Jasper, Schmalenbach and 6 salvos...

[dunmunro]

Hi All

Thanks Alberto, I agree however Jasper states that the switch of fire was the reason he did not see the fatal hit. He only mentions seeing Bismarcks secondary armament fire on PoW. He also states that 2 salvos were fired at PoW to zero the guns in, in a similar fashion to what happened with Hood (ie Vollsalve + bracketing Vollsalve) so we still are unsure if it was a Vollsalve Vollsalve and then a single or multiple bracket or a Vollsalve followed by a single bracket.

We also know IIRC Hunter-Terry gave Hoods open fire as 05.53 which means his watch was a little out too. I think that is part of the problem, we are attributing precise timings to statements that we cannot be sure we're precise at all.

That is why I'm concentrating on sequences, Jasper open fire, boat deck fire, target change, explosion etc and Rowell Leach etc open fire, boat deck fire, turn, explosion.

Best wishes
Cag.

Hunter-Terry's watch might have been reading 0553:30 when Hood opened fire. H-T and his scribe had to have been effected when PoW opened fire from her after 14in quad firing at near maximum traverse.

[Alberto Virtuani]

Dunmunro wrote: "H-T and his scribe had to have been effected when PoW opened fire from her after 14in quad firing at near maximum traverse."

Hi Duncan,
for sure they had, even if they were stationed in the port aft HALA director, while the guns were firing to starboard..... We just know that the starboard aft director crew was heavily disturbed but not impaired (they could have taken on the fire control of the secondary armament), at least until the funnel hit......

In any case, their written notes were considered highly reliable by both boards.

Cag wrote: "Hunter-Terry gave Hoods open fire as 05.53"

Hi Mr.Cag,
I see only now this statement, but I'm afraid it's not the case (here below H-T declaration):

53. Will you describe what you saw of the action particularly with reference to the "Hood", from the time "Hood" opened fire?
"Hood" opened fire with foremost turrets, that is "A" and "B", at 0552. "Prince of Wales" opened fire with "A" and "B" turrets shortly afterwards.

I assume Hood opened fire in the second part of minute 52 (my personal opinion, of course, based on the fact that PoW opened fire just after 0553)


Bye, Alberto

[Cag]

Hi All

Hi Alberto yes sorry I've just spotted that myself!

I'm not sure about the timeline you gave obviously it is feasible and it fits some of the evidence. The only problem I have is that all through this we have used Hunter-Terry and his timings as precise instruments. There was no possibility of movement as Hunter-Terry gave the timings and they match up to other witness testimony.

I fully understand that a watch has a time on it and rounding up occurs so surely in your scenario that would be 06.02? (as a watch also has a second hand on it too) Hunter-Terry said 06.01 for the funnel hit not 06.01:20 or even worse 06.01:40, we seem to be allowing this immovable timeline to be moved but only one way!

From Jasper
"During the completion of ranging fires effectiveness I observed two well placed simultaneous portside strikes which again were fired from the secondary artillery of the Bismarck. At around the 8th salvo the opponent turned at first hard toward (us).
(Approximately 06.01) immediately thereafter I saw the long bow section of a sinking ship traversing behind the opponent pointing about 45° skyward and extending far above the masts of the target. The opponent apparently tried to avoid the wreckage of the leading ship. During this phase of the battle indications of a small fire were recognizable on the enemy ship but it was considerably weaker than on board the first opponent. During this time I had observed a covering salvo from Bismarck's heavy artillery who had changed target.

From the Baron

"Hood is exploding. They just stared at each other in disbelief. Then the shock passed and the jubilation knew no bounds. Overwhelmed with joy and pride in their victory they slapped one another on the back and shook hands. Their superiors had a hard time getting them back to work and convincing them that the battle wasn't over and that every man must continue to do his duty.
When the Hood had gone our heavy guns were ordered to 'shift to left target'.

The Baron says that minimal alteration was needed as by that time due to PoW manoeuvre to avoid Hood she was "approximately the same range and on the same course as the Hood had been". Even at 29 knots it would have taken time for PoW to be in such a position would it not?

We also have salvos 14, 15, 16 of PoW to consider if the salvo map is accurate.

However if, we can move timings about a little, we move the timing of the detonation of Hood back there is plenty of time to do everything.

