About the Bodies

[sineatimorar]

My last comment was more to reflect the impossible nature of non_intrusive investigations of the turrets in their current position would be with CURRENT technology. I am not that much caught up in fictionalized stories like CSI etc.There is enough confusion between what is one author's opinion and what is historical fact published inside historical texts that continued confusion is understandable. Yes I am aware that the pretty pictures are make believe. I am also aware that the current displayed 3D radar images displayed on any warship's radar displays has gone through exstensive interpolation and mathematical analysis to reflect the 3D situation in the surrounding air space. Medical 3D imaging goes thru similar processes.It was considered pure fiction 5years ago that a 3D rendering of a actual human body was possible, today it is as common as 'doing up your fly'. There is no way you can state today that tomorrow there may be more detailed 3D imaging equipment available. All it requires is someone to THINK that MAYBE it will be possible in the FUTURE , then have some really smart cooky out there with the rare ability to rational think 'outside the box' to THINK "Em just maybe"; This the genus of all inventive thought is it not?

[northcape]

Well, of course nobody is able to predict inventions of the future. However, the entire science of imaging, be it sub-surface or medical, be it with seismic waves or EM waves like radar or X-rays, has made a continuous development. The reason why medical imaging produces high-resolution 3D images has two reasons: the energy source is very close to the target, and more importantly, the target can be illuminated by the source from all sides. This is mostly not possible with sub-surface targets or with objects inside a sunk ship - the source mostly is only able to illuminate the target from above. It are simple physical reasons like this (and there are many others) why I don't believe that there will be dramatic changes in subsurface-imaging in the near future - but of course, one never knows what is going to happen.

[sineatimorar]

As I said all I was doing was theorizing what I think would be required to investigate, with minimal distruption of the turrets, to further any future battle analysis. The turrets being smaller than the hull it might be possible to scan the surface ( something I did not clarify earlier, surface scan only, sorry for pushing incredulity) . Internal imaging via radar or sonar would be ny to impossible, as they Donot give internal images. The example of medical imaging was only to support the arguement that image processing may sometime in the future be able to render the surface scan returns into a reasonable 3D facsimile of the object in question . Some what akin to the difference between standard sonar and ultra modern side scanning sonar images.I hope this clarifies my point.

[sineatimorar]

Something else to mention. I find it interesting here in this stream how the importance of respecting a object in which people died as a war grave is in the fore front of everyones thoughts. I then go to another stream discussing matters of design of the Bismarck and his contemporaries were I point out that crew survivabilty was never a consideration in any warship design. Not a peep from anyone. The canon fodder principle seems to exist still. I find it interesting that the respect in death does not seem carry forward into respecting in the lives of crews that man a warship before their deaths occurs.

[RF]

The concept of crew survivability does require some elaboration. The armour plating on warships at any level isn't just to protect the vitals of a ship but also to preserve the crew so as to enable them to continue to fight.

One aspect of the Bismarck's final battle on 27th May is that after some 90 minutes of heavy bombardment from a variety of calibre shells at close range the majority of the crew appeared uninjured until close to the end, and even then hundreds were left in the water by Dorsetshire and Maori. That so many were uninjured is surely due to the armour protection on Bismarck?

[sineatimorar]

Very true I think some numbers have already been posted earlier. The higher figures could be as many as 1200 initial survivors. Maybe I am a little too harsh on the designers. You have to be careful not to imply today's moral standards on past events and maybe I cross that line from time to time.