We have already established Suffolk reported a gyro problem later in the day and it is likely the poor correlation of her estimated position with navigational reality was due to this. Bearings expressed by her, relative to her gyro, are therefore error-prone.
She may have had 1 degree resolution but not 1 degree accuracy. "Do not even try to tell me" is at odds with the supposed revised spirit of co-operation operating in this forum. It is only with regard to Jasper's communications with higher authority that the things some here are trying to "tell us" may be at variance with reality.do not even try to tell me that Suffolk did not have the 1 degree accuracy on the bearings.
It is apparently continuously necessary to remind everybody that there is no certificated "time stamping" of logged information in 1941. As perceptive people have pointed out there well be variable delays of minutes in the recording of bearings and estimated distances. Even where there is information taken from a gunnery fire control table there is no surety that it has been previously synchronised with chronometer time. Rowell specifically says the times from the PoW salvo plot may be up to two minutes out, from chronometer time. We know Norfolk's range measurements are at odds with chronometric time.
If PoW's Admiralty Research Laboratory table plot had survived, the sharp turn towards the enemy, made to avoid Hood's wreck and observed and commented upon by Brooke, Busch, Brinkmann, Jasper, Reimann et al would have been delineated. Because the plan of PoW's movements was recreated by guesswork afterwards, and then months later turned into the salvo plot, both these documents are inaccurate records of her path. Because they are contradicted by so many witnesses, they are not "first class" evidence.
All the best
wadinga