ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » History, Literature, and the Arts
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags World War II history

Reply
Old Yesterday, 04:01 PM   #641
Rincewind
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Adirondacks, NY - with Magrat!
Posts: 7,596
Found something else:

From an article called "Airpower during Munich" - sadly I can't find the original source...

However:

Most of the Luftwaffe was preparing to attack Czechoslovakia, so to shift the emphasis against Britain would have probably take considerably more than the week that Henri allowed Germany to beat Britain. Common sense suggests they would have wanted to defeat the Czechs first.

And - apparently they only has 378 fully operational bombers (excluding the Ju-87) and another 411 partially operational.

The Luftwaffe achieved very high serviceability rates for its aircraft before Fall Grün by reducing flight and training time and using up many spares. These rates were 90% for bombers and 95% for fighters on 26 September.

However, by December the serviceability rate had dropped to 78%

Czech Combat Aircraft:

Fighters: 252; 326 including reserves
Night Fighters: 10
Bombers: 94; 101 light bombers and 54 heavy bombers including reserves
Observation: 160; 529 including reserves.
__________________
I used to think I was happy. then I met Magrat...
Rincewind is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 06:26 PM   #642
Captain_Swoop
Penultimate Amazing
 
Captain_Swoop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 14,562
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
I still think Chain Home radar was in its infancy in 1938:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chain_Home_Low
Chain Home was used to detect aircraft formations forming up and approaching at high altitude from long range, it could never reliable detect at low altitude.

Low altitude detection was covered by a separate system called Chain Home Low.

Go and study the Radar pages at the link given above, it has far more info than Wikipedia.
Captain_Swoop is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 02:23 AM   #643
Tolls
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 3,884
Originally Posted by Rincewind View Post
Most of the Luftwaffe was preparing to attack Czechoslovakia, so to shift the emphasis against Britain would have probably take considerably more than the week that Henri allowed Germany to beat Britain. Common sense suggests they would have wanted to defeat the Czechs first.
Considering this is what happened with Poland a year later, the whole idea that the UK (or even France) would come under sustained air attack in 1938 is nonsense.

It would just be nice if Henri finally admitted it.
Tolls is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 04:44 AM   #644
Henri McPhee
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 2,251
I don't think it is nonsense. I think in Hitler's little mind he thought Britain would negotiate after Dunkirk, and that he would win the air war of the Battle of Britain. It was pretty close even with Spitfires and Hurricanes, which were not really available in 1938. To think that Gloucester Gladiators could win an air war in 1938 is not being a realist.

The Bristol Beaufighter seems to have been a good warplane, which unfortunately was not available in 1938 I didn't know until recently that it was manufactured at Weston-Super-Mare:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bristol_Beaufighter

Quote:
The concept of the Beaufighter has its origins in 1938. During the Munich Crisis, the Bristol Aeroplane Company recognised that the Royal Air Force (RAF) had an urgent need for a long-range fighter aircraft capable of carrying heavy payloads for dealing high amounts of damage.

Last edited by Henri McPhee; Today at 04:48 AM.
Henri McPhee is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 04:57 AM   #645
Henri McPhee
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 2,251
From the internet, which is relevant to appeasement and all that waffle about peace in our time, and the Anglo-German naval agreement:

Quote:
As Wing Commander Andrew Green, who has piloted the more modern Phantoms and Tornados, points out: '’People say that after the Battle of Trafalgar, England was safe from invasion for ever. But if it wasn’t for the Spitfire we would have been invaded in 1940.’’
Henri McPhee is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 05:05 AM   #646
Tolls
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 3,884
You haven't addressed any of the points others have raised, just regurgitated your assertions.

You haven't explained how the Germans could do a thing to Britain in 1938, considering they didn't in 1939 in the real world.

Even had the battle of Britain started in June 1939, you haven't explained how 109s would be effective, when the 'E' (the version used in the Battle of Britain) was only just coming into service, and the 'D' was not as dominant in its role compared to the 'E'.
Tolls is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 05:16 AM   #647
Border Reiver
Philosopher
 
Border Reiver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 6,134
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
I don't think it is nonsense. I think in Hitler's little mind he thought Britain would negotiate after Dunkirk, and that he would win the air war of the Battle of Britain. It was pretty close even with Spitfires and Hurricanes, which were not really available in 1938. To think that Gloucester Gladiators could win an air war in 1938 is not being a realist.