Best wishes
Cag.

[Cag]

Hi All

Sorry I forgot something! A couple of questions,

Why do we count the German delay from when the British opened fire?

The Baron seems a bit confused,

"The clock showed 05.53. The range I figured was less than 25000 meters. There were flashes like lightning out there. Still approaching bow on the enemy had opened fire"

Then on the next page

"Schneiders voice came over the telephone. Request permission to open fire. Silence. Schneider again Enemy has opened fire"

Then on the next page " Two minutes had passed since the British had opened fire"

So was the German request to open fire asked prior to the British actually opening fire? And if so when was the long delay being counted from?

Then the Baron states Schneider says,

"Enemy salvos well grouped and anew request permission to fire"

Which enemy salvos were well grouped, is he spotting the fall of shot of Hoods first two salvos near Prinz Eugen to his right, or PoW perhaps a thousand yards behind him?

Please do not think I am questioning the Baron I'm just confused as to the sequence of events.

Best wishes
Cag.

[Alberto Virtuani]

Cag wrote: "....we seem to be allowing this immovable timeline to be moved but only one way!"

Hi Mr.Cag,
Hunter-Terry dictated only minutes and not seconds, therefore we are left with some margin (does 6:00 means 6:00:00 or 6:00:50?). We are not moving timings only one way, we stay with what H-T reported, compared to and complemented with other evidences (photos, frames, PG GAR etc.).

you wrote: "Even at 29 knots it would have taken time for PoW to be in such a position would it not? "

1 minute more or less, and this accounts for the "minimal alteration" reported by the Baron.... 1 minute is quite a long time compared to the very rapid development of the battle, where the simultaneous fire action lasted less than 7 minutes.....

you wrote: "if, we can move timings about a little, we move the timing of the detonation of Hood back there is plenty of time to do everything."

Sure, but I don't think we should move things just to match a theory..... As Dave Saxton has correctly said in the thread about "BS firing procedure", Bismarck had already the firing parameters for PoW at Hood explosion time, therefore there is no need at all to alter the timeline to fit this (relatively) "quick" switch-fire.


Bye, Alberto

[Cag]

Hi All

Hi Alberto I agree with your thoughts, it just seems we are moving times up and not down. Now 06.00 to maybe 06.00:50 and before 06.01 to 06.01:40 etc.

I do understand your point but it actually does not tie in with the Baron or Jasper accounts ie change target after Hood gone and Bismarck changed target after 06.01? There are inconsistencies.

One minute or so for PoW to reach Hoods position from an approximate 06.00 time gives us 06.01 or so for a first salvo. Therefore the second salvo funnel hit at 06.01 cannot really take place before the first salvo is fired unless the hit sequence is wrong. To reach Hoods position in 30 secs or so would mean travelling at approx 24 yds per second which I'm not sure PoW was capable of.

I quite agree with you and Mr Saxon that we cannot move a timeline to match a theory but would suggest this works both ways? We also cannot keep a timeline when it does not seem to fit.

We have a number of documents (Suffolk log Prinz Eugen torpedo map etc) that state 05.59 detonation time and we have documents (PoW GAR Inquiry No 2) that state 06.00. We even have Brinkmann and others giving 06.01 to 06.05!

My point is we cannot stick rigidly to one time sequence just because it is thought to be right and simply ignore or dismiss others because they do not fit. That's why a sequence of events needs to be investigated and how long this sequence took to occur. It could mean a detonation prior to 06.00 and a funnel hit just after 06.01 but no one even knows the time differences on each ship as of yet.

I do not wish to destroy anyone's theory or any documentation evidence, we all agree some things do not fit, my hope is we can find an answer.

Any ideas on the open fire sequence would be helpful as I'm confused by the Baron's book. Has he got mixed up as he says he witnesses the open fire but then says he hears Schneider ask permission to open fire before Schneider sees Hood open fire. Also which well grouped salvos is Schneider observing, I would imagine not the PoW ones falling behind but the Hood ones to his right.

Best wishes
Cag.

