The Norfolk and Suffolk tracks at Denmark Strait

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

Moderator: Bill Jurens

pgollin
Senior Member
Posts: 276
Joined: Sat Jan 11, 2014 12:01 pm

Re: The Norfolk and Suffolk tracks at Denmark Strait

Post by pgollin » Mon Aug 06, 2018 11:00 pm

.

In other words "we are right and everyone else (no matter how knowledgeable and sensible) are wrong" !

You do know just how ridiculous that makes the pair of you. People are pointing out your errors (e.g. plotting errors, cherry-picking, overlooking facts, wrongly claiming "The Articles of War", and many more) - just covering your ears is just laughable.

.

User avatar
Alberto Virtuani
Senior Member
Posts: 2808
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 8:22 am
Location: Milan (Italy)

Re: The Norfolk and Suffolk tracks at Denmark Strait

Post by Alberto Virtuani » Tue Aug 07, 2018 7:35 am

Hello everybody,
"pgollin" wrote: " A & A were/are wrong in claiming that the Courts Martial would be brought under "The Articles of War""
INTENTIONALLY FALSE !
This silly guy was wrong since 2013 (while insulting and) saying that the charges for Leach and Wake-Walker could be found in the "King's Regs" and he knows it because he was unable to demonstrate what he was saying.... :negative:
We have posted the "Articles of War" (from Naval Discipline Act, 1866) in force at the time (http://www.pdavis.nl/NDA1866.htm) and the "King's Regs" article saying that CM's would be done according to them. Everybody can check what we have said (if just willing).
King_Reg_Article26.jpg
King_Reg_Article26.jpg (27.47 KiB) Viewed 1193 times

He has posted just his ignorant rant, because he has NO WAY to counter these facts. Has anyone noticed he has NEVER posted any evidence of what he claims ? Just his silly and biased personal opinion.... :oops:



another insulting and zero value troll wrote: "No it is not the "best available"."
How funny, said by a person who has contributed NOTHING to the discussion and came into this forum ONLY to deny the work done by someone else !

I would be curious to see his proposed battlemap :lol: , in the meantime Antonio's battlemap is still the reference and the most precise one, matching all the available bearings, all photos/film and most of the reliable witnesses accounts, to the deep scorn and the impotent anger of the "deniers" wo would have preferred to live quietly in their "fairy tale" (Tovey+Pinchin+Kennedy).... :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)

dunmunro
Senior Member
Posts: 3631
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2005 1:25 am
Location: Langley BC Canada

Re: The Norfolk and Suffolk tracks at Denmark Strait

Post by dunmunro » Tue Aug 07, 2018 10:18 am

Alberto Virtuani wrote:
Tue Aug 07, 2018 7:35 am
Hello everybody,
"pgollin" wrote: " A & A were/are wrong in claiming that the Courts Martial would be brought under "The Articles of War""
INTENTIONALLY FALSE !
This silly guy was wrong since 2013 (while insulting and) saying that the charges for Leach and Wake-Walker could be found in the "King's Regs" and he knows it because he was unable to demonstrate what he was saying.... :negative:
We have posted the "Articles of War" (from Naval Discipline Act, 1866) in force at the time (http://www.pdavis.nl/NDA1866.htm) and the "King's Regs" article saying that CM's would be done according to them. Everybody can check what we have said (if just willing).

King_Reg_Article26.jpg


He has posted just his ignorant rant, because he has NO WAY to counter these facts. Has anyone noticed he has NEVER posted any evidence of what he claims ? Just his silly and biased personal opinion.... :oops:



another insulting and zero value troll wrote: "No it is not the "best available"."
How funny, said by a person who has contributed NOTHING to the discussion and came into this forum ONLY to deny the work done by someone else !

