Total number of shells fired by Bismarck and straddles

[paulcadogan]

I am not good with english context here, what means "portside strikes" in this case? Maybe falling into water near portside? And there exactly was mentioned PoW's PORTSIDE, not starboard?

You are correct Serg. The waterline hits on PoW were on her starboard (right) side. The "port side strikes" refered to by Jasper were what he thought were Bismarck's 5.9 in shells striking the water to port of PoW, so this was either when she turned towards the Germans or after she turned away. (otherwise he would not have seen them as they would have been "overs" hidden by the ship itself.)

Jasper also describes the 5.9 in shells exploding on contact with the water producing "endless" smoke clouds compared to the tall white columns produced by his base-fused 8 in. shells. The shells penetrated PoW just below the waterline - so would have struck water first, then she ship's side plating before detonating. Much more likely to be PE's 8 inch than Bismarck's 5.9 inch.

Paul

[RF]

If indeed the 5.91 inch exploded immediately on contact with the water they would not be able to hit POW below the waterline would they?

[delcyros]

Jasper also describes the 5.9 in shells exploding on contact with the water producing "endless" smoke clouds compared to the tall white columns produced by his base-fused 8 in. shells

This is probably a misconception. The 5.91in were causing "shell splashes". These splashes are created by impact energy (=1/2 weight x velocity²) of the projectile hitting and displacing much water immedeatly, not by blast effects of the involved burster charge which contributed little to the size of the splash. Splashes are also created by 8in and 15in delay action patterned impacts but of course, they are much larger because of the significantly higher levels of impact energy in the first place.
Jaspar wrote:

"Im Laufe des Wirkungsschießens habe ich zweimal Treffer beobachtet, beide wieder Bb. -gleichzeitig von der Mittelartillerie des "Bismarck" beschossen, die es gut eindeckte"

He didn´t mentioned any exploding shells producing smoke clouds.
Thus Jaspar credited the secondary battieries of BISMARCK to be effective on the target (sic :"gut eindeckte" from the quote above) but he couldn´t really tell (and didn´t determine this in his account) whether or not the two observed strikes came from either PRINZE EUGEN or BISMARCK´s secondary guns. Furtherly he makes no comments that his observed shell splashes were caused by exploding shells instead of impacting shells (I doubt this would be possible to recognize). He only noted two strikes and numerous splashes! Soon later the heavy Flak of both ships would join the action and contribute to even more tight and consistent splash formation around the target. A nose fused shell (either 8in or 5.91in) cannot make underwater travel and would completely detonate before hitting PoW´s hull. This rules nose fused shells out. Delay action base fused shells can do this and match the damage creation for both waterline aft hits reasonably well.
PE fired all together 8 nose fused HE (all from the first salvo directed against HOOD) and 149 base fused HE. I don´t know how much BISMARCK used up in the action. An 8in base fused HE is very likely to inflict much more damage than was recorded and it would inflict larger entry holes than recorded.

[RF]

delcyross, I am not aware of flak guns being used in this battle - surely the range is too great anyway?

[paulcadogan]

He didn´t mentioned any exploding shells producing smoke clouds.

On page 38 of the KTB he says:

Accordingly I decided to use high explosive based fused shells. I persisted in using this type of projectile during the (entire) course of the battle since their impacts differentiated them very well from other hits. The impacts stood out clearly as high white water columns amid innumerable clouds of explosive smoke that obviously came from the intermediate artillery of the Bismarck.

From my memory I quoted the word "endless" when I should have said "innumerable" - apologies for that.

So what was the size of the entry holes?

[t-geronimo]

delcyross, I am not aware of flak guns being used in this battle - surely the range is too great anyway?

According to the war diary Prinz Eugen fired 74 rounds from the heavy flak when battle range was down to about 14.000 m.

[José M. Rico]

The Germans also used the Flak against Sunderland Z/201 (Flight-Lieutenant R. J. Vaughn) at about the time Hood blew up, and forced the aircraft to take immediate cloud cover.
This must have been just before fire was shifted to Prince of Wales.

[Antonio Bonomi]

Ciao all,

correct Jose' & Thorsten, .... Prinz Eugen opened fire with the 105 mm heavy flak against HMS Prince of Wales too .........

