Bismarck firing procedures at DS

[Antonio Bonomi]

Hello everybody,

@ Alecsandros,

very interesting question my friend.

I am absolutely with you ... the cameraman took the complete film for sure.

So far I have not found it ... but have not lost hope to find it one day ...

But as you can see, ... we can define pretty well a good part of Bismarck firing and timing at Denmark Strait ...and most important we can synchronize it with the existing precise Prinz Eugen and Prince of Wales available information.

This way we re-construct the events in the correct way, ... with minor tolerances ... and a very good approximation.

Bye Antonio

[Steve Crandell]

I think one thing this discussion has put to rest is the idea that Bismarck's possible mechanical rate of fire is a decisive advantage. Here we have a real battle where it obviously doesn't have the effect some people have attributed to it.

[alecsandros]

I think one thing this discussion has put to rest is the idea that Bismarck's possible mechanical rate of fire is a decisive advantage. Here we have a real battle where it obviously doesn't have the effect some people have attributed to it.

Well I think it is pretty obvious that Bismarck fired slow that day... But we do not know why...
(After all, we have the film showing intervals as low as 23 seconds between same turret group firing... so it was possible to fire fast.. but it did not happen).

[Antonio Bonomi]

Hello everybody,

Alecsandros wrote :

After all, we have the film showing intervals as low as 23 seconds between same turret group firing ... so it was possible to fire fast ... but it did not happen

I agree with you on this statement, and also in this case we are now able to change one incorrect assumption about this battle, ... this time on the German side ... but as I always said, ... I have no side taken, ... so, ... no preferences.

Now it is important to realize as good as we can the German firing methodology ... with the Vollsalve, ... the 4 Hectometers Gabelgruppe ... the Wirkungsschießens ( Rapid Fire ) ... and what happened in case of changing target or lost target ... in their procedures ... etc etc etc

This is the reason why I asked everybody ... and provided Kpt Ltnt Paulus Jasper description of what he did with the Prinz Eugen that morning ...

Bye Antonio

[Alberto Virtuani]

Alecsandros wrote and Antonio Bonomi confirmed: "After all, we have the film showing intervals as low as 23 seconds between same turret group firing... so it was possible to fire fast.. but it did not happen"

Hi Alec, Antonio,
yes, at least if, as Steve Crandell already confirmed, Germans were always firing together the 2 guns within the same turret.

I still wonder if, for any reason (tactical, procedural or mechanical), they decided to fire in a different way, e.g. only 1 gun per turret in this particular situation (target lost, range quickly increasing, enemy under smoke, own ship just out of a turn....) because really I don't understand why Schneider should have fired slowly when he had a good fire solution and very quickly when he had not......

With 1 gun only per turret firing, we would be back to the average RoF that was Bismarck one during the whole battle, however we would have just 2 shells in each group of the "Gabelgruppe": I honestly ignore whether this procedure was foreseen by Germans firing instructions in special situations......

Littorio class battleships could fire one gun per turret (but with the 3 turrets together, so 3 shells in the air) not only to acquire the range, but also in the "tiro battente" mode (I guess the equivalent of "Wirkungsschießens"....).

Bye, Alberto

[alecsandros]

@Alberto

Did you see the small lag at 6:37 in the film ? It appears turret Caesar fires first, and Dora at perhaps 0.5 seconds later... they did not fire simultaneosuly... this was probably because of the target allignement device... that deployed guns individualy on target.
As Cag has proposed earlier, this may be one reason why rate of fire was slow...

Another that I am thinking right now would be that Bismarck was doing course alterations to confuse Prince of Wales gunnery... Some survivors mentioned that... Including Bruno Roncza that Antonio has interviewed...

[wadinga]

Hello Alecsandros,

You say

Another that I am thinking right now would be that Bismarck was doing course alterations to confuse Prince of Wales gunnery

Witnesses like Roncza might report course changes, by would they know the motive?

You will notice there are many different charts showing German tracks in the Denmark Straits. Schmalenbach, Elfrath etc. They are all different. Antonio has created a very detailed one with a minute by minute breakdown. It is different too, especially for Bismarck. Why is it right?

