts and radio operators did their work ? Do you know to what accuracy they worked ? Do you know the accuracy that they reported to ? Do you know the way readings are repeated ( if possible ) and mathematically adjusted to give a better accuracy ? There are WW2 era manuals, handbooks and drill books which cover this sort of things (even some training films), with sailor's memoirs sometimes covering the issues. Much information, all of which you seem total ignorant of.

As I stated, any amateur sailor (without GPS, top of the line radar, or decca, etc) knows more than you, which is rather sad.

You delude yourselves as you don't understand the real world - especially the real world as it was then.

.
User avatar
Alberto Virtuani
Senior Member
Posts: 3605
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 8:22 am
Location: Milan (Italy)

Re: The Norfolk and Suffolk tracks at Denmark Strait

Post by Alberto Virtuani »

Hello everybody,

....and "pgollin" (a very poorly educated person) is totally ignorant not only of navigation issues but also of British discipline procedures..... :lol:

After having been (once again) rubbished re. his "King's Regs", he now moved to denigrate Antonio's work, continuing to live in the "fairy tale" the "winners" have sold to the world for 75+ years... Unfortunately for him, the dream is OVER now, thanks to Antonio's work (recognized as the most accurate available by now).

As another authoritative forum member had said once: "there was only one actual Denmark Strait battle", with ships in one position at a certain time, following exact courses at precise speeds, not flying from one point to the other (just to cope with the need to change a declaration) and the cross-bearings taken from British to German ships and viceversa nail all ships to a certain position at a certain time.
Therefore, even if difficult, it is possible to reconstruct with a sufficient precision the battlemap, using BOTH SIDES (not British only....) information (taken at the time, not written in a report to alter the facts), witnesses and accounts (choosing the most reliable ones), available photos and film (these at least are impartial).

Antonio did it (his work may be possibly improved one day, but it is by now the best available), Pinchin just produced a false document to support a lie, "pgollin" prefers to believe that the "fog of war" (a true "smoke screen", in this case) still prevents such an effort.


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)
northcape
Senior Member
Posts: 347
Joined: Wed Mar 06, 2013 6:31 am

Re: The Norfolk and Suffolk tracks at Denmark Strait

Post by northcape »

[quote="Alberto Virtuani" post_id=79409 time=1533533011 user_id=16370

I do recognize my ignorance (I would never have been able to reconstruct the battle as Antonio did), but I can understand its value and mathematically demonstrated precision.

[/quote]

It is finally a honest move to admit your ignorance. It is also mind-boggling to state "I don't understand it but I'm sure it is correct". Classical trolling.

But please be assured, there are some people here less ignorant to facts and maths, and they can really understand the value of the map. As said, due to the inherent uncertainties and myriads of assumptions, it is one out of thousands of possible approximations to the truth. As such, it's value for an interpretation with far-reaching conclusions is little to none.

Finally, there is no mathematically demonstrated precision. That is the whole point of criticism. The map could actually be become useful, if it would have an uncertainty estimation attached. That would be the mathematically demonstrated precision, and it would turn the lines and dots to wide corridors and large circles. But the ignorance to that basic understanding prevents the creator from doing so, and as such this sparse set of of uncertain data are grossly over- and misinterpreted.
User avatar
wadinga
Senior Member
Posts: 2467
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 3:49 pm
Location: Tonbridge England

Re: The Norfolk and Suffolk tracks at Denmark Strait

Post by wadinga »

Hello All,

This map SK_NK_PoW_at_0320_011.jpeg shown above has been shown before but it worth reiterating how much of a distortion it is.


The red track shows PoW's chart course with distortions like the instantaneous change from a northerly track to SSW and the straight lines caused by attempting to reproduce with ruler and curves the track from the Admiralty Research Station plotter lost to damage. This comes from the Action Plan the original of which in its entirety I have shown.The chart grid appears to respect PoW's estimate of her geographical position based on D/R from leaving Scapa.


