Jasper, Schmalenbach and 6 salvos...

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

Moderator: Bill Jurens

User avatar
Herr Nilsson
Senior Member
Posts: 1433
Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2004 11:19 am
Location: Germany

Re: Jasper, Schmalenbach and 6 salvos...

Post by Herr Nilsson » Wed Jun 27, 2018 2:16 pm

@Alberto

You haven't understand. I think Thorsten relates to:

0553 Hood and King George open fire from distance 290 hm on the Formation

when he wrote:

There seems a typing error in several documents regarding the distance of the Denmark strait battle 290 hm should be 208 hm.

Edit: Have to leave now..... South Korea-Germany.... feel free to insult me in the meantime
Regards

Marc

"Thank God we blow up and sink more easily." (unknown officer from HMS Norfolk)

Thorsten Wahl
Senior Member
Posts: 745
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2009 4:17 pm

Re: Jasper, Schmalenbach and 6 salvos...

Post by Thorsten Wahl » Wed Jun 27, 2018 2:47 pm

wording of wireless is without timing information..
it says only
"Encounter took place at distance 208 hm to 180 hm"

Reference
Nara roll: T1022-1783; PG 32552; 0460.jpg (transcript wireless from 25.05.1941)

Obviously MDv 601 Hefte der Schriftenreihe "Operationen und Taktik" (Auswertung wichtiger Ereignisse des Seekrieges) Heft 3: Die Atlantikunternehmung der Kampfgruppe "Bismarck" - "Prinz Eugen", Oktober 1942; and other derived documents received an typo


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Another Problem
Wording of the Gruppe West "Außerdem hinterließ "Bismarck" aufgrund Beschädigungen der im Vorschiff gelegenen Ölzellen eine starke Ölspur.
this seem a wrong Interpretation of the original text.

The original text says
"Bismarck 2 Treffer von King George (comment POW), davon einer durch Unterschießen des Seitenpanzers Abt 13 bis 14
Treffer Abt 20 bis 21 mindert Geschwindigkeit und verursachte 1 Grad Tiefertauchung vorn und Ausfall Ölzellen.



"Ausfall Ölzellen" means in my opinion only failure of fuel oil storage, because of failure of accessibility. (As projectile damage was above the forward Panzerdeck and fuel tanks below this deck).

But the hit in compartment 13/14 caused the complete destruction of adjacent wing tanks in the vicinity of the projectile detonation and caused likely further splinterdamage to other tanks.
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
Alberto Virtuani
Senior Member
Posts: 3607
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 8:22 am
Location: Milan (Italy)

Re: Jasper, Schmalenbach and 6 salvos...

Post by Alberto Virtuani » Wed Jun 27, 2018 3:01 pm

Herr Nilsson wrote: "You haven't understand. I think Thorsten relates to:....."
You haven't understood yet that you played a very low trick cheating about the PG KTB clear wording and you can't accept that you got rubbished in public by a more fair (or less sneaky) German native speaker ! :lol:

PG_KTB_Brinkmann_open_fire_2.jpg
PG_KTB_Brinkmann_open_fire_2.jpg (74.05 KiB) Viewed 806 times
A German native speaker wrote: "The entry in the book says only that PG and BS (= both german ships, "Verband") fired starting at 5:55. I'm sorry, but my mother tongue is german"
Google Translator says that "wird das Feuer von PG und BS erwiedert" means "the fire is returned/reciprocated by PG and BS".
Herr Nilsson wrote: "you can read it like Prinz Eugen opens fire and Bismarck is already firing.....I don't want to be dragged to same low level."
Who is insulting us and our intelligence ? :stop:

I would suggest to Herr Nilsson to avoid to expose himself in public to such ridiculous poor figures, just to support the deniers. :lol: :lol: :lol:


Bye, Alberto
Last edited by Alberto Virtuani on Wed Jun 27, 2018 4:07 pm, 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
Herr Nilsson
Senior Member
Posts: 1433
Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2004 11:19 am
Location: Germany

Re: Jasper, Schmalenbach and 6 salvos...

