Bismarck at DS after the second turn

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

Moderator: Bill Jurens

User avatar
Herr Nilsson
Senior Member
Posts: 1578
Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2004 11:19 am
Location: Germany

Re: Bismarck at DS after the second turn

Post by Herr Nilsson »

Antonio Bonomi wrote: Fri Oct 26, 2018 9:28 am
@ Herr Nillson,

how much do you think the speed of the film needs to be " adjusted " ?
It depends. I consider it likely that Lagemann slowed down his camera from standard 24 fps to the minimum of 18 fps. Additionally we have to take the frame rate of the available video into account. My PAL-DVD-copy is played at 25 fps for example.

In regard of the track it's my opinion that Prinz Eugen is still on a 220°course (if PG's battle map is right at all) at the start of the footage while Bismarck already has turned to starboard before. When it appears that Bismarck is turning to port it is actually Prinz Eugen turning to starboard.
Regards

Marc

"Thank God we blow up and sink more easily." (unknown officer from HMS Norfolk)
User avatar
Antonio Bonomi
Senior Member
Posts: 3799
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 10:44 am
Location: Vimercate ( Milano ) - Italy

Re: Bismarck at DS after the second turn

Post by Antonio Bonomi »

Hello everybody,

@ Herr Nilsson,

thanks for you response, ... that is exactly what I understood you had already evaluated correctly in my personal opinion, ... but I did not want to be the one to " force " this evaluation from my side only, ... :wink:

Referencing this well known Prinz Eugen original film :

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pPmkOtSveXY

We are talking the sequence that goes from 05:39 until 07:12, ... so a total of 21+60+12 seconds = 93 seconds or 1 minutes and 33 seconds, containing an intentionally inserted " cut and paste " sequence of 8 seconds showing Hood sunk smoke and PoW firing for propaganda reasons for that military propaganda film that we have today available.

Removing those 8 seconds the total time showing Bismarck sailing a parallel course to Prinz Eugen at that film speed will be 93-8 = 85 seconds.

Now we need to apply your suggested correction factor, that I have simplified on my personal computer changing the you tube film speed settings from normal to 0,75 %, which should obtain the needed result of slowing down the film of the same percentage ( 1/4 or 25 % equal to from 24 to 18 fps ) you mentioned above.

Now the timing film result is :

- Total sequence length of 123 seconds ( 93+30 ) to which we need to remove now 10 seconds Hood+PoW part ( 8+2 ), which makes the Bismarck sequence new length of 113 seconds ( 85+28 ). Obviously with due tolerances around +/- 1 second.

If we now assume the starting of the Bismarck sequence as you correctly stated a bit before Prinz Eugen turned to starboard ( it was around 06:03 and 40 seconds ) and we use 06:03 and 30 seconds consequently, ... we have :

- Starting of the film with new evaluated film length : 06:03 and 30 seconds, ... plus film duration ( new length ) 1 minute and 53 seconds, ... means the end of the film is at 06:05 and 23 seconds.

I think my calculations should be right here above, but I like your confirmation as well as from anybody else.

After it we can easily determine when the photo NH 69727, contained in the film like many others, was really taken during this battle.

Obviously everything with due tolerances.

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: 1578
Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2004 11:19 am
Location: Germany

Re: Bismarck at DS after the second turn

Post by Herr Nilsson »

@Antonio

As I said I'm working with another version of the footage, but as long as the assumed main error is eliminated even +/-5 seconds should be accurate enough.
Regards

Marc

"Thank God we blow up and sink more easily." (unknown officer from HMS Norfolk)
User avatar
Antonio Bonomi
Senior Member
Posts: 3799
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 10:44 am
Location: Vimercate ( Milano ) - Italy

Re: Bismarck at DS after the second turn

Post by Antonio Bonomi »

Hello everybody,

@ Herr Nillson,

OK, I see, ... and that is fine, ... working with another version using a different methodology only makes the double check a bit more accurate and hopefully avoids any big error.

YES, ... I agree to increase the tolerances to +/- 5 seconds, ... it makes sense to me.

One question where I like your opinion, ... is about how long it could have taken to Bismarck, ... once received the Torpedo Alarm signal from Prinz Eugen at 06:03 ( ref. the mark on the Prinz Eugen battle map track in red color ), ... to change her course from 220° to 270° ?

If we are assuming that the turn started at 06:03 and few seconds, ... are we ok with Bismarck already sailing at 270° as the Prinz Eugen film shows ?

