Frederick Dalrymple-Hamilton report.

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

Moderator: Bill Jurens

HMSVF
Senior Member
Posts: 347
Joined: Sun Jun 17, 2018 10:15 am

Frederick Dalrymple-Hamilton report.

Post by HMSVF »

Hi all,


I imagine that many of the scholars on here will have read this already. I found it whilst browsing!

https://www.benjidog.co.uk/battleships/ ... ost_Mortem


BW HMSVF
Steve Crandell
Senior Member
Posts: 954
Joined: Wed Feb 05, 2014 7:05 pm

Re: Frederick Dalrymple-Hamilton report.

Post by Steve Crandell »

Thank you for providing that link! If I'd read it it was a long time ago.
Thorsten Wahl
Senior Member
Posts: 919
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2009 4:17 pm

Re: Frederick Dalrymple-Hamilton report.

Post by Thorsten Wahl »

many thanks

the report and the discussion of events show interesting details.

my summary of main events

At the start of the action Bismarcks inclination was 180 degrees (head on) slowly changing to 150 L at ~09.00. (so Bismarcks rear turrets were not able to bear against Rodney during the first stage of the action.)
Bismarck listed 3° - 5° to port.

first sighting 08:43 distance 14 miles, when Bismarck came out of a rain squall
fire was opened at 08:47 gun range 235

Bismarck replied at 08:49 with a RoF in the order of 1 - 1.5 salvos per minute until 09:00 . target was Rodney -salvo over-
Bismarcks second salvo at around 08:50 straddled Rodney

the fifth salvo of Rodney around 08:51 brought possibly a double hit against the foward firing control facilities (two splashes out of 4 shells)
as the succeding german salvos start with number three seem to had problems in aquiring the target but ROF was not impaired so far.

at around 09:00 the german periodic shooting became erratic with A turret beeing silenced and B turret being firing spasmodic by a series ofstraddling salvos (17,18,19) of Rodney during a turn to avoid Bismarcks gunfire.

By about 09:15 Bismarck shifted fire to KGV...
09:18 range 10000 yards
by 09:20 Bismarck shifted fire back to Rodney but only Bismarcks X turret was firing back at all regularly
09:27 range 6000 yards
09:40 Bismarck completely silenced

Remarks:
-turret tilts /ships roll and jaw effects to Rodney due to the direction of swell were strongly affecting shooting
-number of 16" hits: estimated as being at least 40.
-fuze No. 159 requires 1 inch steel at right angles to ensure functioning of the fuze.
-they noted that the german shells did not explode on impact on water
(Rodney received splinterdamage by a near miss 08:50 and received a further near miss effect in 09:20)... so these shells must be "Kopfzünders" wich explode on impact with water and the remainder were mostly base fuzed shells)
-coincidence rangefinders (once more)did not provide accurate early ranges as Bismarck provide no good vertical lines and also shapes were uncertain by haze and smoke
-Rodney had problems in accquiring Bismarck and continous straddling despite the lack of speed and maneuver on side of the german ship
when they aquired the target (salvo 17/18/19) they lost again the firing solution by problems with the range plot
-given that Bismarck was completely silenced at 09:40 its likely: a order of self sinking the ship was given at or shortly after 09:40.
Last edited by Thorsten Wahl on Tue Aug 30, 2022 2:57 pm, edited 5 times in total.
Meine Herren, es kann ein siebenjähriger, es kann ein dreißigjähriger Krieg werden – und wehe dem, der zuerst die Lunte in das Pulverfaß schleudert!
Steve Crandell
Senior Member
Posts: 954
Joined: Wed Feb 05, 2014 7:05 pm

Re: Frederick Dalrymple-Hamilton report.

Post by Steve Crandell »

Bismarck's shift of fire to KGV corresponds to the aft FC position taking control of the main battery. The after turrets don't seem to have been in action until then, which makes me wonder why their fire wasn't directed to a different target while the main battery was shooting at Rodney. Were all the British ships in the forward arc? Maybe so. I know KGV and Rodney were.
Thorsten Wahl
Senior Member
Posts: 919
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2009 4:17 pm

Re: Frederick Dalrymple-Hamilton report.

Post by Thorsten Wahl »

thats why I made (...)
Meine Herren, es kann ein siebenjähriger, es kann ein dreißigjähriger Krieg werden – und wehe dem, der zuerst die Lunte in das Pulverfaß schleudert!
dunmunro
Senior Member
Posts: 4394
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2005 1:25 am
Location: Langley BC Canada

Re: Frederick Dalrymple-Hamilton report.

Post by dunmunro »

Steve Crandell wrote: Tue Aug 30, 2022 2:31 pm Bismarck's shift of fire to KGV corresponds to the aft FC position taking control of the main battery. The after turrets don't seem to have been in action until then, which makes me wonder why their fire wasn't directed to a different target while the main battery was shooting at Rodney. Were all the British ships in the forward arc? Maybe so. I know KGV and Rodney were.
Thorsten Wahl wrote: Tue Aug 30, 2022 2:37 pm thats why I made (...)
Bismarck's A arcs should have been open shortly after she opened fire on Rodney. Rodney's report states that Bismarck's first salvo was fired by A and B turrets but this shouldn't be taken to mean that C and D couldn't bear after the first few salvos, as the track charts seem to indicate that Bismarck turned onto a northerly course that should have allowed the after turrets to engage Rodney.

