Hits on PoW and Bismarck

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

Moderator: Bill Jurens

Bill Jurens
Moderator
Posts: 386
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 4:21 am
Location: USA

Re: Hits on PoW and Bismarck

Post by Bill Jurens » Tue Oct 16, 2018 12:34 am

Turning a properly designed spin-stabilized projectile 'sideways' is actually quite difficult to do insofar as it generally requires a rather large and sustained force exerted from a location that creates a significant offset between the center of mass and the center of pressure. Water can do this because the force from the liquid is exerted fairly well forward on the bullet, and the couple is significant and sustained. In the case of impact, unless the bullet is significantly yawed to begin with, the force required to rotate the bullet along its longitudinal axis is so large, and the effective couple so small, that the projectile will generally suffer a structural breakup before it rotates very much.

In the case of the Bismarck damage -- and for that matter other cases of damage as well -- the size of the hole, once it exceeds a certain area, really has fairly little to do with the total quantity of water taken aboard, although it can of course quite dramatically affect the rate at which flooding occurs. Probably anything over 10" (250mm) or so would have been sufficient to overcome any practical dewatering capacity, meaning (in practical terms) that plugging would be the only real answer. Certainly plugging a large hole is more difficult than occluding a smaller one, especially if the ship is at speed (or wishes to proceed at speed after stopping temporarily for repairs) in which case dynamic effects , rather than purely hydrostatic issues, must be addressed as well. What's easy to fix in a shipyard can be very difficult to fix underwater while at sea.

returning to photographic issues, the whole picture in this case (no pun intended) is rendered somewhat problematical insofar as Bismarck was the victim of a very large number of incoming rounds, a fair proportion of which were probably significantly yawed at impact due to striking the water as 'shorts' . This means that entry/exit holes are often somewhat geometrically unusual, rendering it often very difficult or impossible to assign a given hole or holes to any specific timeframe, whether that be measured in minutes or days, with any degree of certainty.

Bill Jurens

Thorsten Wahl
Senior Member
Posts: 680
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2009 4:17 pm

Re: Hits on PoW and Bismarck

Post by Thorsten Wahl » Tue Oct 16, 2018 7:41 am

More importantly, there was a loss of more
than 1000 tons of precious fuel. Fuel tanks had been contaminated
by seawater, and the fuel distribution system forward
had been seriously damaged.

the projectile obviously damaged all watertight walls on its way through the ship
my conclusion from description of damage

entry hole above batterydeck within compartment XXI (projectile possibly came slightly diagonally from the front. Arming distance of fuze has to be considered.

riddled transversal bulkhead (Frame 210,2)between compartment XXI and XX and the central longitudial bulkhead
Exit hole possibly little above the upper platformdeck within compartment XX about 1 m above WL but below the static bow wave at high speed and therfor could be slightly above upper platformdeck.

Fuel Distribution piping and fuel tanks are situated below the forward Panzerdeck, wich is the middle platformdeck in this area, wich is also lightly armored (2 cm Wh). green line in my drawing this deck should be remained watertight.

fuel tanks in the bow section are reserve and ballast tanks, as they were unprotected especially to the danger of mines. If these tanks are used they should be used up early in the journey. And then filled up with ballast water for trim. Nevertheless they should contain residual amounts of fuel oil.
to precious to be thrown away but due to its contamination the oil distribution piping should not be used.
spant 210.jpg
spant 210.jpg (34.19 KiB) Viewed 282 times
Last edited by Thorsten Wahl on Tue Oct 16, 2018 9:29 am, edited 8 times in total.
Meine Herren, es kann ein siebenjähriger, es kann ein dreißigjähriger Krieg werden – und wehe dem, der zuerst die Lunte in das Pulverfaß schleudert!

User avatar
Antonio Bonomi
Senior Member
Posts: 3693
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 10:44 am
Location: Vimercate ( Milano ) - Italy

Re: Hits on PoW and Bismarck

Post by Antonio Bonomi » Tue Oct 16, 2018 8:19 am

Hello everybody,

@ Thorsten Wahl,

many thanks for these additional very detailed and precious inputs.

