SOME SUPPRESSED LAUGHTER ....AT MY EXPENSE!

                                                                      S.S. SOUTH STEYNE

In happier times, the largest of the Manly Ferries- S.S.South Steyne used to join the fleet of small craft following the Sydney - Hobart Yacht Race fleet each Boxing Day, 26th December annually, as the great yachts raced out of Sydney Harbour, through the Heads and out to sea heading South.

On one of those occasions in the early 1960s, with my best friend and now my brother-in-law Tony Hannon, I paid for my ticket and off we went on a brilliant Summer day. It is hard to describe the sheer spectacle and excitement of those occasions, the most amazing harbour in the world, many hundreds of small craft, and at the centre of it all the great yachts. They vary in size and achievement, but handicapping ensures a wide area of interest across the field.

Our trusty South Steyne had no trouble making her way through the hundreds of small craft and, a little way to the South outside the Heads, she hove to, allowing us to watch the passing parade. I had with me my PENTAX SLR Camera - very modern and moderately expensive, slung around my neck on its leather strap.I was wearing my Aviator style dark glasses- I preferred to think of them as General MacArthur glasses - but to take a photo, I whipped them off and stuck them in my shirt pocket. 

To get a better look to the South -following the leaders, I leant out and, as I did- following the laws of nature- the straps of the camera moved outward. Unhappily, in the process, they pulled my sunglasses out of my pocket and flicked them into the sea !! 

Instinctively, I reached out in a futile effort to retrieve them, only to see them zig-zag downwards through the first few feet of relatively clear water. As I did so, the opened leather camera case lid caught on the buckle of my belt causing ithe lid to ride up. This caused the figure of eight shaped hole that held the case's metal retaining stud to move up to the larger hole, detached the cover and it too fell into the sea and, because of its lighter, hollowed construction it floated mockingly in front of me, slowly filling with slurps of seawater.! 

Further instinctive moves toward retrieving it, were checked when I became conscious of a quaking of suppressed laughter all about me - quickly strangled for a time whenever I eye-balled any of the guilty parties. When I turned to Tony Hannon and saw he was having the greatest struggle of all, I, at last, began to appreciate the humour of the situation.

BEGAN to appreciate........I'm still working on the problem!

MY FATHER CRYING - WHAT COULD IT MEAN?

Seventy-one years ago today, my paternal Grandma died - at age Sixty - six years. Here is a Post from 2011 which relates what for Eight Years old me, was a sadly memorable event.

 My Dad John Joseph Dixon 

      at about the age I was that

morning 

                                                                      

His Mother Eleanor Margaret Dixon
  taken the same day as Dad above.

Friday, 20th August 1948:  I was asleep in my bed, just clear of the inward opening door of my bedroom at the front right-hand side (facing), of our two-bedroom timber cottage in Second Avenue Berala NSW. I was woken when the door opened hastily.

There stood my 41 years old Dad. A tumble of thoughts into my gathering consciousness: Dad doesn't wake me in the morning ( Shift work meant he was either at work or not long in from work and sleeping at this hour),  why was his hat crammed on his head in the house? and....... what! My Dad was crying..... what could this mean?  "You'd better get up quick Anth, Ma has died", and he sobbed even more. 

Turmoil. Mum was already up at Grandma's which was in Third avenue just behind us and a tad higher on the gentle hill. Up I got, dressed quickly, no breakfast and round the block we went. The 1900 vintage cream painted timber house, had originally been much smaller but had been added onto. Up the front steps into the hall and I was taken down to Mum who was busy holding the family together, consoling this one, calming that one, and meanwhile getting them fed. My maiden Aunt Nell who was a very good-hearted soul, but at that stage of her life very tense, afflicted with a bad stutter, suggested while Dad was there, that I should be taken into Grandma's room to see her body. 

You can perhaps imagine my horror - at eight years of age - at the suggestion. I had no experience of death and I had no desire to see the Grandma I loved so devotedly, and who loved me, in death. I would NOT go in.

 Dad was too absorbed in grief to intervene, but mercifully Mum came across, asked what the fuss was, saw my reaction and put an end to that idea. I can't remember the rest of the day.

The funeral was some days later leaving - after the Requiem Mass - from our Church-School - St. Peter Chanel's on the hill at Berala. My mind boggled at all the relatives and friends and fellow Parishioners - the Dixons were not the greatest Churchgoers( masterly understatement - I'm getting better at it!) , but in earlier times the wooden Church as well as the Convent, had been in Fourth Avenue behind Grandma's house  and there weren't many houses in those earlier days ,so " Mag. Dixon" was well known to the Nuns and to many Parishioners. That old wooden Church had been hauled up the hill to the new Parish location, by draught horses, sometime in the '20s or '30s, and was now the Parish Hall.

