Denmark Strait and RN Articles of War

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

Moderator: Bill Jurens

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

Re: Denmark Strait and RN Articles of War

Post by dunmunro »

Antonio Bonomi wrote:Hello everybody,

@ Thorsten,

I want to facilitate you and I attach here again my previous map with all the salvo details, so : which salvo is the one showed on your Bild 2 pic from PG Rheinubung film ?

Than you probably can tell me also the timing of that pic and PG Rheinubung film sequence, ... with due tolerances of course ... :wink:

Bye Antonio :D

Pow_revisited_Sept_2013_01.jpg
According to PE's torpedo chart, the wind was blowing to the south-east, at about 230d, at 36km/h or about 19 knots. If Leach had intended to turn away at ~0602, and made smoke then, he would be well covered by the time he completed the first turn-away at ~0603. If the smoke began at ~0602, we should see evidence of that on the photos timed for 0604, but we don't and the smoke that is apparent seems to have started later than that, and the photo might not show a smoke screen at all:
Image

If the green rectangle is the smoke screen, then why isn't PoW behind it? The Red rectangle shows where the smoke screen should be from PE's perspective if it began at 0602: Although that begs the question of why Leach didn't make smoke sooner if his intention was to turn away under his own smoke screen?
Thorsten Wahl
Senior Member
Posts: 919
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2009 4:17 pm

Re: Denmark Strait and RN Articles of War

Post by Thorsten Wahl »

on the film snip ther is no objekt visible in front of the smoke cloud
but possibly a object on the left base of the right smoke cloud partly covered
duncan wher on th phote is POW
is POW covered by the impacts?
if POW present its stern it should have aproximately the same width extension as one impact
do you know deceleration of KGV class when hard rudder is set?
Meine Herren, es kann ein siebenjähriger, es kann ein dreißigjähriger Krieg werden – und wehe dem, der zuerst die Lunte in das Pulverfaß schleudert!
Tom17
Member
Posts: 47
Joined: Mon Sep 02, 2013 2:38 pm
Location: Middlesbrough, England

Re: Denmark Strait and RN Articles of War

Post by Tom17 »

Dunmunro,
What's the object that appears to be sticking up below the 'and' in your description of where POW is (purple writing)? A mark on the photo I presume.
I must admit I originally (on smaller copies) thought it was the remains of Hood's stern. But the larger image shows it too close to the camera and too far away from the smoke column to be so.
User avatar
RF
Senior Member
Posts: 7760
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:15 pm
Location: Wolverhampton, ENGLAND

Re: Denmark Strait and RN Articles of War

Post by RF »

paulcadogan wrote: No, it was because Bismarck withdrew westwards - away from Tovey. Wake-Walker ordered PoW to cease fire so as not to drive Bismarck further in the wrong direction.
Yes, that is right. I was thinking that POW didn't have enough speed to keep going after Bismarck as Lutjens headed westward, so that Bismarck could be kept under fire even though heading away from Tovey. Once Bismarck had started that turn the damage with respect to Tovey closing was done - if Suffolk was kept out of the combat action and purely shadowed then POW, if it was substantially faster than Bismarck (obviously it wasn't) would I think be justified in continuing the action - if indeed the German gunners were hindered by glare that would have been a bonus.
But even in that scenario there would still be the risk of Bismarck escaping.

The point you make about Suffolk is an important one, as it was the radar crew that noticed the sudden reduction in range that caused Captain Ellis to execute a 360 degree turn to open the range - otherwise Suffolk could just have blundered into Bismarck.
I think the radar crew on Suffolk are very much the unsung heroes on the British side, for holding Bismarck in contact for as long as they did.
''Give me a Ping and one Ping only'' - Sean Connery.
User avatar
RF
Senior Member
Posts: 7760
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:15 pm
Location: Wolverhampton, ENGLAND

Re: Denmark Strait and RN Articles of War

Post by RF »

Tom17 wrote:Dunmunro,
What's the object that appears to be sticking up below the 'and' in your description of where POW is (purple writing)? A mark on the photo I presume.
It does look to me like a mark on the photo, as indicated by the white blotch. However under enlargement the object does look like a sinking stern section - or possibly a trick of the eyes if it isn't.
''Give me a Ping and one Ping only'' - Sean Connery.
User avatar
Antonio Bonomi
Senior Member
Posts: 3799
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 10:44 am
Location: Vimercate ( Milano ) - Italy

Re: Denmark Strait and RN Articles of War

Post by Antonio Bonomi »

Hello everybody,

OK, now I see that the event sequence after the turn away 160 degrees to port ordered by Capt Leach seems to have been accepted by everybody, just as it should be given the official evidences available.