You have put your finger on a very important point. I believe Antonio originally developed a Bismarck firing regime mathematically derived of eight shots per minute, every minute, ie one round per gun per minute. Like a metronome. This is recorded in his Storia Militare article and currently on the Hood website. Except that in minutes 06:06, 07, 08 and 09 he says Bismarck fires 4 shells only in each minute. Not 8. Antonio says A & B only in 06:06, C & D only in 07, A & B only in 08 and C & D only in 09. Why he specified these turret combos is unclear. Incidentally this is why Alberto is able to "prove" Bismarck fired fewer shots per minute over 14 minutes.

Antonio then arranged the stills and film footage in such a way as to support this timetable and map, including Bismarck's track based around PG's course from the KTB. “Gefechtschizze” So therefore times around 06:00 are attributed to these pictures. But do the pictures support Antonio's Bismarck track and Antonio's timetable? As we have noticed the metronome does not acknowledge "Good Rapid!" or a bit of footage actually showing rapid fire which has been arbitrarily positioned at a time when rapid fire would have been most unlikely.

In fact Bismarck's rate of fire seems to have varied enormously during the engagement, slowing down, pausing to avoid wasting ammunition, and speeding up at opportune times. Assigning times to photos does not work because the timetable is incorrect.

In fact Bismarck was undertaking violent manoeuvres to avoid something more concrete than PoW's gunnery. Her accompanying cruiser. The fact is that Prinz Eugen had turned approximately 90 degrees across the Flagship's bows, causing Bismarck to alter course to avoid a collision.

Jasper says that on the 28th salvo, PG’s A & B turrets wouldn't bear any more, and this was before 06:09 when Bismarck fouled PG's range, by being between her and the target. Antonio's map shows PG steering a little north of 270, but he has also showed Bismarck steering 270 during this violent jinking, which surely must have meant only C & D turrets would bear. So you are correct.

Unfortunately instead of working together to attempt to resolve the mystery of Bismarck's actual movements, we have been wasting time on the fantasy of the Conspiracy Theory.

All the best

wadinga

[Alberto Virtuani]

Wadinga wrote: "Incidentally this is why Alberto is able to "prove" Bismarck fired fewer shots per minute over 14 minutes.
"

Hi Sean,
no, I'm able to prove this fact based just on the known number of actual shells fired .......

BTW, we are still waiting your own "proposal" regarding a complete salvo plot for Bismarck, respecting all the evidences. Where is it ?
In which interval(s) would Bismarck have fired very quickly, "speeding up at opportune times", in your opinion ?

Bye, Alberto

[Steve Crandell]

Wadinga wrote: "Incidentally this is why Alberto is able to "prove" Bismarck fired fewer shots per minute over 14 minutes.
"

Hi Sean,
no, I'm able to prove this fact based just on the known number of actual shells fired .......

BTW, we are still waiting your own "proposal" regarding a complete salvo plot for Bismarck, respecting all the evidences. Where is it ?
In which interval(s) would Bismarck have fired very quickly, "speeding up at opportune times", in your opinion ?

Bye, Alberto

I'm not willing to go to the effort of trying to plot her entire series, but there are two obvious points of maximum firing rate that we know of from German procedure, either of which could have been in the film sequence.

1. The initial range ladder calls for three 4-gun salvos at three different ranges, fired as fast as possible.
2. When a straddle is achieved, "good rapid" is called for, which involves both turret groups firing as fast as possible.

Either of those situations would obviously skew any nice metronomic salvo plot because it involves moving several of the salvos closer together than a one minute interval. Ergo, she MUST have stopped firing at one or more intervals or there would have been many more shells fired.

[Alberto Virtuani]

@Steve Crandell:
Hi Steve,
I agree with your logic above and I would have though the same in the absence of evidences.

However, we know that BS only fired 93 shells in 14 minutes, that she fired 5 full salvos before sinking Hood and that the PG film only shows a very strange sequence of fast fired salvos from 6:04 till 6:05 (when BS was sailing away for the torpedo alarm, target was lost and PoW was quickly opening range).
More, we have plenty of photos for salvos (at least 4 if not 5) fired just after 6:06 (second BS turn).

Due to the above facts, the theory of BS stopping fire cannot be true for more than the 30 seconds of each turn (btw there is no evidence even supporting these short pauses....). BS could not have fired much faster than her average RoF at any other stage of the battle and this rate was in average slower than PoW (viewtopic.php?f=1&t=6811&start=450).