The Bristol Beaufighter seems to have been a good warplane, which unfortunately was not available in 1938 I didn't know until recently that it was manufactured at Weston-Super-Mare:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bristol_Beaufighter
Henri - focus!

The Luftwaffe had NO way to provide fighter cover for their bombers if they tried to attack Britain in 1938. Without fighter protection, the bombers were vulnerable to any of the British fighter aircraft available in 1938.

A realistic threat analysis of German military capabilities, whether in 1938 or even up to June 1941 clearly reveals that the German military had no chance of landing in Great Britain, sustaining any landing, or defeating Great Britain militarily. And all the quotes you dredge up from people who want to pump the war winning contribution of their arm of service up won't change the facts that the German military could not:

a. Achieve air supremacy over any potential landing area in Britain;
b. Achieve naval supremacy in the Channel;
c. Get anything other than a single division of paratroops into southern England; and
d. Resupply those forces once deployed.

Wing Commander Green is talking tosh.
__________________
Questions, comments, queries, bitches, complaints, rude gestures and/or remarks?
Border Reiver is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 05:25 AM   #648
Hubert Cumberdale
Muse
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 998
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
I don't think it is nonsense. I think in Hitler's little mind he thought Britain would negotiate after Dunkirk, and that he would win the air war of the Battle of Britain. It was pretty close even with Spitfires and Hurricanes, which were not really available in 1938. To think that Gloucester Gladiators could win an air war in 1938 is not being a realist.

The Bristol Beaufighter seems to have been a good warplane, which unfortunately was not available in 1938 I didn't know until recently that it was manufactured at Weston-Super-Mare:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bristol_Beaufighter
Once again you totally ignore the fact that there were no German fighters capable of reaching the UK from Germany, and once again you fail utterly to explain how Germany could have forced a British capitulation within a week in 1938.

Honestly, this is getting boring.
Hubert Cumberdale is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 05:31 AM   #649
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 25,881
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
It was pretty close even with Spitfires and Hurricanes, which were not really available in 1938. To think that Gloucester Gladiators could win an air war in 1938 is not being a realist.
No. What's unrealistic is to pretend that the 1938 RAF would have had to face the 1940 Luftwaffe flying from 1940 bases. What the Gladiators and Hurricanes (and of course even a few Spitfires) would actually have had to face was about 300 unescorted bombers with 500kg bomb loads. And even if they hadn't been there, you're pretending that 300 bombers with 500kg bombloads could force a surrender in a week, when the RAF found that 1,000 bombers with 5,000kg bombloads couldn't force a surrender in three years. You're out by a factor, therefore, of about 5,000.

And it's "Gloster".

Dave
__________________
Me: So what you're saying is that, if the load carrying ability of the lower structure is reduced to the point where it can no longer support the load above it, it will collapse without a jolt, right?

Tony Szamboti: That is right
Dave Rogers is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 05:55 AM   #650
Captain_Swoop
Penultimate Amazing
 
Captain_Swoop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 14,562
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
From the internet, which is relevant to appeasement and all that waffle about peace in our time, and the Anglo-German naval agreement:
Andrew Green is wrong. Without the Spitfire there still wouldn't have been an invasion in 1940 or any other year.
Captain_Swoop is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 06:17 AM   #651
Craig B
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 21,969
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
From the internet, which is relevant to appeasement and all that waffle about peace in our time, and the Anglo-German naval agreement:
The vague expression "the Internet" isn't very helpful in defining a source. Your informant doesn't even seem to know the name of the country participating in the Battle of Britain, which isn't a good sign. If it was being fought by "England" why is it the Battle of Britain?
Craig B is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 07:13 AM   #652
Tolls
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 3,884
That's how it's normally phrased, based on how early 19th century types viewed it all.

