Remembering the Battleship BISMARCK

Any discussion about the Bismarck should begin, and end, with this man. Captain Ernst Lindemann. From his early days as a young gunnery officer in the Battleships Elsass and Schleswig-Holstein during World War 1, Lindemann went on to be a lecturer at the Naval Gunnery School. From 1936 he was an advisor to, and later head of, the construction department of the Naval High Command. If you were to choose your very best man to command your very best ship, Kapitän zur See Ernst Lindemann was an ideal choice. Such key people were crucial in the war at sea during those dark days of the 1940's. From the German point of view, it was a case of so few against so many. The "many" they referred to was, of course, His Majesty's Royal Navy, then the greatest sea power ever known.

The strategy was as brilliant as it was simple.

Sink enemy merchant shipping, avoid enemy warships and on NO account, engage Battleships of the Royal Navy.

By 1941, three million tons of allied merchant ships had been sunk by German U-boats and the impact was very nearly catastrophic. Since Britain is an island, the best way to bring her to her knees, then as now, is to interdict her trade routes. If you sink the ships bringing provisions to Britain, you will very soon starve her. It was for this purpose that the greatest Battleships of the the Kriegsmarine were built.

None greater than this one. None greater than BISMARCK. In fact, so massive was Bismarck, Captain Lindemann decided his ship was to be known and referred to as, a 'he', rather than in the female as is customary when it came to ships. Not for Bismarck, though. Bismarck was a 'he'.





Three days earlier, Bismarck not only engaged battleships of the Royal Navy, but sunk the very pride of their fleet during the Battle of the Denmark Strait. This unleashed a force of fury and determination that would lead to sinking of Bismarck. But she very, VERY nearly got away with it.

After sinking HMS Hood, Bismarck and Prince Eugen were relentlessly pursued by HMS Norfolk and Suffolk. In a brilliant tactic, the two German ships separated, causing the hounds to lose the scent, thus allowing their fox Bismarck to escape into the vastness of the Atlantic. It was only a long, rambling and completely unnecessary series of radio messages sent by Admiral Günther Lütjens that permitted the location of Bismarck to be triangulated by radio detection stations onshore in Britain.

HMS King George V was on her way at high speed though over 110 nautical miles away. HMS Rodney and Dorsetshire were to leave convoy duty for the hunt, and an attack force from Gibraltar, HMS Sheffield and the brand new carrier HMS Ark Royal was underway at high speed.

Flying his flag in HMS King George V, Admiral Jack Tovey ordered the aircraft from Ark Royal to find and attack Bismarck. She had to be slowed down somehow or they'd have no chance of catching her before she reached Brest and the safety of German air cover.

HMS Sheffield was between the Ark Royal and Bismarck and in their enthusiasm, the Swordfish torpedo bombers of HMS Ark Royal mistook HMS Sheffield for the Bismarck and launched a coordinated attack on their own ship! Fortunately for HMS Sheffield, a new type of contact detonator was being tried on the torpedoes and they were duds. No torpedo exploded and the Swordfish recovered to HMS Ark Royal for rearming with older, but effective detonators.

There was to be no mistake the second time and the subsequent attack disabled Bismarck's steering. It was only a matter of time now.

I think it useful to reflect upon the force gathered to hunt and sink the Bismarck. It required the collective efforts of a British fleet of five battleships, three battle cruisers, two aircraft carriers, four heavy and seven light cruisers, and twenty one destroyers to find an destroy her. In addition, more than fifty aircraft of the RAF's Coastal Command participated in her destruction. At ranges that diminished to 2,500 meters and brought a proportionalely high rate of hits, the following ordnance was fired at the Bismarck after the action off Iceland.

380 16 inch shells fired from HMS Rodney
716 6 inch shells fired from HMS Rodney
339 14 inch shells fired from from HMS KGV
660 5.25 inch shells fired from HMS KGV
527 8 inch shells fired from HMS Norfolk
254 8 inch shells fired from HMS Dorsetshire

In total, 2,876 shells fired at the Bismarck during a course of action that lasted ninety minutes.


Of the battle to sink the Bismarck, CINCHOME, Admiral Jack Tovey wrote:-

"The Bismarck had put up a most gallant fight against impossible odds, worthy of the old days of the Imperial German Navy, and she went down with her colours flying".

The admiral had wanted to say this publicly but the Admiralty informed him: "For political reasons it is essential that nothing of the nature of the sentiments expressed by you should be given publicity, however much we admire a gallant fight".

A final word about Captain Lindemann. This brief extract from 'Battleship Bismarck, a survivors story' by Baron Burkard Von Müllenheim-Rechberg, the Bismarck's top-ranking survivor.

When swimmers close to the bow of the ship looked back, they saw Lindemann standing on the forecastle in front of turret Anton. His messenger, a seaman, was with him. Soon, both men went forward and began climbing a steadily increasing slope. Lindemann's gestures showed that he was urging his companion to go overboard and save himself. The man refused and stayed with his commanding officer until they reached the jackstaff. Then Lindemann walked out on the starboard side of the stem which, though rising ever higher, was becoming more level as the ship lay over. There he stopped and raised his hand to his white cap. The Bismarck now lay completely on her side. Then, slowly, slowly, she and the saluting Lindemann went down.