Antonio's "metronomic" timetable is not a simplification, it is based on evidences (mostly a detail study of photos and film), in the absence of another complete study of her salvo plot (accounting for all the 93 shells), it is by far the most probable one and the rest is just speculation.

Bye, Alberto

[alecsandros]

In fact Bismarck's rate of fire seems to have varied enormously during the engagement, slowing down, pausing to avoid wasting ammunition, and speeding up at opportune times. Assigning times to photos does not work because the timetable is incorrect.

... Antonio did not rearage the movie,
the movie has "hooks" that can be hooked with other evidence in order to provide a timetable. Not exact... but approximate. How apprroximate... I don't know.

He has done the best work that can be done with the available info, and went the long way and retrieved new info for the general public.

----

The Bismarck salvos are derived from Baron , Jasper, Schlamembach, and Prince of Wales reports on enemy gunnery. Possible other sources to.

----

Bismarck's rate of fire is a dubious aspect. Schneider required 3 salvos to zero-in on Hood. But those were semi-salvos... All landed by 5:56. So rapid fire order was given at 5:56/5:57 at the latest. But still, with rapid fire order given, Bismarck only produced 6 or 7 semi-salvos until 6:00:30... That's up to 28 guns ordered to fire in 4 minutes... or 0.875 shells ordered to fire per gun fire per mintue. Extremely slow...
Why is that ?
I can't find a reasonable explanation.

[it brings me back to Paul's theory of Hood destroyed earlier than 6:00... good times...]

[Antonio Bonomi]

Hello everybody,

@ Wadinga,

you asked : Why Antonio Denmark Strait battle map is right ?

ANSWER : because it is done using as base the Prinz Eugen original battle map, adding Bismarck track based on the existing photos ( not reversed or mixed up with no common sense ) and it is perfectly correlated with the PoW/Hood one.
Recently I added also the Suffolk and Norfolk tracks, placing them where they really should have been always traced, finally.

I made the initial 2005 version of my map not working on the full precise time table details, but as you very well know, with the main intent to demonstrate that the " Reversed Photo theory " was incorrect, and the correct way to put the photos and the events was another.

Now it is the time to improve it, since I have many more data and details both sides as you well know, and one day everybody will be reading a much more complete version compared to the initial 2005 version.

In Italian the " metronome " is the one that provides the correct timing of the events, ... well I like it, ... ... because on this battle that is the main problem to be resolved, due to several persons providing incorrect data and time of the events for the well known reasons.
Allow me to remind you the 06.13 time for PoW retreat, the around 15 sea miles for Norfolk/Suffolk, or " The Plot " ... as evident examples of what I am stating.

It is time to put the timing of the events on the proper place and start using the correct available data.

You correctly wrote :

In fact Bismarck's rate of fire seems to have varied enormously during the engagement, slowing down, pausing to avoid wasting ammunition, and speeding up at opportune times.

But after you start loosing yourself again :

Assigning times to photos does not work because the timetable is incorrect.

No, you are incorrect here with your statement.
It is possible and we can associate precisely the photos with the film sequence, and with the PoW local control fired last salvoes.
In this way we can determine the events in the middle of the battle since we can see the Prinz Eugen first turn, and we can determine what occurred before and after.

I know you do not like this because it nails down PoW last local salvoes event to a given time, just a bit after 06.04, with the Prinz Eugen first turn at 06.03 and 45 seconds .
Consequently all the other well known PoW on board events must have happened before the time declared for the last 3 local control salvoes been fired starting at 06.03 as for PoW gunnery map.

I provided you time ago those 2 milestones, two pillars you must refer to :

1) the Prinz Eugen first turn on his map at 06.03 and 45 seconds

2) the X manually traced on PoW gunnery plot at 06.03.

Here for you once again my explanation :

DS_battle_time_06_03_45_01.jpg (123.53 KiB) Viewed 1411 times

There is no way you can refute this Sean.
If you do not agree with me, please provide me a different way to read the official documents and the associated data I am referring to.

