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 15th February 2018, 09:59 AM   #561
Henri McPhee
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Bristol UK
Posts: 3,582
You people talk as though weak little Germany's bombers and fighters were incapable of reaching the UK in 1938. The point is that RAF fighters were woefully inadequate in 1938. Chamberlain's priority was to put that right, which he did, and he also organised radar. Churchill just had a 'with what' strategy and he wanted to choose war before dishonour.

Von Manstein, who was one of Hitler's best generals, always maintained that an invasion of Britain would be risky, but necessary. Hitler himself seems to have been opposed to an invasion of the UK as long as the RAF was still operational, which thankfully it was in 1940.

There is a bit about Chamberlain's military advice on the internet. Chamberlain would have been foolish to ignore this:

Quote:
(a) A German absorption of Czechoslovakia will enhance her military prestige, increase her war potential and probably enable her to dispose of stronger land forces against France and ourselves than she can do at present.

(b) So far as air power is concerned, Germany may be able to maintain her lead over the Franco-British Air Forces in air striking power. On the other hand, it is open to us, provided that we make the necessary effort, to catch her up, or at least greatly reduce her lead, in the matter of defence (both active and passive) against air attack. By so doing we shall have heavily insured ourselves against the greatest danger to which we are present exposed: indeed by substantially reducing Germany’s only chance of a rapid decision, we shall have provided a strong deterrent against her making the attempt.

(c) It follows, therefore, that, from the military point of view, time is in our favour, and that, if war with Germany has to come, it would be better to fight her in say 6-12 months’ time, than to accept the present challenge.
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 15th February 2018, 10:07 AM   #562
Henri McPhee
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Bristol UK
Posts: 3,582
From a Wikipedia about Von Manstein:

Quote:
Battle of Britain[edit]
Main article: Operation Seelöwe

Manstein was a proponent of the prospective German invasion of Great Britain, named Operation Seelöwe. He considered the operation risky but necessary. Early studies by various staff officers determined that air superiority was a prerequisite to the planned invasion. His corps was to be shipped across the English Channel from Boulogne to Bexhill as one of four units assigned to the first wave. But as the Luftwaffe failed to overcome the Royal Air Force during the Battle of Britain, Operation Seelöwe was postponed indefinitely on 12 October. For the rest of the year, Manstein, with little to do, spent time in Paris and at home.
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 15th February 2018, 10:08 AM   #563
Craig B
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 22,646
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
... a bit about Chamberlain's military advice on the internet ...
Your sources never cease to impress. What next? "A man on the telly once said ... "?
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 15th February 2018, 10:15 AM   #564
Henri McPhee
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Bristol UK
Posts: 3,582
The source for that Chamberlain military advice is at:

http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/e...tler/source-3/
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 15th February 2018, 10:17 AM   #565
ddt
Mafia Penguin
 
ddt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 19,576
Originally Posted by lobosrul5 View Post
Well France did get troops ashore in 1797... but I wouldn't call it a great success.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Fishguard
Which is why I said successful invasions. France also tried repeatedly to invade with one or the other Scottish pretender, every time with failure.
__________________
"I think it is very beautiful for the poor to accept their lot, to share it with the passion of Christ. I think the world is being much helped by the suffering of the poor people." - "Saint" Teresa, the lying thieving Albanian dwarf

"I think accuracy is important" - Vixen
ddt 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 15th February 2018, 10:19 AM   #566
ddt
Mafia Penguin
 
ddt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 19,576
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
From a Wikipedia about Von Manstein:
Yes, and? Von Manstein is also very good at blaming his own failures on Hitler's micromanagement.
__________________
"I think it is very beautiful for the poor to accept their lot, to share it with the passion of Christ. I think the world is being much helped by the suffering of the poor people." - "Saint" Teresa, the lying thieving Albanian dwarf

"I think accuracy is important" - Vixen
ddt 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 15th February 2018, 10:19 AM   #567
lobosrul5
Graduate Poster
 
lobosrul5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 1,681
Originally Posted by ddt View Post
Which is why I said successful invasions. France also tried repeatedly to invade with one or the other Scottish pretender, every time with failure.
Yeah, I just felt like mentioning it, its a funny story I saw on a documentary a few months back. Most of the French troops were more interested in drinking than fighting. And it was just a rouse for a much bigger invasion of Ireland that went awry. Had never heard of it before.