Later a machineist wrote,

"I always thought such things happened only in books, but I saw it with my own eyes."

The Battleship Bismarck, sunk on this day, May 27th, 1941. Sixty nine years ago today. She sank slowly by the stern and slipped beneath the waves at 1039 am. Of her ship's company of 2200, 1995 would die.

Remembering HMS Hood, sunk on this day 69 years ago.

THE MIGHTY HOOD

Some ships are ledgendary. So much more than mere metal and gunpowder. Some of them, by their beauty and power, became the very embodiment of Empire. Everything that was great and good about British sea power. So it was with HMS Hood.



Actually, she wasn't a Battleship in the strictest sense. HMS Hood was a battle cruiser. Battlecruisers were generally as large and costly as battleships of the same generation, often using the same large-calibre main armament, but they traded off armour or firepower for higher speed. The earliest battlecruisers carried significantly less armour than the equivalent battleship, meaning they were not intended to stand up against the guns they themselves carried. Thus ships of this type could inflict much more punishment than they could absorb.

The following is an extract from Ludovic Kennedy's excellent book 'Pursuit'. It describes the mighty HOOD so beautifully; and far better than I'm able.

She was an old lady now, one of the oldest in the Navy, laid down in 1916 in the Clydebank yards of John Brown, who later built the great Queens, named after a family who had given the Navy four famous admirals, Lord Hood who helped Rodney defeat the French in the West Indies in the eighteenth century, his brother Lord Bridport who was with Howe at the Glorious First of June, Sam Hood who helped Nelson win the battle of the Nile, Horace Hood killed at Jutland when his flagship Invincible blew up.

She was launched by his widow, Lady Hood, in August 1918, just three months before the Armistice, the biggest warship ever built, longer even that Bismarck (860 feet as compared to 828) though narrower in the beam, with - like Bismarck - eight fifteen inch guns mounted in pairs in four turrets. Her maximum speed of 32 knots made her the fastest warship of her size in the world, going flat out it took a ton of oil to drive her half a mile.

She was a beautiful ship, elegant and symmetrical like Bismarck, yet dignified and restrained, without the aggressive sweep of Bismarck's lines or the massiveness that spoke of held-back power. But she had one great defect, a lack of armour on her upper decks. Hood had been laid down before Jutland where three British battle cruisers were destroyed by German shells which, fired at long range, had plunged vertically through the lightly protected decks, exploding inside. All big ships built after Jutland had strengthened armour.

Hood's armour was strengthened on her sides but not on her decks: they were to be her Achilles heel.

More from Kennedy's 'Pursuit'...

Between the wars, when a quarter of the globe was still coloured red for Britain, the Hood showed the flag, as they used to say, to the Empire and the world. She went on cruises to Scandinavia and South America, to the Mediterranean and the Pacific, to the old world and the new. Her 1923-24 world tour, in company with HMS Repulse and five cruisers, was described as "the most successful cruise by a squadron of warships in the history of sea-power".

They visited South Africa, Zanzibar, Ceylon, Singapore, Australia, New Zealand, the Pacific Islands, San Francisco, the Panama Canal, Jamaica, Canada, Newfoundland. Their arrival anywhere caused huge crowds to gather, filled the pages of the local press. A girl in Melbourne noted: "Every road and pathway was thick, and many families were making a day of it, taking out all the children and hampers of food and bottles of beer. The Bay was dotted with sailing boats. The mist lifted to reveal Hood and her consorts coming in. It was a wonderful sight - something I shall never forget, everyone cheering and the kids running up and down and the sirens of all the ships in the harbour going off".

In Hood's eleven-month voyage millions of people saw her, hundreds of thousands came aboard. She was a unique blend of strength and beauty, the outward and visible manifestation of sea-power. Looking at her one understood what Rule Britannia meant. Her visitors fingered the brasswork and fondled the guns, walked the long decks and climbed the superstructure, took snapshots galore, stunned by the scale and wonder of it all. Her pulibc relations too were immaculate. Finding in Honolulu that a boy scout chosen to represent Hawaii at an assembly in Copenhagen had missed the steamer to the United States, Hood's Admiral gave him free passage on the boy's mess deck, and won a garland from the American press. When she arrived in San Francisco, the mayor, bowled over by her size and beauty, said: We surrender our city unto you. We capitulate".

Such was the nature, spirit and beauty of HMS Hood.









Kennedy again.....

But at least one shell of that broadside made no splash: it came plunging down like a rocket, hit the old ship fair and square between centre and stern, sliced its way through steel and wood, pierced the deck that should have been strengthened and never was, penetrated to the ship's vitals deep below the water line, exploded, touched off the 4 inch magazine which in turn touched off the after 15 inch magazine. Before the eyes of the horrified British and incredulous Germans a huge column of flame leapt up from Hood's centre.