Basically is around a 30 seconds time, ... an enough amount of time for the Bismarck to have received the Torpedo alarm, and to be in the position we are looking at her when the Prinz Eugen film started at 06:03 and 30 seconds more or less ? ....+/- the 5 seconds ... of course.

It is a 50° turn to starboard, ... made in around 30 seconds, ... :think:

The only comparable event I can think about is the Tirpitz under the Albacore attack I am going to check now ... :wink:

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
Alberto Virtuani
Senior Member
Posts: 3605
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 8:22 am
Location: Milan (Italy)

Re: Bismarck at DS after the second turn

Post by Alberto Virtuani »

Antonio Bonomi wrote: "If we are assuming that the turn started at 06:03 and few seconds, ... are we ok with Bismarck already sailing at 270° as the Prinz Eugen film shows ?
Basically is around a 30 seconds time, ... an enough amount of time for the Bismarck to have received the Torpedo alarm, and to be in the position we are looking at her when the Prinz Eugen film started at 06:03 and 30 seconds more or less ? "
Hi Antonio,
I would complicate a bit the problem here: if an alarm is received exactly at 6:03:00 and an immediate order is given to the helmsman, we should consider the time for the ship to react to the rudder (20 secs) and then the turning time; for a 50° turn at 30 knots speed, I would say 30 secs are ok (available data for Bismarck show 1'24" time for a 90° turn to starboard at 20,5 knots under hard rudder while usually increasing the speed makes the turn quicker), but this would move the start of the film to 6:03:50, as Bismarck seems to have already completed her turn by the time the film starts.

Possibly the alarm came some seconds before 6:03 and Bismarck rudder was turned slightly before 6:03 as well... :think:


Bye, Alberto
Last edited by Alberto Virtuani on Wed Nov 07, 2018 2:17 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
Herr Nilsson
Senior Member
Posts: 1578
Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2004 11:19 am
Location: Germany

Re: Bismarck at DS after the second turn

Post by Herr Nilsson »

@Antonio
At 20 knots under hard rudder Bismarck needs 48 seconds for 45°...and hard rudder wasn't allowed at high speed. So I have my doubts that 30 seconds are possible.
Regards

Marc

"Thank God we blow up and sink more easily." (unknown officer from HMS Norfolk)
User avatar
Antonio Bonomi
Senior Member
Posts: 3799
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 10:44 am
Location: Vimercate ( Milano ) - Italy

Re: Bismarck at DS after the second turn

Post by Antonio Bonomi »

Hello everybody,

@ Alberto Virtuani,

thanks for you inputs.

@ Herr Nillson,

and thanks to you as well for the confirmation that we are very likely too short in time here for the PG Film start evaluation.

Based on the above wise suggestions, I think it is the time to revisit my assumptions and move them forward by 15-20 seconds.

My suggested new sequence will be the following :

- PG Torpedo Alarm -> 06:03 as for the PG KTB and battle map inputs
- Bismarck rudder reaction and start turning -> 06:03 and 15 seconds
- Prinz Eugen start turning -> 06:03 and 45 seconds
- Bismarck completed turn - > 06:03 and 50 seconds
- PG film start -> 06:03 and 50 seconds

This will mean the film 1 minute and 53 seconds to end up at 06:05 and 43 seconds.
Tolerances as said always +/- 5 seconds.

Let me have your opinion and suggestions.

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: 2467
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 3:49 pm
Location: Tonbridge England

Re: Bismarck at DS after the second turn

Post by wadinga »

Hello Alberto,


I don't need to re-evaluate my opinion

but I would like to hear from Mr.Wadinga an explanation why NH69729 should show Bismarck cutting PG course at 90° . Based on what exactly
Because we already agree

But the credit to have resolved this ' enigma ' goes to Wadinga that clearly addressed the issue

Now I think we all can say with a very high confidence level that Nh 69729 was surely taken midship as I said , between the catapult and the crane.

It shows Bismarck coming 90 degrees to Prinz Eugen beam on starboard side.

That Bismarck is at 90 degrees to Prinz Eugen's course. It's just that in twelve years of increasingly extreme fantasizing about British cover ups and conspiracies and defending his speculative map and timetable as irrefutable (accurate to +/- 5 seconds of course :lol: ) he has never changed this part of his original map to reflect what we have all agreed and is obvious from the photography. And of course explaining away that the only time Prinz Eugen was on a course at about 90 degrees to the German base course of 220T is long after the shooting stopped, if the Gefechtsskizze and its timing were a reliable document. But since the photo shows two vessels at 90 degrees and one of them is still shooting, something requires further investigation.


