Hits on PoW and Bismarck

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

Moderator: Bill Jurens

User avatar
Antonio Bonomi
Senior Member
Posts: 3738
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 10:44 am
Location: Vimercate ( Milano ) - Italy

Re: Hits on PoW and Bismarck

Post by Antonio Bonomi » Fri Oct 26, 2018 6:36 am

Hello everybody,

but the film only starts after the Prinz Eugen Torpedo alarm well after 06:03, ... as everybody with a minimum knowledge of the German Official documents very well knows.

Even Sir Ludovic Kennedy realizing it could not avoid to mention this event on his book, ... :wink:

After having realized it, ... one should know Bismarck turrets well enough to see that they are turned around 35° after the beam, ... and with an easy calculation realize the Bismarck course on that moment ...

It is not that difficult ....

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
Herr Nilsson
Senior Member
Posts: 1282
Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2004 11:19 am
Location: Germany

Re: Hits on PoW and Bismarck

Post by Herr Nilsson » Fri Oct 26, 2018 7:02 am

@Antonio

I'm still evaluating the picture Alberto had posted. This picture is a very hard nut to crack. Do you know where the picture had its origin? Is it a scan from a book?
Regards

Marc

"Thank God we blow up and sink more easily." (unknown officer from HMS Norfolk)

User avatar
Alberto Virtuani
Senior Member
Posts: 2812
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 8:22 am
Location: Milan (Italy)

Re: Hits on PoW and Bismarck

Post by Alberto Virtuani » Fri Oct 26, 2018 7:53 am

Mr Jurens wrote: " I would try to shout less and say more."
Hi Mr.Jurens,
I'm well aware of my shouting, and I would like to avoid it as I avoid it with people not deserving this treatment, but with a guy posting nonsense and lies only to troll the forum, not even reading what I have posted just above, I see no alternative. Sorry for that.

If this denier at any cost doesn't want to accept the closure rate of Bismarck in the first stage of the battle, until Hood explosion, it's not my fault.
Possibly you can explain it to him very plainly,with better arguments than me and with all good manners (if you think he deserves them): my patience with this ignorant, insulting and mocking guy is over since a while.


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
Herr Nilsson
Senior Member
Posts: 1282
Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2004 11:19 am
Location: Germany

Re: Hits on PoW and Bismarck

Post by Herr Nilsson » Fri Oct 26, 2018 8:14 am

@ Bill Jurens
Bill Jurens wrote:
Thu Oct 25, 2018 9:54 pm
There were, of course, problem areas with the design, but these revolved around much larger issues, such as difficulty in establishing -- or more properly maintaining -- an optimal position for the longitudinal center of buoyancy, particularly as machinery weights were adjusted during building, but that is another story entirely.
Yes, at that time they generally had such difficulties.
For towing tank test they must have the ship lines. For that purpose the center of buoyancy has to be predefined. The center of buoyancy ideally has to be exact below the center of gravity, but at that moment the center of gravity was unknown, because at that early stage the interior layout wasn't yet designed. Actually they would have had to do several iterations of creating full plan sets which was impossible, because a warship had to be in service as soon as possible. Because of the uncertainty of the trim, provisions were made in case of Bismarck that the ship would rather be stern heavy than bow heavy. In reality it was a bit more stern heavy than intended.

The Deutschland-class and Scharnhorst-class were considered as "well done". In case of Leipzig and Nürnberg the influce on the trim of Diesel engines was overlooked in the preliminary design. When this mistake was noticed it was to late. Therefore both had bigger tanks in the forecastle as originally intended.
Regards

Marc

"Thank God we blow up and sink more easily." (unknown officer from HMS Norfolk)

User avatar
Antonio Bonomi
Senior Member
Posts: 3738
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 10:44 am
Location: Vimercate ( Milano ) - Italy

Re: Hits on PoW and Bismarck

Post by Antonio Bonomi » Fri Oct 26, 2018 9:08 am

Hello everybody,

@ Herr Nillson,

you wrote :
@Antonio

I'm still evaluating the picture Alberto had posted. This picture is a very hard nut to crack. Do you know where the picture had its origin? Is it a scan from a book ?
That picture is by fact an impossible nut to crack in my personal opinion and it is not the only one on that time frame period between 06:03 and 30 seconds, ... until after 06:05 battle time after the photo NH 69727 when Bismarck started her turning back on course 220° most likely.