The smoke was clearing to show Hood with a broken back, in two pieces, bow and stern pointing towards the sky. As he watched, he saw the two forward turrets of Hood suddenly spit out a final salvo: it was an accident, the circuits must have been closed at the moment she was struck, but to her enemies it seemed a last defiant and courageous gesture.

HMS HOOD, pride of the Royal Navy, was struck by a fatal shell fired from the Bismarck at 0601 hours on the morning of today, May 24th, sixty nine years ago. She sank in three minutes.

Of her 1418 men and boys aboard, there were 3 survivors.

The Admirals

These three men are central to our story. 69 years ago, two of them had only days to live and with them, 4000 officers, men and boys would be lost in one of the greatest Battleship engagements of naval history. The fate of these men would materially effect the future of Battleships, for decades the capitol ship of all navies everywhere. It was, and still is, about power. Being able to project naval power. You could protect with a lesser ship, but in order to project, a Battleship was called for. But not for much longer.

Naval warfare was to change forever.

Admiral of the Fleet Sir John Cronyn Tovey, 1st Baron Tovey, GCB, KBE, DSO, DCL


Admiral Sir 'Jack' Tovey, Here is another of Jack Tovey, wearing the lace of a full Admiral, RN, when Commander in Chief Home Fleet (CINCHOME), and flying his flag in HMS King George V during the hunt for Bismarck.


Vice Admiral Lancelot Earnest Holland, flew his flag in HMS Hood

Admiral Günther Lütjens



In the 1960 film, Sink the Bismarck!, Lütjens is portrayed as egotistic, overconfident, and a Nazi enthusiast angered over Germany's humiliation and his own lack of recognition at the end of World War I. In reality, Lütjens, the grandson of a jew, was pessimistic of the chance of success of Bismarck's mission and did not agree with Nazi policies; he was one of the few officers who refused to give the Nazi salute when Hitler visited Bismarck before its first and final mission, deliberately using instead the traditional naval salute. Lütjens also wore by choice the dirk of the Kaiserliche Marine, rather than the more modern Kriegsmarine dirk which bore a swastika. The film also makes a mistake in the sequence of events aboard Bismarck, showing Lütjens ordering Captain Ernst Lindemann to open fire on Hood and Prince of Wales. In the event, Lütjens actually ordered Lindemann to avoid engaging Hood, but Lindemann disobeyed and ordered the ship's gun crews to open fire on Hood and Prince of Wales.

The Battle of Denmark Strait

In two days, we will celebrate the 69th anniversary of one of the great battles in naval history.

Here is the story in the hope in will whet your appetite as to what will follow in the days ahead.

Sinking of the Kreuzer "Blücher"

Today is May 17th, Norwegian Constitution Day, the National Day of Norway. In recognition of this auspicious date, here is a story of David versus Goliath from the pages of Naval History.




The Blücher was a German Admiral Hipper-class heavy cruiser. The Kriegsmarine's newest ship at the outbreak of World War II, having been in commission for just over six months, she was sunk by Norwegian shore defences at the Battle of Drøbak Sound on April 9, 1940, the first day of the invasion of Norway (Operation Weserübung).

Blücher was the flagship of the naval flotilla Marine Gruppen 5, with heavy cruiser Lützow (formerly Deutschland), light cruiser Emden, with three small torpedo boats and eight small minesweepers, commanded by Rear Admiral Oskar Kummetz, transporting troops to capture Oslo in the initial stages of the German invasion of Norway - Operation Weserübung ("Weser Exercise").

Blücher's sister ship, Hipper also took part in the invasion of Norway, landing troops at Trondheim (Norway's third largest city, roughly half way up Norway's west coast), despite being rammed and damaged by HMS Glowworm. The troops occupied the city in the early hours, flying the Nazi flag on the city's old Kristiansten Fortress and other municipal buildings before most of the inhabitants had even awoken.

The attack on the German fleet by the Norwegian guard vessel Pol III, just before midnight on April 8, 1940 had alerted the Norwegian defences. Blücher, carrying 1000 troops, led the line as the German flotilla approached the unlit Oscarsborg Fortress on South Kaholmen Island in the Drøbak narrows. The German squadron commander "kept his ship's main armament aligned fore and aft in a gesture of disdain for the Norwegian fortifications."


One of the two 28 cm guns in the main Oslo coastal fortress that took part in the sinking of Blücher
At 04.21 hours, (Norwegian time) the fortress' guns opened fire on the Blücher. The three German-made Krupp 280 mm (11 in) guns (only two were manned due to a lack of trained gunners) of the fortress, installed in 1893 (aptly named Moses, Aaron and Josva), were obsolete, so the defenders held fire until the warships were at point-blank range (most sources state that fire was opened at a range of 1,600 to 1,800 metres (about 1 mile). The first 28 cm shell hit the Blücher right in front of the aft mast, and created an inferno of flames and smoke in the midship area up to the fore mast.

The second Main Battery round shortly thereafter hit the base of the fore 20.3 cm gun turret, throwing large parts of it into the fjord and igniting further fires on board. There was only time for the Main Battery to fire these two rounds, due to their slow reload time with only 30 untrained recruits manning them at the time. There was not time to reload; there was not even time to fire a third gun, Josva (Joshua), which was loaded, but unmanned.