I notice you refuse to comment on the ridiculous proximity of the German as ships depicted in Antonio's map, whilst being prepared to speculate on the precise number of seconds it takes Bismarck to turn through a certain number of degrees when there is apparently no evidence from the Ship's trials at 28-30 knots to tell us.


There is no hidden agenda, I am completely against the entire map and timetable which are fabricated solely to serve the purposes of your Conspiracy Theory and the idea that it is infallible. Nobody has been defeated or requires resurrection.


For Bill Jurens:

I have only declined to provide my own straw-man map (accurate to +/- 5 seconds of course :lol:) for A & A to knock down. As I believe you have observed there is probably too little information to generate a definitive map. I am perfectly happy to say why I think there was a turn away before Hood's demise and it is based on Rowell and Lagemann as witnesses. Rowell's letter from Iceland says so and someone, probably Lagemann from 1941, has apparently written on the photographs. Steamrollering over the evidence of Rowell who said the Germans turned away and Lagemann showing Bismarck was diverging as Hood's shells landed is not responsible investigation. Neither is ignoring the Busch book comment saying these are the last shots from the Battlecruiser. Both M-R and Schmalenbach have also shown such turnaways.


I have published Rowell's letter (not previously available) with his evidence on this website, and the only one of us who has apparently been to the Bundesarchiv and handled the actual photographic material refuses point blank to reveal what is written on or with the photographs. He chooses not to say at all what it is, rather than show it and then explain why in his opinion, the witness is wrong and he is right. Draw the conclusion you wish from this.

Incidentally, I believe I used the phrase "Crazy Ivan" to describe the synchronized turns executed by Bismarck and Prinz Eugen much earlier and apparently to no obvious purpose. I was analogizing to the hydrophone enabling turns made by the "Red Oktober" in the movie. The person dominating the pages of usages of "crazy" found by using the website search function, by calling other posters or their ideas "crazy" is indeed Alberto.

All the best

wadinga
"There seems to be something wrong with our bloody ships today!"
User avatar
Alberto Virtuani
Senior Member
Posts: 3605
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 8:22 am
Location: Milan (Italy)

Re: Bismarck at DS after the second turn

Post by Alberto Virtuani »

Hello everybody,

I have already confirmed to Mr.Jurens that I have used the word "crazy" as the most kind to define the totally uncorroborated theory of Mr.Wadinga regarding a turn away of Bismarck before Hood explosion, rubbished by all serious evidences (Leach report, German reports, etc), including the irrefutable (sic) range closure rate of BS vs PoW, as per PoW salvo plot. :kaput:

From the above post, the trolling attitude of Mr.Wadinga is evident: he is unable to explain why the photo NH69729 should show Bismarck on a course 90° from PG one, just parroting an Antonio's post from 2006 ( :shock: ). He insists on wrong "captions" as they could be a proof. He even lies about Rowell letter, that DOES NOT support his theory at all (it's easy to see that on course 270° the arcs are more closed compared to course 220°, but possibly it is not an intentional lie, as geometry is a very weak point of Mr.Wadinga).

Zero value to the actual discussion, only the admission he is unable to present a decent alternative to Antonio's battlemap and the implicit admission he does have an agenda:
" I am completely against the entire map and timetable which are fabricated solely to serve the purposes of your Conspiracy Theory and the idea that it is infallible."
:lol:




Reverting discussion to a more productive topic, that is the reason why this thread has been opened :
Antonio Bonomi wrote:"
- PG Torpedo Alarm -> 06:03 as for the PG KTB and battle map inputs
- Bismarck rudder reaction and start turning -> 06:03 and 15 seconds
- Prinz Eugen start turning -> 06:03 and 45 seconds
- Bismarck completed turn - > 06:03 and 50 seconds
- PG film start -> 06:03 and 50 seconds
This will mean the film 1 minute and 53 seconds to end up at 06:05 and 43 seconds.
Tolerances as said always +/- 5 seconds.
Let me have your opinion and suggestions"
Hi Antonio,
I would say this is an acceptable timetable, I would just prefer to keep 20 seconds for Bismarck to react to the rudder turn and 30 seconds to complete a 50° turn, as the reaction delay to the rudder seems less sensitive to ship speed than the turning rate once started, according to Bismarck available data.