BTW, KGV's GAR states that Bismarck didn't straddle with her 2nd salvo ("...correct for range but out of line...") but noted 3 straddles during the period when Bismarck was engaging Rodney.

Rodney's report reinforces my view that all the early hits (first 15-20mins) on Bismarck came from KGV, which her vastly superior radar ranged FC system.
Thorsten Wahl
Senior Member
Posts: 919
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2009 4:17 pm

Re: Frederick Dalrymple-Hamilton report.

Post by Thorsten Wahl »

Bismarck's A arcs should have been open shortly after she opened fire on Rodney. Rodney's report states that Bismarck's first salvo was fired by A and B turrets but this shouldn't be taken to mean that C and D couldn't bear after the first few salvos,
a definitive NO.

Bismarck was slow and the turning to starbord was also very slowly.

Rodneys general movement was eastward during the first 10-15 minutes. So the course change of Bismarck was mostly overcome by movement of Rodney.
when Rodney changes the course southerly then Bismarcks A-arcs may have been opened at a certain time.
at around 09:0o Bismarcks inclination was then around 150° L.

So Bismarck very definitive could use only two turrets during the first ten to twelve minutes
Meine Herren, es kann ein siebenjähriger, es kann ein dreißigjähriger Krieg werden – und wehe dem, der zuerst die Lunte in das Pulverfaß schleudert!
User avatar
hans zurbriggen
Senior Member
Posts: 421
Joined: Sat Dec 21, 2019 8:15 am

Re: Frederick Dalrymple-Hamilton report.

Post by hans zurbriggen »

Hello,
according to Rodney narrative, between 09:48 and 09:50 first range came from main rangefinder and fire was corrected by 2,500 (!) yards above previous gun range, obtaining a good plot. Apparently Norfolk observation of early straddle(s) at 08:47-08:48 from Rodney was inaccurate (as these salvos fall of shot, fired much closer, were not visible even from Rodney herself).

This confirms German accounts saying that no early hit were received by Bismarck on May 27. Only after 09:00 (distance down to less than 20,000 yards) Bismarck started to be consistently straddled by Rodney.

hans
dunmunro
Senior Member
Posts: 4394
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2005 1:25 am
Location: Langley BC Canada

Re: Frederick Dalrymple-Hamilton report.

Post by dunmunro »

hans zurbriggen wrote: Wed Aug 31, 2022 9:25 am Hello,
according to Rodney narrative, between 09:48 and 09:50 first range came from main rangefinder and fire was corrected by 2,500 (!) yards above previous gun range, obtaining a good plot. Apparently Norfolk observation of early straddle(s) at 08:47-08:48 from Rodney was inaccurate (as these salvos fall of shot, fired much closer, were not visible even from Rodney herself).

This confirms German accounts saying that no early hit were received by Bismarck on May 27. Only after 09:00 (distance down to less than 20,000 yards) Bismarck started to be consistently straddled by Rodney.

hans
KGV had accurate radar ranges for her first two salvos, so Norfolk would have been observing KGV's fall of shot; for the next few minutes KGV seems to have been spotting using Rodney's fall of shot, but this was corrected by 0853.

KGV's GAR states that she began receiving continuous radar ranges from about 0852 and that she observed a 14in hit at 0853.
User avatar
hans zurbriggen
Senior Member
Posts: 421
Joined: Sat Dec 21, 2019 8:15 am

Re: Frederick Dalrymple-Hamilton report.

Post by hans zurbriggen »

Hello,
unluckily there is no consistent account/reconstruction of May 27 engagement yet:

- according to Rodney, they observed a straddle at 3rd salvo (22,500 yards), but, when first range came from rangefinder, they realized they were 2,500 yards short and had to correct;
- according to KGV, 284 radar initially mixed their and Rodeney's fall of shots (25,000 yards) and then they observed a hit on Bismarck, already at 08:53 (20,500 yards), with very first 'correct' radar range measurement: no confirmation from any other source;
- according to Norfolk (flank-marking) first straddle on Bismarck was observed only after 09:00, first hit only at 09:04;
- according to German survivors, AFAIK, first hits came after 09:02 (Brenneke)or even later, around 09:08 (Baron).

IMHO it would be tremendous piece of work to try and reconcile all these contradictory info to build a reliable sequence of events/hits.

hans
Last edited by hans zurbriggen on Sun Sep 17, 2023 8:29 am, edited 1 time in total.
dunmunro
Senior Member
Posts: 4394
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2005 1:25 am
Location: Langley BC Canada

Re: Frederick Dalrymple-Hamilton report.