Bismarck was on course 270° due west and her main turrets are rotated back 35° aft the beam as it is fairly easy to be seen, ... especially knowing well the turret B-Bruno rotation details on her back, ...

The photo was initially printed on F.O. Busch book on 1943 been the reference picture 52, ... and it is available at the Bundesarchiv - Freiburg into the Lagemann file with reference Bild 146-1968-015-012.

It does have an incorrect Bundesarchiv caption mentioning the landing shell being fire by the Hood, ... but it is impossible because it was taken after the Bismarck turn to west on course 270° after 06:03 battle time and it is contained into the PG film too, .. and the film covers the period 06:03 and 30 seconds until after 06:05 battle time, ... and Hood was already under the waves at that time.

In fact this photo created a lot of confusion about its captioning time ago, ... both for the word " schlachtkreuzers " used by Busch on 1943, ... as well as for the wrong interpretation of the " schlachtkreuzer " being the " Hood " on the Bundesarchiv captioning occurred after :

On the Bundesarchiv photo search page if you enter 146-1968-015-012

from here :

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=5752&hilit=lagemann ... 555#p79968
The incorrect captioning of those photos is a common problem into the Bundesarchiv, in the National Historical Center, on the Imperial War Museum, ... as well as in the majority of the publications, ... even on recent ones, ... not to mention who even " reversed " them too.

@ Bill Jurens,

I see your point addressed to Alberto Vituani and I agree with you, ... as I wrote few days ago, ... we need to wisely go back to the old style of this forum before the Court Martial discussion that did cause the raising of the tones from somebody quite immediately.

Now that discussion in done and it is well over and behind us, ... and somebody should stop using sarcasm and offenses trying to make his points on others work, ... and provide as I did his excuses to this forum participants for the past attitudes.

In absence of this negative attitude change, ... I simply cannot blame Alberto " strong " reactions, ... even if I simply decided not to answer anymore to those persons until they do demonstrate a restored fair approach as I have said before.

I have given my right hand ahead as a sign of peace now, ... I have seen no positive reactions so far.

Maybe you can help in this direction with your wise attitude, ... and good words.

Thanks and 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 )

paul.mercer
Senior Member
Posts: 686
Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2010 10:25 pm

Re: Hits on PoW and Bismarck

Post by paul.mercer » Fri Oct 26, 2018 9:58 am

Byron Angel wrote:
Wed Oct 24, 2018 2:54 am
RN capital ship main batteries, certainly of the early war period, did not feature RPC capability. I might be mistaken, but I don't think that RPC became available for RN battleship main batteries until Vanguard.

"Weaving" was a standard evasive tactic by German warships under close fire as early as WW1. The RN evaluated it and found it effective with little or no hindrance to outgoing gunnery. Course deviations of as little as one point about the base course were found to be sufficient for "Fast" ships (Bismarck would certainly have qualified).

B
Thanks Wadinga and Byron for your replies, I suppose throwing a 50,000 ton ship around is not the simplest thing to do!
However, assuming Bismarck was varying her course, would a course deviation of as little as one point be enough to change the angle of impact of PoW's shell?

User avatar
Herr Nilsson
Senior Member
Posts: 1282
Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2004 11:19 am
Location: Germany

Re: Hits on PoW and Bismarck

Post by Herr Nilsson » Fri Oct 26, 2018 11:43 am

Antonio Bonomi wrote:
Fri Oct 26, 2018 9:08 am
Hello everybody,

@ Herr Nillson,

you wrote :
@Antonio

I'm still evaluating the picture Alberto had posted. This picture is a very hard nut to crack. Do you know where the picture had its origin? Is it a scan from a book ?
That picture is by fact an impossible nut to crack in my personal opinion and it is not the only one on that time frame period between 06:03 and 30 seconds, ... until after 06:05 battle time after the photo NH 69727 when Bismarck started her turning back on course 220° most likely.