This is for sure since it was reported into Schmalenbach battle report attached to PG KTB and it was confirmed by the Prinz Eugen officer that did open fire that day from Prinz Eugen port side directly to me last year in Kiel during a 2 day interview I have recorded.

Distance was too long and fire was ceased after few salvoes and before the turn to starboard at 06.03.

Bye Antonio

[t-geronimo]

According to the war diary from PG which I downloaded here: --> http://www.kbismarck.com/archives/index.html the heavy flak fired with batteries B (8 rounds) and D (68 rounds) on PoW and afterwards fired with battery C on the Sunderland.

[Antonio Bonomi]

Ciao all,

@ T-Geronimo,

YES Thorsten, Schmalenbach ( 2nd Artillery officer and Flak responsable ) took precise note of the 105 mm heavy flak shells expenditure on his report attached to Prinz Eugen KTB.

Directly from Schmalenbach report thanking Ulrich translation :

Experiences on Board.
At the commencement of fire, the serving crew of the heavy and light flak was transferred to the starboard side's protective shielding in the lee of the line of fire.
This was because the flimsy shielding provided for the [fire-control] stations [on the port side] appeared inadequate in anticipation of the hostile [heavy] caliber [hits] and shrapnel we could expect.
Furthermore, I assumed that the battle distance would not slip below 150 hectometers [ = 15.000 meters although it did, Editor].
At the order to open fire against "King George", the services of the starboard side [flak batteries] were first brought to bear.
Thus, (flak) Battery "Dora" expended 60 rounds of explosive shells with a firing rate of (two rounds per) 5 seconds, accounting for a firing duration of 80 seconds [average of 22.5 rounds per minute per barrel: Editor].
Battery "Bruno" expended only 6 rounds. Both (gunnery) leaders ceased fire on their own [volition] when the maximum [firing] range was reached.
In both batteries, the [fire control] station's computations and the entire transport of ammunition by the portside (crew) was accomplished calmly and without interruptions.
Credit is also due to the stand-by crew's assistance, although they only saw moderate action.

and more about the Sunderland after :

During the subsequent shooting at a Sunderland flying boat by Battery C, two detonation failures or [fuze] setting errors were observed by me.
Their causes could not be explained (determined). Most likely, preset ammunition was fired without resetting the fuzes.

The 105 mm guns were type C/31 and you can read their characteristics here in.

http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNGER_41-65_skc33.htm

Gun designation : B-Bruno was the one aside the main tower forward, C-Caesar was the gun in the middle aside the crane on the main deck level and obviously D-Dora was the one aft.

According to the officer I have interviewed last year the shells felt all short and consequently they ceased fire, he could still not beleive himself he did participate in that battle with his 105 mm guns firing at a battleship of KG V class : the HMS Prince of Wales.

Bye Antonio

[José M. Rico]

Also check flight-Lieutenant R. J. Vaughn report (can't find where it is now). It says the Sunderland came under heavy fire just a few seconds after the Hood blew up.
Perhaps it was Bismarck's Flak firing at this time since she was behind PG and closer to Sunderland Z/201.

[paulcadogan]

Here you go.

http://www.hmshood.org.uk/reference/off ... 15-415.htm

[martyn1]

Ciao all,

also Geoffrey Brooke, an Officer on board HMS Prince of Wales on his book " ALARM Starboard " made a good re-construction of those crucial minutes.

http://www.amazon.com/Alarm-Starboard-G ... 1844152308

although some memories were a bit mixed up on timing when compared to the official Hood board of inquiry reports,and it is absolutely normal, this book is highly reccomended.

Than we have Esmond Knight and Sam Wood memories too.

On german side we do have the same problems with survivor memories versus offficial kriegsmarine documents, so it is a common factor to deal with.

Lucky us now we have all those sources available and by matching them all on a pragmatic way one can see the reality, with due tolerances of course.

Bye Antonio

Hello there I was curious to know where you read about Sam Wood and his memories as he is my Grandfather

Martyn.

[Antonio Bonomi]

Hello Martyn,

YES, I do have read the memories of Sam Wood and are quite accurate with my reconstruction timing too of course, a great story of an eyewitness.

I have read about his story on the internet a year ago.

If you have more please contact me directly.

Bye Antonio