Post by dunmunro »

hans zurbriggen wrote: Sun Sep 17, 2023 7:17 am Hello,
unluckily there is no consistent account/reconstruction of May 27 engagement yet:

- according to Rodney, they observed a straddle at 3rd salvo, but, when first range came from rangefinder, they realized they were 2,500 yards over target;
- according to KGV, 284 initially mixed their and Rodeney's fall of shots and then they observed a hit on Bismarck, already at 08:53, with very first 'correct' radar range measurement: no confirmation from any other source;
- according to Norfolk (flank-marking) first straddle on Bismarck was observed only after 09:00, first hit only at 09:04;
- according to German survivors, AFAIK, first hits came after 09:02 (Brenneke)or even later, around 09:08 (Baron).

IMHO it would be tremendous piece of work to try and reconcile all these contradictory info to build a reliable sequence of events/hits.

hans
Rodney didn't observe a straddle on her 3rd salvo (fired at 0848). Norfolk reported it ( see Rodney's GAR appendix 1 para. 5) as a hit but Rodney's 3rd and 4th salvo would have been landing just about the same time as KGV's first two salvos, and KGV had an accurate range from her Type 284 radar whereas Rodney's estimated range was considerably in error.

KGV didn't mix her first two salvos with Rodney's because they were fired with no spotting corrections.
User avatar
hans zurbriggen
Senior Member
Posts: 421
Joined: Sat Dec 21, 2019 8:15 am

Re: Frederick Dalrymple-Hamilton report.

Post by hans zurbriggen »

Hello,

KGV 284 did mix her salvoes fall of shots with Rodney's and range was estimated constant (while rapidly decreasing) at 25,000 yards (see KGV GAR, Gunnery Control, point 2).
KGV Gunnery Control.jpg
KGV Gunnery Control.jpg (56.42 KiB) Viewed 4072 times


Norfolk did not observe any hit before 09:04.
Adm.WW report.jpg
Adm.WW report.jpg (59.02 KiB) Viewed 4072 times

hans
dunmunro
Senior Member
Posts: 4394
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2005 1:25 am
Location: Langley BC Canada

Re: Frederick Dalrymple-Hamilton report.

Post by dunmunro »

hans zurbriggen wrote: Sun Sep 17, 2023 8:33 am Hello,

KGV 284 did mix her salvoes fall of shots with Rodney's and range was estimated constant (while rapidly decreasing) at 25,000 yards (see KGV GAR, Gunnery Control, point 2).

KGV Gunnery Control.jpg



Norfolk did not observe any hit before 09:04.

Adm.WW report.jpg


hans
PLease try to read what I post carefully.

This is what I stated:
Rodney didn't observe a straddle on her 3rd salvo (fired at 0848). Norfolk reported it ( see Rodney's GAR appendix 1 para. 5) as a hit but Rodney's 3rd and 4th salvo would have been landing just about the same time as KGV's first two salvos, and KGV had an accurate range from her Type 284 radar whereas Rodney's estimated range was considerably in error.

KGV didn't mix her first two salvos with Rodney's because they were fired with no spotting corrections.


By definition KGV's first two salvos were fired without spotting corrections because both salvos were in the air at the same time, and as these were KGV's first salvos her FC team would have ignored any previous salvos fired by Rodney. It was after these first two salvos that KGV began to spot on Rodney's salvos, but this error was corrected around 0852, so that the salvos fired at 0853 were fired using an accurate radar range, and these salvos were seen to hit by KGV.

paragraph 65 from WW has has incorrect timing. Rodney opened fire at 0847 however Norfolk was in contact with Rodney and was reporting the fall of shot (flank marking) right from the start.

Can you please provide a location for WW's report so that we can read it all? Thanks.
User avatar
hans zurbriggen
Senior Member
Posts: 421
Joined: Sat Dec 21, 2019 8:15 am

Re: Frederick Dalrymple-Hamilton report.

Post by hans zurbriggen »

Hello,
therefore, KGV 284 did mix her salvoes fall of shots with Rodney's and range was estimated incorrectly constant (while rapidly decreasing) at 25,000 yards from 08:49 till 08:53, except very first 2 salvoes (fired at 08:48) (thanks for this very important correction).
However, KGV was unable to follow her target for 4 minutes after open fire, while her GAR pretends she hit Bismarck with her very first salvo finally fired at a correctly measured range... very impressive performance, that is not confirmed by anybody else.

Rodney's supposed straddle is marked on her salvo plot at salvo 3, but then they realized their shells were falling almost 3 km over (at 09:48 distance could not be 22.300 yards).

Rodney_Salvoes.jpg
Rodney_Salvoes.jpg (37.55 KiB) Viewed 4030 times

WW's report is in ADM 234-509 and says no straddle was observed from Norfolk before 09:00 and no hit was seen before 09:04. German survivors spoke of an interval from 09:02 till 09:08 for first hits on board, therefore Norfolk observations are in line with them.

I confirm, I have not seen yet a solid reconstruction of battle tracks, events and hit timings for May 27 engagement.

hans
Post Reply