The Wreck of DKM Bismarck − A Marine Forensics Analysis 1 The ...

The Wreck of DKM Bismarck − A Marine Forensics Analysis
“good question” stage with few “good answers”:
What can explain the differences in rusticle growth in two adjacent rooms equally far
inside the structure? Would it be the result of fire damage? Could it be that one space burned,
another didn't, creating different chemistry in the substrate? Was it due to the accumulation of oil
or other substances during the sinking? Fuel oil may have entered some spaces as the ship
capsized, or even after the impact with the bottom, as it burst from the tanks and rose up to the
surface. When the ship was sliding down the seamount, oil may have been blown into some
spaces and not into others, and may have been trapped in some closed volumes or excluded from
others. Could it be organics that may have been in some spaces or been forced into others during
the sinking? Was it from food in the ships stores? Was it a product of human remains?
What is the white substance which is aggregated in some of these structures? Presumably,
it is not calcium, which is so low in concentration at these depths that bones completely dissolve
in only a few years. Is it anhydrate or is it some kind of white bacterial tissue, like bacterial mats.
Tube worms and galathea crabs at this depth are white.
WHO SANK THE BISMARCK – The British or the Germans?
We are convinced the answer is … “BOTH!!”
Bismarck unquestionably would have sunk due to progressive flooding hours after the
battle ended. By 0930, CDR Oels heard no response from the Bridge and he knew that the ship
was defenseless, when turrets Caesar and Dora were no longer operational. There is enough
evidence to indicate that he ordered the ship scuttled to prevent her boarding by the British and
to end the agony of the prolonged battering by British shellfire that was hindering escape into the
sea.
The German Navy, prompted by memories of the scuttling of High Seas Fleet ships
interned at Scapa Flow after the end of World War One and the Graf Spee at Montivideo,
Uruguay in 1939, had provided scuttling charges and timers in major vital spaces on the
Bismarck. This information was provided by Lt. Gerhard Junack, who set charges in the middle
engine room, and Seaman Josef Statz in correspondence with author Bill Garzke. Scuttling of
Bismarck to speed an inevitable sinking was likely and eminently probable.
This does not detract from the fact that the men, ships, and aircraft of the Royal
Navy had finally succeeded in their determined quest to “SINK THE BISMARCK!”
CONCLUSION
There are a number of useful historical insights that have resulted from the combination
of decades of technical and historical research with the results of Jim Cameron’s 2002 survey of
the wreck of Bismarck on the seabed:
○ Long-range gunfire (16,000 to 18,000 meters) from Prince of Wales the morning of
24 May was crucial to the early stages of the British effort to destroy the German
battleship. This damage resulted in the loss of fuel and flooding (and counterflooding)
which amounted to 3,000 to 4,000 tonnes, a significant loss of reserve
50