I would be curious to see his proposed battlemap :lol: , in the meantime Antonio's battlemap is still the reference and the most precise one, matching all the available bearings, all photos/film and most of the reliable witnesses accounts, to the deep scorn and the impotent anger of the "deniers" wo would have preferred to live quietly in their "fairy tale" (Tovey+Pinchin+Kennedy).... :lol:



Bye, Alberto
It's clear from this exchange regarding Drew of HMS Manchester:

http://www.kbismarck.org/forum/viewtopi ... ter#p78275


, that A/A was pretty foggy about BofIs and CMs and the difference between them, and that the NDA under which CMs were conducted, was continually being altered.

User avatar
Alberto Virtuani
Senior Member
Posts: 2808
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 8:22 am
Location: Milan (Italy)

Re: The Norfolk and Suffolk tracks at Denmark Strait

Post by Alberto Virtuani » Tue Aug 07, 2018 4:40 pm

Hello everybody,
Dunmunro wrote: "the NDA under which CMs were conducted, was continually being altered."
Instead of fairly admitting that the insulting troll "pgollin" was simply wrong, while Antonio and me were just right since the beginning, Mr.Dunmunro has felt the need to support its error and he desperately tried to insist with the above nonsense: apparently he has not read what Herr Nilsson and myself have posted already:

http://www.pdavis.nl/NDA.htm
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10. ... de=ywar20&

The 1866 Naval Discipline Act was NOT altered in its "Articles of War" section by the 1884 NDA, being replaced ONLY by the 1957 NDA.
Its "Articles of War" were the ones in force in 1941 and were the ones containing the "misconduct in the presence of the enemy" possible charges for Leach and Wake-Walker (article 2 and 3), had a BofI and a Court Martial been held, as it was the case for Troubridge (article 3).


So difficult for the deniers to recognize we were right ? :oops:


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)

User avatar
wadinga
Senior Member
Posts: 1629
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 3:49 pm
Location: Tonbridge England

Re: The Norfolk and Suffolk tracks at Denmark Strait

Post by wadinga » Tue Aug 07, 2018 4:55 pm

Hello Alberto and Dunmunro,

Please remove this argument to the Court Martial thread where I have shown several of the early Articles of the NDA were considerably modified in wording even by WWI and were different to 1866.


This thread is meant to show how erroneous Antonio's cartographic "proofs" are with regard to Norfolk and Suffolk. I believe I shown there is no value in the map he has shown above, and his work is no basis to accuse, as he has done, virtually every RN officer present of "lying".


All the best

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

User avatar
Antonio Bonomi
Senior Member
Posts: 3733
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 » Tue Aug 07, 2018 6:10 pm

Hello everybody,


I agree, every argument should be discussed on the proper thread, ... otherwise we confuse the forum readers.

Here we are showing, … still with no cooperation, ... but hopefully soon this problem will be resolved, … where Norfolk and Suffolk really were that morning.

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: 275
Joined: Wed Mar 06, 2013 6:31 am

Re: The Norfolk and Suffolk tracks at Denmark Strait

Post by northcape » Tue Aug 07, 2018 7:58 pm

Alberto Virtuani wrote:
Tue Aug 07, 2018 7:35 am
another insulting and zero value troll wrote: "No it is not the "best available"."
How funny, said by a person who has contributed NOTHING to the discussion and came into this forum ONLY to deny the work done by someone else !

I would be curious to see his proposed battlemap :lol: , in the meantime Antonio's battlemap is still the reference and the most precise one, matching all the available bearings, all photos/film and most of the reliable witnesses accounts, to the deep scorn and the impotent anger of the "deniers" wo would have preferred to live quietly in their "fairy tale" (Tovey+Pinchin+Kennedy).... :lol:
and
Here we are showing, … still with no cooperation, ... but hopefully soon this problem will be resolved, … where Norfolk and Suffolk really were that morning.
You still don't get it at all, not a bit. Nobody with common sense or minimum scientific/mathematical understanding will try to work on such a map to show "where they really were". Simply because the data which are available do not allow for a reconstruction of the "truth", due to their sparseness and uncertainties. But it seems that you really are not able to grasp this very simple fact.