Bismarck was on course 270° due west and her main turrets are rotated back 35° aft the beam as it is fairly easy to be seen, ... especially knowing well the turret B-Bruno rotation details on her back, ...

The photo was initially printed on F.O. Busch book on 1943 been the reference picture 52, ... and it is available at the Bundesarchiv - Freiburg into the Lagemann file with reference Bild 146-1968-015-012.

It does have an incorrect Bundesarchiv caption mentioning the landing shell being fire by the Hood, ... but it is impossible because it was taken after the Bismarck turn to west on course 270° after 06:03 battle time and it is contained into the PG film too, .. and the film covers the period 06:03 and 30 seconds until after 06:05 battle time, ... and Hood was already under the waves at that time.

In fact this photo created a lot of confusion about its captioning time ago, ... both for the word " schlachtkreuzers " used by Busch on 1943, ... as well as for the wrong interpretation of the " schlachtkreuzer " being the " Hood " on the Bundesarchiv captioning occurred after :

On the Bundesarchiv photo search page if you enter 146-1968-015-012

from here :

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=5752&hilit=lagemann ... 555#p79968
The incorrect captioning of those photos is a common problem into the Bundesarchiv, in the National Historical Center, on the Imperial War Museum, ... as well as in the majority of the publications, ... even on recent ones, ... not to mention who even " reversed " them too.
Hello Antonio,

thank you for this information. My problem with that picture is, that at least the one from Busch's book is definitely edited.
Regards

Marc

"Thank God we blow up and sink more easily." (unknown officer from HMS Norfolk)

HMSVF
Member
Posts: 107
Joined: Sun Jun 17, 2018 10:15 am

Re: Hits on PoW and Bismarck

Post by HMSVF » Fri Oct 26, 2018 12:09 pm

paul.mercer wrote:
Fri Oct 26, 2018 9:58 am
Byron Angel wrote:
Wed Oct 24, 2018 2:54 am
RN capital ship main batteries, certainly of the early war period, did not feature RPC capability. I might be mistaken, but I don't think that RPC became available for RN battleship main batteries until Vanguard.

"Weaving" was a standard evasive tactic by German warships under close fire as early as WW1. The RN evaluated it and found it effective with little or no hindrance to outgoing gunnery. Course deviations of as little as one point about the base course were found to be sufficient for "Fast" ships (Bismarck would certainly have qualified).

B
Thanks Wadinga and Byron for your replies, I suppose throwing a 50,000 ton ship around is not the simplest thing to do!
However, assuming Bismarck was varying her course, would a course deviation of as little as one point be enough to change the angle of impact of PoW's shell?

I was wondering this too. From what I’ve read on here Bismarck was a very stable ship,but wouldn’t there be even a small amount of roll when at sea? Also, whilst there is standardisation, wouldn’t there be slight individual differences in the make up of a shell? I was under the impression that shells were tested in lots?

Soooo many potential variables?


Best wishes


HMSVF

User avatar
Antonio Bonomi
Senior Member
Posts: 3738
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 10:44 am
Location: Vimercate ( Milano ) - Italy

Re: Hits on PoW and Bismarck

Post by Antonio Bonomi » Fri Oct 26, 2018 12:43 pm

Hello everybody,

@ Herr Nilsson,

as stated, there is a good not edited version of that photo available at the Bundesarchiv - Freiburg into the Lagemann file with reference Bild 146-1968-015-012.

There are also some other photos taken on the same period showing the same main turrets rotation backwards around 35° aft the beam.

There is the PG film merging them all on the same taken period, ... from 06:03 and 30 seconds until after 06:05.

Last but not least there is the photo NH 69727 , ... taken just at the end of the above mentioned PG film sequence containing all those photos, ... that showing the Bismarck having started her turn toward the enemy, ... from course 270° back on course around 220°, ... and being at around 260°true course, ... still shows a 25°aft the beam main turrets rotation toward the enemy, ... the PoW.

Here in :

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=8335#p81043

As a final consideration I see no chances for that nut to be cracked, ... neither one, ... it is simply impossible.