[Alberto Virtuani]

Cag wrote: "it actually does not tie in with the Baron or Jasper accounts ie change target after Hood gone and Bismarck changed target after 06.01? There are inconsistencies"

Hi Mr. Cag,
I see no inconsistency. Hood blows up just after 6:00 (H-T timing) and immediately Bismarck switches fire (Baron), firing her first salvo to PoW at around 6:00:30. This salvo lands around 6:01 (Jasper is looking to PoW).... where is the inconsistency ?
Again, we don't have the seconds and we have to fit them according to other evidences.
The funnel hit is IMO around 6:01:30, still fitting H-T timing, and being the second or third (semi-)salvo aimed at PoW.

you wrote: "Has he got mixed up as he says he witnesses the open fire but then says he hears Schneider ask permission to open fire before Schneider sees Hood open fire. Also which well grouped salvos is Schneider observing, I would imagine not the PoW ones falling behind but the Hood ones to his right."

I just read Schneider "enemy has open fire" as a remark of something happened already since a while, referred anyway to point out to the bridge something that they "seem" to have missed (that is impossible, of course...). A kind of military way of implicitly "disputing" the decision to hold fire.
I would say Schneider (or someone close to him because I guess he was only looking at the British ships anyway) should have been more interested to PoW salvos, but here we will never know for sure.
Again the remark that "enemy salvos well grouped and anew request permission to fire" sounds to me as a very military way to "contest" the delay..... my 2 cents opinion, of course, having spent some time in the Navy.


Bye, Alberto

[Cag]

Hi All

Thanks Alberto, I do understand and respect your point of view.

As for inconsistencies I understand your view and do not wish to argue too much about it. It was just if Jasper states Bismarck's change of main artillery fire being "after' his notation of the time (06.01) and the Baron states change of target 'after' Hood is gone then Bismarck's 1st salvo according to Jasper would be after 06.01. If we say at 06.01 exactly plus 25 seconds flight time then observation and the 2nd salvo plus flight time, this puts the second salvo hit to PoW funnel hit much closer to 06.02 would it not?

This would put Hunter-Terry's timings at odds with Jasper as regards the funnel hit as we are now talking nearly a minute not a few seconds. We must also consider Bismarck's reload time would that have been within the 25 second flight time? I'm sure it was.

Again for PoW to reach Hoods sinking site by 06.00:30 she would have to be travelling at approx 24 yds per second (as Alecsandros suggests 29 knots would relate to approx 14 yds per second) was PoW capable of speeds faster than Bismarck or if 06.00:30 is right then Hood must have exploded earlier to allow for this travelling time and it does not match Jaspers account of change of target ie after 06.01?

Again I'm happy to accept your opinion no problems.

Schneider is attributed the phrase sequence
1) permission to open fire
2) enemy has opened fire

So a question proceeds a statement.

Best wishes
Cag.

[Alberto Virtuani]

Cag wrote: "....if Jasper states Bismarck's change of main artillery fire being "after' his notation of the time (06.01)..."

Hi Mr.Cag,
I'm unsure I understand your doubt.....

Jasper (translated....) words: "approximately 6:01......During this time I observed a covering salvo from Bismarck's heavy artillery , who had changed target"

For me it just means that he saw at around 6:01 a heavy salvo, thus he deduced Bismarck had already changed target (before 6:01, not after due to the use of past perfect....). Am I misinterpreting your doubt ?


Bye, Alberto

[Cag]

Hi All

Hi Alberto yes that's right, my point is that Jasper has been keeping PoW under observation and yet it is only 'after' 0601 that he sees a Bismarck main salvo and assumes Bismarck's main artillery 'had changed target' (he only observes secondary artillery before this). Which salvo was the one he observed? First or second?

If we are to believe that PoW could travel at 24 yds per second and Bismarck fired at PoW at 0600.30 why is there no mention of this fall of shot being seen before 0601 as Jasper was zeroed in on PoW as from 0559 and could tell the difference between differing shell splashes?

If we guess that he had missed it, which is quite possible we are still left with PoW achieving an amazing turn of speed, faster than Bismarck and Prinz Eugen were possible to achieve, to enable her to reach the Hood position in 30 seconds. If we guess that it took PoW longer, as she could not achieve that speed, and if it took nearly a minute to reach that position then Hood detonated around 0559.30.

Again I'm sure we all have our opinions and we can work them out and find the answer. There are so many, did Schneider ask permission to fire before the enemy opened fire? Did Hood get hit prior to the turn? When did the turn happen? When did Hood actually explode? When did Bismarck change target?