Thorsten has showed us a very good info about the PoW salvo 16th and the Bismarck first salvo landing on PoW with the hit on the compass platform occurred at 06.00 and 50 seconds,...very, very close to were I have always been placed here ( between salvo 15 and 16 of PoW :wink: ) realizing it from the events logic thru the witness narrative and official reports. Good enough this one too, .. and now we have PoW course on that exact moment precisely available, it was 280 degrees.
PoW_compass_hit_BS.jpg
PoW_compass_hit_BS.jpg (43.26 KiB) Viewed 696 times
Since you now move on the NH 69731 ( or IWM HU 384 ) photo analysis, ... you may want to start from were we left years ago about it :

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=1446

Some reccomendations from my side :

1) You must have a good enough photo quality to analyze the smoke if you want to do that, and you have to have it COMPLETE including the TOP clouds.
2) Same is for the PoW identification and the 3 landing shells from Bismarck very close to her.
3) Keep in mind that Bismarck is behind Prinz Eugen on this moment, so PoW wants to hide to Bismarck and not from Prinz Eugen, that is why she turned that way, to follow the smoke and not loose to much speed while doing it.
4) Similarly PoW wanted to fire to Bismarck her 19th salvo ( 1st in Local Control ) of the 2 shells you see falling very short from Bismarck ( this give you also the direction Bismarck is behind the German cruiser )
5) Prinz Eugen has NOT turned yet to starboard ( it will occur at 06.03 and 45 seconds battle time ) and you see her railing and sailing direction very well.
6) I do not provide you more elements about the 2 Hood smoke pillars since it has been already well established before and you can just read it.

Correlating this photo with all other battle elements occurred before and soon after on both sides, it become evident that this battle time photo is positioned at 06.03 and 25 seconds more or less. BEFORE the turn to starboard by Prinz Eugen ( 06.03 and 45 seconds ) and before PoW salvo 20th and 21st of course.

Bye Antonio :D
In order to honor a soldier, we have to tell the truth about what happened over there. The whole, hard, cold truth. And until we do that, we dishonor her and every soldier who died, who gave their life for their country. ( Courage Under Fire )
Thorsten Wahl
Senior Member
Posts: 919
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2009 4:17 pm

Re: Denmark Strait and RN Articles of War

Post by Thorsten Wahl »

Tom17 wrote:Dunmunro,
What's the object that appears to be sticking up below the 'and' in your description of where POW is (purple writing)? A mark on the photo I presume.
I must admit I originally (on smaller copies) thought it was the remains of Hood's stern. But the larger image shows it too close to the camera and too far away from the smoke column to be so.
I found the problem
right click on the picture contextmenu open in another tab/browserwindow
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
paulcadogan
Senior Member
Posts: 1148
Joined: Sun Jul 16, 2006 4:03 am
Location: Kingston, Jamaica

Re: Denmark Strait and RN Articles of War

Post by paulcadogan »

Tom17 wrote: What's the object that appears to be sticking up below the 'and' in your description of where POW is (purple writing)? A mark on the photo I presume.
I must admit I originally (on smaller copies) thought it was the remains of Hood's stern. But the larger image shows it too close to the camera and too far away from the smoke column to be so.
Hi Tom,

That has been the subject of much discussion in the past. It is definitely NOT any part of Hood's structure since she had already sunk in the position of the oil fire in the center of the picture (her stern went first).

The original photo description from Fritz Otto Busch's book (posted by Antonio) identifies it as a second smoke column related to Hood. That makes no sense either as it is too far from the sinking site and does not billow to the right in the prevailing wind as the other smoke in the photo does.

I once thought it could be a stray shell splash from Norfolk, which had briefly opened fire, but even that is not quite feasible as the splash should appear white as the others do.

It doesn't look like a photographic artifact either....so really it's a mystery!