Last edited by lobosrul5; 15th February 2018 at 10:23 AM.
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 15th February 2018, 10:24 AM   #568
ddt
Mafia Penguin
 
ddt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 19,576
Originally Posted by Craig B View Post
Your sources never cease to impress. What next? "A man on the telly once said ... "?
My bet is not a man but the penguin on his telly. Which has the same fate as all his arguments.

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE
__________________
"I think it is very beautiful for the poor to accept their lot, to share it with the passion of Christ. I think the world is being much helped by the suffering of the poor people." - "Saint" Teresa, the lying thieving Albanian dwarf

"I think accuracy is important" - Vixen
ddt 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 15th February 2018, 10:26 AM   #569
Craig B
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 22,646
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
The source for that Chamberlain military advice is at:

http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/e...tler/source-3/
And here it is, pasted from the page you specify
3. This is the conclusion of a note from General Ismay to the British Cabinet sent on 20th September 1938, marked ‘Secret’. Ismay was Secretary of the Committee of Imperial Defence.
This source is part of the National Archives' educational materials, and it asks its youthful readers to consider this question
How might General Ismay’s views affect what Chamberlain did when he met Hitler later, at Munich on 29 September?
I think the credit for this advice from the Secretary of the Committee of Imperial Defence to the Cabinet belongs to General Ismay, its author.
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 15th February 2018, 10:29 AM   #570
ddt
Mafia Penguin
 
ddt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 19,576
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
You people talk as though weak little Germany's bombers and fighters were incapable of reaching the UK in 1938.
You're absolutely right. The range of the Bf109 is 660km. The distance, as the crow flies, from Aachen (Aix-la-Chapelle) to London is 440km. So they were perfectly capable to reach the UK, just not to get back home.
__________________
"I think it is very beautiful for the poor to accept their lot, to share it with the passion of Christ. I think the world is being much helped by the suffering of the poor people." - "Saint" Teresa, the lying thieving Albanian dwarf

"I think accuracy is important" - Vixen

Last edited by ddt; 15th February 2018 at 10:48 AM.
ddt 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 15th February 2018, 10:37 AM   #571
lobosrul5
Graduate Poster
 
lobosrul5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 1,681
Originally Posted by ddt View Post
You're absolutely right. The range of the Bf109 is 660km. The distance, as the crow flies, from Aachen (Aix-la-Chapelle) and London is 440km. So they were perfectly capable to reach the UK, just not to get back home.
Yup and in summer 1938, no Ju-88's, and only a handful of Dornier Do 17's. They would've relied on un-escorted He 111's. Bristol Blenheim's could make mincemeat out of them, no need for Spits or Hurricane's.
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 15th February 2018, 11:09 AM   #572
Captain_Swoop
Penultimate Amazing
 
Captain_Swoop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 20,796
Originally Posted by ddt View Post
This thread is really going in rounds, isn't it? To up your Sandhurst wargame report, here's from page 4 of the thread:




I wonder if sending some good old-fashioned burners into the crowd of barges would also have been effective, like it was in 1588?
Steel barges.
Captain_Swoop is online now   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 15th February 2018, 11:14 AM   #573
Captain_Swoop
Penultimate Amazing
 
Captain_Swoop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 20,796
Originally Posted by ddt View Post
Disregarding intelligence from the Dutch underground that there were significant German troops around Arnhem, and fitting out your troops with radios that only have a range of 5km while you drop them 20km off the intended target does not help. Still, John Frost held Arnhem bridge for four days.
German Paratroopers had a big problem with their equipemnt.
They were suspended from the parachute by a single attachment point on their back. They had little control over the descent and couldn't carry any equipment.
All they had with them when they landed was a pistol.
British and American Paratroopers had their weapon and kit bag with them. it was strapped to their leg and they jumped with hit. When the chute opened they released the leg strap and the bag hung from a line below them.
It hit the ground first and the wight of the kit wasn't added to that of the paratrooper when he landed.