Post by Herr Nilsson » Wed Jun 27, 2018 4:06 pm

Alberto,

I‘m sorry, I don‘t know how to explain it better so that you are able understand it.
Regards

Marc

"Thank God we blow up and sink more easily." (unknown officer from HMS Norfolk)

User avatar
Alberto Virtuani
Senior Member
Posts: 3607
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 8:22 am
Location: Milan (Italy)

Re: Jasper, Schmalenbach and 6 salvos...

Post by Alberto Virtuani » Wed Jun 27, 2018 4:29 pm

just because there is no way to explain such a shameful attitude without admitting the blatant cheat and insult.... :oops:
"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
Herr Nilsson
Senior Member
Posts: 1433
Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2004 11:19 am
Location: Germany

Re: Jasper, Schmalenbach and 6 salvos...

Post by Herr Nilsson » Wed Jun 27, 2018 4:56 pm

So, what don’t you understand?
Regards

Marc

"Thank God we blow up and sink more easily." (unknown officer from HMS Norfolk)

User avatar
Alberto Virtuani
Senior Member
Posts: 3607
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 8:22 am
Location: Milan (Italy)

Re: Jasper, Schmalenbach and 6 salvos...

Post by Alberto Virtuani » Wed Jun 27, 2018 5:05 pm

Apparently Herr Nilsson can't admit to have been cheating (+ insulting)..... and having been rubbished in public.....a very poor guy.... :lol: :lol: :lol:
"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
Herr Nilsson
Senior Member
Posts: 1433
Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2004 11:19 am
Location: Germany

Re: Jasper, Schmalenbach and 6 salvos...

Post by Herr Nilsson » Wed Jun 27, 2018 5:26 pm

Are you able to express what you don‘t understand in regard of my explanation that Bismarck fired possibly first? Yes or no?

And where did I insult anyone?
Regards

Marc

"Thank God we blow up and sink more easily." (unknown officer from HMS Norfolk)

dunmunro
Senior Member
Posts: 3965
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2005 1:25 am
Location: Langley BC Canada

Re: Jasper, Schmalenbach and 6 salvos...

Post by dunmunro » Wed Jun 27, 2018 5:34 pm

Antonio Bonomi wrote:
Wed Jun 27, 2018 11:56 am
Hello everybody,

@ Thorsten Wahl,

this way everybody should be able to understand your input, ... :wink:

http://hmshood.com/history/denmarkstrai ... tlemap.gif

The distance of 207 hm ( hectometers ) between Prinz Eugen and the enemy was measured at 05:55 as we can see.

Obviously the Bismarck was behind the Prinz Eugen and her evaluation of the enemy was a bit more on the same moment, ... so 208 hm ( hectometers ) is close to perfection.

More, Prinz Eugen cannot have opened fire on Hood before the change of target ordered by Adm Lutjens from the " links ( PoW ) " to the "rechten gegner ( Hood ) ", ... and that happened at 05:55 as the Prinz Eugen battle map shows too.

The Lagemann photo showing both the Prinz Eugen and the Bismarck first salvo closes this debate, ... just as I have explained.

From Tedd Briggs :
Captain Kerr then ordered: 'Open fire.' From the control tower the gunnery officer bellowed: 'Shoot.' And the warning gong replied before the Hood's first salvo belched out in an ear-pulsating roar, leaving behind a cloud of brown cordite smoke, which swept by the compass platform. Seconds later a duller boom came from our starboard quarter as the Prince of Wales unleashed her first fourteen-inch salvo.

The menacing thunder of our guns snapped the tension. All my traces of anxiety and fright left me momentarily. I was riveted with fascination as I counted off the seconds for our shells to land -20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25...then tiny spouts of water, two extremely close to the pinpoints on the horizon. Suddenly a report from the spotting-top made Holland realize he had blundered. 'We're shooting at the wrong ship. The Bismarck's on the right, not the left.' Our shells had been falling near the Prinz Eugen, which many hours earlier had begun to lead the German raiding force when the Bismarck's forward radar failed. Holland seemed hardly perturbed and in the same monotonous voice said: 'Shift target to the right.'

