Nordkap-Treffer auf "Scharnhorst"

[harold]

Hier also erste Zeichnung zu SH, Treffer von achtern (ca 20 hm, 18,2°);



...sollte irgendeine Pz-Dicke nicht stimmen (meine Quellen: Garzke/Dulin 1985; Breyer 2002), bitte ich um Korrekturen.

Die möglichen Maschinentreffer sind zwischen den beiden orangen Balken, achtern begrenzt durch "C", und vorne durch die Trajektonomie.
Für einen Treffer in die Rauchgasführung (kann ja auch ganz biestig sein-) müsste der vordere Balken um ca 14% nach vorne verschoben werden.

Ausrechnen dürfen dies unsere Spezialisten...
Harold

[Huszar]

Hallo, Harold,

Auf ca. 200hm kommt die Granate mit ca. 19,3° an, nach Oberdeck mit 21,4° weiter, und nach einem 8cm Deck weiter mit 30,1°. Entfernung bis zur Detonation nach Oberdeck 15,1 Meter.Kannst du bitte die Balken so verschieben, dass nur K1 getroffen wird?
Ich mache noch eine Schnell-REchnung für 20mm@5°+95mm.

mfg

alex

PS: da gehts unter "normalen" Bedingungen nicht durch! Wenn die Scharnhorst aber den Bug gerade um etwa 4° in die Höhe geschoben hat, gehts schon durch 

[t-geronimo]

Entfernung um 18.20 Uhr übereinstimmend nach Watts und Winton 180 hm = 20.000 yds.
Einfallwinkel 35,6-cm = 18,2°.

Sollte aber schon bei mäßigem Seegang kaum Unterschied machen aufgrund der Schiffsbewegungen.

Für den genauen Kurs müßte man eigentlich den Radar Plot der DoY kennen, da in allen mir bekannten Quellen nur von östlichen Kursen die Rede ist.
Fürs Abdrehen spricht aber, daß in den vier Minuten bis 18.24 Uhr die Entfernung SH-DoY auf 21.400 yds = 196 hm anwuchs.

[harold]

Nach Antonios Karte gehe ich von 11 Meilen = 20.3 hm aus.
Ganz kapier ich nun nicht, welche Anderungen an der Skizze gewünscht sind - bitte Aufklärung per PN; werd dann nachbessern!
Ciao,
Harold

[t-geronimo]

Die obigen Angaben sind aber Radar Plot DoY. 

Keine Ahnung, ob as an den Berechnungen was ändert...

[toppertino]

Mal ein laienhafter Einwurf:
Könnte das Wrack nicht etwas Aufschluss geben oder ist SH schon zerfallen?

mfg

PS: Wie wahrscheinlich ist eigentlich ein Treffer übers Heck (kleine Sillouette) bei dem Wetter/Seegang?

[t-geronimo]

Das Wrack liegt leider auf dem Kopf und weist große Zerstörungen auf, weil der Kampf danach ja noch weiter ging.
DoY griff mit der SA nochmal ein und mehrere T-Treffer kamen auch noch hinzu.

Ein Teffer auf eine kleine Silhouette ist sicherlich kleiner, aber trotzdem nicht null.
Siehe T-Treffer Ruder Bismarck - wie wahrscheinlich war der, und trotzdem ist er passiert.

[toppertino]

Hab noch was gefunden, allerdings wurde es nur benutzt um das Wrack der Scharnhorst zu finden. Ob es auch Treffer simulieren kann, weiß ich nicht:

"However, is it any more credible than the official position? None of the logs of the other ships taking part in the battle give any positions for the sinking, but there is a unique method to check the accuracy of the log position.

This is a computer driven warship simulator at the Royal Norwegian Navy's Naval Academy in Bergen. It is similar to an aircraft simulator, but with a warship's bridge replacing the flight deck. In order to recreate the battle, the Bergen computers were loaded with navigational data from the log of the flagship, along with her documented performance data.

A virtual Battle of North Cape could now be fought. The simulator transforms itself into the bridge of HMS Duke of York as it was at noon on 26 December 1943. At this time, the exact position for HMS Duke of York is precisely recorded in her navigational log. From now till the sinking of Scharnhorst, the simulator will reproduce every movement of HMS Duke of York."

Aus http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/worldwars/wwtwo/scharnhorst_03.shtml

[harold]

Hier also die Geschossbahn (18.2°) - interessant, dass bei einem möglichen Treffer auf die "Aufstockung" des Pz-Decks bei absolut mittiger Lage zuerst mal der mit 50mm (Seite) gepanzerte achtere Leitstand "im Wege" ist.