German troops had to find their equipment canisters to get to their weapons after landing.
This was a problem on Crete and also when they were used in the Netherlands to attempt capturing air fields.
Captain_Swoop is online now   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 15th February 2018, 11:29 AM   #574
Captain_Swoop
Penultimate Amazing
 
Captain_Swoop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 20,796
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
From a Wikipedia about Von Manstein:
All very nice but it ignores the Navies.

The Royal Navy had overwhelming superiority and the German navy couldn't have protected the fleet of invasion barges.
Germany had no specialist landing barges. They were going to use un powered barges towed across the channel and pushed ashore. Then the troops inside were going to lower wooden ramps over the bows and ride their motorbikes down them. In the face of opposing fire from machine guns and artillery in to mine fields and barbed wire.

They had no supporting fire from naval guns to help them.

Then somehow the unpowere barges would be towed off the beach, re strung and towed back across the channel to pick uo more men and supplies.

Yup. piece of cake.

then somehow the
Captain_Swoop is online now   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 15th February 2018, 12:18 PM   #575
Garrison
Illuminator
 
Garrison's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 4,721
Originally Posted by ddt View Post
You're absolutely right. The range of the Bf109 is 660km. The distance, as the crow flies, from Aachen (Aix-la-Chapelle) to London is 440km. So they were perfectly capable to reach the UK, just not to get back home.
Henri really seems fixated on Spitfires, so its no surprise he's ignorant of actual Luftwaffe capabilities.

Originally Posted by lobosrul5 View Post
Yup and in summer 1938, no Ju-88's, and only a handful of Dornier Do 17's. They would've relied on un-escorted He 111's. Bristol Blenheim's could make mincemeat out of them, no need for Spits or Hurricane's.
I mentioned the Ju-88 issue earlier, only to have it studiously ignored by Henri.
__________________
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; 15th February 2018 at 12:20 PM.
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 15th February 2018, 01:12 PM   #576
jimbob
Uncritical "thinker"
 
jimbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 20,707
Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop View Post
All very nice but it ignores the Navies.

The Royal Navy had overwhelming superiority and the German navy couldn't have protected the fleet of invasion barges.
Germany had no specialist landing barges. They were going to use un powered barges towed across the channel and pushed ashore. Then the troops inside were going to lower wooden ramps over the bows and ride their motorbikes down them. In the face of opposing fire from machine guns and artillery in to mine fields and barbed wire.

They had no supporting fire from naval guns to help them.

Then somehow the unpowere barges would be towed off the beach, re strung and towed back across the channel to pick uo more men and supplies.

Yup. piece of cake.

then somehow the
Indeed, for an estimate for how successful an invasion would have been, one only needs to see what D-Day required. And the Allies didn't have to worry about German ships or aircraft, and had dedicated vessels, not just barges.
__________________
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 online now   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 15th February 2018, 02:44 PM   #577
Captain_Swoop
Penultimate Amazing
 
Captain_Swoop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 20,796
Hitler admitted he didn't understand sea power and apart from a brief period up to WW1
Germany never made any attempt to be a sea power.

Sealion was treated as just a wide river crossing which was the job of light forces who would capture a small bridgehead and hold on until a pontoon bridge was thrown across.

Sealion would use light forces to capture a port which would receive the main force by ship.

For Overlord it was understood that everything would have to come over the landing beaches for quite a time after D-Day and planning was undertaken accordingly.
Captain_Swoop is online now   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 15th February 2018, 03:20 PM   #578
jimbob
Uncritical "thinker"
 
jimbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 20,707
Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop View Post
Hitler admitted he didn't understand sea power and apart from a brief period up to WW1
Germany never made any attempt to be a sea power.

Sealion was treated as just a wide river crossing which was the job of light forces who would capture a small bridgehead and hold on until a pontoon bridge was thrown across.

Sealion would use light forces to capture a port which would receive the main force by ship.