Paul
Qui invidet minor est - He who envies is the lesser man
User avatar
wadinga
Senior Member
Posts: 2471
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 3:49 pm
Location: Tonbridge England

Re: Denmark Strait and RN Articles of War

Post by wadinga »

All

It is amazing to read pages of speculation about the deliberations Captain Leach might have gone through in the 120 secs before he decided to betray hundreds of years of tradition, dishonour the flag and run from the enemy.

On the other hand as I have previously suggested, maybe he spent the time staggering around like Tom Hanks on Omaha Beach after the mortar bomb goes off next to him. Deafened, stunned, probably covered in blood and gore I believe he was incapable even of countermanding the "hard-a-port" order he had given seconds before the shell passed through the Compass Platform. I don't believe he told anyone to "turn 160 degrees to port" or to turn to a heading away from the enemy, he just didn't countermand the last order he had given, another emergency turn, this time to port to avoid swinging around in a circle towards the enemy. Virtually everybody else in the compartment was dead, dying or severely injured. He described himself as "unhurt" because not being pulped, or with his blood gushing from a slashed femoral artery, permanently deafened or even having a huge wooden splinter driven through his cheek, he was pretty fortunate compared with everybody else in the compartment.

Here is the description of the moment from Sick bay attendent Sam Wood
I stepped back ten yards and started up the ladder to the compass platform, two thirds of my upper body were through the hatch, suddenly there was a flash in front of my eyes and I felt the searing heat, I heard no explosion and everything appeared to be in slow motion, I was sucked up and seemed to float across the bridge area I finally came to rest on the deck amongst a shambles of torn metal and human bodies , I heard a voice say "hang on doc I think we have been hit" I recall giggling at the silliness of such a remark, I got to my feet the first wounded man I got to was Leading Seaman Tucker he was lying under a pile of debris I remember he told me to leave him as he did not feel too bad, I pulled back the debris and saw his left leg was hanging on by a thin strip of flesh his femoral artery spurting like a fountain, I quickly put a tourniquet on his leg. I injected morphine and organised his removal, other casualties were dealt with as I came across them, losing count of how many, there were. Lt Esmonde Knight a well known actor in his pre- war days, blood pouring from his face around his eyes, I treated him wondering what his future would hold , I remember Boy Signalman Johnstone, recognizable only by the crossed flags on his arm and later by his pay-book, the navigator with a hole in his cheek and so it went on, for how long I cannot recall, the bridge and compass platform were a complete shambles,
Some contributors seem to be keener even than Winston (the World's Worst Back Seat Driver) to pin something on Leach. Minutes later after some more turns by which time the Captain was in charge again, and with most of his major armament out of action he turned a complete circle before resuming a shadowing course. He had disengaged from the enemy but he was not running away. As for re-engaging Wake-Walker explains his considerations. Unlike the forlorn hopes Rawalpindi, Jervis Bay, Acasta, Glowworm, Ardent or Li-Wo W-W knew another chance would come.

However re-engaging would require Germans to co-operate.

All the best

wadinga
"There seems to be something wrong with our bloody ships today!"
User avatar
RF
Senior Member
Posts: 7760
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:15 pm
Location: Wolverhampton, ENGLAND

Re: Denmark Strait and RN Articles of War

Post by RF »

wadinga wrote: Unlike the forlorn hopes Rawalpindi, Jervis Bay, Acasta, Glowworm, Ardent or Li-Wo W-W knew another chance would come.
But each of these was an entirely different situation to the DS battle and its aftermath - not all of these actions were completely forlorn either, they had concrete results and saved the Allied side from bigger losses.
''Give me a Ping and one Ping only'' - Sean Connery.
User avatar
Alberto Virtuani
Senior Member
Posts: 3605
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 8:22 am
Location: Milan (Italy)

Re: Denmark Strait and RN Articles of War

Post by Alberto Virtuani »

Wadinga wrote: " I don't believe he told anyone to "turn 160 degrees to port" or to turn to a heading away from the enemy, he just didn't countermand the last order he had given"
Hi Sean, nice to hear from you again!
I was long time of your same opinion after reading several errors in the books and tying to imagine how was the scene after the hit in the compass platform (thanks for posting the narrative from Sam Wood).

