Two Photos

[Antonio Bonomi]

Ciao Bill, Vic and all,

@ Vic,

I am not an authority, ...just someone with more knowlwdge and material than you have, ... because I have worked very hard on this, .... that is why your inventions so superficially posted out on my face are causing this reaction from my side,....

...... nothing personal of course...........

.. because you know it, .. and still you want to try this way with no competence and material to put in discussion my work.

Who is the real arrogant between us ?

You can write and invent what you want, I will always come back demostrating you wrong, no doubts, you knew it and still you are here doing it.

Back on the subject , how many photos do you need to see on Grimstad Fjord Norway of Prinz Eugen with the Baltic camo on her to be convinced about it ?

Tell me please,.... how many.

Do you need a detail of the main turrets under repaint ?

I have that too,.... B turret with the painters in action,.. would it be ok ?

I have also a photo with painting in progress from Grimstad Fjord to Kalvanes bay,.. but I think is is not necessary for you this one,.. too much for your superficial needs.

Meanwhile you let me know just look into this and carefully look at Prinz Eugen main gun barrels photo, the one were you can see the 3 destroyers Z10 Hans Lody, Z16 Friedrich Eckoldt and Z23 on the wake of the German heavy cruiser on the way to Norway, that photo was taken around Kristansand-Norway on May 20th, 1941.

http://www.bismarck-class.dk/bismarck/h ... hein1.html

You will surely notice the main guns barrel with the Baltic camo scheme on them, still.. and a " strange elevation " of C turret main guns.

Do not worry, .. all is correct, .. it was only Kpt Brinkmann,...... trying to " impress " Adm Lutjens with his " creative " initiatives, ..... ah,ah,ah,ah,ah,ah

Than under it you can see the airplane I was talking you about taking a photo of Bismarck,...and after he took Prinz Eugen of course.

Than here in you can see on another famous photo of Bismarck into Grimstad Fjord the 105 mm gun barrrel of Prinz Eugen still with Baltic camo on her,.. what a strange combination my friend....Baltic camo still there.

http://www.bismarck-class.dk/bismarck/g ... hein2.html

Did you ever notice those details ?????

Or it is just too much for you to realize at first ???

@ Bill,

I agree with you about the depth charges,.. and I recall also Graf Spee use of them, .. even if Mr. E. Bagnasco told me it was more often used as a trick during WW 1.

Anyway in this occasion Brinkmann initiative was smart,..to say the least,..with Bismarck at 2500 meters behind him....

But you now opened a point that really made me laughing my friend ....

This because I just imagine Adm Lutjens face when Kpt Brinkmann was doing his " personalized stuffs " ... all the way thru Op. Rheinubung ........

.......... ah,ah,ah,ah,ah,ah ...................

.............. pardon me but I cannot quit laughing about it, ........

... it started with the Fliegersichtzeichen " personal interpretation " by Kpt Brinkmann,..... sailing with Prinz Eugen from Gotenhafen until Bergen and than out,..... with B and C main turret guns elevated to maximun not to paint the gun barrels with Yellow ............ while Kpt Lindemann on Bismarck did it,.........

the above photo on Kristiansand I showed to Vic is just proving it, .. can you imagine Adm Lutjens face when he saw it ??? Can you imagine the 3 destroyers commanders when they saw it ????

... than the depth charges drop ,..... at the beginning of the battle,....

... than the 3 torpedo warning issued with no torpedoes anywere at 06.03, ..... and Bismarck guns scrambled,......

... than Prinz Eugen going all over the sea,..... 3 turns,... with Kpt Ltnt Jasper going crazy about it,.......

.. and than Brinkmann driving Prinz Eugen on the bow of his Flottenchef flagship sailing full speed at 30 knots, ...... with him passing ahead firing thru the stern, ...

.. obviously keep on firing with Bismarck coming to cross behind him,.....

,.. and almost firing over his own flagship if from Bismarck they were not telling him : DO NOT EVEN THINK TO DO IT !

.. but it was not enough,....

... as Brinkmann saw another torpedo and went toward Suffolk passing again ahead his flagship bow,... crossing and going north, .....