May I ask you from where you got them ?

I have another request for you, ... can you be so kind to show us a top view of the PoW shell inside the Bismarck bow, ... thru the compartments and bulkheads so everybody can realize the direction from where the shell came into the Bismarck.


Thanks 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 )

Thorsten Wahl
Senior Member
Posts: 680
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2009 4:17 pm

Re: Hits on PoW and Bismarck

Post by Thorsten Wahl » Tue Oct 16, 2018 9:01 am

I made also a visualisation of the E-Werk hit
uncertainty of UW trajectiory has to be observed.
projectile probably hit the static wave trough generated by shipmovement
the 12,5 m distance is determined by the likely arming distance for the british fuze as the projectile detonated at contact with the torpedobulkhead and damaged the transversal bulkhead between E-Werk and Boilerroom
blue the E-Werk
green Boilerroom
orange 15 cm ammunition
E-Werk Treffer.jpg
E-Werk Treffer.jpg (43.66 KiB) Viewed 248 times
Last edited by Thorsten Wahl on Tue Oct 16, 2018 9:24 am, edited 3 times in total.
Meine Herren, es kann ein siebenjähriger, es kann ein dreißigjähriger Krieg werden – und wehe dem, der zuerst die Lunte in das Pulverfaß schleudert!

User avatar
Antonio Bonomi
Senior Member
Posts: 3693
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 10:44 am
Location: Vimercate ( Milano ) - Italy

Re: Hits on PoW and Bismarck

Post by Antonio Bonomi » Tue Oct 16, 2018 9:11 am

Hello everybody,

@ Thorsten Wahl,

a very good job indeed, ... :ok: ... :clap:

The incoming path of the PoW shell is very clear to me on your drawing, ... and it confirms both the Bismarck course as well as the PoW shell incoming direction on her hull according to the PoW gunnery plot, ... simply as it must be.

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: 1603
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 3:49 pm
Location: Tonbridge England

Re: Hits on PoW and Bismarck

Post by wadinga » Tue Oct 16, 2018 5:33 pm

Hello Thorsten,
my conclusion from description of damage
I made also a visualisation
These diagrams are interesting, and thank you for presenting them, but without provenance to confirm the projectile tracks, they are as invalid as evidence, just like Antonio's visualisation. Please confirm whether the tracks are your conclusions, and your visualisation, based on the same verbal evidence presented above.

Antonio, unsurprisingly, accepts and applauds their representation,
but we know very well the agenda of this guy
even before he gets an answer to his very reasonable question.
May I ask you from where you got them ?
It is interesting that to get under the belt the splash would be 60m short of Bismarck, assuming the trajectory as depicted.
uncertainty of UW trajectiory has to be observed.
I have gained the impression that fuse performance against specification was pretty poorly correlated.


All the best

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

User avatar
Alberto Virtuani
Senior Member
Posts: 2760
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 8:22 am
Location: Milan (Italy)

Re: Hits on PoW and Bismarck

Post by Alberto Virtuani » Tue Oct 16, 2018 5:47 pm

Hello everybody,
Wadinga wrote: "Antonio, unsurprisingly, accepts and applauds their representation,... "

... while Mr.Wadinga is very critical and careful before accepting someone else statements.... :lol:
the same shameless Wadinga wrote (my bold underlined) viewtopic.php?f=1&t=8329&start=30#p80826: "Unlike you I would blindly trust a statement from Bill Jurens, but mot a single word from Antonio any more"
:lol:


His prudence and wisdom, before exposing himself again, costed me a pizza.... :evil:
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=8329&start=15#p80817
I would suggest him to study, get evidences and put together( "in context" with a decent battlemap) his evidences before speaking....

For the time being the available evidences point in vast majority to a hit coming from forward the beam, not aft. When we will get some solid (more than the PoW salvo plot :wink: ) evidence of the contrary, we will discuss.