For Overlord it was understood that everything would have to come over the landing beaches for quite a time after D-Day and planning was undertaken accordingly.
It's almost as if one was serious, and the other was just sufficient to enable the generals to tell a dangerously volatile leader that the planning was underway.
__________________
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 online now   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 15th February 2018, 04:30 PM   #579
ddt
Mafia Penguin
 
ddt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 19,576
Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop View Post
Steel barges.
Fair enough. And as far as I can see from some googling, also with a steel superstructure.

Originally Posted by jimbob View Post
It's almost as if one was serious, and the other was just sufficient to enable the generals to tell a dangerously volatile leader that the planning was underway.
You forgot to weave an overweight, cocaine-addicted air force chief into that narrative.

But it seems the Germans actually put a lot of effort in requisitioning the barges, of the peniche and kampine types, and preparing them for the operation, even welding them in pairs side by side together.
__________________
"I think it is very beautiful for the poor to accept their lot, to share it with the passion of Christ. I think the world is being much helped by the suffering of the poor people." - "Saint" Teresa, the lying thieving Albanian dwarf

"I think accuracy is important" - Vixen
ddt 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 16th February 2018, 01:32 AM   #580
Hubert Cumberdale
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,096
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
You people talk as though weak little Germany's bombers and fighters were incapable of reaching the UK in 1938. The point is that RAF fighters were woefully inadequate in 1938. Chamberlain's priority was to put that right, which he did, and he also organised radar. Churchill just had a 'with what' strategy and he wanted to choose war before dishonour.

Von Manstein, who was one of Hitler's best generals, always maintained that an invasion of Britain would be risky, but necessary. Hitler himself seems to have been opposed to an invasion of the UK as long as the RAF was still operational, which thankfully it was in 1940.

There is a bit about Chamberlain's military advice on the internet. Chamberlain would have been foolish to ignore this:
No Henri, we people are talking as if Germany's fighters were incapable of reaching the UK in 1938, which is demonstrably a factual assertion.

Neither the Bf109 nor the Bf110 (and nor the Ju87) could reach mainland Britain from Germany.

To reach London from Germany without overflying neutral/hostiles would mean roughly a 1000mile round trip.

That means only He111's and Do17's capable of doing the job, both of which were plenty vulnerable to the aircraft in RAF service at the time (which included two operational Hurricane squadrons) and could have been detected by the Thames estuary chain-home radar system which was in operation by the time of the Munich crisis

As to Manstein, the fact that he viewed Sealion favourably simply underscores the total lack of German expertise with amphibious operations. His enthusiasm for the scheme is at best crass ignorance of the realities of such an operation, and at worst willful delusion.
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 16th February 2018, 01:34 AM   #581
Hubert Cumberdale
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,096
Originally Posted by ddt View Post
You're absolutely right. The range of the Bf109 is 660km. The distance, as the crow flies, from Aachen (Aix-la-Chapelle) to London is 440km. So they were perfectly capable to reach the UK, just not to get back home.
The Belgians would probably have some objections to that flight path.
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 16th February 2018, 02:10 AM   #582
Hubert Cumberdale
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,096
I note that Henri has still not ventured an explaination for how Germany is going to defeat the UK in 1 week.

We wait with baited breath!
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 16th February 2018, 02:11 AM   #583
Tolls
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 4,636
A concerted bombing campaign of Britain simply wouldn't have happened without a collapse of France (IMO).

Also, even with a collapse of France, it wouldn't have happened until summer 1939 at the earliest anyway, unless someone wants to predict a German success over the last couple of months of 38 (slightly unlikely, to say the least). Even then that would mean air attacks in winter 39...even more unlikely.