The return fire from Blücher was ineffective, with the light artillery mostly pointing too high and the main batteries, 20.3 cm guns, could not fire due the damage caused by the second 28 cm round from Oscarsborg's Main Battery.



While fire was raging aboard Blücher, the secondary Norwegian coastal batteries pelted her with guns ranging in calibre from the small 57 millimetre pieces at Husvik on the mainland, designed to protect the fortress' minefields (not laid at the time of the invasion), to the 15 cm guns of the Kopås battery on the eastern side of the fjord. The larger guns wrought havoc on board the cruiser while the 57 mm guns concentrated on the cruiser's superstructure and anti-aircraft weapons, and were partially successful in suppressing the fire from her light artillery as the Blücher slowly sailed past the fortress.

The Husvik Battery had to be abandoned when Blücher passed in front of it and fired her light AA guns directly down into the positions. One of the 15 cm rounds from Kopås disabled the Blücher's steering system and forced the cruiser's crew to steer her using the engines and propeller to avoid running aground.



The Germans were unaware of a torpedo battery near Oscarsborg's main gun battery at North Kaholmen Island. Built in 1901, it was equipped with three shore-mounted dual elevators firing the torpedoes via underwater tunnels. The torpedoes were Austro-Hungarian-built Whitehead torpedoes (in the torpedo factory of Fiume, Hungarian Kingdom, now Rijeka, Croatia) of the same turn-of-the-century vintage. These torpedoes had been practice-launched well over 200 times before being fired in anger, and no-one was certain if they would function or not. They did.

Blücher received two direct hits, one near her forward turret Anton and the second in the engine room, leaving her drifting out of control in the narrow fjord. The torpedoes sealed her fate. The rest of the flotilla, seeing the torpedo explosions, mistakently believed that the Blücher had hit mines. As a result, the flotilla reversed out of the narrows, thus ensuring that Oslo would not be invaded at dawn as intended. Before the remaining ships of the invasion force could withdraw, the Lützow was hit three times by the Kopaas battery and her Anton and Bruno turrets were disabled. The damaged Lützow steamed at full-speed astern, into mist and out of the Norwegian shore batteries' zone of fire.

Attempts were made to run Blücher aground on the Nesodden peninsula, but they failed. At 06.00 hours, the damaged and now sinking Blücher dropped anchor at Askholmen. The purpose was to let wind and current swing the stern closer to Askholmene to rescue more of the crew and soldiers onboard. Askholmene is 6 nautical miles (11 km) south of Oslo and out of the arc of fire from the Norwegian shore batteries. Her torpedoes were fired into the sides of the fjord to prevent them from exploding aboard the ship. At 06.23 the fires reached the 10.5 cm ammunition magazine which detonated, dooming the ship.



By 7.00 with no hope of containing the fires, the order to abandon ship was given. At 7.22 hours, the Blücher capsized and sank. Of the 2,202 crew and troops on board, some 830 died (at least 320 of them crewmen). Most either drowned or burnt to death in the flaming oil slick surrounding the wreck. The survivors came ashore on either side of the fjord. The Blücher's sailors were ordered to give up their life jackets (all sailors are expected to be able to swim) to the troops on board, thus saving the lives of a significant number of soldiers. Her Commanding Officer, Kapitan zur See Heinrich Woldag, survived the sinking, but was killed in a plane crash eight days later.


One of the Blücher's anchors at Aker Brygge.


The delay caused to the landings in Oslo allowed the Norwegian royal family, parliament and cabinet to escape.
Norway's gold reserves were also moved out of reach of the invaders and ultimately shipped abroad for Norway's use during the war.

HMS Dorsetshire, the Bismarck and the truth about Captain Benjamin Martin, Royal Navy.

In May of 2008, I authored a post entitled "HMS Dorsetshire and the ignominy of Benjamin Martin". By clicking the underlined titled of that post you will be taken to what I wrote then.

In that post, I postulated the view that Captain Martin conducted himself in a less than honourable way in leaving so many survivors of the Bismarck to their fate in the Atlantic on that afternoon in late May, 1941. I offered in support of this theory the fact that Captain Martin was relieved of his command upon HMS Dorsetshire's arrival in Newcastle following the dispersal of the fleet returning from battle.

I further offered the colloquial information gathered about Midshipman Joe Brooks and his brutal treatment for attempting to assist Bismarck survivors. Finally, I suggested that Captain Martin's command style was brutal, even cruel on occasion, and suggested his command style was contributory to suicides by crew members in Dorsetshire during her convoy duties that preceded her joining the battle to sink the Bismarck.

That post, more than any other, has generated a polarised discussion in the comments section. It is reproduced for you at the end of this post. Let me conclude, for now, with my words from the end of the most recent comment. I'm hoping they will solicit a return visit here, one month from now.

One month from tomorrow, May 27th, 2010, marks the 69th anniversary of the sinking of the KMS Bismarck by an attack force of His Majesty’s Royal Navy. On that day, I shall publish a post here on my blog that lays bare the entire truth as I have learned it to be.