Grandma was 66 years old.

Dad's Father, Thomas James Dixon died on the 2nd August 1950. I had rarely seen him. He had left the family home many years before, had a major problem with drink, and was not a very endearing person (actually, I'm getting better at understatement !) He was 66 years old also - I had never realised the coincidence of their ages at death until a minute ago, when I came to write this!

Deaths in August were to become more common in the family for some reason as you will see if you bear with me.And, as it happened, when my dear Mum died in August 1971 she was also 66 years old.


Requiescant in Pace.

WHO ARE WE? AND WHO DO OTHERS THINK WE ARE?

1993 THE TOURIST -IN FLORENCE
IN PIAZZA DELLA SIGNORIA

In some ways, I suppose we are most ourselves in the eyes of others when we are little children. We are just little ..........   whoever. It is that simple. But within our own being, we are then not yet fully ourselves, because we are not free to say whatever we wish, and in fact, we do not yet have ideas or opinions on many, even most subjects.

Later as teenagers, we have strongly felt opinions or prejudices, sometimes ill-informed, but not at all times freely expressed. Our identity is gradually unfolding to the world like a  flower. Our sense of our own identity is powerful at this time. Others' sense of our identity will then depend on how successfully or completely we have negotiated the shoals of puberty. Most of our peers, being in just the same stage of confusion as we are at some stages, will think we are great or a "drag". Older folk will see the forming personality more readily and begin to react accordingly.

As we reach the stage of being a young man or woman, our identity, just completed, begins to be moulded by strong external influences, our equally mature peers, our studies, our vocation and or, employment. This effect works on how we see ourselves and how we are seen by others. To take exceptional cases, the young Sailor sees himself as just that and is likewise perceived as a Sailor. In the employment sphere, the young man or woman can come to identify themselves with the corporation which employs them. The Sailor is a NAVY man and affects to have no time for Soldiers/ the Army or Airmen/the Air Force. The Commonwealth Banker will affect to look down on The Westpac man. Others will come to identify the individual with that employment. ""Here comes the NAVY!" as he enters a social gathering. Or, "What has the Commonwealth Bank got to say for himself??"This phenomenon has even been publicly acknowledged in St.George Bank's TV Commercials, distinguishing its man as socially acceptable, whereas a mere "banker" was not.

With my beautiful Bride in 1970.

The Paterfamilias in 1976

More important than all of these for a man is his identity as a husband, father and grandfather, this is an enduring underpinning of the superstructure. .And it is itself ideally resting on the foundation of his relationship with God.



So, where am I going with this?


Well, in my time I have been:
the Catholic Schoolboy
the aspiring Seminarian
the Seminarian
the ex-Seminarian
the young Commonwealth Public Servant
the Solicitor for Railways young man
Mr Commonwealth Bank
the Man from United Dominions
The Man from the Banque Nationale de Paris
The Man from the Archdiocese of Brisbane
The Man from Ignatius Press
The Publisher of Foundation
The Queenslander
and always, through it all The Catholic

But all the employment identities are long since gone, and the question arises
then, what is my identity? At 71 years I am still The Catholic, The Husband, Father, Grandfather,

A few words from Grandad about Stephen Dixon's new gift Telescope.

Consoling Grandson Daniel Whiting at Christmas time 2010 after a fall off a ride-on vehicle.

the Publisher of FOUNDATION .the Queenslander,the Blogger of "VEXILLA REGIS"http://vexilla-regis.blogspot.com/, of" EDWARD BECKMANN "http://edwardbeckmann.blogspot.com/of "CONRADBECKMANNhttp://conradbeckmann.blogspot.com/
 of "CARL DOPMEYER"http://carldopmeyer.blogspot.com/ and, of course of this  Blog, "BUT NOUGHT".

But many things change as time rolls on. I shall be the Catholic, the Husband, the Father and the Grandfather until God calls me away. And I hope to be able to continue FOUNDATION for years yet and the same with the Blogging.I shall remain the Queenslander always in spirit, though in the coming months my wife and I shall be moving back to Sydney to draw "the wagons into a circle" around the majority of our relatives and our oldest friends as the "enemy" 9advancing years begins to close in.

There, little identity analysis is complete. I am reduced to the core elements now.The time for adding features may be past. But then again one of my favourite quotes is:

"Come, my friends,
'Tis not too late to seek a newer world.
Push off, and sitting well in order smite
The sounding furrows; for my purpose holds
To sail beyond the sunset, and the baths
Of all the western stars, until I die."