However, after the precise reconstruction of timing, salvos and routes from Antonio Bonomi, it is clear that Leach gave 3 orders just after 6:01: 1) turn away , 2) smoke screen and 3) pass gun control to aft director. While the first one may well be just a missing counter-order as you hypothezise (but why he didn't tell that ?), I'm sorry that the other 2 orders are clearly aiming to a run away from the enemy. :(

The point versus the Naval Discipline Act (former Articles of War) is whether this disengagement decision was improperly or wisely taken. In my poor opinion disengaging after having received just one or two hits on board, with a ship in good fighting efficiency, without any certainty to have inflicted any damage to a dangerous commerce raider and with no certainty to resume action with Tovey (as it never happened after) is from a strategical viewpoint very debatable and from a military viewpoint is for sure not "in the RN highest traditions".
As Paul correctly said a Board of Inquiry would have been an opportunity to clarify things.
I know we will disagree forever on this judgement ! :lol:

Your evaluation on Churchill is another story, he could have been a "back seat driver" but for sure he was not a navy ignorant politician (e.g. his support to the decision to build QE battleships in WWI and his position against the choice of the quadruple 14" turrets just before WWII testimony about his naval competence). His political decision not to Court Martial Leach and Wake-Walker is in my opinion a wise one in 1941, having sunk BS, not willing to disclose to Germans any weak point of the KGV class and not disrupting the Home Fleet command chain after a victory. From a pure military viewpoint he would have taken another decision........

Bye, Alberto
Last edited by Alberto Virtuani on Wed Sep 25, 2013 8:15 am, edited 2 times in total.
"It takes three years to build a ship; it takes three centuries to build a tradition" (Adm.A.B.Cunningham)

"There's always a danger running in the enemy at close range" (Adm.W.F.Wake-Walker)
User avatar
RF
Senior Member
Posts: 7760
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:15 pm
Location: Wolverhampton, ENGLAND

Re: Denmark Strait and RN Articles of War

Post by RF »

[quote="wadinga"]
....decided to betray hundreds of years of tradition, dishonour the flag and run from the enemy. [quote]

This is the stuff of propaganda and the sort of thing beloved of political headline writers. Forget any idea of objectivity and simply pursue the line that stirs things up. Don't let the facts get in the way of a good story.

I'm quite sure that the good Dr Geobbels would fully appreciate this line of view. After all the Reich proopaganda ministry managed to produce a totally distorted film of the sinking of the Titanic very close to the import of the above quote.

Unfortunately this lack of objectivity is the norm for todays standards, particulary in journalism.
''Give me a Ping and one Ping only'' - Sean Connery.
User avatar
RF
Senior Member
Posts: 7760
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:15 pm
Location: Wolverhampton, ENGLAND

Re: Denmark Strait and RN Articles of War

Post by RF »

Alberto Virtuani wrote: I'm sorry that the other 2 orders are clearly aiming to a run away from the enemy.
This exactly illustrates the point in my previous post.

No objectivity here, just repeating the same narrow point and in correct interpretation without looking at all the considerations, which have been already discussed in this thread.
''Give me a Ping and one Ping only'' - Sean Connery.
User avatar
wadinga
Senior Member
Posts: 2471
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 3:49 pm
Location: Tonbridge England

Re: Denmark Strait and RN Articles of War

Post by wadinga »

All,

In Haste -I have a day job.

I hope the irony came across - I do not believe for an instant Leach was anything other than true to the tradition. The case against him is false.
More later.

All the best

wadinga
"There seems to be something wrong with our bloody ships today!"
User avatar
RF
Senior Member
Posts: 7760
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:15 pm
Location: Wolverhampton, ENGLAND

Re: Denmark Strait and RN Articles of War

Post by RF »

Alberto Virtuani wrote:
The point versus the Naval Discipline Act (former Articles of War) is whether this disengagement decision was improperly or wisely taken. In my poor opinion disengaging after having received just one or two hits on board, with a ship in good fighting efficiency, without any certainty to have inflicted any damage to a dangerous commerce raider and with no certainty to resume action with Tovey (as it never happened after) is from a strategical viewpoint very debatable and from a military viewpoint is for sure not "in the RN highest traditions".


Of course it is debateable. But the pint of view here is itself narrow and doesn't present a balanced view and because it isn't balanced it not surprisingly draws a somewhat perverse conclusion as stated many times by this contributor.
As Paul correctly said a Board of Inquiry would have been an opportunity to clarify things.
Logically it should have clarified things if it had happened. The thing is that people would pick at its findings and make issues out of it - or even claim it was a whitewash.
''Give me a Ping and one Ping only'' - Sean Connery.
Post Reply