Within the next two minutes the Hood's foremost turrets managed to ram in six salvoes each at the Bismarck. I counted each time, expecting to see a hit registered. The first salvo pockmarked the sea around her, and the third appeared to spark off a dull glow. I thought we had got in the first blow, but I was wrong.

Suddenly it intrigued me to see four star-like golden flashes, with red centres, spangle along the side of the Bismarck. But I had no time to admire them. Those first pretty pyrotechnics were four fifteen-inch shells coming our way, and deep, clammy, numbing fear returned. That express train, which I had last heard when the French fired on us at Oran, was increasing in crescendo. It passed overhead. Where it landed I was not sure. My eyes were on the two ships rapidly becoming more visible on the starboard bow. They were still winking at us threateningly. But the next salvo was not just a threat. Not far from our starboard beam there were two, no three, no four high splashes of foam, tinted with an erupting dirty brown fringe. Then I was flung off my feet. My ears were ringing as if I had been in the striking-chamber of Big Ben. I picked myself up, thinking I had made a complete fool of myself, but everyone else on the compass platform was also scrambling to his feet. 'Tiny' Gregson walked almost sedately out to the starboard wing of the platform to find out what had happened. 'We've been hit at the base of the mainmast, sir, and we're on fire,' he reported, almost as if we were on manoeuvres.
By the way, ... Danke Schon, ...


Bye Antonio
How could Briggs know anything of Bismarck's radar?

What is the time of flight of a 15in shell at 25K yds?

Even Briggs seems to state that Bismarck fired before PE.

This was Briggs testimony at the BofI into Hood's loss:
EVIDENCE OF ORDINGARY SIGNALMAN ALBERT EDWARDS BRIGGS, PJX.157404 late of H.M.S.HOOD.

The witness was cautioned in accordance with K.R. Chapter 11.

87. Where were you at the time of the action?

On the Compass Platform
88. Was the Compass Platform in the Hood still covered in?

Yes, Sir.
89. Tell us what you know from the time the HOOD opened fire.

The HOOD opened fire with the forward turrets 17 miles range, and the BISMARCK and the PRINCE EUGEN we about 30° on the starboard bow and when the HOOD opened fore the PRINCE EUGEN definitely turned away and the BISMARCK was thought to turn away. This I gathered from conversation between the Admiral and the Captain. We altered course 40° to starboard bringing the BISMARCK right ahead, 40° together and we closed in to 12 miles range. We hit the BISMARCK with our second salvo right amidships and the BISMARCK did not open fire until we had fired about 4 or 5 salvos and she hit us, according to the Squadron Gunnery Officer "on the starboard side of the boat deck aft, causing a fire in th 4" ready use lockers".
http://www.hmshood.org.uk/reference/off ... htm#Briggs
Hood's 4th salvo would have been fired at ~0554, if she was respecting PoW's time slots, otherwise about 0553:30.

However, Briggs seems pretty confused.

User avatar
Alberto Virtuani
Senior Member
Posts: 3607
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 8:22 am
Location: Milan (Italy)

Re: Jasper, Schmalenbach and 6 salvos...

Post by Alberto Virtuani » Wed Jun 27, 2018 5:35 pm

Hello everybody,
Herr Nilsson wrote: "where did I insult anyone?"
unable to shut up or at least to read back what he has written..... :lol: :lol: :lol:
he wrote (without having been provoked after his VERY LOW trick)..."I don't want to be dragged to same low level"
another miserable guy!


Bye, Alberto
"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
wadinga
Senior Member
Posts: 2054
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 3:49 pm
Location: Tonbridge England

Re: Jasper, Schmalenbach and 6 salvos...