"Ulysses"  Alfred Lord Tennyson

Who knows what God has in store for any of us? His Will be done !

MEMORIES - RE-DISCOVERED.

My Childhood Home - Picture taken in 1960s can be dated by TV Antenna
Which definitely puts it after the introduction of TV in 1956 and we did not get a TV until about 1961
AND my car a second hand 1961 VAUXHALL CRESTA ( Panoramic Windscreen! Leather Upholstery and a Radio !!!), so I think this is about 1964/65. 

When life was simple......for most children, little children that is, life is simple. It may be delightful,dull,harsh, even, hurtful but it is usually simple, due to the limitations of the little child's developing brain. A piece of cake can induce ecstasy, a teaspoon of peas may induce reactions of tragedy.

My pre- school years were mostly centred around my parents of course and lived out in our small , two bedroomed home pictured above. I was not conscious of being in any way deprived . I was always well-fed with the prudent necessities of food and regularly enjoyed delights beyond the necessities - including Mum's sponge- cakes: from time to time  true delights.

The weatherboard ( what Americans call "clapboard "I believe), house had a corrugated iron roof, which could produce a not unpleasant noise when rain was soft, but was  totally deafening in heavy rain, let alone hail. It did not look the way it does in the photo ( taken in the late 1960s) . The house had been built in the mid 1920s , and when I was very young we did not yet own it.In those early 1940s its paintwork looked more than a little tired, the front fence was in need of repair, there was no concrete driveway (and as I have said, no car in any case), the double gates for car entrance were wooden , and not well built so that they sagged and had to be lifted to open. Of course there was no TV aerial seen in the photo. That came several years after the introduction of T.V. in  1956, around 1959 I think .

My Dad worked Shiftwork in those years at the Garden Island Dockyard.In fact he worked Shiftwork even when he later worked for the Metropolitan Water Sewerage and Drainage Board at nearby Potts Hill Pumping Station and later at Ryde Pumping Station for the few years before his retirement.Dad's Shiftwork meant that he was not as significant a factor in my bringing up as he might otherwise have been,He worked Morning , Afternoon and Night Shifts in weekly succession with a break of about four days at the end of each cycle. Night Shift was the worst week for me because Dad left home about 7.30 to 8.00 p.m. to start at 9.00 p.m. When he arrived home about 6.00 - 6.30am he went straight to bed and would not be up until about 2.00 p.m. This meant "SHHH!Remember Dad's asleep!" Echoing in my ears whenever I wanted to do anything amusing.Especially in the small house with its timber floors and linoleum floor coverings of the time.
I subsequently learned that the War had prevented us enjoying a lot of things such as chocolates, sweets and soft drinks, and Ration Books ruled the domestic economy - a Socialist's heaven. But now and then Dad's work at the Dockyard paid off. Servicemen were not denied these little luxuries and some were happy to trade their issue or sell it. So, coming off Night Shift and arriving home as I was having breakfast he would often reach into his pocket , and with feigned surprise "find"a small bar of chocolate or some other treat for me.

Dad used to travel to and from Garden Island by a workers Ferry from Circular Quay, then walk to or from Wynyard underground Railway Station to home. At Circular Quay on the Eastern Corner of Pitt Street was Plasto's "SHIP INN"a regular port of call and centre of "devotion"on his way home. Each year we used to have brought home the large format Calendar of the "SHIP INN" which always featured large black and white prints of sailing ships that had frequented Sydney Harbour and in many cases, Circular Quay itself.
Afternoon Shift was not so bad family wise,. Dad left after an early Lunch and got home about 11.00 p.m.
Morning Shift was almost like a normal family , though Dad was gone before I got up he was home in time for Dinner or "Tea"as we always called it ."Dinner"was the Lunchtime Meal.

My Mother was the constant loving presence, the true "hub"of the little family. For my Dad, though he was never cruel or harsh, was not good at any display of affection. I have no recollection of him hugging me, lifting me up or kissing me.It was a not uncommon phenomenon amongst men of the time as literature now shows.( Indeed the Poet James McAuley in the poem "Because"relates the extreme case of his own father :

"Having seen other fathers greet their sons,
I put my childish face up to be kissed
After an absence. The rebuff still stings."

Mum, God bless her, was the very model of loyalty, love and kindness , thinking always of others, ever ready to blame herself for whatever went wrong. Dad's mealtimes were always rigidly observed as if by the most sacred Rubrics. And it didn't matter if this meant her getting up in the depths of Winter to get his breakfast at some ungodly hour when dawn was still a long way off, or having a very late Dinner on the table when he came home at 11.00 pm on the relative Shift. When he came home at night she always had the external light at the back burning bright "to welcome him home".