General Ismay above is focused on a war on the continent, rather than a Battle of Britain. This is important to remember as it is the focus of all defence analysis that was forwarded to Chamberlain. It's also worth noting that they weighed in the addition of Czech production to the German military, or at least seem to have.
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 16th February 2018, 03:05 AM   #584
Captain_Swoop
Penultimate Amazing
 
Captain_Swoop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 20,796
Originally Posted by Hubert Cumberdale View Post
As to Manstein, the fact that he viewed Sealion favourably simply underscores the total lack of German expertise with amphibious operations. His enthusiasm for the scheme is at best crass ignorance of the realities of such an operation, and at worst willful delusion.
Manstein may have just been bigging up the army, if they could be transported across the channel and in to the UK his job was straightforward. He could afford to be enthusiastic.
It was the Navy that had to get them there and they were never enthusiastic about the escapade.
Captain_Swoop is online now   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 16th February 2018, 03:45 AM   #585
Henri McPhee
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Bristol UK
Posts: 3,582
Originally Posted by Hubert Cumberdale View Post
I note that Henri has still not ventured an explaination for how Germany is going to defeat the UK in 1 week.

We wait with baited breath!
Chamberlain was a realist. I agree he talked a lot of blah blah about appeasement and disarmament and peace in our time, but that is politicians all over. Chamberlain did not make any strategic errors. Both Chamberlain, and experienced soldiers, were fully aware of British military weakness in 1938, and that America or the League of Nations or Australia or New Zealand or Canada were not going to be much help in 1938. This is from the parliamentary debate about Munich in 1938:

https://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/munich.htm

Quote:
While we must renew our determination to fill up the deficiencies that yet remain in our armaments and in our defensive precautions, so that we may be ready to defend ourselves and make our diplomacy effective--[Interruption]--yes I am a realist-

Last edited by Henri McPhee; 16th February 2018 at 03:46 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 16th February 2018, 03:46 AM   #586
Hubert Cumberdale
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,096
Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop View Post
Manstein may have just been bigging up the army, if they could be transported across the channel and in to the UK his job was straightforward. He could afford to be enthusiastic.
It was the Navy that had to get them there and they were never enthusiastic about the escapade.
Which kind of links into the trope about German officers and their complete disregard for logistics and intelligence

OKW: Lets invade Russia

Logisticians: Eh, you'll run out of supplies and end up with your balls hanging out in the middle of a Russian winter

OKW: Wotever!

Logisticians: Told you! Told you!

OKW: WTF I hate Russia now

Last edited by Hubert Cumberdale; 16th February 2018 at 03:47 AM.
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 16th February 2018, 04:01 AM   #587
Henri McPhee
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Bristol UK
Posts: 3,582
Originally Posted by Tolls View Post
A concerted bombing campaign of Britain simply wouldn't have happened without a collapse of France (IMO).

Also, even with a collapse of France, it wouldn't have happened until summer 1939 at the earliest anyway, unless someone wants to predict a German success over the last couple of months of 38 (slightly unlikely, to say the least). Even then that would mean air attacks in winter 39...even more unlikely.

General Ismay above is focused on a war on the continent, rather than a Battle of Britain. This is important to remember as it is the focus of all defence analysis that was forwarded to Chamberlain. It's also worth noting that they weighed in the addition of Czech production to the German military, or at least seem to have.
I am not terribly sure about that. This is the sort of military advice Chamberlain was getting at the time:

https://www.historylearningsite.co.u...risis-of-1938/

Quote:
The attitude of the British tended to reflect the view of the majority in Britain at this time. If there was the chance of negotiating a peace, then that chance should be taken. The policy of appeasement has been criticised over the years since 1938, but the fear of war in 1938 was very real. The images shown in the cinemas of the horrors seen in Guernica during the Spanish Civil War terrified many – and Germany had openly displayed the might of the Luftwaffe with its many bombers from 1936 on. It was also German bombers that had caused such devastation in Guernica.

Britain, under Neville Chamberlain, chose to negotiate with Hitler over the Sudenten crisis. Chamberlain knew very well that Czechoslovakia was a land-locked nation and that Britain’s military strength – its navy – could play no part in a conflict here. Britain’s army – though professional – was small. Britain’s air force was far from strong and undergoing change from a bi-planed force to using the new monoplanes which were still not ready for combat.