.. I just see Adm Lutjens face with Brinkmann doing all this,.......

thank Bill for those 10 minutes of fun,...... lets see if Vic understood what was going on,..I am sure you did.

Ciao Antonio

[Olaf]

Ok, I'm lost ...

Can anybody please enlighten me what is going on in this thread? It seems to be off-topic in itself. Or a few messages in between seem to have been deleted. You all are jumping from one topic to another. There are many out there who are reading this, without getting involved, and maybe a few of them are reading through similar topics over at the Hood forum, so do I occasionally, but even with discussions that are lead across two (or more?) message boards, I fail to see what is going on here.

The initial topic ('two photos') has morphed into a discussion about what? PG Baltic camouflage at Norway? Photoshopping of PG's oil ring clamps (or however you call them in English)? Photoshopping TP into a BS/PG photo? Yellow turret tops? DCs? Weather? DS-photos taken in the Baltic? Battle on the River Plate? Lütjens going berserk about Brinkmann? (How on earth can anybody even know today if this was really the case?) Accusing each other of holding back or inventing evidence? Phone lines? Hood shell impacts?

To be honest, if I had some breaking evidence about XY, maybe some never-seen untouched photos, but I'm not allowed to post them in public message boards, I never ever would even post a hint about them. I never ever would say 'this was done this way' or 'the ship looked like this' or whatever, I would not say anything that is visible on such photos when I'm not allowed to post them to prove that I'm right. And even if I believe I have breaking evidence, I still could be wrong. For years I was thinking that on the 'A' turret roof on BS at Grimstad the two sailors are handling some kind of bar, yard or whatever that was leading over the back of the turret (and I thought to see a shadow of that thing) and then down to main deck where another guy was standing, aparently with his arms in the air trying to grab that 'bar'. Then I saw the same photo in a better quality and realised (well, someone put my nose onto it) that this long 'bar' was nothing else but a very long scratch from the mountain to the right, going almost across the whole right-handed side of the photo, across the forward superstructure of the ship and down into the water ...

So, if there is some evidence about something, then please post it and if you can't, just live with the fact that others don't buy the story. Inserting hyperlinks to discussions (mainly between the very same protagonists) or inserting hyperlinks to self-created illustrations or self-created battle tracks, or even contemporary paintings ... does not prove ANYTHING. If someone has a nice colour photo showing Bismarck's red turret tops but can't post it due to copyright reasons or promises made, then he shouldn't tell us the turret roofs were painted red, because we all want to see the proof.

I'm not a regular poster here, every now and then, but I'm trying to read most of the stuff that is written here and slowly but surely I'm getting tired of reading through never-ending and fruitless discussions.

So, what are you all talking about?

Happy discussing ~ Olaf!

[Antonio Bonomi]

Ciao Olaf and all,

you are absolutely right my friend and I beg pardon if sometimes I am too " Mediterranean " style with my responses, also the language does not help me much here, but I am sure everybody understand that there is nothing personal against anybody, just a 'passional intense' discussion on a subject that involve me personally since the summer of 2003.

This said let me try to explain you why all this is correlated.

In order to modify current existing Demark Strait battle map I have published on 2005 using existing evidences you need to put in discussion them, otherwise the result of the exercise to determine Bismarck track comes out unique, as it is basically what I did with existing available material, simple and clean.

That is the reason why time ago new posts have been written by Vic to put in discussion the credibility of photos like Nh 69722, Nh 69730 and more, because they are solid evidences you must respect to do the job, as they define unique situations between Bismarck and Prinz Eugen.
If those photos are confirmed as they are now, there is no other result possible than my work and it is already out there.

Same is for Prinz Eugen film timing and PoW original battle maps, same technique, same intentions, remove credibility from those evidences and open new room for new theories to fit hopefully.

So the technique is to state: “Nobody can prove those are real Denmark Strait taken photos “and Vic thinks he can run away with that and open all sort of theories.

The only way to prove it and it is the long hard work of historical research I have made for years on all the KM warships photos and material to prove that certain ship details and camouflage schemes ONLY apply to certain situations.