We all dressed simply, Wartime Clothing Rations ensured that was the case.But there was always a set of "Best"clothes for going out, which would mean perhaps a visit to Grandma Beckmanns (interesting - I typed that automatically, but that was what I called it - Not Grandma & Grandad Beckmann's)or to nearby Auburn which had several important shops, or further afield to Burwood , Parramatta Road to the North and Liverpool and Canterbury Roads to the South .Then again there were trips, sometimes weekly, to the City.

My brother Pat did not feature largely in my life. He was born in 1929 , and so was 11 when I came on the scene, During the War-years he was completing his High School to 3rd Year and then went off to work - not exactly the years he might want to be involved with a baby brother. But in any case I have no memories of him at that time. Interesting really, in later years when his life started going wrong, he would always, or often anyway, reproach Mum & Dad for his shortcomings with the refrain : "He (me) was always the favourite"  now that I reflect on it, I wonder how far back his resentment went . Maybe the arrival of baby me was to him wholly unacceptable. Mum and Dad always spoke of Pat having been "spoiled" by Grandma Dixon and the Aunts and Uncles around in Third Avenue. Even to the extent of giving him a pushbike Mum and Dad had said he couldn't have; whatever he couldn't get at home, he got at Grandma's.Ah, well....

Almost all of my toys were War themed. My pride and joy was a sheet tin toy  - a tank with a little plane attached to it by a wire arm. When you wound the tank up it would go along and the plane would rise up on its wire arm until the tank shot at it with friction sparks! There were the usual lead soldiers and I had a small fort which I think was desert/Foreign Legion themed.Later there was a very small HORNBY most basic wind-up train Red Engine and two carriages I think and a simple circle of track. When Santa came at Christmas he left my few presents in a Pillow Case always left at the foot of my bed for his convenience and he was always provided with a hefty chunk of Mum's delicious Christmas Fruit Cake and a small bottle of Beer! Good old Santa!

So, I had a very nice early childhood thank you Mum & Dad. Whatever your troubles, and photos show the strain of those post Depression War years, you did not let them get to me - models of parental care - thank you!

P.S. I used to play in the dirt under the house when I could, building roads and dirt houses, but always close to the side which in later years had the driveway, the Northern side which let the Sun shine in there. I discovered my brother's much earlier diggings under there too - gave the effort something of an archeological flavour. The discovery of some Red- Back spiders later made the spot forbidden.

"SINK THE BISMARCK !"

K.M.S. BISMARCK, bows on escorted by seagulls.

"In May of 1941, the War had just begun" according to the American pop song     " Sink the Bismarck" (1960). Well, it was a pop song and not History.  

The Second World War began on 3rd September 1939. By May of 1941, it was already 21 months old. Through all those 21 Months the full panoply of British patriotic fervour and all its manifestations had been swiftly mobilised to win the War: "God Save the King", "Land of Hope and Glory" and especially "Rule Britannia!" swelled loyal chests.  The people did not really need to be reminded that:

 "It is upon the Navy

under the good Providence of God 

that the safety, honour and welfare 

of this realm do chiefly depend" 

( taken from the preamble to "Articles of War"

 of King Charles II (1630-1685). 

H.M.S.HOOD

Nothing better exemplified the inevitability of Victory in this struggle than that same Royal Navy. And the pride of the Fleet remained the 46,680 tons Battle Cruiser  H.M.S. HOOD with her awesome main armament of eight 15 inch guns and her impressive speed of 32 Knots, even though she had been commissioned in 1920. 

Unknown to the populace, she was overdue for a major refit when War broke out. Her steaming capacity was limited so much that she could only make 28 knots.  Despite this, HOOD was sent, in company with the new 43,786 tons Battleship H.M.S. PRINCE OF WALES to attack and destroy the new  50,300 tons German Battleship K.M.S. BISMARCK sailing in company with the new 19,050 tons Heavy Cruiser K.M.S. PRINZ EUGEN. 

K.M.S. BISMARCK

But the key to what happened was not only the nature of each ship but also the way it was being used.

HOOD was designed to avoid a battle with a superior ship such as BISMARCK, but she was used to seek out and attack BISMARCK. Of course, it could be argued that sailing in company with the Battleship PRINCE OF WALES - brand new and still suffering some operating problems, the pair were nominally far superior to BISMARCK and PRINZ EUGEN. 