Norfolk's position has been transferred from the erroneous location relative to PoW at 05:41 (itself guesswork) and the track from the strategical chart generated by Norfolk superimposed, presumably at close to the right scale. It is of course very different to the Norfolk track from the PoW action plan, which actually generated that D/R position at 05:41. This Strategical map shows two positions for Suffolk, without any explanation of how these POSITIONS are derived. One at 03:20 coincides with a transmission by Suffolk. A green bearing from PoW's track is drawn, based on the 03:20 bearing shown on the PoW action plan with no respect for the plus or minus 2 degrees factor. The one D/F bearing PoW achieved on a Norfolk transmission at 02:29 is used as a guesstimate to anchor the start point of Norfolk's track, again without allowing for plus minus 2 degrees. Then a blue bearing is generated from the 03:20 location on the Norfolk track to intersect the PoW bearing. With angle of intersection only being c 15 degrees it could have been 19 or 11 degrees making an enormous difference to Suffolk's distance to the NW. That is only the D/F measuring tolerance, assuming the Norfolk location at 03:20 is perfect.

By 05:41 a second POSITION is shown for Suffolk only about 14 miles NW of Norfolk, but neither ship reports seeing each other despite Hood and PoW being able to see the German ships, on a similar bearing only ten miles SW, at a distance of well over 17miles. Suffolk's represented position is clearly in error as is Norfolk's as well. Despite the two ship's average courses continuing to converge for 45 minutes, they never sight each other, except when Norfolk sees gunflashes at 06:20 only, on a day of "exceptional visibility".

This map has been reverse engineered solely from from the requirement to prove some sort of guilt. On the Norfolk strategical map the POSITIONS shown for Suffolk at 03:20 and 05:41 have no provenance. On the PoW action plan the POSITIONS of Norfolk and Suffolk have provenance in that they are simple estimates based on D/R from erroneous radioed positions made hours before.
to challenge my works with an old and very poor Schmalenbach 1970' s map
At least Schmalenbach was there and had some interest in what actually happened , rather than creating a smear campaign based on "intuitions" and fabricating evidence to prove it so as to out-Cernuschi Cernuschi.


All the best

wadinga
"There seems to be something wrong with our bloody ships today!"
pgollin
Senior Member
Posts: 382
Joined: Sat Jan 11, 2014 12:01 pm

Re: The Norfolk and Suffolk tracks at Denmark Strait

Post by pgollin »

Alberto Virtuani wrote: Mon Aug 06, 2018 1:20 pm
.... After having been (once again) rubbished re. his "King's Regs", he now moved to denigrate Antonio's work ......, continuing to live in the "fairy tale" the "winners" have sold to the world for 75+ years... Unfortunately for him, the dream is OVER now, thanks to Antonio's work (recognized as the most accurate available by now). ....


Just repeating false claims does NOT make them true. A & A were/are wrong in claiming that the Courts Martial would be brought under "The Articles of War" - they know this.

Likewise, they have no sensible response to their total ignorance of navigational bearings procedures or accuracies in WW2. Their lack of practical knowledge shows every time they try to defend their ridiculous assertions.

IF they want to convince people they need to know about the subject they are talking about.

.
northcape
Senior Member
Posts: 347
Joined: Wed Mar 06, 2013 6:31 am

Re: The Norfolk and Suffolk tracks at Denmark Strait

Post by northcape »

Alberto Virtuani wrote: Mon Aug 06, 2018 1:20 pm
Antonio did it (his work may be possibly improved one day, but it is by now the best available)t.

Bye, Alberto

No it is not the "best available". What should this even mean? Since A&A demonstrate over and over the compete lack of understanding of basic science principles in general and math/navigation uncertainties in particular, I try to make it simple: What do you get if you buy fine ingredients for Spaghetti Frutti di Mare (pasta, octopus, sea salt, basil, garlic, shrimp, pepperocini, tomatoes), and simply throw them in pot and boil everything together for 20 minutes? The "best dish" available or something you can dump right into the toilet?
User avatar
Antonio Bonomi
Senior Member
Posts: 3799
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 10:44 am
Location: Vimercate ( Milano ) - Italy

Re: The Norfolk and Suffolk tracks at Denmark Strait

Post by Antonio Bonomi »

Hello everybody,

I will not even take in any account comment by the ones that are first not in condition to judge a properly done work, and second, ... more important, ... also not in condition to propose their own version of the facts in a similar ( hopefully better according to them ) way, ... in writing on a map.

To easy to write useless words of disagreement based on nothing but an immense ignorance and incompetence

Show your competences ... or just ...save your time, ... and our one too.

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 )
Post Reply