I am sure that after your current evaluations, ... you will agree with me, ... and move on the new thread about the after second turn photo analysis, ... :wink:

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=8335#p81065

There is not much we can add here, ... since Bismarck was closing the range from 05:55 until 06:03 the way we all know, ... running a course of around 220° following the Prinz Eugen, ... and at 06:03 after the torpedo alarm she turned 50° to starboard due west on course 270° as demonstrated.

Consequently the 2 hits came both from forward the beam port side on the compartments XXI ( first hit on the bow ) and XIV ( second hit at midship ).

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 )

Byron Angel
Senior Member
Posts: 838
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2011 1:06 am

Re: Hits on PoW and Bismarck

Post by Byron Angel » Fri Oct 26, 2018 9:34 pm

paul.mercer wrote:
Fri Oct 26, 2018 9:58 am
Thanks Wadinga and Byron for your replies, I suppose throwing a 50,000 ton ship around is not the simplest thing to do!
However, assuming Bismarck was varying her course, would a course deviation of as little as one point be enough to change the angle of impact of PoW's shell?
Hi Paul,
One point = one compass point = 11.25 degrees, which is my guess, based upon some conclusions about evasive maneuvering drawn by the RN, as to how much Bismarck might alter course if evasive maneuver had been performed. There is no proof one way or the other as to whether it was done. It is worth keeping in mind that such a course alteration could have gone either way: if to port, it would have increased the striking angle of the projectile to about 30 degrees; if to starboard, it would have reduced the striking angle to about 10 degrees.

B

User avatar
Antonio Bonomi
Senior Member
Posts: 3738
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 10:44 am
Location: Vimercate ( Milano ) - Italy

Re: Hits on PoW and Bismarck

Post by Antonio Bonomi » Fri Oct 26, 2018 10:01 pm

Hello everybody,

we have evaluated the distance between Prinz Eugen and Bismarck at open fire, on photo NH 69722 more than 10 years ago already, ... it was evaluated been around 2300-2400 meters.

We did the same thing at the PG film start, ... at 06:04 more or less, ... and it was evaluated been around 1500-1600 meters.

The possibilities that in 10 minutes the Bismarck did reduce the distance from the Prinz Eugen sailing a 220° course, ... while executing also some zig-zag are close to zero, ... due to the above distance reduction executed, ... and in my opinion it was also not so useful to perform a good gunnery on the enemy, ... like she did.

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 )

Byron Angel
Senior Member
Posts: 838
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2011 1:06 am

Re: Hits on PoW and Bismarck

Post by Byron Angel » Fri Oct 26, 2018 10:01 pm

HMSVF wrote:
Fri Oct 26, 2018 12:09 pm
I was wondering this too. From what I’ve read on here Bismarck was a very stable ship,but wouldn’t there be even a small amount of roll when at sea? Also, whilst there is standardisation, wouldn’t there be slight individual differences in the make up of a shell? I was under the impression that shells were tested in lots?

Soooo many potential variables?

Best wishes
HMSVF

Hi HMSVF,
Roll is not usually a matter of great concern for a well designed warship under normal sea conditions. Typical period of roll is 14-15 seconds, as measured from the port and starboard extremities of its roll arc. As seas become heavier and the number of degrees of arc described by the roll increases, the rate of the roll (degrees per second) increases; but, inasmuch as the roll behavior of a ship mimics that of a pendulum, the roll period always remains the same regardless of the number of degrees the ship might roll through. Also note that Bismarck's main battery was fitted with RPC (remote power control) in elevation; in other words, the system automatically and continuously adjusted the elevation of the guns to compensate for the roll of the ship (within the design limits of the RPC system).

Re projectiles, yes, they were customarily tested in lots to ensure that the shells coming off the production line met the performance parameters set down by the contracting navy; but those performance parameters could differ from navy to navy. Thick and heavy books have been written on the many and varied differences in shell design, particularly with respect to armor piercing type. AP projectile design sat at the intersection of the cutting edges of metallurgy, aerodynamics, chemistry, physics, as well as both interior and exterior ballistics, with each nation optimizing its design in different ways to suit sometimes quite different tactical applications.