I am now certain that many of my previously held beliefs are wrong. I will explain myself more fully on May 27th, 2010 here with a brand new post on the subject.



Thank you all, so very kindly, for your continuing interest and for visiting "Nineteen Keys and the Lure of a Furious Sea". It will be an honour, and indeed my duty, to present for you all, my findings in a month and a day from today.

Best wishes until then.


Every Sailor

Anonymous said...

My father was an officer on the Dorsetshire and present when Martin announced he was going after the Bismarck. According to my father, Martin had received no order to go after Bismarck and therefore abandoned his convoy. That is the reason for him being relieved of his functions afterwards.
21 September 2008 17:53

Every Sailor said...

Hello Anonymous, and thank you very much indeed for your comment. I'm afraid, with every respect, that your Father is mistaken. Admiral Sir John Tovey flew his flag in HMS King George V, which was the flagship involved in the pursuit of Bismarck following the Battle of the Denmark Strait which culminated in the tragic loss of HMS Hood. After it was clear Bismarck was done for, Admiral Tovey ordered HMS Dorsetshire, under the command of Captain Benjamin Martin, Royal Navy, to finish her off with torpedoes. This done, his further orders were to recover Bismarck survivors. KGV was very low on fuel and needed to recover to Scapa Flow and left Dorsetshire on scene to carry out these orders. However, Captain Martin used the pretext of U-boats in the area to leave hundreds and hundreds of fellow sailors in the Altantic to die, no doubt informed by the still recent memory of the loss of HMS Hood. His disgraceful actions resulted in him losing his command on arrival in Newcastle days later, and not for the reasons your Father suggests. With best regards, and thanks again for your visit.
21 September 2008 18:13

Anonymous said...

I think we are both right. Dorsetshire was never ordered to leave her convoy and went off to the scene to join the fight without permission. She was then ordered to finish Bismarck off. My father was present when Martin made the decision to abandon his convoy. That is historical fact. I don't think he was relieved of his functions for leaving the survivors in the water, that must be pure speculation, unless you have documented proof.

I'm fascinated by the character of Joe Brooks. Have you got anything on him? It was my father who took him the news that he was accused of leaving the ship without permission. He just said, "Jesus". I know he left the Dorsetshire before she was sunk.

I don't want to sign up on Google. My name is Martin. I live just across the Rhine from you in Alsace.
2 October 2008 14:43

Anonymous said...

Thanks for removing the comment. I'm not condoning Martin's actions. He was a hothead and probably a lot more... All reports I have read back up the story of a submarine alert and he was only following procedure. He may well have been looking for a way to curtail his rescue mission. There was a U-Boot (U27?)somewhere near, but it had no more torpedoes. To give Martin credit, he gave the Bismarck sailors who died on Dorsetshire a full military funeral and allowed fellow sailors to make the Hitler salute.

We cannot place ourselves in the context of war. The Doresthire survivors were machine gunned in the water by the very Japanese planes that had sunk the ship. That is also against all the rules of war. It's too easy to condemn people retrospectively. You can even excuse Martin for abandoning his convoy to go and get a bit of action, the number of suicides on Dorsetshire during convoy patrol indicating the desperation caused by the boredom of nothing happening and the constant fear that a torpedo would send you to the bottom in a few minutes.

Let not our fascination for the War blind us into glorifying it.
12 October 2008 16:02

Every Sailor said...

Hello Martin, thanks again for your visits. I haven't removed any comment from this entry and don't know to what you refer. In the time since last writing I was waiting for academic friends to get back to me to confirm my understanding of Captain Martin's motivation and the real reasons for his removal from the command of HMS Dorsetshire, but to date I have no further information, nor do I have any further details of the career of Mid Brooks, although he was received as guest of honour at many Bismarck survivor reunions until well into the 70's. With respect, I think you're wide of the mark in accusing this site of glorifying war. I take the view that war is the apotheosis of vulgarity, hardly glorious, merely an often revisited reminder of our history as savages. My interest here is in ships, and the men who go down to the sea in them. All the very best, Martin, and thanks again for visiting.
12 October 2008 23:27

Anonymous said...

Sorry if I went a bit overboard (sorry about the pun) on my last comment about glorifying the war.
And I could have sworn there was a comment about Martin losing his command for leaving the Bismarck survivors in the water. My mistake. I was not accusing your site of doing anything of the sort. There is just a danger of getting out of touch with the reality. Lots of Brits are fascinated by the War. They tend to get disconnected from the horrors of war.
I'm waiting with baited breath for the information about Martin from your historian friends. I'm also sure Martin used the sub alert to get his revenge on the Bismarck sailors. But is there any historical proof? My father had a few brushes with him. Once my father's Walrus (he was the "observer" (navigator))was left in the middle of the ocean by Martin who suddenly decided to go and look at something. Luckily my father's training taught them to do square searches and he eventually found the ship. My father nearly got into deep trouble when he went at Martin for leaving the agreed position for pick-up.