User avatar
Alberto Virtuani
Senior Member
Posts: 2808
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 8:22 am
Location: Milan (Italy)

Re: The Norfolk and Suffolk tracks at Denmark Strait

Post by Alberto Virtuani » Tue Aug 07, 2018 8:28 pm

Hello everybody,

it seems that "northcape" really is not able to grasp the very simple fact that the ships were actually in a certain position at a certain time, inconvenient as it can be for the RN hooligans.

If he thinks that they could have been in ANOTHER position than the one showed in Antonio's battlemap, he should try to challenge it: good luck!

If he thinks they were in the positions showed by Pinchin's Plot or by Schmalenbach 1943 map, worse for him. :kaput:

If he thinks that they were in an undefined position, lost in the "fog of war" (= "smoke sceeen") and that no map of any battle in history can be drawn :shock: , I suggest him to leave this forum, where battlemaps are currently used , being drawn based on available information.... :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)

northcape
Senior Member
Posts: 275
Joined: Wed Mar 06, 2013 6:31 am

Re: The Norfolk and Suffolk tracks at Denmark Strait

Post by northcape » Tue Aug 07, 2018 9:18 pm

Alberto Virtuani wrote:
Tue Aug 07, 2018 8:28 pm


If he thinks that they were in an undefined position, lost in the "fog of war" (= "smoke sceeen") and that no map of any battle in history can be drawn :shock:

Bye, Alberto
This sentence is so confusing and self-contradictory, a classic trolling exercise.

What should an "undefinefed" position be?

Again, for the ones which constantly show off so proudly their limited intellectual capability and lack of ability to understand the most basic things: They were in a position, but the position cannot be reconstructed with an accuracy smaller than several miles and times smaller than full minutes (and that is already an optimistic estimate), because the existing data don't allow for that. It is like shooting at the moon with bow and arrow. Of course you can aim for it, because it appears so large. But only a two year old child might believe that you can actually shoot it down.

For the second part of the sentence, we are talking about the specific DS map and not about any other battle in history. Why is that brought up here?

User avatar
Alberto Virtuani
Senior Member
Posts: 2808
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 8:22 am
Location: Milan (Italy)

Re: The Norfolk and Suffolk tracks at Denmark Strait

Post by Alberto Virtuani » Wed Aug 08, 2018 4:31 pm

Hello everybody,

scorning the usual insulting attitude of this poor limited hooligan,
northcape wrote: "They were in a position, but the position cannot be reconstructed with an accuracy smaller than several miles and times smaller than full minutes"
Unfortunately the combination of photos/films, PoW gunnery plot (where salvos can be timed in minutes and seconds, +-10sec), cross-bearings taken from British and German ships (matching at the very single degree), ship's tracks and logs allow to reconstruct everything with tolerances below 20 seconds for times and below 1 km for distances.....
Apparently "northcape" prefers the "fog of war" (in reality a "smoke screen") to an alternative proposal of battlemap, because of the conclusion that can be drawn once put the ships in their proper position.... :lol:

nortcape wrote: "we are talking about the specific DS map and not about any other battle in history"
Refusing to accept the precise (in absence of any alternative.... :negative: ) enough reconstruction done by Antonio, just means we cannot trust ANY battlemap in history: in this case we have observations from almost all angles, photos, film, precise PoW/PG gunnery reports that allow the recostruction of a 10 minutes battle vs the enormous difficulty reconstructing e.g. Jutland or Tsushima (and however some good battlemaps are available even for these very confused and long battles)....


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: 275
Joined: Wed Mar 06, 2013 6:31 am

Re: The Norfolk and Suffolk tracks at Denmark Strait

Post by northcape » Wed Aug 08, 2018 5:23 pm

It has been explained so many times why the map cannot be precise in the range of miles and less than minutes. Opposed to others, I will not bore everybody by repeating statements again and again. The constant repetetion of obvious sillyness (e.g. it is precise because it is the only map) and false information (mixing relative timing on one ship with absolute times on another ship; mixing relative bearing uncertainties with absolute uncertainties of shio tracks) do not help your case.