Post by wadinga » Wed Jun 27, 2018 5:44 pm

Hello All,

I do hope it is not too late to get my name added to the highly distinguished "Black List" of hooligans and deniers on this thread too! :D

Can I remind you of Geoffrey Brooke who writes with great clarity:
Ting-ting went the fire gong and I shut my eyes. BAROOM! The Prince of Wales' first salvo was away from A and B turrets. The slight concussion and the brown smoke that drifted aft (the wind dispersed it fairly quickly) brought welcome relief from inaction. My fingers moved up and down the three knobs. Suddenly a rippling yellow flash played in front of the Bismarck, followed by a dark cloud that, nearly blotting her out, hung for an appreciable time. She had fired. At whom? The range was 26,500 yds (nearly 13 miles) and it would take almost a minute to find out. There was a hoarse croak from a box on the bulkhead heralding our fall of shot...………...
Clearly, Bismarck fires shortly after PoW's first salvo and before her fall of shot. This event, unlike PG's KTB is actually time stamped by PoW's fire control record, whereas the PG KTB is ambiguous and merely says both ships are returning fire at 05:55. There is to my eye nothing about starting or commencing and this point has been already made by Herr Nilsson. (Who does not deserve the outrageous insults being thrown at him :negative: ). This can mean both ships were in the process of firing at 05:54 and will be at 05:56 but a log entry was made at 05:55. A & A, who I believe have employment in the computing trade wish to believe that KTB/log entries are accurately time stamped. When it suits them they contradict this, say when the KTB says Hood explodes after 06:01 or when Norfolk logs the identification of the BCF half an hour after first smoke. The evidence is ignored or distorted as required to support the speculative timeline.

Dunmunro, please add the excellent Geoffrey Brooke to your impressive list of authorities.


Northcape, have you noticed your observation
Northcape wrote: "The entry in the book says only that PG and BS (= both german ships, "Verband") fired starting at 5:55. I'm sorry, but my mother tongue is german"
(My emphasis) is being used against your observations? Surely "return fire" is just a present tense, and nothing actually written says "commenced"?


All the best

wadinga
"There seems to be something wrong with our bloody ships today!"

User avatar
Herr Nilsson
Senior Member
Posts: 1433
Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2004 11:19 am
Location: Germany

Re: Jasper, Schmalenbach and 6 salvos...

Post by Herr Nilsson » Wed Jun 27, 2018 5:58 pm

Alberto Virtuani wrote:
Wed Jun 27, 2018 5:35 pm
Hello everybody,
Herr Nilsson wrote: "where did I insult anyone?"
unable to shut up or at least to read back what he has written..... :lol: :lol: :lol:
he wrote (without having been provoked after his VERY LOW trick)..."I don't want to be dragged to same low level"
another miserable guy!


Bye, Alberto
@Alberto

That means that the only answer you have to contribute is another insult and you can not even express what you don’t understand? That‘s fine with me, too.
Last edited by Herr Nilsson on Wed Jun 27, 2018 6:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Regards

Marc

"Thank God we blow up and sink more easily." (unknown officer from HMS Norfolk)

User avatar
Alberto Virtuani
Senior Member
Posts: 3607
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 8:22 am
Location: Milan (Italy)

Re: Jasper, Schmalenbach and 6 salvos...

Post by Alberto Virtuani » Wed Jun 27, 2018 6:00 pm

Hello everybody,

This is a snapshot from our friend Paul Cadogan's proposed salvo plot for Hood (only very first salvos, as I don't want someone staring again diverting the discussion on Hood explosion time). Of course, they were ok when proposed to demonstrate Paul's theory of Hood explosion at 5:58, now the deniers will find errors..... :lol: )

Paul Cadogan_Hood_Salvo_DS Track Chart_First Salvos.jpg
Paul Cadogan_Hood_Salvo_DS Track Chart_First Salvos.jpg (31.89 KiB) Viewed 745 times

The 5th salvo would have been fired at 5:55:10 and the 6th at 5:55:30. Ted Briggs is very precise, unfortunately for the denier who was stating that no British source confirm the German delay... :lol:
Dunmunro had (histerically) cried: "We NO STATEMENTS FROM THE RN SIDE THAT BISMARCK DELAYED FIRE. NONE!!!"
:lol: :lol: :lol:
As we have discussed here (viewtopic.php?f=1&t=7736&start=345#p73208), in my (poor) attempt to reconstruct the German salvo plots I have put PG first salvo at around 5:55:20 (and BS at 5:55:27). A perfect match (we have 5 salvos fired by Hood before Germans open fire....)