You can look at my site. Sorry, there's nothing about Dorsetshire.
www.mollkirch.com

Greetings, Martin
13 October 2008 11:29

Anonymous said...

I am reading Robert Ballard's book about the Bismarck and just got through with the section about Martin's decision to leave the German survivors scraping at the sides of the Dorsetshire as it sailed away. Surely he didn't believe a German submarine would launch a torpedo at a ship rescuing it's own countrymen. I believe Martin should go to hell for leaving those men to die.
10 November 2008 06:05

Every Sailor said...

Hello anonymous, and thank you for your comment. I agree with you that Captain Martin's decision to leave all those hundreds of Bismarck survivors in the water is difficult to fathom. The impression I have formed of him is that he was, to put it mildly, a difficult man. It should be remembered that the sinking of HMS Hood only days earlier would have been fresh in his mind, though, and so perhaps he abandoned these men to the Atlantic as an act of revenge. No U-Boat ever fired upon a ship recovering survivors. What is certain, though, is that he was relieved of his command upon arrival at Newcastle days later. It is interesting to imagine what was going through the collective mind of HMS Dorsetshire's ship's company when she herself was sunk by the Japanese the following year, with hundreds of sailors spending the night in the water before being rescued!
10 November 2008 13:16

Anonymous said...

My last comment doesn't seem to have appeared on your site. Are you running out of space? I found this link which mentions the presence of U74 during the sinking of the Bismarck. So there was a U-Boot in the area.

http://www.uboat.net/articles/index.html?article=25

Greetings, Martin
10 January 2009 13:13

Anonymous said...

It's my again, Martin.

This video talks about Dorsetshire leaving its convoy "on its own initiative", in other words "abandoning it".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WubneHZBeic&NR=1

Most likely the reason for Martin's loss of command.
11 January 2009 19:54

Every Sailor said...

Hi Martin, this is your characterization, unsupported by the evidence. Leaving convoy duty in support of a larger action is within the purview of any warship captain in time of war unless he has explicit orders to the contrary. Your use of the words "abandoning it" are emotive, and using them to support what amounts to nothing more than your opinion is not valid. Your long post of some time ago was deleted because it rehashed your points of view made clearly in earlier entries. You're entitled to your opinions, Martin, but I reserve the right to remove them from my blog when, in my view, they offer nothing in pursuit of the truth. Once again, I put it to you that Captain Martin of HMS Dorsetshire was relieved of his command on arrival in Newcastle due, in part, to his dereliction of duty in abandoning (to borrow your word) Bismarck survivors to drown in the north Atlantic, when given explicit orders by Admiral Tovey embarked in HMS King George V to pick them up. If you have evidence to the contrary, I'd be glad to have it.
11 January 2009 20:51

Anonymous said...

Hello Every Sailor and Martin.
I have come across this sit by pure accident and find it quit disturbing. I am the great grandchild of Benjamin Martin, and a serving member of the Royal Navy. I Find this blog very one sided on behalf of yourself Every Sailor and find you do not seem to give credit to Martins opinion.

I am sure there is some form of evidence that reflects both your arguments and mine, though it will be one of those things that will never come to light but just think of these true facts that still ring true to this very day. Leaving your patrol (Convoy) is an act of “abandoning” and is an act that is punishable. At war the ship is first and life is second. Ask yourself this, if you were in the situation my great granddad found himself in, sitting in the water like a sitting duck with a possible U –Boat in the area. Would you not remove yourself to save your ship and the ships company? Or would you stay and risk your men and the fellow men they saved.

Every Sailor you say “No U-Boat ever fired upon a ship recovering survivors” but no one ever sank the Germans pride battle ship the Bismarck. War is a very unpredictable thing. I believe you should watch the link Martin put on your blog as this is view from both sides.

I also find you have not spoken about how the men were treated when they found themselves aboard HMS Dorsetshire. If he was such a heartless man would he have treated the Bismarck’s Crew with as much respect as he did. Please look into the faces about this, as this will show his true character and not a Captain of a ship doing the best for his ships company in the height of war.

Sailors were lost on both side, these men should be remembered. As should the crew of HMS Hood of witch 3 survived of 1418 crew members, of witch the Bismarck did not pick up one.

With Regards

Serving Sailor
8 February 2009 17:50

bob said...

dear sirs

i have read this feed with much interest. the differing opinions are fascinating to say the least.
the comment "Sailors were lost on both side, these men should be remembered. As should the crew of HMS Hood of witch 3 survived of 1418 crew members, of witch the Bismarck did not pick up one." (sic) made by serving sailor ,for instance. the hood sank in 3 minutes after her magazines and stores of her own torpedo's exploded as a result of a hit by one or more shells from the bismarck. . there basically were'nt any survivors to pick up!
as for capt. martin ( there isnt even agrrement as to his first name..benjamin in some articles,john on the history channel program shown on the you tube feed) and his leaving those men in the water....no matter what nationality or political beliefs you may have, it was indeed disgraceful.

there can be no doubt he was relieved of command so as not to be in a position of further embarrassment the royal navy .
with regards,
22 March 2009 08:18

Anonymous said...

