Hi Mr.Jurens,Bill Jurens wrote: "British shooting at the beginning of the action was really quite bad"
I respectfully disagree: Hood shooting was very bad but PoW initial shooting was absolutely acceptable, finding the range (without the radar providing it and despite an initial 1000 yards overestimation...) after only 3 minutes and 6 semi-salvos, while Bismarck and PG (we don't know whether they obtained a radar range at open fire) took 3 to 3,5 (BS) and 2 to 2,5 (PG) minutes to hit Hood for the first time. From Jasper we realize that it took 6 semi-salvos (2 vollsalve + 2 semi-salvos) to hit, therefore the same identical performance, even if PG opened fire at a shorter distance than PoW. BS hit quite later.
Only the hit rate of Germans was superior to PoW during the battle (luck or merit, we cannot know), with PoW hitting the enemy 3 times, PG hitting 5 times and BS hitting probably 5 times (however, Germans fired for more time in total) but much better than Hood's (0 hits in 8 minutes) anyway.
The absolute RoF of PoW was better than Bismarck's, her effective RoF was anyway comparable to Bismarck's one (as demonstrated since long time), and her effective number of delivered shells per minute was even better than Bismarck's.
A good example of "interpretation" (Tovey was a master in "interpreting" the detailed reports to produce a better overall final report, please see 6:13 and "Y" turret jamming....) of what is written in the GAR. Points 3, 4 and 5 clearly refer to range acquisition and open fire. Does point 5 refers to the whole 1st engagement ?Dunmunro wrote: " 4. No results were obtained from either Type 281 or 284 R.D.F.is a statement pertaining to the entire 1st engagement from enemy to sight to cease fire."
I said I'm ready to accept that 284 did not provide ranges because the key point is that the set was anyway working.
If a gun can be fired but it does not hit the enemy, it's not defective.Wadinga wrote: "It was defective, clear and simple, it provided no range"
The Type 284 set was not defective at all: it was working on board the Prince of Wales. It surely provided the opening ranges during the evening engagement. It simply had no time enough to warm up to provide initial ranges during the first engagement. Whether it provided some ranges at a later stageis irrelevant, as radar is not very useful once rangfe is acquired.
The "excuse" (justifying Capt.Leach decision to disengage) of a defective radar is over as well as the one of an "inexperienced crew" (because Hood had the same problem in the morning engagement according to McMullen and she was not a green ship).
Better to post a "redacted" part of a letter from a primary source (McMullen original letter) than mentioning a statement from secondary sources without any date (Murphy): post your source, if you have any.Wadinga lowly wrote: "redacted from a letter not made available in its entirety...attempting to promulgate a Conspiracy Theory...distorted for personal gain..."
Please follow the moderator recommendation: avoid personal attacks and your usual low insinuations. (see above)
Avoid to accuse of "Conspiracy theories", the battle has been reconstructed by Antonio and all the old sailors memoirs are perfectly matching this reconstruction. There is no conspiracy theory, there was a proven "cover-up" (embellishment of the reports) to justify the poor (IMO) behavior of a couple of "honorable" but timid (IMO) officers.
I wonder why the moderator is still tolerating Mr.Wadinga undisciplined and provoking presence here. I will not accept anymore this kind of personal attacks and I promise I will answer as deserved (escalating to the webmaster if needed) if no measure will be taken to silence this guy.