I'm sure the answers will come either new ones or proof of the current ones.

Best wishes
Cag.

[Alberto Virtuani]

Cag wrote: "we are still left with PoW achieving an amazing turn of speed, faster than Bismarck and Prinz Eugen were possible to achieve, to enable her to reach the Hood position in 30 seconds."

Hi Mr.Cag,
PoW could reach Hood position in around 1 minute at 29 knots, but I don't see the puzzle here.

Any salvo aimed at Hood after the "fatal" one (if any, I personally doubt....) would have been fired by Schneider at Hood "future position", as per a basic gunnery principle (to take into account the 24 seconds flight time during which Hood was expected to move ahead at full speed on the same course 280°). This means it would be fired some 400 meters ahead of Hood actual position at firing instant.
This hypothetical salvo would have fallen ahead of Hood sinking bows (even admitting Hood still advanced after the explosion, as per H-T and Rowell accounts, she sharply slowed down).

The first salvo aimed at PoW was fired changing the firing parameters, to keep into account at least the 800 meters distance difference (if not the different range....).
Again, the Baron account is the best source we have for Bismarck gunnery: he stated that a "minimal alteration" was actually done by Schneider to hit PoW. Probably this was done with his first salvo, in Antonio's reconstruction it is the CP one, fired at 6:00:24, landed at 6:00:48, of which we see 2 splashes (thanks to Antonio for his posted PG film frame below, just the arrows and legends in orange are mine).

PoW_Compass_Platform_hit_0600_48seconds_small.jpg (90.04 KiB) Viewed 1465 times

As you can easily see, PoW at 6:00:48 was not even precisely at Hood position (both because possibly Hood still advanced a bit and because of PG relative position and consequent angle of sight). She is however much closer than in photo NH69724.

In any case a salvo fired at Hood after the "fatal" one would have landed much ahead of PoW, on the Hood future position (I have added a shape in the red rectangle to "simulate" how Hood would have appeared at 6:00:48 without the explosion, proportions and distances may be incorrect....) and this shows that obviously an adjustment was actually done by Schneider.


Bye, Alberto

[alecsandros]

f sight). She is however much closer than in photo NH69724.

In any case a salvo fired at Hood after the "fatal" one would have landed much ahead of PoW, on the Hood future position (I have added a shape in the red rectangle to "simulate" how Hood would have appeared at 6:00:48 without the explosion, proportions and distances may be incorrect....) and this shows that obviously an adjustment was actually done by Schneider.


Bye, Alberto

Dear Alberto,
While I think it is possible that Bismarck did some sort of correction of her artillery coordinates after destroying Hood,
I don't want to rule out just yet the possibility of firing on the same coordinates versus Prince of Wales as well.

We have the movie frame that you posted above. It's perfect.
Now , we have to consider this: the movie was filmed from Prinz Eugen... at 6:01 or so.

Where was Bismarck in relationship to Prinz Eugen at 6:01 ? 1000-1500meters behind and on the starboard side, no ?

Now the question is: what would the same "frame" look like if it were filmed from Bismarck... ? Wouldn't Prince of WAles's hull overlap (even slightly) with Hood's wreckage ?

[Alberto Virtuani]

Hi Alec,
yes absolutely right, it was what I meant saying that PoW was apparently "not yet at Hood position".

However, as per my above post, any salvo fired at Hood after the "fatal" one would not have landed on PoW (or Hood actual position after explosion) but far ahead of Hood bow (on her "future position", the red rectangle, where Hood would have been if not hit). Thus IMO a correction was done.

Basically, even if Schneider saw Hood exploding and stopping, why should he have fired another salvo to her ? If he did not, then an additional salvo would have been fired at Hood future position, not at her actual one.

Bye, Alberto

[Cag]

Hi All

Hi Alberto, I'm sorry you dont see what I'm trying to say but I don't think I can explain it any easier than I already have done.

I won't explain it again if you don't mind as people are probably bored with it by now anyway!

As I say we all need to try and understand the sequence and how the physical time required to achieve all of the various facets fit.

Best wishes
Cag.

[Alberto Virtuani]

Hi Mr.Cag,
I'm sorry, it's possibly my English level that is not enough....

Bye, Alberto