Hello Every Sailor
I am the grand daughter of Benjamin C.S. Martin.

With respect to all stories being bantered about, a lot of of the comments made are not true to fact.

My grandfather did not lose his command of Dorsetshire at Tyneside.

Dorsetshire berthed at Tyneside on 30th May 1941. Dorsetshire was handed over to Captain Agar on 8th August 1941 at Scapa Flow. (Captain Martin having spent 2 years as Captain of the Dorsetshire at sea)
Thankyou Bob for your comments, but Captain Martin then went on to become Commadore at the Naval base in Durban South Africa. He was awarded the DSO in Oct 1941, CBE in Jan 1944 KBE in Jun 1946, He was the Admiral in charge of the landing Force in Rangoon in the Burma Campaign. Tell me where in these honours and further commands does it relate that he was a discrace to the Royal Navy. My father received a letter from a Bismarck survivor many years later,having nothing but praise for my grandfther and the way they were treated on board Dorsetshire upon their rescue.

I belong to H.M.S.Dorsetshire Association where a lot of the remaining survivors of the Dorsetshire's sinking still meet up every Easter to remember those they lost in 1942. One was his messenger boy and another his steward who also went on with him to South Africa.

I have read a lot of the memoirs that these wonderful gentlemen have written. They say my grandfather was a hard task master and didn't stand for any nonsence, but they say he was a fair Captain and had nothing but respect for him, they believe that had he still been their Captain in 1942, they probably wouldn't have been sunk by the Japanese as sailing into the sun was the worst senario. They went through hell when they lost their ship and still they were fired upon by the Japanese in the water.

By all accounts Dorsetshire saved as many as she safely could and Brooks' comments are probably a touch of 'sour grapes' because he had been reprimanded. War is a terrible and has many casualties, decisions have to be made that are not liked by all, but have to be made all the same for the safety of your crew. U boat or no U boat, if there had been one, what would the argument have been, Dorsetshire could have been crippled or even lost then and many more lives could have been lost and the brave and often forgotten men of this conflict wouldn't be alive today to tell the tale.
9 April 2010 03:28


Every Sailor said...

Dear Lady,

Thank you very much indeed for your kind visit and for your words in memory of a beloved Grandfather, Captain Martin of HMS Dorsetshire. I am deeply moved by what you have written and will respond appropriately in due course.

With sincere, best regards,

Every Sailor.
9 April 2010 06:44


Anonymous said...

The reason for his relief notwithstanding, Captain Martin got what he deserved. Frankly, I would not have promoted that man. As I recall, A midshipman on the Dorsetshire attempted to rescue a Bismarck crewman who lost his arms and was literally hanging onto the rope on the side of the ship with his teeth. The midshipman was placed under arrest by Martin and confined to his cabin, while the German sailor the midshipman bravely attempted to rescued fell into the Atlantic and perished with over 1,000 of his shipmates. Yes, that speaks volumes about Martin. And WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, none of you good people out there are going to change my perception of that man. I would have had him thrown out of the Navy or assigned to a bloody supply depot in a remote area of what was then known as the British Empire and kept him there until he had to retire for serving the maximum amount of time on active duty as a Captain.
25 April 2010 18:38


Richard said...

I respectfully disagree with Martin's Granddaughter. With all due respect to the lady, she can be perceived as someone who is lacking objectivity in assessing what her Grandfather did. Martin's actions can be construed by some as a War Crime. I would not go that far, but on the other hand I hardly consider him an admirable sort. Also, I agree with the previous comment: Martin should have been passed over for promotion. Furthermore, Martin's arrest of a Midshipman who bravely tried to save a Bismarck Sailor who lost his arms was absolutely shameful and reprehensible. He should have been brought before a court of inquiry and reprimanded.
25 April 2010 18:48


Every Sailor said...

Thank you to you both, Anonymous and Richard for your kind visit to the site and for your comments.

Since posting about Captain Martin and his involvement in the sinking of Bismarck, I have gone to great lengths in researching the truth. After such a long time, though, it is inevitable that the truth fades and is replaced, in varying degrees, by legend and myth. So it is with the Bismarck.



Searching the service records of Her Majesty's Public Records Office in Kew is a long and thankless task, but I was determined to learn the truth, no matter what that may be.



As a German, I was keen, even after all this time, to prove that Captain Martin was a beast. I wanted to establish, above all, that his refusal to collect all those boys and young men, the survivors of the Bismarck's sinking, from the sea was an inhuman act. I wanted very much to prove that he used the pretext of a submarine sighting to abandon those boys to their Atlantic deaths as one man's vengeance for Bismarck's sinking of HMS HOOD in very recent days.



I wanted to prove that life in HMS Dorsetshire under his command was horrendously brutal and that Captain Martin drove men to suicide through frustration at his command style in a time of war. I wanted to establish that Benjamin Martin was a cruel man; one who willfully disobeyed orders to seek the aggrandisement that lay in the Bismarck engagement. I wanted to prove that he was relieved of his command on arrival at Newcastle-Upon-Tyne for dereliction of duty and for failing to carry out the orders of Admiral Tovey, that HMS Dorsetshire should rescue the Bismarck’s survivors.