K.M.S. PRINZ EUGEN

H.M.S. PRINCE OF WALES

PRINCE OF WALES had been commissioned four months earlier, on 19th January 1941. She had a displacement of 43,786 tons, a speed of 28.3 Knots and a main armament of 10 x 14-inch guns. But both before and throughout the brief, but disastrous encounter, she was suffering major equipment failures, the worst of which was the jamming of "Y" Turret (the final one toward the stern, the second of her two four- gun turrets).

Another intruding factor was that the Flag Officer Commanding the Squadron was in HOOD, the pride of the Royal Navy. It was unthinkable that he would leave the attack to his hierarchically subordinate companion vessel.

THE ACTION

The brief engagement on 24th May 1941 provided what were to be among the most devastating minutes of the War. The British Squadron first spotted the German ships at 05.37  and the action was broken off by PRINCE OF WALES at 06.05. Twenty-eight minutes had elapsed. But in three of those minutes,  HOOD had been hit by BISMARCK'S remarkably accurate gunnery. She blew up and sank with the loss of 1,418 men leaving only 3 survivors. It was a horrendous and awe-inspiring event which profoundly shocked those onlookers in the other ships, both German and British.

We know from eyewitness accounts, and from the wreck discovered in 2001, that the after magazine had exploded breaking the great ship's back and destroying her stern. The wreck also revealed that portion of the bow was missing - suggesting an explosion of the forward magazine either just before, or just after the ship sank below the surface.

Precisely what caused the catastrophe is keenly debated. The probable causes are either :

a direct hit by BISMARCK's 15" Shells penetrating to the HOOD's after magazine, or, 

that a massive fire known to have been caused by another of BISMARCK's 15-inch shells in the midships section caused the 4-inch ammunition lockers (which were not armoured) to explode, causing damage to the 15-inch magazines resulting in the fatal explosion, or, 

that a BISMARCK 15 inch shell fell short and travelled underwater striking the ship below its armour plating and exploding in or near the after magazine. 

There were also several theories suggesting that accidents within HOOD's own guns or the explosion of her own torpedoes might have been to blame. Both have been conclusively disproved. The ideas seem to have been intended to suggest that it was not the enemy that sank the HOOD - foolish disinformation.

The British had opened fire at 05.52 with HOOD firing on PRINZ EUGEN which was ahead of BISMARCK. Three minutes later the Germans returned fire, both their ships concentrating on HOOD.  An 8-inch shell from Prinz Eugen struck HOOD between the funnels starting a large fire amongst the ready use ammunition for the anti-aircraft guns. Just before 06.00 HOOD was hit directly by BISMARCK's fifth salvo at a range of 10.35 Miles. This resulted in the catastrophic explosion and within three minutes HOOD was gone along with all her crew save three, as we have said.

The first two salvos from PRINCE OF WALES had landed more than half a mile beyond BISMARCK. Her 6th, ninth and thirteenth salvos straddled BISMARCK. Two direct hits were made - one holed her bow and caused the loss of 1,000 tons of fuel oil. The second had fallen short and struck BISMARCK below the armour belt exploding in a boiler room. 

Tellingly, HOOD and PRINCE OF WALES in their eagerness to engage BISMARCK and PRINZ EUGEN had approached them at an angle of about 30 Degrees off the bow. The effect of this was to limit the British guns that could be brought to bear to the forward "A" and "B" turrets of each ship., whereas the German ships were able to bring all of their guns to bear. This was a serious tactical misjudgement. 

Nevertheless, it still left the British with 4 x 15-inch guns and 5 x 14-inch guns in action vs. the German ships with 8 x 15-inch guns and 8 x 8-inch guns in action. This meant that each firing of the British guns hurled 23,335lbs. of shells toward the Germans, and each time the Germans fired they hurled only 16,152 lbs in return. This is a result of the disparity in shell weights  :

HOOD                                 1,920lbs each x 8      Rate of Fire 2.0 per min. per gun

                                           

PRINCE OF WALES      1,595 lbs each x 5      Rate of Fire 1.3 per min. per gun

BISMARCK                       1,800 lbs each x 8      Rate of Fire 2.5 per  min.per gun

PRINZ EUGEN                    269  lbs each  x 8     Rate of Fire 4.0 per  min.per gun

The actual difference in weight of shells fired depends of course on the rate of fire actually achieved since the above rates of fire are design figures.  We know that the BISMARCK was firing its salvos at the rate of one per minute.

                               K.M.S. BISMARCK  bows on (note the "escort" of gulls.)

SUMMARY

The complexities of the contest are even greater than shown above, but the main outline has been given. The struggle was one of epic proportions and intensity.