They are unique and they do match with PG film as well, so there is not the final prove of a negative available ( and I doubt we will never find it unfortunately ) but there are so many correlations among evidences that you are 99,99 % sure.
For me is 100 % but since the negative is not there I leave you guys the 0,01 % doubt.

You are right about another point my friend, I have seen private material in such a quantity to have a much larger viewpoint and confidence level of Vic and the majority of you guys.
Unfortunately I cannot provide you this material so easily, not for the moment.
I beg you pardon but I have to play with what is out there even if I know much more.
I guarantee you that I am currently working in such a way that one day everybody will have everything and not only about Denmark Strait battle or Bismarck, as you know for example that my favourite ship is Tirpitz and I love the Scharnhorst as well, so be ready for big things to come on next years.

This said for the moment I have to play with what I have already published by somebody else and explain what I know in much larger details and evidences, sorry again for this, but the existing published material if properly analyzed with enough basic knowledge is more than enough already to do the job of defending what I have made with so much hard work.

So, summarizing:

To remove the credibility from those photos you need to put in discussion Prinz Eugen fitting out and photo details, that is why the discussion went to oil rings and camo schemes.

But than when these are well defined, the statement changed and went into sky, clouds, smoke, speed, wake and even light background on those photos and all the other ones.

Than when also these are kind of defined, the propaganda censoring activity by Dr. Goebbels came out, so basically everything is valid now to hold the concept that you cannot be sure 100 % those photos are historically correct which is the final goal of Vic that started this discussion about them.

So following this unfair approach you can imagine it is useless at this point to show even the unknown original best photos you have, as one can always say : “ Propaganda by Dr, Goebbels, those were Tirpitz and Adm Hipper on 1942 and someone worked on the photo and modify them”.

As you can see everything is easy and valid to disprove and destroy leveraging on everybody limited knowledge and material availability, while it takes an enormous knowledge and material to prove and work positively on something, mostly it takes trust on who did the job for you with his knowledge.

I do not buy the approach neither the intent of such demolition activity that I rate unfair and offensive for serious historical researcher that have spent years of their life to work on this matter for everybody benefit.

I simply do not buy the concept.

If you have something more valid and new, publish it and post it with your new associated evidences, but do not try to destroy what somebody else have done before using the existing ones by selling the concept that your work cannot be better than mine because all evidences cannot be trusted.

Lucky me my work is out there and it is correctly rated and used by the persons I trust and rate very knowledgeable guys on naval history.

Ciao Antonio

NOTE :

1 - Prinz Eugen had Baltic camo scheme into Grimstad Fjord and you know it too, photo available do confirm this. So every photo of Prinz Eugen showing her turrets withou Baltic camo and with th erefuelling rings on her was taken into the Atlantic Ocean during Op. Rheinubung. Easy and irrefutable.

2 - The refuelling Oil rings and depth charges racks are unique on Prinz Eugen for Op. Rheinubung and I think you know it as well but I have provided full photo/graphic
evidences of it. They were added in Kiel on May 1941 and removed in Brest on late 1941.

3 - Consequently the available Denmark Strait photos are all correct, including Nh 69722 and Nh 69730 .

4 - Tirpitz and Adm Hipper were never used by Propaganda guys to create false photos. The existing photoshop modified photo was done recently by incompetent, and not by Dr. Goebbels guys.

5 - Lutjens vs Brinkmann personal evaluations done by me was only intended to share with Bill Jurens something I realized by working on the never published material one day you will all see. The B and C turret main guns elavation is already easily noticeable on existing photos I have referred to, but there are many more. The rest is just history well know by everybody, proven facts. .

[Vic Dale]

To Olaf.

The discussion here is as you say about two photos shot with just seconds between them and for some time now I and others have tried to use them to show salvoes from Hood falling close to PG. Subsequent study has revealed that there are major flaws which cause me at least to doubt their authenticity as action photos, due to the lack of helmets and anti-flash gear. It looks to me that though the gun has been cleared for action that it is ready for a loading or tracking exercise only. Anti-flash would be essential for this size of gun as on opening the breech after firing, unburned propellant could flash back and burn the loading numbers. If the gun was not actually in use, the anti-flash hood could be eased back off the head, but it would still be worn and clearly visible. The anti-flash hoods and gloves would also give some protection to the men against the biting cold of the Denmark Strait with the ship forging ahead at 27 knots providing additional wind-chill.