His military chiefs had advised Chamberlain that over one million people would be killed by bombing raids in just 60 days and that mass graves would be needed as there simply would not be enough wood for timber coffins. Any form of conflict with Germany was fraught with dangers – hence Chamberlain’s desire for a negotiated peace. Many British people supported Chamberlain at the time and before the meetings took place no-one would have known what it would be like negotiating with Hitler. It seemed right that a negotiated settlement should be tried and the attempts to succeed started in September 1938.

Last edited by Henri McPhee; 16th February 2018 at 04:05 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 16th February 2018, 09:15 AM   #588
ddt
Mafia Penguin
 
ddt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 19,576
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
Chamberlain was a realist. I agree he talked a lot of blah blah about appeasement and disarmament and peace in our time, but that is politicians all over. Chamberlain did not make any strategic errors. Both Chamberlain, and experienced soldiers, were fully aware of British military weakness in 1938, and that America or the League of Nations or Australia or New Zealand or Canada were not going to be much help in 1938. This is from the parliamentary debate about Munich in 1938:

https://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/munich.htm
That's still no answer to how Germany was going to defeat the UK in a single week. We're waiting for an answer to that question, Henri.
__________________
"I think it is very beautiful for the poor to accept their lot, to share it with the passion of Christ. I think the world is being much helped by the suffering of the poor people." - "Saint" Teresa, the lying thieving Albanian dwarf

"I think accuracy is important" - Vixen
ddt 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 16th February 2018, 09:17 AM   #589
ddt
Mafia Penguin
 
ddt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 19,576
Originally Posted by Hubert Cumberdale View Post
The Belgians would probably have some objections to that flight path.
I don't know. The planes would run out of fuel and need to emergency-land in Belgium. They'd only have to do a paint job to get their own wing with some fine fighters.
__________________
"I think it is very beautiful for the poor to accept their lot, to share it with the passion of Christ. I think the world is being much helped by the suffering of the poor people." - "Saint" Teresa, the lying thieving Albanian dwarf

"I think accuracy is important" - Vixen
ddt 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 16th February 2018, 09:32 AM   #590
Henri McPhee
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Bristol UK
Posts: 3,582
Originally Posted by lobosrul5 View Post
Yup and in summer 1938, no Ju-88's, and only a handful of Dornier Do 17's. They would've relied on un-escorted He 111's. Bristol Blenheim's could make mincemeat out of them, no need for Spits or Hurricane's.
Tell that to the Marines. Had the police been informed?

Last edited by Henri McPhee; 16th February 2018 at 09:36 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 16th February 2018, 09:43 AM   #591
lobosrul5
Graduate Poster
 
lobosrul5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 1,681
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
Tell that to the Marines. Had the police been informed?
The Royal Marines? OK I'll build myself a time machine and go tell them.
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 16th February 2018, 10:11 AM   #592
Henri McPhee
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Bristol UK
Posts: 3,582
There is a detailed account of the Luftwaffe on the internet at:

https://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/AAF...ftwaffe-1.html

which I admit includes its weaknesses in 1938. I still don't think it's correct to say the Luftwaffe were unable to get to the UK, and London, in 1938 to drop bombs, to be countered by the advanced British Blenheims. The Germans managed it in the First World War, and I think there was quite a big bombing raid at Folkestone then, which was a British troop embarkation point at the time.

Quote:
The failure of the Luftwaffe to progress further towards a "strategic" bombing capability is attributable to several factors. The first is that many within the Luftwaffe thought that they possessed sufficient capability with their twin-engine aircraft to launch "strategic" attacks against Germany's most likely continental opponents--France, Czechoslovakia, and Poland. England presented greater

--10--

problems, but even here General Felmy, Commander of Luftfotte 2 and charged with planning of an air war against Britain in 1939, saw possibilities.

Concluding the 1939 spring planning effort, Felmy admitted to his subordinates that the Luftwaffe did not yet possess any of the prerequisites for a successful "strategic" bombing offensive against Great Britain. He did suggest, however, that the panic that had broken out in London in September at the height of the Munich crisis indicated that a massive aerial onslaught directed against London might break Britain's powers of resistance.