The crushing loss of H.M.S. HOOD was a psychological blow to British confidence. It was the falling of one's champion in battle. Contrary to the anthem, it called into question the claim that "Britannia Rules the Waves." 

To British pride, this was intolerable, quite apart from being tragic. The old Lion Rampant himself, Winston Churchill gave the order: "SINK THE BISMARCK !  " and all hell broke loose at sea as the Royal Navy threw everything it could muster into that effort. 

On the 26th May, as BISMARCK made for the port of Brest for the repair of damage sustained, Torpedo Bombers from the Aircraft Carrier H.M.S. Victorious made hits on her stern, jamming her port rudder in a turning position. This condemned her to steaming around in a given area.  British destroyers kept watch on her position overnight. 

And finally on the 27th May the British Battleships KING GEORGE V and RODNEY came up into position , and with the aid of several Cruisers attacked the crippled BISMARCK and sank her with considerable loss of life , 111 survivors were rescued, but hundreds more were left in the water when U Boats were detected in the vicinity. These later saved some of those survivors after the British ships departed. The great ship was like a bear in a pit surrounded in an unequal fight.

HUBRIS

The headlong dash of H.M.S. HOOD and H.M.S. PRINCE OF WALES into the attack on K.M.S. BISMARCK and K.M.S. PRINZ EUGEN brings to mind the quote attributed to Admiral Lord Nelson :

 "Never mind manoeuvres go at them" 

Was this necessary, or advisable? The two German ships had been spotted the previous day by the British Heavy Cruisers H.M.S. SUFFOLK and H.M.S. NORFOLK. These two sister ships were substantial combatants in their own right each displacing 13,450Tons, carrying a main armament of 8  Eight Inch guns (as did K.M.S. Prinz Eugen). They also carried two quadruple mounts of 21" Torpedo Tubes and they each had a speed of 31.5 Knots.  They had not only sighted  BISMARCK and PRINZ EUGEN the day before the battle, but they had followed them continually, vectoring HOOD and PRINCE of WALES onto the German Squadron. They clearly had no trouble keeping up with the great ships of either side. Their involvement in the action would have had the advantage of enabling the British to achieve the maximum advantage by obtaining the best angle of attack, so that ALL their guns were brought to bear. This could be done using the Cruisers' torpedo tubes to fire on the German ships causing them to alter course to avoid the torpedoes. (This was done repeatedly during the war, often by mere Destroyers with great effect.) Even their main armament  - a combined 16  8- Inch guns could have been very useful as we see with PRINZ EUGEN and her 8- Inch guns scoring hits on the HOOD.

But the services of SUFFOLK and NORFOLK were NOT used. However, after HOOD had been sunk and BISMARCK damaged, they joined company with PRINCE OF WALES at last, and then, were brought in to assist KING GEORGE V and RODNEY to despatch the crippled BISMARCK.

It seems that the hubris induced by the "Britannia Rules the Waves" syndrome, the Nelsonian  "Never mind manoeuvres " exhortation,  and the myth of "the Mighty Hood" as she had long been known, had led to the decision not to use all available forces, and not to seek the optimum angle of approach. It is easy to be the armchair Admiral after the event of course. But the facts are the facts.

In December of the same year 1941, the British Battleship PRINCE OF WALES and the Battle Cruiser REPULSE were sunk when attacked by eighty-eight Japanese land-based Aircraft. The ships, with only 4 Destroyers and no air superiority cover, were despatched to reinforce Singapore. With its massive seaward pointing defense guns, Singapore had been "impregnable".  Until the Japanese attacked "through the back door" piercing through the"impenetrable" jungle. 

These two traumatic events, following so closely on the loss of HOOD, finally put "paid" to British hubris.

VULNERABILITY

For all the consideration given to Armour to protect the waterline and beneath it, to protect the main deck, the gun turrets, the barbettes on which the turrets were mounted ,adding thousands of tons of weight to the great ships, they all retained a point of vulnerability out of necessity : the stern beneath which there extended the propellers and their drive shafts and the rudders. Both propellers and rudders must, by the very nature of their operation, be exposed in order to have their influence on the seas.

                                 Fairey "Swordfish" Maximum Speed 134 MPH.

And it was at this point of vulnerability, that the ancient, obsolescent Fairey "Swordfish" bi-plane Torpedo Bombers from the carrier H.M.S. VICTORIOUS were successful in striking the BISMARCK, leading to her sinking. One of their torpedoes struck her stern and the explosion jammed BISMARCK's port rudder at an angle of 12 Degrees to Port. This caused the great ship to begin to circle and defied all efforts to regain control of her direction. 