Trafalgar saved England.
Tolls is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 09:59 AM   #653
Henri McPhee
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 2,251
Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop View Post
Andrew Green is wrong. Without the Spitfire there still wouldn't have been an invasion in 1940 or any other year.
I just think that's amazing complacency. The Gladiators would not have stood a chance against any German fighter aircraft, and not much chance against German bombers in 1938:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gloster_Gladiator

Quote:
By September 1937, all eight Gladiator squadrons had achieved operational status and had formed the spearhead of London's air defences.[16] Difficulties with introducing the type had been experienced. Although the Gladiator was typically well liked by pilots, the accident rate encountered during operational training for the type were so numerous that a small replacement batch of 28 Gladiator Mk IIs was hurriedly produced.[15] Most accidents were caused by pilots being caught out by the fighter’s increased wing loading and many aviators had little experience in landing aircraft with such a wide flap area.[15] The aircraft had a tendency to stall more abruptly, frequently dropping a wing while doing so. The Gladiator proved even easier to enter a flat spin with and great skill was needed to recover.[17][15]

During 1938, the RAF had begun to receive its first deliveries of the Hurricane and Spitfire monoplanes; an emphasis was soon placed on quickly reequipping half of the Gladiator squadrons with either of these monoplane types.[18] By the outbreak of the Second World War, the Gladiator had largely been replaced by the Hurricane and Spitfire in frontline RAF service.

Last edited by Henri McPhee; Today at 10:03 AM.
Henri McPhee is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 10:07 AM   #654
lobosrul5
Critical Thinker
 
lobosrul5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 322
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
I just think that's amazing complacency. The Gladiators would not have stood a chance against any German fighter aircraft, and not much chance against German bombers in 1938:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gloster_Gladiator
You got anything to back that up?
lobosrul5 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 10:07 AM   #655
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 25,881
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
I just think that's amazing complacency. The Gladiators would not have stood a chance against any German fighter aircraft, and not much chance against German bombers in 1938:
And I think that's just amazing obstinacy. The Gladiator didn't need to stand a chance against any German fighter aircraft in the first week of a hypothetical war in 1938, because they couldn't actually get within a few hundred miles of one. Finnish Gladiators scored 45 kills in 1940; Norwegian Gladiators shot down Bf110s and He111s in 1940; 263 squadron RAF shot down 26 aircraft over Norway; Gladiators over Malta scored several successes despite being no more than a single flight, outnumbered by higher performance monoplane fighters. All in all, they did pretty well against the sort of opposition prevalent in 1940. That clearly gives the lie to the suggestion that they would have been utterly useless in 1938, don't you think?

Dave
__________________
Me: So what you're saying is that, if the load carrying ability of the lower structure is reduced to the point where it can no longer support the load above it, it will collapse without a jolt, right?

Tony Szamboti: That is right
Dave Rogers is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 10:08 AM   #656
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 25,881
Originally Posted by lobosrul5 View Post
You got anything to back that up?
No, but as usual he's edited in a random quote that has nothing to do with it.

Dave
__________________
Me: So what you're saying is that, if the load carrying ability of the lower structure is reduced to the point where it can no longer support the load above it, it will collapse without a jolt, right?

Tony Szamboti: That is right
Dave Rogers is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 10:25 AM   #657
Border Reiver
Philosopher
 
Border Reiver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 6,134
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
I just think that's amazing complacency. The Gladiators would not have stood a chance against any German fighter aircraft, and not much chance against German bombers in 1938:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gloster_Gladiator
As we've pointed out - there is no reasonable chance that a Gladiator would have gone up against an Me109d in a 1938 - the German fighters did not have the range to reach Britain and return. And if you'd actually read the article you linked to you'd have found out that the Gladiator was capable of scoring victories in all theatres against Axis aircraft until 1940...