Last edited by Henri McPhee; 16th February 2018 at 10:14 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 16th February 2018, 10:20 AM   #593
jimbob
Uncritical "thinker"
 
jimbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 20,707
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
There is a detailed account of the Luftwaffe on the internet at:

https://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/AAF...ftwaffe-1.html

which I admit includes its weaknesses in 1938. I still don't think it's correct to say the Luftwaffe were unable to get to the UK, and London, in 1938 to drop bombs, to be countered by the advanced British Blenheims. The Germans managed it in the First World War, and I think there was quite a big bombing raid at Folkestone then, which was a British troop embarkation point at the time.

Did you see the bit about the combat radius of the fighters? The bombers could have potentially flown to London, unescorted, which would not have been a good idea. The British and French would have had the Czech resources on their side rather than the German side. Germany would have had a war on two fronts at the start. And on top of this, we now know that there were German generals waiting for an excuse for a coup against Hitler.
__________________
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 online now   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 16th February 2018, 10:22 AM   #594
Henri McPhee
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Bristol UK
Posts: 3,582
There is a bit of waffle about the Bristol Blenheims at this website:

http://www.historyofwar.org/articles...im_combat.html

Quote:
The Blenheim suffered heavily during the Battle of France. Loses in the air were matched by heavy losses on the ground. No. 144 squadron lost almost its entire strength of Blenheims to a bombing attack. After two days of fighting an initial force of 135 Fairey Battles and Blenheims had been reduced to 71 aircraft. Reinforcements kept coming, but the losses kept mounting. The attacks on the Sedan bridgehead on 14 May that famously saw the loss of so many Battles, also saw five out of eight Blenheims lost. Another seven were lost in another attack on the bridgehead later that day. The majority of Blenheims sent to France were lost either to the fighting, or destroyed to prevent them falling into German hands.

The fighting in France revealed the Blenheim Mk IV to be under armoured, under armed and too slow. The problem was that any attempt to solve the first two problems would simply make the third one worse.

Last edited by Henri McPhee; 16th February 2018 at 10:24 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 16th February 2018, 10:26 AM   #595
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: 29,018
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
There is a bit of waffle about the Bristol Blenheims at this website:
Noted that you don't know the difference between the fighter and bomber versions of the Blenheim, or about their roles in combat.

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 16th February 2018, 10:26 AM   #596
lobosrul5
Graduate Poster
 
lobosrul5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 1,681
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
There is a bit of waffle about the Bristol Blenheims at this website:

Quote:
The Blenheim suffered heavily during the Battle of France. Loses in the air were matched by heavy losses on the ground. No. 144 squadron lost almost its entire strength of Blenheims to a bombing attack. After two days of fighting an initial force of 135 Fairey Battles and Blenheims had been reduced to 71 aircraft. Reinforcements kept coming, but the losses kept mounting. The attacks on the Sedan bridgehead on 14 May that famously saw the loss of so many Battles, also saw five out of eight Blenheims lost. Another seven were lost in another attack on the bridgehead later that day. The majority of Blenheims sent to France were lost either to the fighting, or destroyed to prevent them falling into German hands.
The fighting in France revealed the Blenheim Mk IV to be under armoured, under armed and too slow. The problem was that any attempt to solve the first two problems would simply make the third one worse.
http://www.historyofwar.org/articles...im_combat.html
Yes, it was wholly outmatched by the Bf109, no one has said otherwise. And it seems more were lost on the ground than in the air in France.

Last edited by lobosrul5; 16th February 2018 at 10:33 AM.
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 16th February 2018, 11:08 AM   #597
Garrison
Illuminator
 
Garrison's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 4,721
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
I am not terribly sure about that. This is the sort of military advice Chamberlain was getting at the time:

https://www.historylearningsite.co.u...risis-of-1938/

His military chiefs had advised Chamberlain that over one million people would be killed by bombing raids in just 60 days and that mass graves would be needed as there simply would not be enough wood for timber coffins. Any form of conflict with Germany was fraught with dangers – hence Chamberlain’s desire for a negotiated peace.
Yes Chamberlain did base his policy on a wholly unrealistic assessment of the impact of airpower summed up in the mantra the 'bomber will always get through' and presented to the public through media like the film 'Things to Come'. The reality was of course that the bomber did not always get through, especially if was attacking without fighter support(look at what happened to Luftflotte 5 in 1940).