The whole story is too long to recount here, but basically, the British had lost contact with BISMARCK earlier due to her clever maneuvering and the pursuing armada of battleships, battlecruisers, cruisers and destroyers had, in any case, desperate needs for fuel. Only King George V and Rodney were able to stay the course and were joined by Suffolk and Norfolk. Finally, a Catalina Flying Boat detected Bismarck and those ships moved in for the kill.

The great drama came to a close.

CONCLUSION

A matter of Hubris and Vulnerability - there are lessons here - not only Naval but for all of us in our lives, not to be led astray by inflated ideas of ourselves and to know ourselves well enough to consider our weakest points both moral and spiritual.

 

HUBRIS AND CATASTROPHE

78 Years ago today 0n 24th May 1941, almost a year after the seeming miracle of the Dunkirk evacuation, H.M.S.HOOD in company with the Battleship PRINCE OF WALES was in search of the German Battleship K.M.S. BISMARCK which was known to be at sea sailing in company with the Heavy Cruiser K.M.S. PRINZ EUGEN. There were to be no miracles on this occasion.

It is difficult today, to recover the sense of how large some things loomed in the public consciousness even 50 years ago. Today instant communications and a hysterical Public relations industry create "sensations" overnight and discard them just as readily.

But in the decades before 1941, the public mind was accustomed to long-lasting "bests and greatests". They gave the world a sense of order and an imagery that made it easier to comprehend.  High in the ranking of "greatests"  was the Battlecruiser H.M.S. HOOD. She was, and had been for over twenty years, the very embodiment and symbol of the might of the British Empire. She proved that "Britannia Rules the Waves!"

Commissioned in 1920, she had been laid down in 1916 and launched in 1918. For the twenty years after her commissioning, she was the largest and most powerful warship in the world. She had the nickname "The Mighty Hood". In fact, she became the ultimate symbol of the power of the British Empire.

Weighing 47,000 Tons and 860 Feet long with a Beam of 104 Feet, her 144,000 SHP engines could drive her along at 32 Knots.  The concept of the Battlecruiser had evolved as a ship with the armament of a Battleship but the light armour of a cruiser - so that she could catch anything she could outgun and evade anything whose armour she could not pierce. She did have light armour but nothing to match that of a Battleship. Her deck Armour was arranged on the Upper Deck and on the two decks below it. This was quite clever, the idea being that an enemy shell would be detonated on hitting the Upper Deck and the blast would be progressively absorbed by the two decks below.  However, in the twenty years since her commissioning, the invention of time delay shells had invalidated that theory because they would pierce probably two or even all three decks before detonating with immense effect in the bowels of such a ship. In addition, in those intervening years the Heavy Guns being mounted in Battleships were much more powerful than the 8 x 15" Guns of her main armament. The new 16" guns fired heavier shells over a greater range with increased accuracy. There were plans to improve many aspects of HOOD but the outbreak of war in 1939 prevented the work from being done.

K.M.S. PRINZ EUGEN

Just before dawn, at 5.37am   HOOD spotted the PRINZ EUGEN ahead of BISMARCK. At 5.52 am HOOD opened fire on PRINZ EUGEN. This was an act of inbred hubris. 

The angle of approach meant that HOOD could only engage the enemy with half her armament - the two turrets forward, AND she was engaging a force including a battleship -  BISMARCK -  which she was designed to avoid. True, she obviously hoped to dispose of the inferior PRINZ EUGEN in short order, and she was accompanied by the new battleship H.M.S. PRINCE OF WALES, but PRINCE OF WALES was experiencing operational teething troubles with some of her guns. Had the force commander in HOOD not been confident that the "Nelson spirit" would give the British the absolute advantage over the enemy, prudence would have required a less precipitate engagement. The German ships were able to bring all their guns to bear.

Three minutes later, at 5.55 am BISMARCK and PRINZ EUGEN opened fire on HOOD scoring a hit on the secondary armament ready-use ammunition on the boat deck between HOOD'S two funnels. A Massive fire ensued. Four minutes later, BISMARCK'S main armament scored a direct hit on HOOD at a range of 18,210 yards (10.35 Miles). HOOD was in the process of turning 20 degrees to Port to bring her after armament to bear.  A huge sheet of flame shot up from the area of the main mast followed by a mighty explosion of the after magazine which entirely destroyed the after part of the ship. HOOD's back was broken and her bow stood vertically before the whole of the ship disappeared beneath the sea. 

In 3 minutes she was gone, taking with her all but 3 of her crew of 1,416 men.