The photo below shows the German pattern of anti-flash hood.

Another one bites the dust.

Here is a little lesson for us all regarding "reliable" photos.

Take a look at the first of the two photos showing the destroyers taking station astern of PG on Exercise Rhine? May 20th? Not likely.

The oiling rig (see 2nd photo) has yet to be attached to PG's stern, so despite the camo stripes, the lack of the oiling rig shows that this photo was taken at a very early time, certainly before PG and Bismarck exercised the fueling evolutions on the 13th of May, prior to sailing for the Atlantic.

Antonio has insisted that he has documentation which places this photo on 20th of May. Let him present that documentation and we can all have another laugh.

With regard to the stripes on PG's turrets, I have been thinking about their value and it occurs to me that they may have been applied only for the time when the ship went into dock. Wilhelmshaven was within the sphere of RAF overflight from the UK, so an intense disruptive would be of greater use than stripes designed to fox attacking aircraft so they misjudge the ship's true heading.

The pretty picture of PG with her carmine turret tops AND stripes on her turret sides may simply be a view taken before her dockyard camouflage was fully removed.

The sad fact is that very few of the photos used to illustrate the Denmark Strait have any real value except as representations of the ships on exercises in the Baltic.

This thread began with just two photos, but those photos relate to others and the authentication row often spreads into other aspects of the operation with contributors trying to prove or disprove this or that by relating the photos to documented events. It gets complicated at times and it requires people like Olaf to bring us back to the point.

In expressing gratitude to Olaf for his timely reminder, I would urge him not to jump on his best hat in frustration when someone deviates when struggling to prove a point.

It may be time to begin a completely new thread, devoted simply to unseating some of the "pet theories" - perhaps my own included - due to the corrupting influence of dodgy photos on our collective perceptions and which may have been wrongly relied upon in the past.

Vic Dale

[Antonio Bonomi]

Ciao Vic and all,


... as Olaf suggested,..... show it !

Here you have 3 occasions for a laugh, .. if you can after.......

http://www.hmshood.org.uk/forum/phpBB3/ ... 1205#p1205

So, .. what are you going to invent now to discredit historical evidences ?

Ciao Antonio

[Vic Dale]

To Antonio.

I have answered your points on the other site, but basically the camouflage on the barrels of the after 105mm flak matches the pattern of the after stripe on PG which is half the width of the other two stripes and thins and meanders as it rides up over the superstructure.

The raised gun barrels prove nothing except that the guns have been elevated to permit the painters unhindered access to the top of the turret below.

You still have not explained the absence of the oiling rig in that photo of Prinz Eugen on the "20th of May" with destroyers astern.

Vic Dale

[Antonio Bonomi]

Ciao Vic,

and I have explained to you both the Kristiansand photo and the elevated gun situation created by Brinkmann not to paint the main gun barrels on YELLOW that directly correlates with Kristiansand photo as well.

There is another photo existing taken on Kristiansand from the ground by a Norwegian agent showing that situation with Bismarck on the lead, Prinz Eugen following and the 3 destroyers back of Prinz Eugen exactly as this photo shows.
Of course both Bismarck and Prinz Eugen wearing Baltic camo scheme, a fantastic historical photo one day everybody will see in good quality .

I will check tonight if I have home a better quality view of the Kristiansand photo .

Bye Antonio

[lwd]

US Destroyers were involved in a number of very intense surface gunnery engagements with the Japanese in WWII. They usually had a large number of depth charges; many more than PE. Some of them were hit many times by Japanese shells, and some were sunk by them. I've read a lot of these battle histories, and I don't recall reading about any of these depth charges exploding due to this gunfire. Not even one. Does anyone else?