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: 3799
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 10:44 am
Location: Vimercate ( Milano ) - Italy

Re: Bismarck at DS after the second turn

Post by Antonio Bonomi »

Hello everybody,

@ Alberto Virtuani,

at 30 knots the Bismarck was covering more than 15 meters each second, ... so even if she was loosing some speed during that turn, ... and even if as Herr Nilsson correctly stated, ... probably the turn was not executed under " hard rudder ", ... anyway with 30 seconds that means 30x15 = 450 meters arc, ... I think that even 400 meters were enough to execute the 50° turn arc from course 220° to the 270° new course we can see at the PG film start.

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 )
Bill Jurens
Moderator
Posts: 876
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 4:21 am
Location: USA

Re: Bismarck at DS after the second turn

Post by Bill Jurens »

I am gratified that the level of invective seems to have decreased in recent posts, and can only hope that the trend continues. I am also very encouraged to see Herr Nilsson's contributions as I have found his analyses to be consistently very thorough and responsible.

I would suggest that in the future it might be productive to try to separate attempts at a reconstruction of the Denmark Strait track chart from what it might imply regarding the personal characteristics or motivations of the individuals commanding. Collecting information and drawing conclusions therefrom represent two separate phases which need to be done in the correct sequence. Attempting to mix these two facets of the study or reversing their order -- basically intermixing an analytic and synthetic approach -- leads to both bad history and strained intellectual discussion. At this stage, we are best served by attempting to determine what exactly might have happened, not what these findings, individually or collectively, might demonstrate.

That approach, if adopted, largely revolves around avoiding the premature insertion of adjectives such as 'crazy', 'timid', into commentary, plus eliminating statements which suggests other participants are in some way mentally deficient or have some particular axe to grind. If the discussion(s) are conducted in reasonable tones and in good faith, those concepts and characteristics will emerge from the discussions themselves, i.e. they will become self-evident in their own good time.

Regarding image analysis, it appears that the original negatives exposed by still-frame cameras employed during the action have disappeared, but that negatives (or copy negatives) of the motion picture film have survived. This situation, if true, in all likelihood more-or-less precludes the establishment of distances from the still frame photography. If the motion picture negatives have survived, then measurements on the negatives themselves coupled with some knowledge of the focal length of the lens(es) employed during exposure should enable one to establish distances from camera to subject with quite a surprising degree of accuracy. If the frame rate of the camera can be established then timing can be constructed with fairly high precision. I would, for a variety of reasons, consider attempts to extract timing or camera to subject distances from video reproductions as highly problematical. Unfortunately, scans of the film frames, if they are available, are usually made in such a way as to obscure photogrammetric information as well. Although scans done on a frame-by-frame basis can in principle establish timing as well as the original film, they cannot usually be reliably used to establish distances. That process requires full width scanning which includes the entire width of the film, including sprocket holes, etc., which is not normally done.

At least not in my experience.

Bill Jurens
User avatar
Alberto Virtuani
Senior Member
Posts: 3605
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 8:22 am
Location: Milan (Italy)

Re: Bismarck at DS after the second turn

Post by Alberto Virtuani »

@Bill Jurens:
I would be glad to accept your suggestion, regarding a more fair discussion and a strict separation of topics. However:
you wrote: "That approach, if adopted, largely revolves around avoiding the premature insertion of adjectives such as 'crazy', 'timid', into commentary, plus eliminating statements which suggests other participants are in some way mentally deficient or have some particular axe to grind."
In this regard, I have to ask you:

1) to add to the list of things to be avoided the mocking, the irony, the intentional mis-usage of evidences and words like "conspiracy theorists", "russian spam e-mail" (the insult being spammer, surely not russian even if these nationalistic guys may think otherwise :kaput: ), "defame", "mountains of madness", "stupid (referred to Arbuthnot)", etc. very recently used by the other side, and

2) to clearly condemn who insulted first in this forum years ago starting the "war" (viewtopic.php?f=1&t=5830&p=54913&hilit=idiot#p54913, viewtopic.php?f=1&t=6728&p=65533&hilit=stupidity#p65533),

if you really want to appear as a "super-partes" contributor and a true "moderator".


Bye, Alberto
Last edited by Alberto Virtuani on Wed Nov 07, 2018 8:43 pm, edited 8 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: 3799
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 10:44 am
Location: Vimercate ( Milano ) - Italy

Re: Bismarck at DS after the second turn

Post by Antonio Bonomi »

Hello everybody,

@ Bill Jurens,

just to underline the truth, ... I am sure you have seen and realized who is trying to restart the provocations.