Bye, Alberto
Last edited by Alberto Virtuani on Tue Oct 16, 2018 6:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"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: 1603
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 3:49 pm
Location: Tonbridge England

Re: Hits on PoW and Bismarck

Post by wadinga » Tue Oct 16, 2018 6:00 pm

Hello Alberto,

You bought a pizza because Antonio successfully "trolled me"? And then bragged about it :shock:

you need to pay me the pizza as agreed now, ... as I was anticipating you yesterday night that the " big fish " was going surely to " eat the hook " entirely.

You two have been trolling everybody here for the last few years. I doubt even Dominos make enough pizzas to cover that!

All the best


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

User avatar
Alberto Virtuani
Senior Member
Posts: 2760
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 8:22 am
Location: Milan (Italy)

Re: Hits on PoW and Bismarck

Post by Alberto Virtuani » Tue Oct 16, 2018 6:05 pm

Hello everybody,
Wadinga wrote: "Antonio successfully "trolled me"? And then bragged about it"
He successfully rubbished Mr.Wadinga once again.

If demonstrating someone is wrong when he stubbornly and petulantly insists in his errors (ONLY because he has an agenda) means trolling.... then yes we trolled him several times already. :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)

User avatar
Antonio Bonomi
Senior Member
Posts: 3693
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 10:44 am
Location: Vimercate ( Milano ) - Italy

Re: Hits on PoW and Bismarck

Post by Antonio Bonomi » Tue Oct 16, 2018 9:10 pm

Hello everybody,

@ Alberto Virtuani,

I have to thank you again for the last day wonderful Pizza you paid me as agreed, … I never enjoyed a pizza so much lately, … :wink:

Next time I have to take care about my fishing rope, ... because after the hook someone is able to eat also that one, ... so desperate it is lately to find something to hang on to and try to state that we are surely incorrect about something, ... and consequently our " ziggurrat of self constructed suppositions, ... our triangle of perfidy, ... our conspiracy theory … etcetera etcetera " … I mean really everything we have done and written so far, … is surely with no base.

That is the dream of our poor " hooligan/denier " left with no more arguments to try to use against us.

I will not be surprised for a trial using also one of the last " old map " missed from the recent trials, ... the first original Fritz Otto Busch of 1943, ... from where everything started, ... it is incorrect and generic enough to try to state almost everything one likes to.
What about another pizza on this one too Alberto ? :wink:


Meanwhile, thanking again Thorsten for the summary of his way to read the hits and the Bismarck damage reports and having provided his translated version, ... I am providing the top view of what he showed in details above :

BS_received_PoW_Hits.jpg
BS_received_PoW_Hits.jpg (61.09 KiB) Viewed 151 times


I do not really see many chances to have to change this drawing in the future, ... and what it clearly shows.


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
Antonio Bonomi
Senior Member
Posts: 3693
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 10:44 am
Location: Vimercate ( Milano ) - Italy

Re: Hits on PoW and Bismarck

Post by Antonio Bonomi » Wed Oct 17, 2018 6:58 am

Hello everybody,

it is very important also to establish the right sequence of the 3 received hits by the Bismarck.

In this regard we have Matrose Lorenzen declarations :
Simultaneously, a message came from central command to the damage control center that we were engaged in battle with two English battleships.
Shortly thereafter, it was transmitted that the pair of battleships we were dealing with were the "Hood" and "King George".
Then, we sensed a strong shock in the ship. Damage control center made a group call [all-points call].
We ascertained that compartment 21 had been hit.
A second shock immediately followed which seemed to us to be less severe than the first.
Again, an all-points call was made [by damage control], but we did not obtain any specifics.
Then it was announced by central damage control: " 'Hood' has exploded and has sunk. 'King George' has two hits and is aflame."
We exclaimed a triple "Hurrah", and a joyful mood prevailed. Firing had stopped.
Now we felt the ship's slight list to port. We were cruising at 27 knots.
We found out later that the second hit had entered Compartment 13.
From here :

http://www.kbismarck.com/archives/debriefing5.html

Together with his reliability evaluation by Group West :
Since the 3 soldiers cannot make any reliable statements about personnel losses and damage, and since they did not repeat anything about the severe portside torpedo hit as they had stated in their first debriefing, even despite intensive questioning, only the statements of Matrosengefreiter Lorenzen provide a certain grasp of the situation and the effect of the hit. Therefore, the debriefing of Lorenzen appears to be the most objective and reliable in content.
Frome here :

http://www.kbismarck.com/archives/debriefing.html


It seems quite clear to me that the hit received on the bow on compartment XXI ( 21st ) occurred before the hit received at midship on compartment XIII ( 13th ).