After we can see what happend before and after, on Bismarck fired salvoes visible on available photos and film sequence, just when Bismarck had to avoid Prinz Eugen manoeuvring on her bow like you correctly recall, ... but this once again confirms my evidence sequence and makes my work even more easy, ... while it confirms everything happened before that batle time.

Finally :

Unfortunately instead of working together to attempt to resolve the mystery of Bismarck's actual movements, we have been wasting time on the fantasy of the Conspiracy Theory.

No, I disagree, I like to work together on everything, on both sides with no pre-conceived view or assumptions and no side taken because of a flag or a nationality to be defended at any cost.

We are here talking military history and a naval battle fought 75 years ago, just for the pleasure to re-contruct it as correct as we can.


Bye Antonio

[Antonio Bonomi]

Hello everybody,

@ Alecsandros,

thanks for your compliments ...

I do not know why Schneider fired slow " Rapid Fire " salvoes, but it is useless to play back and forth Hood explosion time because you are trying to adjust the Bismarck firing rate making it fast at a given time.

We do not know how " Gut Schnell ! " ... Rapid Fire ... translated into real facts for the Bismarck.

The Hood explosion time is fixed forever at 06.00 and 20 seconds by the photo Nh 69724 ... where we can see the PoW salvoes 13th and 14th, just being fired and in the air, ... and we have the perfect time for those salvoes thanking PoW gunnery plot.

Bismarck fired 93 real shells on 14 minutes and nothing will change that.

Probably 104 guns were ordered to fire, it can be everything from 96 to 120 or even more, and I assumed 104 not knowing the truth.

But even if you take 112 ... it is going to be slow no matter what ... before or after the Hood explosion even if you move it.

As I stated weeks ago, ..it is time to forget about PoW being a useless " green ship " not worked out ...and Bismarck a warship on the " peak of her efficiency ", ... somebody liked to put the facts on that way 75 years ago.

They were just 2 warships, ... with their own performances.

Lets realize the truth, ... and make our personal considerations after it.

We need to fill up this data sheet with " metronomic " precision, and reference :

BS_DS_01.jpg (91.71 KiB) Viewed 1410 times

... hopefully some German friends can help here ...

... and after we will have also the KGV on May 27th, ... thanking Duncan current efforts ... all will be more clear.

Bye Antonio

[Antonio Bonomi]

Hello everybody,

now putting together the above information we can start making some " metronomic " evaluations.

Assuming, ... always with due tolerances, ... the landing time of the PoW 20th salvo is correctly positioned at 06.03 and 45 seconds ... and here we have PoW gunnery map and PG battle map reducing a lot the tolerances to few seconds only ... we can measure and make a time assesment to the whole Prinz Eugen Rheinubung film 86 seconds, removing obviously the 8 seconds inserted showing Hood explosion final sequence, the Bismarck first salvo Landing on PoW and the PoW 16th salvo departing.

DS_timetable_BS_PG_film_04.jpg (71.66 KiB) Viewed 1388 times

Using the above assumptions and timetable, we can determine the timing of the 5 Bismarck salvoes visible on the Prinz Eugen Rheinubung film.

Here you have them inside the correct timetable and with reference with available NH69xxx photos we already know very well and you can find into the single PG film frames :

DS_timetable_BS_PG_film_BS_salvoes_04.jpg (106.56 KiB) Viewed 1388 times

Opinions welcome ...

Bye Antonio

[Alberto Virtuani]

Antonio Bonomi wrote: "Opinions welcome ..."

Hi Antonio,
great research work, as usual !

However, IMHO, due to the fact that PoW salvo 20 was fired by one of the same guns that fired salvo 19 (Y1 or Y4), and that this salvo landed at 6:03:25, as per photo NH69731, I would not assume PoW salvo 20 could land before 6:03:55 (giving at least 30 seconds to reload the same gun as per theoretical RoF of British 14"). What do you think ? Does this match with the other evidences ?

In any case, with this timing for salvo 17 (6:03:29 or 6:03:39, and knowing that Bismarck salvo 16 (also visible in photo NH69731) was already landing at 6:03:25 (therefore fired at around 6:03:05) , we can say that BS did not cease fire during the first turn at all, or,if we move salvo 20 to my proposed slightly delayed timing, she suspended fire between salvo 16 and 17 for very few seconds.....

Bye, Alberto