(se vedi che la traiettonomia del 35.6cm passera -solo in caso assolutamente mediano!- per la centrale poppiera al "boiler hump")

Ciao,
Harold

[delcyros]

Above the deck the P1 15cm mounting had been destroyed. The hangar was hit and the aircraft destroyed thereby causing a large fire. The starboard 105mm mounting had been hit, a shell landed near the funnel, also on the starboard side and another 'tween decks on the port side.

http://www.mikekemble.com/ww2/scharnhorst.html

Wenn ein Projektil, wie beschrieben in den Abgasführungen landet, kann dies die beschriebenen Ausfälle verursachen?
Mit den vorgeschlagenen 4 Grad Bugneigung habe ich so meine Probleme. Scharnhorst war gute 240m lang und 4-5 Grad Neigung im Längsbereich sind sehr massive Veränderungen zur Normallage (...das Heck müßte dann komplett eingetaucht sein...).

Daran würde sich bei mir eine Frage anschließen: Wie groß war eigentlich die Längsstabilität der Scharnhorst? Das Konzept der metazentrischen Höhe taucht immer bei Fragen bezüglich der Querstabilität auf, ist diese identisch für Längsstabilität?

MfG

[Antonio Bonomi]

Ciao Harold, Thorsten and al,

here attached you can see a scheme I have prepared on Harold request to show how the shells were landing on Scharnhorst from 18.00 till 18.24 during North Cape battle.

As you can see, just as Harold  as anticipated,  at 18.00 the angle of the shell falling were around  20-21 degrees from back starboard side ( in absolute measurement  versus azimut it would be 69-70 degrees which is 90-20= 70 degrees).  Harold evaluated  it as 18 degrees  and it is ok as well.

Very interesting is to notice how this acute angle changed during the last part of the evaluation at 18.15-18.20.

From Scharnhorst  track on the official map posted above you can see that HMS Duke of York  was  following every Scharnhorst  course change as obvious  too keep  Scharnhorst straddled and under correct accurate radar firing.

With this logic in mind you can see that  the course change to north  Scharnhorst made at 18.21 on his  track was followed by HMS DoY by a same course change made before her track point at 18.24 and Scharnhorst was still at 20  (or 70 degrees) angle at that point, as  the distances were stable and increasing between teh 2 ships so as logic tell us the angle was becoming more acute, as Scharnhorst was sailing away faster than HMS Duke of York.

But suddendly as you can see the angle start increasing at 18.21 and Scharnhorst turned north, slowing down consistently as the angle between 18.21 and 18.24 becomes wider  28 or 62 degrees and  immediately after as Harold correctly saw 90 or 0 so the Scharnhosrt now was receiving the shells directly from the stern as I have depicted down below on my example.

Now the point is,  are those 20 degrees very acute angle at that distance that was  surely more than 18.000 meters ( 180 hectometers ) increasing up to 19.500 meters ( 195 hectometers )  enough to have that falling 356 mm  shell penetration were it has been reported ?

Remember that at 18.19  Adm Bey  sent a radio message to SKL telling them it was under precise radar fire from more than 18.000 meters ( so the distance is proven ) and Scharnhorst was still sailinng at 26 knots on the rough sea, so her engines were OK at 18.19, apparently.

It seems to me that whatever has happened, it as immediately suddendly stopped Scharnhorst engines,  as she broke down the speed very evidently as we can see, .... and again ...  it seems no big explosions reported,..... no evident fire on board Scharnhorst noticed from that shells from British ships,...  while about many other hits  seen landing on board there was visible explosions and fire effects.

I have read all British language reports,..and it is not clear to me what happened in reality,.....   but I cannot read the German  books and texts,..so maybe from those ones listed by Thorsten you can have better explanations,...at least from German side.

It is an intriguing dilemma,..at least to me,..one of the things I love to resolve,.. if ever possible ... or discuss about ,.... at least.

Talk to you soon,..... here the examples,....

            Ciao Antonio 

[t-geronimo]

Hello Antonio!

On what informations is the official map based?

What I want to say is: I have 5 books about SH - and therein are 4 different maps.
I guess that those that give an parallel course of SH and DoY are wrong because then the increase in the range between 18.20 and 18.24 wouldn't have been that much.
But was the angle really 90°? Or was ist just let's say 70° between SH and DoY?
And when did SH change her course? Before or after the possible hit?
Sadly we have not survivor reports about the exact courses steered by SH. At least I don't know one, but I would give a lot to read the whole interrogation report of the survivors.
Interesting would be the complete radar report from DoY. Do you have this?

For what the witnesses saw, here in english what I wrote in german above:
Some of them felt a big shock in the hull just before the battlecruiser lost speed. Most thought it was a torpedo hit The problem are the given times. They are differing much from each other but this is a problem we already know from Bismarck's last battle when slaughter and confusion rule a ship under devastating fire.

Matrosenobergefreiter Hubert Witte saw the speed recorder dropping from 29 to 22 knots at 18.20, "just after a shell hit aft".
Oberbootsmannsmaat Willi Gödde felt a big shock in the ship which at once lost but later regained speed. He gives the time 17.00.
Matrosengefreiter Günter Sträter also felt a big shock and just afterwards he heard the message "torpedo hit boiler room No. one, spee 8 knots." the problem with that statement is that different authors give different times....

It would really be interesting what the sole survivor from boiler room 1 told the british after the battle!!