I wanted all of this and more to be true. I wanted it very much.



HOWEVER.....



There is nothing more important to me than the actual truth. The truth of what happened and why. It has been my privilege in very recent days to have struck research gold in my quest for the truth of HMS Dorsetshire and the command of Captain Martin.



I must report to you now, that much of what I have learned has been personally explosive because it has compelled me to reassess long-held views and to re-examine that which, to my mind, was established as correct to a moral certainly.

However, in the interests of truth, and in order to more respectfully honour the memories of those no longer with us, on both sides of the war at sea, I am duty bound to faithfully report what I have learned about Captain Martin, HMS Dorsetshire, Midshipman Brooks and a lot more besides.



One month from tomorrow, May 27th, 2010, marks the 69th anniversary of the sinking of the KMS Bismarck by an attack force of His Majesty’s Royal Navy. On that day, I shall publish a post here on my blog that lays bare the entire truth as I have learned it to be.

I am now certain that many of my previously held beliefs are wrong. I will explain myself more fully on May 27th, 2010 here with a brand new post on the subject.



Thank you all, so very kindly, for your continuing interest and for visiting "Nineteen Keys and the Lure of a Furious Sea". It will be an honour, and indeed my duty, to present for you all, my findings in a month and a day from today.

Best wishes until then.


Every Sailor.
26 April 2010 15:30

The Aussie Admiral, Sir John Augustine Collins, KBE, CB

Remembering Vice Admiral Sir John Augustus Collins, Royal Australian Navy.

Vice Admiral Sir John Augustine Collins KBE, CB (7 January 1899 – 3 September 1989) was a Royal Australian Navy (RAN) officer who served in World War I and World War II, and who eventually rose to become a Vice Admiral and Chief of Staff of the RAN.




Collins was one of the first graduates of the Royal Australian Naval College to attain flag rank. During World War II, he commanded the cruiser HMAS Sydney in the Mediterranean campaign. He led the Australian Naval Squadron in the Pacific theatre and was wounded in the first recorded kamikaze attack, in 1944.

World War II

Collins' career advanced steadily between the world wars. At the outbreak of war in 1939 he held the positions of Assistant Chief of Naval Staff and Director of Military Intelligence.

In the early war years, Collins commanded HMAS Sydney in the Battle of the Mediterranean. HMAS Sydney led Allied ships which sank a state-of-the-art Italian cruiser, Bartolomeo Colleoni, in July 1940. For this action he was appointed a Companion of the Bath (CB).

Captain Collins left the command of HMAS Sydney for other posts and the famous ship left for Western Australia under the command of Captain Burnett, with men and boys from every major city and town in Australia embarked. HMAS Sydney was to be sunk by the German raider Kormoran in the Indian Ocean. The sinking of HMAS Sydney remains to this day, Australia's most tragic loss at sea.


Relations between the RAN and British Royal Navy were close at the time, with frequent exchanges of officers between the two and in June 1941, Collins was transferred to Singapore, as Assistant Chief of Staff to the British Naval Commander in Chief, China Command, Vice Admiral Geoffrey Layton.

Following the outbreak of war with Japan, Collins was appointed Commodore Commanding China Force, the RN-RAN cruiser and destroyer force based in Batavia, Dutch East Indies, under the American-British-Dutch-Australian Command.


After the fall of Singapore and the Allied defeat in the Battle of the Java Sea, it became clear that the Dutch East Indies would be occupied by Japan. Collins organised the evacuation of Allied civilians and military personnel from Batavia, and was on one of the last ships to leave, before the city fell, in March 1942. As a result he was Mentioned in Despatches, and was later made a Commander of the Dutch Order of Orange-Nassau.

Collins was then appointed Senior Naval Officer, Western Australia, based at Fremantle.

During 1943, Collins commanded HMAS Shropshire and took part in the Bougainville campaign, the Battle of Cape Gloucester, and operations off the Admiralty Islands and Hollandia (Dutch New Guinea).
In mid-1944, Collins was made commander of the Australian-US Navy Task Force 74, and commander of the Australian Naval Squadron, with HMAS Australia as his flagship. He became the first graduate of the RAN College to command a naval squadron in action, during the bombardment of Noemfoor, on 2 July 1944.



Collins was badly wounded in the first kamikaze attack in history, which hit Australia on 21 October 1944, in the lead up to the Battle of Leyte Gulf. He did not resume his command until July 1945. When the war ended Collins was the RAN's representative at the surrender ceremony in Tokyo Bay.


Collins was appointed Chief of Naval Staff in 1948 and held the position until 1955. He was knighted as a Knight Commander of the Order of the British Empire (KBE) in the 1951 New Year Honours. He later served as Australia's High Commissioner to New Zealand (1956–1962).

The latest class of Australian submarine, the Collins class bears his name. The lead submarine, HMAS Collins, was launched by his widow on 28 August 1993. Collins Road, a street in the Sydney suburb of St Ives was also named in his honour.