Everybody can take his own evaluations now about what this additionally means ... :wink:

NOTE : in reality the hits entered from compartments XXI ( 21st ) and XIV ( 14th ) and involved after the compartments XX ( 20th ) and XIII ( 13th ) due to the shell path inside the ship.
It is my opinion that due to the communication reports talking about XX and XXI and XIII and XIV being the impacted compartments, a lot of confusion could have been easily made.
Same confusion I have seen thru the years and the books and some websites where those hits instead of being showed on the port side of the Bismarck, ... have been showed on her starboard side ... :shock:

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: 1603
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 3:49 pm
Location: Tonbridge England

Re: Hits on PoW and Bismarck

Post by wadinga » Wed Oct 17, 2018 9:41 am

Hello Antonio,

You have created yet another speculative drawing without waiting for the answer to your own obvious question, as if making a drawing made the underlying assumption true.
May I ask you from where you got them ?

Then before Thorsten responds:
I am providing the top view of what he showed in details above :

You need to cut him off before he confirms:
my conclusion from description of damage.....I made also a visualisation
You might as well draw a unicorn, and say that makes them real.


You quote Lorenzen as a reliable source, then cut him off before he contradicts your speculation of the shells themselves piercing transverse bulkheads. What he says is:
About 1 hour after the battle, we had to cut out plates with which the leak in compartment 21 was to be sealed. The plate had a diameter of 1 meter.
No mention of a hull penetration and a requirement for such patches in compartment 20. Lorenzen is attempting to make a full, helpful report to his superiors. As Maschinengefreiter, battle station workshop-damage control group, does he not know of the same repair requirement in the immediately adjacent compartment?

He also describes the mechanism by which bulkheads not penetrated by shells themselves would suffer damage and leakage:
had severed the welding seams and several rivet heads near the portside waterline level; which [eventually] resulted in water entering Generating Plant IV. Simultaneously, port Boiler Room II bulkhead was also ripped open by the hit, causing water to fill Generating Plant IV and penetrate into the boiler room. The bulkhead wall was quickly sealed with hammocks and further flooding was prevented.

The emphasis on the comprehensiveness of Lorenzen's account does not degrade the testimony of the other survivors including Herzog:
I saw a piercing flame (a flash) astern of port as I came topside; I later found out was from the sinking "Hood".

Made-up maps, made-up drawings, made-up timetables, made-up Conspiracies. And an unembarrassed admission of Trolling activities. :D

All the best

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

User avatar
Alberto Virtuani
Senior Member
Posts: 2760
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 8:22 am
Location: Milan (Italy)

Re: Hits on PoW and Bismarck

Post by Alberto Virtuani » Wed Oct 17, 2018 10:49 am

Hello everybody,
Wadinga wrote: "...an unembarrassed admission of Trolling activities"
...while Mr.Wadinga shamelessly denies his own trolling activity, going on since months, proposing again and again old stuff in order to counter what cannot be countered anymore (like the PoW salvo plot, fixing Bismack course) and posting again and again fragments of witnesses that only Thorsten has interpreted, from his native language, in the right way, up to now. :kaput:


Bye, Alberto


edit:
Wadinga wrote: "...bulkheads not penetrated by shells themselves would suffer damage and leakage..."
This is well possible, but in no way a leakage can produce a pressure of water at high speed against the bulkhead of the compartment aft (XIX)... Bulkhead between XX and XXI must have been open ripped to oblige a reinforcement of XIX-XX bulkhead and to let in the ship such an amount of water.
Last edited by Alberto Virtuani on Wed Oct 17, 2018 10:58 am, edited 2 times in total.
"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
Antonio Bonomi
Senior Member
Posts: 3693
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 10:44 am
Location: Vimercate ( Milano ) - Italy

Re: Hits on PoW and Bismarck

Post by Antonio Bonomi » Wed Oct 17, 2018 10:57 am

Hello everybody,

at least we seems to be getting free from old very incorrect maps proposal on this thread, ... :wink:

No more statements about Bismarck surely being under Hood fire ( :shock: ) and/or getting those hits from aft the beam while sailing on course 270° due west, ... from the " delirium " of the above guy, ... since it will be more and more ridiculous, ... just as everybody can all fairly easily realize now.