[harold]

"Wie groß war eigentlich die Längsstabilität der Scharnhorst? Das Konzept der metazentrischen Höhe taucht immer bei Fragen bezüglich der Querstabilität auf, ist diese identisch für Längsstabilität?"

Bei 26 kn liegt sie mit dem Bug etwas tiefer, ca 1.8° - aufgrund ihrer hydrodynamischen Auftriebsverschiebung - siehe auch
(aus Johns Forum)

Ihr eigener "Wellenberg" gibt ihr hier achtern so viel Auftrieb, dass der Formschwerpunkt (der Verdrängung) nach achtern rutscht und einen Hebelarm mit dem (unveränderten) Massenschwerpunkt bildet;
das ist aber eine stabile Lage, Längspendelei ergäbe sich nur bei sehr langer (=  >halbe Schifflänge) Dünung.

[Antonio Bonomi]

Ciao Thorsten  Harold and all,

I have spoken personally a lot with  Bill Garzke Junior about his book and this reported hit, a very interesting discussion.

The scheme I have created above is an elaboartion in line of concept from the official British  Royal Navy  battle map  I have posted  before.

All maps available on printed books are taken out of that Official colour map from Royal Navy I have posted a piece above.
The only ones I know that as published those in low quality on B/W  was Winton on his book and Philippe Caresse.
Recently Grove published a book with those high quality coloured ones, much better.
Good information on witnesses reports are on Grove ( prisoner interrogations ) and  Jacobsen recent book on 2003.

I will read them again tonight to see what I come out with, I was supposed  to do this  during my vacation  on seaside  next 2 weeks writing my new text, but I will anticipate  this reading now due to this very interesting discussion going on here with you my friends.

If you check the angles and the relative course thacks of Scharnhorst and HMS Duke of York  you will find those relative angles  between the 2 ships that of course in reality were never parallel on course 90 of course, I  have plotted that just to make it easier to everybody to understand how the shells were landing from the back on Scharnhorst, so with what type of angles.

What you wrote about the German survivors is very interesting and I know soem statements already from translated  documentaries I have on TV, so I knew their opinions about it.

So if you read carefully :

Matrosenobergefreiter Hubert Witte saw the speed recorder dropping from 29 to 22 knots at 18.20, "just after a shell hit aft".

Very interesting is the speed felt only from 29 to 22  knots and the fact that the hit was aft, so no center ship with  a penetration, no big visible explosion.
Very important is that the reported time is exact with the KEY moment at 18.20.

than :

Oberbootsmannsmaat Willi Gödde felt a big shock in the ship which at once lost but later regained speed. He gives the time 17.00.

Very important correlation with a hit causing ship shock vibrations and consequently reducing Scharnhorst speed at ONCE !  ( guess why ?? ) and of course later Scharnhorst was going  to regain speed, just as Konig was saying to Hintze, ... ''  within 30 minutes I  will give you back 22 knots '',....  so it seems same cause and effect on Scharnhorst machinery, .. and not a permanent damage like a shell penetration on a boiler room ( in fact some British  reports talk about a shell cutting a steam pipe and not exploding into a boiler room ( ? ) , as nobody saw a big explosion that was going to be the logic consequence with permanent  and very big  damages ).     

Matrosengefreiter Günter Sträter also felt a big shock and just afterwards he heard the message "torpedo hit boiler room No. one, spee 8 knots." the problem with that statement is that different authors give different times....

Thsi is another KEY  report, as this Matrose Strater correlates the reduction  from 22 down to 8 knots  with a BIG  SCHOCK  that somebody thought it was a torpedo  hit aside the hull, so NOT a shell into a boiler room and this caused he speed to go down to 8 knots.

As you can read yourself  NO German survivor clearly talks about a direct shell hit into a boiler room with explosion reported on command bridge.

Now the British did not see that either although they noticed and wrote about many hit with flames and visible explosions before and after this ' potential one ',  I think a hit like that would have caused a very visible result  in terms of explosion and consequent fire onboard Scharnhorst, but nothing was seen and many were just carefully observing Scharnhorst thru binocular and rangefinders.

More, Adm Fraser was just ordering  a turn  south  when somebody told him that the radar ( so no visible confirmation as I wrote as the hit was NOT observed by British )  was telling them that Scharnhorst was loosing speed.

I will attach later the full map with my comments at the KEY points.

          Gruss  Antonio 

[Huszar]

Hallo,

If we assumea hit at 1820, causing damage to boiler room 1 - either through a direct hit, a hit passing BR1, or an explosion above Deck - the hit should have obtained quite aft - approximately between the catapult and the funnel. Can be seen as "aft".
I think, there is some probability, that the hit would not produce any visible fires or explosions. See Hood: just before the aft magazine went off, there was only the granade, passing through the superstructure. No fire, no visible explosion.

May I assume, that SH wont be "pendeling" about 4°? In this case a penetration is almost inpossible. At this distance and at 95mm Main deck it is only possible, if we "FIND" somewhere 3,5-4°.

mfg

alex