User avatar
Antonio Bonomi
Senior Member
Posts: 3733
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 » Wed Aug 08, 2018 5:51 pm

Hello everybody,

@ Alberto Virtuani,

do not loose any more time my friend, … some of those " deniers " just apply Franz Joseph strategy about the Mayerling event :
" Everything is better than the truth ! "

Consequently there is no willlingness at all to understand, … to learn, … to realize, … to accept, … not at all.

For them those 2 cruisers were " ghost " in the middle of the ocean …


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 )

User avatar
wadinga
Senior Member
Posts: 1629
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 3:49 pm
Location: Tonbridge England

Re: The Norfolk and Suffolk tracks at Denmark Strait

Post by wadinga » Fri Aug 10, 2018 4:22 pm

Hello All,


Frankly repulsive and groundless assertions have been made on another thread:

I do not have any thesis about Capt Ellis, ... I know he lied on 1941 intentionally, ... as it is self evident by his autobiography.

the radio messages and Suffolk strategical plot bearings are more than enough and will reveal once again that simply .... he lied on 1941, ... and he lied intentionally of course.
Was Ellis "lying" when he told the Germans he was 15 miles astern at 05:22? How would he know what to lie, the imaginary conspiracy couldn't have happened yet.
0447B/24.5.
Von k3g = Suffolk an mta = Scapa. P
My 0321B. Enemy bear 184º 15 miles, course 220º. My position is 64º 10' north 30º 40' west X.
0522B/24.5.
Von k3g = Suffolk an mta = Scapa. P
My 0456B. No change, my position is 63º 55' north 30º 55' west X .. .
He could not have closed 12,000yds in 20 minutes. Neither he with his 24,000yd range radar nor Bismarck's Second Gunnery officer with his, thought he did. After his circle he was further away still.

It is no wonder many posters have expressed revulsion at the outrageous and unjustified slurs being made on the flimsiest of evidence. These universal accusations of "lying" are bordering on manic behaviour. I think someone should go to Sardinia, sit on the beach and contemplate their actions. :D

All the best

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

User avatar
Antonio Bonomi
Senior Member
Posts: 3733
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 » Fri Aug 10, 2018 6:42 pm

Hello everybody,

please stop the useless bla, bla, bla, ... trying to deny what you do not like to understand and realize due to your apparent incompetency ( to me it is intentional ).

Do the job !!!

First on Norfolk as required in this thread to you since months, ... and after the Suffolk, ... and you will see where the 2 heavy cruisers really where that morning.

The blatant bla, bla, bla, bla, ... will bring you nowhere, ... but will show yours and somebody else frustration about it, ... while keep on writing useless statements ... and refusing to do the job yourself on a map and try to demonstrate what you are trying to sustain unsuccessfully.

Ignorance and incompetence are not welcome anymore, ... do the job as required !
Plot_redone_bearing_02.jpeg
Plot_redone_bearing_02.jpeg (66.51 KiB) Viewed 1031 times
Or just shut up if you are not able to !

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 )

User avatar
wadinga
Senior Member
Posts: 1629
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 3:49 pm
Location: Tonbridge England

Re: The Norfolk and Suffolk tracks at Denmark Strait

Post by wadinga » Sat Aug 11, 2018 12:16 am

Hello Antonio,

You really do miss the point, don't you?. You are accusing Ellis of lying, but why is he lying before the battle has even been fought? Before Hood has been sunk? What would be the point of pretending he was further away from Bismarck than he really was?

You have fabricated a Conspiracy taking place after the battle, out of your own imagination, and alleged the evidence has been changed to support it,

You have alleged over and over that every inconvenient item in the records have been changed, but these reports from before the battle have been in German hands not British. Like the Baron's words they render your imaginative fantasy baseless.

The only bla,bla bla is the endless reposting of your worthless mapping, (this still has the same constant speed marks after two high speed 50 degree turns and a new fabricated Norfolk track)) distorted by the need to solely serve your purposes, and the endless restating of a few trivial and irrelevant changes in reports based on the reasonable reconciliation and collation of information from detached forces.


Instead of telling people who disagree with you to "shut up" maybe you should have a nice lie down.


All the best

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

Post Reply