Where are now the evidence of this poor " hooligan/denier " about it ? He had nothing on his hands about it as obvious.
It is clear the intention of all he was writing before only intended to try to put in discussion other works because he does not like it being cornered by the evidence supporting them.

Now the " maginot " last defense line, ... to try to avoid to admit the evidence, ... is on the precision of the witness statements, ... but just as occurred to the " maginot " defense line, ... the destiny of this line is known already ... :wink:

The poor incompetent and unfair " hooligan " is carefully avoiding to evaluate from where the PoW shells were coming into the Bismarck hull and on which course was the Bismarck while under PoW accurate fire ( with 3 hits received from PoW ) just as the PoW gunnery plot clearly shows.

Better to try to switch the discussion about the accuracy of the reports that can be read in this or that way, ... and not to listen to the only German guy that commented about the way to read them as a whole and even produced a couple of drawings for us to understand what can be realized from the many witnesses declarations and reports.

Of course the way to read them just matches exactly to the PoW shell direction data and the Bismarck course on that moment as seen from the PoW, ... just as it must be for any average logical and intelligent person trying to re-construct this historical event.

My drawing simply puts everything in a visible and easy to understand way, ... for the ones that like to read historical re-construction and have something correct at hand to refer to.

For the " delirium " post's like the one here above that only would like to go in the opposite direction muddying the water as much as possible once having realized that the truth will be another humiliating defeat ... on top of the many already sustained, ... there is only one answer :

Show us the evidence you have of what you are trying to state that will counter what we are showing as evidence on our side !

So far, ... no evidence has been produced, ... just words, ... while our evidence are over whelming on our side, ... and almost impossible to be countered.

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: 1603
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 3:49 pm
Location: Tonbridge England

Re: Hits on PoW and Bismarck

Post by wadinga » Wed Oct 17, 2018 5:15 pm

Hello Antonio,

The boundary between your imagination and reality seems to be blurring even further:
No more statements about Bismarck surely being under Hood fire
I have never said such a thing. What you are constructively misremembering is probably:
Even McMullen did not know which salvoes actually hit Bismarck- "No hits were observed, but it is likely from results observed that fire was effective between salvoes 5 and 16." This was true even when badgered by the overbearing First Lord Alexander. As I pointed out, for a considerable period of time it was considered Hood had scored all the hits (the only British fairy tale about Denmark Straits).
The Maginot Line was of course not defeated but outflanked, and just as you are brought to a halt by a barrage of facts and reality, you swing around and gallop off into unreality, with invented shell tracks, imagined salvo tables and a downright refusal to accept the evidence of the men who were there: Lorenzen, Herzog and Lagemann.


Alberto: this your opinion:
This is well possible, but in no way a leakage can produce a pressure of water at high speed against the bulkhead of the compartment aft (XIX)... Bulkhead between XX and XXI must have been open ripped to oblige a reinforcement of XIX-XX bulkhead and to let in the ship such an amount of water.
Maybe your speculation will be supported by the poster here who can say "I was the technical representative on that expedition [to Hood and Bismarck] representing the Marine Forensics Panel of the Society of Naval Architects and Marine Engineers". But since he appears to have disagreed with pretty much everything you and Antonio have suggested so far- it seems unlikely. :cool:

Bismarck sailors mention hull penetration with patching required in XXI only. One says Hood exploded aft of Bismarck's port beam. Lagemann times the film and stills before Hood is sunk. Why are they all wrong?


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

Post Reply