This despite the fact that I have offered already two times my hand in sign of peace, ... with no response in a similar way nor any excuse.

Anyway I am with you and I also hope that his trend will continue.

Back on the productive work ...

What happened should be fairly easy now to be realized after the 1978 Schmalenbach map for the German squadron tracks, ... and my 2005 one, ... now we are trying to improve a bit more the level of precision and tolerances analyzing the PG film and the photos that are already sequenced in the correct way as far as I am concerned.

Many persons here in do not have them all, ... I mean all the photos, ... while everybody can see the PG film and the photos contained on it, ... which are the photos from 11 to 16 on my map.

On my 2005 map for example, ... between 06:06 and 06:09 I have attached only 4 photos, ... the photos numbered 17, 18, 19 and 20 on my map :

http://hmshood.com/history/denmarkstrai ... trait2.htm

... but the photos taken in that period were many more, ... twice as many at least, ... and after having correctly positioned now the PG film with the PG track from her own map, ... we can start analyzing them one by one and improve the Bismarck track referencing the Prinz Eugen one.

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: 347
Joined: Wed Mar 06, 2013 6:31 am

Re: Bismarck at DS after the second turn

Post by northcape »

Antonio Bonomi wrote: Wed Nov 07, 2018 7:59 pm
... and after having correctly positioned now the PG film with the PG track from her own map, ... we can start analyzing them one by one and improve the Bismarck track referencing the Prinz Eugen one.

Bye Antonio
This misunderstanding is your big problem.

You did not "correctly position" the PG film or the PG map or anything, so you cannot use it as as starting point for serious (=robust) interpretation of anything else.

You did propose a theory on how to correlate untimed snippets of film of unknown frame rate with a track map of low accuracy/low certainty. Please provide the independent information which allows you to verify your theory/correlation which allows you to state that it is "correct". Thank you in advance.
User avatar
wadinga
Senior Member
Posts: 2467
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 3:49 pm
Location: Tonbridge England

Re: Bismarck at DS after the second turn

Post by wadinga »

Hello All,

Regrettably I cannot see what Bill does:
I am gratified that the level of invective seems to have decreased in recent posts, and can only hope that the trend continues.

Having just been accused of lying by Alberto, I see no improvement in his behaviour, which remains as boorish and intemperate as ever.

We have a further witness to Bismarck turning away- Rowell. viewtopic.php?f=1&t=8249&start=30In his letter (I published unredacted on this site) to Bellairs he says:
Bismarck opened fire half a minute after the Prince of Wales, before doing so turning to open her "A" arcs.

Direct eye-witness evidence Bismarck turned away, long before Hood was sunk. That there was an assumption Bismarck needed to open her A arcs is possibly wrong. The motive does not matter, the turn is seen and recorded.

Once again the Conspiracy Theorist tries to invent reasons why the witness is wrong, with guesswork about A arcs instead of simply accepting what the witness says. Rowell's salvo plot is somehow irrefutable evidence but when the same man says Bismarck opened fire right after PoW instead of complying with Antonio's irrefutable salvo timetable, and also after turning away it is not even worth discussion. Instead I am subjected to abuse for bringing this valuable evidence to light.

the totally uncorroborated theory of Mr.Wadinga regarding a turn away of Bismarck before Hood explosion

It is corroborated by Rowell, Lagemann, and was first suggested by M-R and Schmalenbach. I merely support it. I think when we correct the incorrect timings on the Gefechtsskizze, that will confirm it too. :D

A reminder:
the Prinz Eugen "Gefechtsskizze" submitted by Prinz Eugen ( Kpt Brinkmann ) to Vize-Adm Hubert Schmundt has been cause of a lot of troubles for Kpt H. Brinkmann.

Hans Henning von Schulz on 2009 confirmed it to me during the interview I had with him in Salzburg for several hours, same did Otto Schlenzka ( PG A/A gunnery port side ) a year before in Kiel.

Von Schulz was the responsible designed by Brinkmann to respond to all Schmundt request as well as re-constructing the Bismarck war diary.

Schmundt declared the Prinz Eugen " Gefechtsskizze " useless and wortheless to measure Prinz Eugen versus enemy distance on his own letter of June 16th, 1941

For Alberto:


Do you not agree with Antonio and I that Bismarck and Prinz Eugen are travelling at right angles to each other? Do you have permission to do that?

All the best

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