Based on the wiki entries statistics for Gladiator, and the bombers it would have to intercept and chase - the He 111 and the Do 17[ - the biplane ends up with a higher ceiling and comparable speeds. Not to mention German bombers were notoriously poorly defended.
__________________
Questions, comments, queries, bitches, complaints, rude gestures and/or remarks?
Border Reiver is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 10:26 AM   #658
Hubert Cumberdale
Muse
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 998
We are kind of getting away from the main point which is that the Germany economy was tanking by the late '30's

Quote:
By 1937, the German economy was suffering serious shortages of steel because of a lack of ore imports, while the industry itself was operating at barely 83 percent of capacity. These economic difficulties affecting rearmament most likely played a role in pushing Hitler into the confrontations of 1938. Here again, despite substantial financial gains made by the Anschluss with Austria, efforts to expand the rearmament program, to build up synthetic and munition industries, to begin the massive construction of the Westwall project, and to mobilize for the Czech crisis severely strained the German economy. In November 1938, Hermann Göring admitted that the German economic infrastructure had reached a point of maximum economic distress. As a direct result, the Oberkommando der Wehrmacht (OKW), the German armed forces high command, made major reductions in steel and raw material allocations to armament production. Continuing difficulties led Hitler to announce to the Reichstag on January 30, 1939, that Germany must wage an "export battle" (Exportschlacht) to raise foreign exchange. Simultaneously, he announced further reduction in Wehrmacht allocations: steel, 30 percent; copper, 20 percent; aluminum, 47 percent; rubber, 14 percent.
In other words, all the western allies had to do was to say "No!" and the German economy would have collapsed. As it was.....

Last edited by Hubert Cumberdale; Today at 10:27 AM. Reason: Edit: Source is "Luftwaffe, Strategy for Defeat" by Williamson Murray
Hubert Cumberdale is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 10:31 AM   #659
Captain_Swoop
Penultimate Amazing
 
Captain_Swoop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 14,562
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
I just think that's amazing complacency. The Gladiators would not have stood a chance against any German fighter aircraft, and not much chance against German bombers in 1938:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gloster_Gladiator
An invasion would have to get past the Royal Navy and then it would have to capture at least one major port intact.
e have gone over this several times.
Captain_Swoop is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 10:44 AM   #660
Garrison
Illuminator
 
Garrison's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 3,876
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
From the internet, which is relevant to appeasement and all that waffle about peace in our time, and the Anglo-German naval agreement:
I'm not surprised you cut out the source, I suppose even you guessed that invoking the current holder of the land speed record as an expert on pre WWII aviation might be seen as less than compelling.

Originally Posted by Hubert Cumberdale View Post
We are kind of getting away from the main point which is that the Germany economy was tanking by the late '30's
In other words, all the western allies had to do was to say "No!" and the German economy would have collapsed. As it was.....
'Wages of Destruction' by Adam Tooze covers the economics of the entire Nazi period and it really does seem to have consisted of lurching from one crisis to another. One great irony is that in 1934 Germany threatened to default on debts owed to the British and one Neville Chamberlain was in the forefront of demanding punitive action.

Originally Posted by Border Reiver View Post
Based on the wiki entries statistics for Gladiator, and the bombers it would have to intercept and chase - the He 111 and the Do 17[ - the biplane ends up with a higher ceiling and comparable speeds. Not to mention German bombers were notoriously poorly defended.
If Henri needs an example of what happened to unescorted bombers he could try reading about the Schweinfurt–Regensburg mission from WWII. The USAAF shared the same delusion that powerful bomber formations could fight their way through unescorted, they learned better, can Henri?

Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop View Post
An invasion would have to get past the Royal Navy and then it would have to capture at least one major port intact.
e have gone over this several times.
Yep, even if the Germans somehow pull off a conquest of France with a fraction of the armoured forces they had in 1940 they are going to be sat staring across the Channel in the summer with no hope of mounting an invasion (not that they had one in 1940) and the distinct possibility that a hostile USSR is rearming behind them...
__________________
So I've started a blog about my writing. Check it out at: http://fourth-planet-problem.blogspot.com/
And my first book is on Amazon: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B077W322FX

Last edited by Garrison; Today at 10:56 AM.
Garrison is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 11:13 AM   #661
jimbob
Uncritical "thinker"
 
jimbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 16,406
Originally Posted by Border Reiver View Post
Henri - focus!

The Luftwaffe had NO way to provide fighter cover for their bombers if they tried to attack Britain in 1938. Without fighter protection, the bombers were vulnerable to any of the British fighter aircraft available in 1938.

