Cag wrote: "I do believe I've answered your questions, "
Hi Mr.Cag,
no, you haven't. Read my questions,
I repeated the very last one at least twice...... Now I'm tired of your attitude.
you wrote: "The fact remains that Wake-Walker was only threatened and criticised for not re engaging Bismarck with PoW, he was not threatened or criticised for not engaging during the morning action"
I already told you several times already: everybody was aware he did not re-engage, while very few people were knowing
at which distance the cruisers actually were and it is a
fact that ONLY Tovey version (meant to mislead about their real distance) went to the printers, allowing
NO CRITICS. However (in case you will be kind enough to answer my question above, you will see that this version would have been surely "challenged" by someone intending to evaluate the facts).
"
I understand that Wake-Walker was human with strengths and failings like all humans, whatever you think of him we know" (your words):
1) he did actually turn away from Bismarck in the evening of May 23, never seeing her anymore until 05:41 next day (visual shadowing was well possible before 23:52/24 and after 03:21/25, as Suffolk
visual sightings demonstrate),
2) he turned immediately to port to avoid to close on Bismarck, despite an "enemy in sight" message at 05:41, not taking any initiative to engage with his cruisers,
3) he did not open fire being in (albeit extreme) range (even when Hood exploded and PoW was in clear difficulties),
4) he did not exercise a proper leadership immediately after Hood explosion (at what time did he send the first message to PoW ?),
5) he did immediately turn away (at 6:00 exactly...),
6) he did refuse to re-engage (albeit "kindly asked" by the Admiralty),
7) he did very poorly manage the shadowing during the night between 24 and 25 (as per known official reports and Ellis autobiography)....
I still accept your opinion as well......
Bye, Alberto