Wadinga wrote: "I do hope it is not too late to get my name added to the highly distinguished "Black List" of hooligans and deniers""
Mr.Wadinga is black-listed since long time ! As his convoluted and nonsense post demonstrates, because almost all British witnesses contradict themselves about the open fire sequence and timing. :lol:

Luckily we have the PG KTB and all the German Gunnery Officers giving a clear input, despite the attempts to quibble over German language "nouances" (after the ones to quibble over English "nouances"). :lol:


Bye, Alberto
Last edited by Alberto Virtuani on Wed Jun 27, 2018 6:25 pm, edited 7 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
Alberto Virtuani
Senior Member
Posts: 3607
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 8:22 am
Location: Milan (Italy)

Re: Jasper, Schmalenbach and 6 salvos...

Post by Alberto Virtuani » Wed Jun 27, 2018 6:02 pm

Herr Nilsson wrote: "That means that the only answer you have to contribute is another insult and you can not even express what you don’t understand? That‘s fine for me, too."
But it will never be fine for me !
Mr.Nilsson will deserve any insult after his FIRST one, while he can easily get back to see how he tried to cheat about PG KTB crystal clear statement: I will not loose time anymore with him, apparently even unable to post a decent literal translation supporting his "interpretation". :lol: :lol: :lol:
"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)

dunmunro
Senior Member
Posts: 3965
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2005 1:25 am
Location: Langley BC Canada

Re: Jasper, Schmalenbach and 6 salvos...

Post by dunmunro » Wed Jun 27, 2018 6:25 pm

Alberto Virtuani wrote:
Wed Jun 27, 2018 6:00 pm

The 5th salvo would have been fired at 5:55:10 and the 6th at 5:55:30. Ted Briggs is very precise, unfortunately for the denier who was stating that no British source confirm the German delay... :lol:
Dunmunro had (histerically) cried: "We NO STATEMENTS FROM THE RN SIDE THAT BISMARCK DELAYED FIRE. NONE!!!"
:lol: :lol: :lol:
As we have discussed here (viewtopic.php?f=1&t=7736&start=345#p73208), in my (poor) attempt to reconstruct the German salvo plots I have put PG first salvo at around 5:55:20 (and BS at 5:55:27). A perfect match....
This is what Briggs stated:
Yes, Sir.
89. Tell us what you know from the time the HOOD opened fire.

The HOOD opened fire with the forward turrets 17 miles range, and the BISMARCK and the PRINCE EUGEN we about 30° on the starboard bow and when the HOOD opened fore the PRINCE EUGEN definitely turned away and the BISMARCK was thought to turn away. This I gathered from conversation between the Admiral and the Captain. We altered course 40° to starboard bringing the BISMARCK right ahead, 40° together and we closed in to 12 miles range. We hit the BISMARCK with our second salvo right amidships and the BISMARCK did not open fire until we had fired about 4 or 5 salvos and she hit us, according to the Squadron Gunnery Officer "on the starboard side of the boat deck aft, causing a fire in th 4" ready use lockers".
The "...very precise..." Briggs states "...about 4 or 5 salvos..." which isn't very precise at all. However Briggs states that "...We hit the BISMARCK with our second salvo right amidships and the BISMARCK did not open fire until we had fired about 4 or 5 salvos and she hit us, according to the Squadron Gunnery Officer "on the starboard side of the boat deck aft, causing a fire in th 4" ready use lockers".

However, last time I checked A&A still believe that Hood mistook PE for Bismarck and fired at PE instead of Bismarck. So taken literally with the mistaken identity in mind, Briggs is stating that Hood hits (actually straddles) PE with her 2nd salvo (confirmed by Busch) and PE doesn't reply until Hood's 4th or 5th salvo... So Briggs is actually stating that PE delayed fire until Hood's 4th or 5th Salvo, since we know that Hood fired upon PE, not Bismarck.

Briggs actually says nothing about when Bismarck opened fire.

Post Reply