A realistic threat analysis of German military capabilities, whether in 1938 or even up to June 1941 clearly reveals that the German military had no chance of landing in Great Britain, sustaining any landing, or defeating Great Britain militarily. And all the quotes you dredge up from people who want to pump the war winning contribution of their arm of service up won't change the facts that the German military could not:

a. Achieve air supremacy over any potential landing area in Britain;
b. Achieve naval supremacy in the Channel;
c. Get anything other than a single division of paratroops into southern England; and
d. Resupply those forces once deployed.

Wing Commander Green is talking tosh.

a) or even get air superiority

b) forget about naval supremacy, or even naval superiority, they were nowhere near parity. Not even in submarines, in 1938.

Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop View Post
An invasion would have to get past the Royal Navy and then it would have to capture at least one major port intact.
we have gone over this several times.
And even if they dd get past the Royal Navy once, and did capture a major port intact, they would *still* have to keep getting past the Royal Navy to bring in supplies, until, say Scarpa Flow was captured.

I doubt that even unopposed, the Germans had the logistics to supply an army fighting its way through Britain.

The Allies paid a lot of attention to this, and even then it was a close thing at the start.
__________________
OECD healthcare spending
Expenditure on healthcare
http://www.oecd.org/els/health-systems/health-data.htm
link is 2015 data (2013 Data below):
UK 8.5% of GDP of which 83.3% is public expenditure - 7.1% of GDP is public spending
US 16.4% of GDP of which 48.2% is public expenditure - 7.9% of GDP is public spending
jimbob is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 03:01 PM   #662
dudalb
Penultimate Amazing
 
dudalb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 38,017
Originally Posted by Border Reiver View Post
First, you will never find a Canadian who will argue that Dieppe was not a fiasco.

Second, Dieppe was NEVER intended to be anything other than a large scale raid. The purpose was to:

a. Test the amphibious techniques used for landings;
b. Give the Canadians something to do so they felt useful; and
c. Let Lord Mountbatten feel useful.

What it actually accomplished was to demonstrate:

a. You need better intel than a single flyover and someone's prewar holiday pics for operational planning;
b. Landings need to be practised on the same type of beaches where you will be landing - vehicles behave differently on pebbles then they do on sand;
c. Don't skimp on either the naval firepower, or the aircover, if you want success; and
d. There needs to be a better reason to commit a division of soldiers to an operation than "well, they need to be seen to be doing SOMETHING or morale will start to slip."
e. Practice getting off the beach under fire.
Too Bad the US Navy and Marines did not take the lessons of Dieppe on Amphbious Operations into account before Tarawa....
__________________
Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty.

Robert Heinlein.
dudalb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 04:11 PM   #663
Captain_Swoop
Penultimate Amazing
 
Captain_Swoop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 14,562
Originally Posted by Garrison View Post



If Henri needs an example of what happened to unescorted bombers he could try reading about the Schweinfurt–Regensburg mission from WWII. The USAAF shared the same delusion that powerful bomber formations could fight their way through unescorted, they learned better, can Henri?
As already mentioned Luftflotte 5 attacked the north of England on On 15 August 1940.
It was only escorted by Me 110 as the 109s didn't have the range. It was so badly mauled by the RAF it never came back.
Captain_Swoop is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 04:16 PM   #664
dudalb
Penultimate Amazing
 
dudalb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 38,017
And although the Spitfire gets all the publicity, the Hurricane was just as important in the battle of Britian. There were two Hurris for every Spit in Fighter Command. Although it was not as good as the ME 109, the gap between the Hurry and the ME 109 was not so great that a skilled pilot could not overcome them.
I read the standard tactic in the Battle of Britain was for the Spits to go after the Fighter escorts, allowing the Hurricanes to go after the bombers.
And the Battle of Britian was the end for the myth of the invincibility of the Stuka. When there was effective aerial opposition, the Stuka proved to be very vulnerable. The Stukas were often slaughtered over England.
__________________
Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty.

Robert Heinlein.

Last edited by dudalb; Today at 04:18 PM.
dudalb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 04:27 PM   #665
Captain_Swoop
Penultimate Amazing
 
Captain_Swoop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 14,562
Stukas were withdrawn altogether, even from attacks on shipping in the Channel.
Captain_Swoop is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » History, Literature, and the Arts

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:15 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.