Fellow Contributors<
It has been said:
simple analysis of available data and consequent figures
"Simple" as in naïve and grossly inaccurate analysis.
The greatest recorded temperature ranges in the world are around the Siberian `cold pole' in the east of Russia. Temperatures in Verkhoyansk (67ø33'N, 133ø23'E) have ranged 105degC 188degF, from -68øC -90øF to 37øC 98øF.
Is the average temperature of any interest at all? No, because it rarely happens and is so difference to the majority temperatures actually experienced. This because the Variance of the values and hence standard deviation make the Mean irrelevant. The average rate for PoW is irrelevant, and we don't have any real figures at all as opposed to "invented/assumed" figures for Bismarck.
that are based only on what is officially available
There is only one official figure for Bismarck- number of rounds expended.
We know the Baron makes no mention of any gunnery problems in Bismarck apart from one missed shot. Her green crew had months of practice in the Baltic.
[Extensive redaction by moderator Jurens. Comments may be valid, but must be respectfully phrased...] Darn, can't remember what I posted now, but I'll bet the MPI was right on target! And low variance meant several hits in one salvo.
Oh yes, it was about failing to mention what else Geoffrey Brooke says on the
same page 49 about how much trouble the unreliable 14" installation was.
explained very clearly why British couldn't simply accept that PoW fired quite well
What Adm Santarini says is that of the few shots PoW got away, before she started being hit and before the range came down towards point blank when she should have got more but didn't, a surprising number hit. However since one out of three (that's a whole 33% for statistics fans) merely took off the wooden bow of a boat of no value during an ocean voyage, it was as good as a clear miss. Adm Santarini fails to appreciate that the emphasis of many respected writers, including some British, and at least one Canadian, on
poor output from PoW's guns relates to the several additional hits
she should have made if her guns had not been failing to be available to shoot even at the glacially slow rate and huge intervals between her double salvoes.
Good gunnery is composed of at least three vital elements: accurate shooting, high output and very importantly, luck. One hit may remove some irrelevant woodwork, one hits destroys a battleship and its crew. As far as Santarini is concerned a hit is a hit.
I posted
photographs of a multi page handwritten letter from Tovey to Pound which I found at my own expense etc etc and I believe had never been identified, quoted, cited or referred to previously in any of the literature. I believe a World Premiere on this site. Surely photographs of pages could be sent to the Moderator? Many, many, many photographs of pages of copyright books have been posted to this site by the possessor of the 32 page document.
A photograph of a page means nothing can be left out, accidentally changing the meaning of the document. Transcribing is supposed to mean reproducing everything in the document not just the "relevant parts".
If there is a 32 page technical report how can a simple, elementary level mathematical analysis overturn its findings and render them invalid or even dishonest? I guess if you consider Ellis' reminiscences in unedited, unpublished form recollected after many, many years are more reliable than the multi-page report he wrote in 1941 you might believe that. Those fragments of the 32 page report which have been mentioned in that old thread raise many, many questions unanswered there.
All the best
wadinga