I do remember reading of some of them exploding but from what I remember they were unsafed charrges that detonated after the ship was sunk. It's not at all clear to me that a hit would detonate the charges and that even if it did they would go "high order". Furthermore if one went off next to others it could from the above be as or more likely to knock them off the vessel rather than detonate them. I do recall reading that one of the first aircraft attacks by the a Taffey plane at Leyte involved depth charges. The plane was trying to get them close aboard and actually hit the ship (a cruiser). I don't believe he claimed any signficant damage to the ship nor have I seen anyone claim that the Japanese reported any significant damage.

[Herr Nilsson]

On some pictures it's unfortunately almost invisible by reflections of the wet deck, but in NH69722 you can clearly see a line painted along the edge of the deck. IIRC this line was painted during the first stage of Rheinübung. Busch describes that in his book "Prinz Eugen im ersten Gefecht". So each picture with Bismarck and this line on PGs deck is from Rheinübung. I see no reason why Busch should fool somebody because of that.

[Vic Dale]

On some pictures it's unfortunately almost invisible by reflections of the wet deck, but in NH69722 you can clearly see a line painted along the edge of the deck. IIRC this line was painted during the first stage of Rheinübung. Busch describes that in his book "Prinz Eugen im ersten Gefecht". So each picture with Bismarck and this line on PGs deck is from Rheinübung. I see no reason why Busch should fool somebody because of that.

What you have posted is unclear. Can you enlarge on this please?

Can you give us an illustration?

Can you give us the exact reference? The text perhaps from the book?

Thanks Vic

[Antonio Bonomi]

Ciao Herr Nilsson, Vic and all,

@ Marc,

YOU ARE FANTASTIC !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

as usual my compliments to you .

I could have never found that myself due to my poor German language knowledge.

After your enourmous help on 2004 on Nh 69730, now another big one on the Nh 69722.

I have the same white line painted on the deck on the previous 2 photos taken on the early morning of the 24th, of May.

..and it is there also on the after battle photo, the one censored on the oil ring, with the used cartridges also on the higher deck and refuelling rings and only one depth charge.

No words Marc for you .............. what a bullet you shot,....... WUNDERBAR / FANTASTIC !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

@ Vic,

See Vic, I am not an authority at all.

I am only a "passionate" guy with many trustable and very competent friends.

The lesson to be learned here is when you know you are on the right path and on the right side of it, keep going because sooner or later a light will go on for you.

No room to escape anymore now for you, .... on Nh 69722, ... on DS photos, ... on tracks and battle map, ...

.. the circle is closed, .... all teh photos are protected forever now, .. no more room for credibility issues, ... thanking Marc.

.... you only have one thing to do now, ... and you know it.

Ciao Antonio

[Herr Nilsson]

h69722line.jpg (89.94 KiB) Viewed 2384 times

Vic, here you are!

IIRC Busch writes that this line was painted to avoid to fall overbord. Beyond this line, which was 2 meters(?) away from the edge, was danger zone. Of course I can give you the exact reference and the text, but you have to wait until tonight when I'm back at home.

[Antonio Bonomi]

Ciao Marc, Vic and all,

while Marc will give us the book text, ....

......... I can show you now the same white line on many other DS photos, .......

...and show you now that on May 12th, 1941 that line was NOT there on the refuelling exercise.

Everything matches perfectly !

Ciao Antonio

[Olaf]

... and I thought you all new about this line. I knew about it but I thought it was a rope - stupid me!

This thin white line will probably be difficult to represent on my model ... hmmm ...

Happy staring (at photos) ~ Olaf!

[Antonio Bonomi]

Ciao Olaf and all,

do not worry my friend,... it happens, .... Marc did the discovery but now that the "enigma" is resolved forever the photos and my work are preserved forever we are all more happy so we will not be boring again all people here in with useless discussions about Denmark Strait maps and photos anymore. .

I just had too many of it,.... first Winklareth and lately Vic,..... way too much .... and I hope no more in the future from now on.

Here you can see the white line,... on many photos,.. but there are many more,..basically all Prinz Eugen taken Op. Rheinubung photos if the deck is not wet.

http://www.hmshood.org.uk/forum/phpBB3/ ... &start=200



Bye Antonio