When bombers did reach their targets the damage they could do, especially with the aircraft available in 1938, was far removed from what the advocates of air power claimed.

Add to that the Luftwaffe's propaganda success in tricking the British and others into substantially overestimating Luftwaffe strength, helped by the likes of Charles Lindbergh.

Perhaps if Chamberlain hadn't fallen for this hysterical vision of bomber power he might have made a better job of Munich.

Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
The Germans managed it in the First World War, and I think there was quite a big bombing raid at Folkestone then, which was a British troop embarkation point at the time.
At a time when the British had no fighters that could fly high enough to hit the Zeppelins you mean? A situation that no longer applied in 1938.

Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
I still don't think it's correct to say the Luftwaffe were unable to get to the UK, and London, in 1938 to drop bombs.
Good thing no one claimed that then, please do look at the link above about what happened when Luftflotte 5 ran into RAF fighters without any escorts. Even with fighter cover the Luftwaffe bombers suffered heavy attrition and failed in their objective in 1940. How on Earth are the unescorted and less powerful Luftwaffe bombers of 1938 going to do better?
__________________
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; 16th February 2018 at 11:16 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 16th February 2018, 11:15 AM   #598
jimbob
Uncritical "thinker"
 
jimbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 20,707
Originally Posted by Garrison View Post
Yes Chamberlain did base his policy on a wholly unrealistic assessment of the impact of airpower summed up in the mantra the 'bomber will always get through' and presented to the public through media like the film 'Things to Come'. The reality was of course that the bomber did not always get through, especially if was attacking without fighter support(look at what happened to Luftflotte 5 in 1940).

When bombers did reach their targets the damage they could do, especially with the aircraft available in 1938, was far removed from what the advocates of air power claimed.

Add to that the Luftwaffe's propaganda success in tricking the British and others into substantially overestimating Luftwaffe strength, helped by the likes of Charles Lindbergh.

Perhaps if Chamberlain hadn't fallen for this hysterical vision of bomber power he might have made a better job of Munich.



At a time when the British had no fighters that could fly high enough to hit the Zeppelins you mean? A situation that no longer applied in 1938.
Yes but the British tanks would have been destroyed by the Panthers and Tigers, the Hurricanes without spitfires would have been destroyed by the Me-262 and FW-190s and the Royal Navy would have er... still been dominant.
__________________
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 online now   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 16th February 2018, 11:53 AM   #599
ddt
Mafia Penguin
 
ddt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 19,576
Originally Posted by jimbob View Post
Did you see the bit about the combat radius of the fighters? The bombers could have potentially flown to London, unescorted, which would not have been a good idea. The British and French would have had the Czech resources on their side rather than the German side. Germany would have had a war on two fronts at the start. And on top of this, we now know that there were German generals waiting for an excuse for a coup against Hitler.
Chamberlain also knew; he just didn't believe and/or trust them. The only thing we know more than Chamberlain did is that the main plotters participated in the 20 July plot.
__________________
"I think it is very beautiful for the poor to accept their lot, to share it with the passion of Christ. I think the world is being much helped by the suffering of the poor people." - "Saint" Teresa, the lying thieving Albanian dwarf

"I think accuracy is important" - Vixen
ddt 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 16th February 2018, 11:54 AM   #600
ddt
Mafia Penguin
 
ddt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 19,576
Originally Posted by jimbob View Post
Yes but the British tanks would have been destroyed by the Panthers and Tigers and Leopards, the Hurricanes without spitfires would have been destroyed by the Me-262 and FW-190s and Eurofighters and the Royal Navy would have er... still been dominant.
FTFY. Hope that helps Henri get the point.
__________________
"I think it is very beautiful for the poor to accept their lot, to share it with the passion of Christ. I think the world is being much helped by the suffering of the poor people." - "Saint" Teresa, the lying thieving Albanian dwarf

"I think accuracy is important" - Vixen
ddt 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 09:56 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

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.