Hope this helps.

B

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

Re: Hits on PoW and Bismarck

Post by wadinga » Sat Oct 27, 2018 1:25 am

Hello Antonio,

You allege of Bild 146-1968-015-012.:
It does have an incorrect Bundesarchiv caption mentioning the landing shell being fire by the Hood, .
Do not tell us your opinion it is incorrect. We are not interested in your opinion or interpretation. It says this is the original caption found with or on the photo. You have seen the original Bundesarchiv material. Tell the truth. Is that what it says on or with the photo? There would be no point saying something incorrect. Any day someone can visit Freiberg read the original caption and tell us the truth.
Eine der letzten Granaten der "Hood", die über Prinz Eugen hinwegheulend als Weitschüsse in die See fuhren. Im Hintergrund Bismarck.
Foto Lagemann
Is this below the Bundarchiv generated caption?
"Unternehmen Rheinübung", Seegefecht in der Dänemarkstraße - Schlachtschiff Bismarck und Schwerer Kreuzer Prinz Eugen im Gefecht mit HMS Hood und HMS Prince of Wales, Granateinschlag vor der Bismarck

Once we have established what it actually says on or with the photo, and you have accepted it, you can give us your opinion why the person who was actually there wrote an untruth.

All the best

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

User avatar
Alberto Virtuani
Senior Member
Posts: 2812
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 8:22 am
Location: Milan (Italy)

Re: Hits on PoW and Bismarck

Post by Alberto Virtuani » Sat Oct 27, 2018 7:55 am

Hello everybody,

I guess the obvious (for everybody except Mr.Wadinga) answer why the caption IS wrong and the photo cannot have been taken when Hood was still afloat has been already given several times here (in the right threads) and it is not an opinion, it is a fact :
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=482&start=45#p81083
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=5752&start=930#p80769

confirmed by everybody on this very thread:
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=8329&start=135#p80975
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=8329&start=150#p80997


I do hope someone ELSE than me will be willing to politely explain to this guy what he is unable to understand yet....because I'm very tired of his trolling denial attitude, not responding to the points raised and only repeating his nonsense !


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: 3738
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 10:44 am
Location: Vimercate ( Milano ) - Italy

Re: Hits on PoW and Bismarck

Post by Antonio Bonomi » Sat Oct 27, 2018 8:00 am

Hello everybody,

the photo Bundesarchiv Bild 146-1968-015-12 was surely taken after the photo Bundesarchiv Bild 146-1990-081-10A since both are one after the other showed into the PG Rheinubung film sequence.

The photo Bundesarchiv Bild 146-1990-081-10A is wrongly captioned too in the Bundesarchiv as well as into the Imperial War Museum ( Ref. HU 382 ), ... and it is known as NH 69728 in the NH Center ( USN National Archives ), … it was captioned also by the Baron on his book.

It does not take much to demonstrate both photos often been wrongly captioned for the landing shell coming from Hood in the Bundesarchiv as well as into the Imperial War Museum ( somebody should take care to correct them sooner or later ... :wink: ).

Here it is :

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=482&p=81085#p81083

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=482&p=81085#p81084

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=482&p=81085#p81085



Why did I use that old thread for the demo ?

Because this point was already discussed and clarified 12 years ago about the NH 69728, on this forum as well as on the old HMS Hood forum too.


Since surely and irrefutably the photo Bundesarchiv Bild 146-1968-015-12 :

Bundesarchiv_Bild_146-1968-015-12.jpg
Bundesarchiv_Bild_146-1968-015-12.jpg (76.74 KiB) Viewed 899 times

was taken after the photo Bundesarchiv Bild 146-1990-055-10A as for the PG Rheinunbubg film :

Bundesarchiv_Bild_146-1990-081-10A.jpg
Bundesarchiv_Bild_146-1990-081-10A.jpg (85.3 KiB) Viewed 899 times

both captions are surely wrong mentioning the Hood and needs to be changed to PoW, despite who wrote anything anywhere.


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