H.M.S. HOOD

Observers on PRINCE OF WALES, PRINZ EUGEN and BISMARCK were all likewise appalled at the horrendous character of the event.

PRINCE OF WALES made a few hits on BISMARCK before disengaging due to the failure of a number of her guns. BISMARCK had sustained a hit which contaminated part of her fuel supply and caused her to head for a French port under German control.

The loss of HOOD was a severe blow to British pride and confidence from Winston Churchill to the man in the street. Early efforts to explain what happened sought to correct the official version given above. Efforts were made to say that it had been the ship's torpedoes which had blown up in an accident, or the that the magazine had blown up in an accident. A second official Inquiry found the same as the first - enemy shells had done the deed - there was to be no denying the fact. In more recent times the wreck of HOOD has been located and examined confirming the official account.

The BISMARCK's fate is a story for another day.

THAT BOUQUET OF MOTHERS

MY MUM in later life. She was born in 1905 and died in 1971.

Here I am surrounded by a pictorial  bouquet of Mothers !( I think "bouquet" is a suitable collective noun for a group of Mothers!) Each one of them I have had the privilege and joy to share my life with, and each one has been a remarkable example of love and kindness in action, even in the gravest difficulty. The pictures are in no particular order. Obviously, the first Mother I knew was my very own dear Mum, who led a life of self- sacrifice, love, and loyalty in the most adverse circumstances. Her love was generous and kind, never in the least demanding.

She was the ideal example of her Father's philosophy that love and respect go hand in hand: if you have not got love you will show no respect, if you show no respect, you have no love. Grandad hit the nail on the head, and my dear Mum had absorbed the lesson and lived it out.

 

My Grandma Dixon -Elinor Margaret (Mag) Dixon

Born  1882       Died 1948

Next, I got to know my Grandma Dixon who lived on the next block one street behind us. Hers was also a tough life coping with a difficult husband and who gave herself to helping many human strays in the family orbit. She was very loving in her treatment of me and in early primary school days I used to walk home via Grandma's place, where she would always be seated on the verandah - waiting for me with a One Shilling piece( with its Merino Sheep Head image on it) clutched in her hand which she gave to me for treats. I can still recall its warmth from her hand, today.

My Grandma Beckmann. Born 1886  Died 1965.

My Mum's Mother, Grandma Beckmann, was a very special lady too. She was more self - confident and outgoing within the family group than my Mum or Grandma Dixon and her love was open-hearted and generous, her hugs big and strong. She was totally devoted to her husband "Ted" Edward Beckmann and in the family circle, she would refer to him as "Daddy"( they had 9 children!). When I knew him his health was failing, and though she would firmly proclaim that "Daddy and I are going to live on into the (Biblical) Millenium", looking back, I can see her anxiety that he was slipping away. She was a wonderful example of love and affection and that, constant and reliable. She had had a tough life with never a lot of money around, and when some windfall occurred an adverse development would sweep it away. She suffered a lot for marrying a "German" especially in World War I as did the older girls, reproached for being "Germans".I recall her unconditional love of me, and those strong, generous hugs today. And, as she lay close to death in Hospital, I can recall her calling out "Mummy" - my Grandmother, at the end of her 

life - calling out for Her Mother!

Robyn and the children in the Autumn leaves of Mount Wilson in 1979.

Then we come to the full-colour Mums. My dear wife Robyn and those three beautiful children, what fun we had that day in the bracing air and rich autumn tones of Mount Wilson! What fun we have had over all the years - and how much of that is due to Robyn, loving loyal, devoted wife and Mother. I guess we have had more good times than all the predecessor Mothers and their families combined and yet we have had a ton of tough times, but Robyn has been a constant source of love and loyalty through thick and thin, and even thinner! No - one could ask for a better Wife or, the children, a better Mother.

Our daughter Justine with 2 mths premature son Daniel (born 1st June 2009)

 now a charmer & picture of robust  good health

The latest Mother in the family bloodline is our dear daughter Justine, Mother to Emily, Christopher, and Daniel. Words nearly fail me (nearly! I always have a few left!) As parents we could not be prouder of this thoroughly modern Mother. She is an exemplary model of love and devotion in effective action, handling even the strain of tiny Daniel's birth, when this tiny literal handful of life seemed to us too fragile , she brought him to the fullness of healthy life with dedication and love, without skipping a beat in the care of Emily and Christopher and husband Paul. And like her paternal Grandmother, she is a stalwart strength for her parents.

So, Mothers of mine, I salute you and honour you, but most of all, I love you unfailingly.