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 16th February 2018, 12:02 PM   #601
ddt
Mafia Penguin
 
ddt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 19,576
Originally Posted by Garrison View Post
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.
One third of the bombs fell within 5 miles of target, didn't they?


Originally Posted by Garrison View Post
Perhaps if Chamberlain hadn't fallen for this hysterical vision of bomber power he might have made a better job of Munich.
Yep.
__________________
"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, 12:45 PM   #602
jimbob
Uncritical "thinker"
 
jimbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 20,702
Originally Posted by ddt View Post
FTFY. Hope that helps Henri get the point.
Good point, well made
__________________
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 17th February 2018, 01:46 AM   #603
Degeneve
Muse
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 868
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.
I might be wrong, but I think I remember that during WWI the Germans occupied almost all Belgian territory, which made the distance to the UK and Folkestone much shorter...
Degeneve 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 17th February 2018, 04:48 AM   #604
ddt
Mafia Penguin
 
ddt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 19,576
Originally Posted by Degeneve View Post
I might be wrong, but I think I remember that during WWI the Germans occupied almost all Belgian territory, which made the distance to the UK and Folkestone much shorter...
Expect that statement to be refuted with a quotation from the time of the Agadir crisis.
__________________
"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 17th February 2018, 11:17 AM   #605
Henri McPhee
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Bristol UK
Posts: 3,582
Originally Posted by Degeneve View Post
I might be wrong, but I think I remember that during WWI the Germans occupied almost all Belgian territory, which made the distance to the UK and Folkestone much shorter...
British air intelligence were well aware of the range of German bombers in 1938, probably from Admiral Canaris and Colonel Oster. That information would have been given to Chamberlain. From the internet the Dornier was 800 nautical miles and the Heinkel even further:

Specifications[edit]

Performance
Maximum speed: 440 km/h (273 mph)
Range: 2,300 km (1,429 mi) with maximum fuel
Service ceiling: 6,500 m (21,330 ft)
Rate of climb: 20 minutes to 5,185 m (17,000 ft)
Wing loading: 137 kg/m² (28.1 lb/ft²)
Power/mass: .082 kW/kg (.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dornier_Do_17

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heinkel_He_111

Last edited by Henri McPhee; 17th February 2018 at 11:36 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 17th February 2018, 11:22 AM   #606
jimbob
Uncritical "thinker"
 
jimbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 20,702
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
British air intelligence wrere well aware of the range of German bombers in 1938, probably from Admiral Canaris and Colonel Oster. That information would have been given to Chamberlain. From the internet the Dornier was 800 nautical miles and the Heinkel even further:

Specifications[edit]

Performance
Maximum speed: 440 km/h (273 mph)
Range: 2,300 km (1,429 mi) with maximum fuel
Service ceiling: 6,500 m (21,330 ft)
Rate of climb: 20 minutes to 5,185 m (17,000 ft)
Wing loading: 137 kg/m² (28.1 lb/ft²)
Power/mass: .082 kW/kg (.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dornier_Do_17
Yes, and?

The point was that the RAF did have the fighters and radar to intercept those unescorted bombers in 1938.
__________________
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 17th February 2018, 11:37 AM   #607
Garrison
Illuminator
 
Garrison's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 4,720
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
British air intelligence wrere well aware of the range of German bombers in 1938, probably from Admiral Canaris and Colonel Oster.
At no point has anyone claimed the bombers couldn't reach Britain, the issue that has been repeatedly explained to you is that without fighter escort they won't be getting back to Germany. Even with fighter escort in 1940 the Luftwaffe bombers suffered a high rate of attrition, how are the going to do better in 1938 flying alone? How are they going to bring about the defeat of Britain in a week?
__________________
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
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 17th February 2018, 02:54 PM   #608
ddt
Mafia Penguin
 
ddt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 19,576
Originally Posted by Garrison View Post
How are they going to bring about the defeat of Britain in a week?
Quoting this part to remind Henri that he still has to tell us how, in 1938, Germany was going to defeat the UK within a single week.
__________________
"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 17th February 2018, 03:04 PM   #609
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 34,933
Originally Posted by ddt View Post
Quoting this part to remind Henri that he still has to tell us how, in 1938, Germany was going to defeat the UK within a single week.
I agree that Chamberlain knew about the German bombers in 1938. But Churchill only wanted war and dishonor. There was a bit of waffle about it on the BBC twenty or thirty years ago...

Last edited by theprestige; 17th February 2018 at 03:07 PM.
theprestige 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 17th February 2018, 03:09 PM   #610
Klimax
NWO Cyborg 5960x (subversion VPUNPCKHQDQ)
 
Klimax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Starship Wanderer - DS9
Posts: 12,807
Originally Posted by ddt View Post
Quoting this part to remind Henri that he still has to tell us how, in 1938, Germany was going to defeat the UK within a single week.
By dropping, nukes...
__________________
ModBorg

Engine: Ibalgin 400
Klimax 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 17th February 2018, 03:15 PM   #611
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 34,933
Originally Posted by Klimax View Post
By dropping, nukes...
I remember reading in Lord Beaverpoke's memoirs that Chamberlain knew about the German nuke program, but the Irish in the British secret service didn't warn Stalin until it was too late. I agree that Churchill would have canceled the RAF.
theprestige 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 17th February 2018, 03:17 PM   #612
jimbob
Uncritical "thinker"
 
jimbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 20,702
@theprestige

well played
__________________
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 17th February 2018, 03:20 PM   #613
ddt
Mafia Penguin
 
ddt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 19,576
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
I agree that Chamberlain knew about the German bombers in 1938. But Churchill only wanted war and dishonor. There was a bit of waffle about it on the BBC twenty or thirty years ago...
We already have our hands full with one Henri - you misspelled dishonour!
__________________
"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 17th February 2018, 03:21 PM   #614
ddt
Mafia Penguin
 
ddt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 19,576
Originally Posted by jimbob View Post
@theprestige

well played
Seconded.
__________________
"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 17th February 2018, 04:14 PM   #615
jimbob
Uncritical "thinker"
 
jimbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 20,702
Originally Posted by ddt View Post
Seconded.
I particularly liked "lord beverpoke"
__________________
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 18th February 2018, 02:21 AM   #616
Hubert Cumberdale
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,092
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
I remember reading in Lord Beaverpoke's memoirs that Chamberlain knew about the German nuke program, but the Irish in the British secret service didn't warn Stalin until it was too late. I agree that Churchill would have canceled the RAF.
You forgot to make some obscure reference to Rhodesia
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 18th February 2018, 04:10 AM   #617
Henri McPhee
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Bristol UK
Posts: 3,582
Originally Posted by jimbob View Post
Yes, and?

The point was that the RAF did have the fighters and radar to intercept those unescorted bombers in 1938.
I don't think that is scientifically reliable. There is a bit about British air defence capability at this website. It was not organised in 1938:

http://www.airdefence.org/

Quote:
PREPARATIONS FOR WAR 1935-1939

In the early 1930s the War Office were aware that the sound sensors only provided limited early warning and they sought new ways of detecting and disrupting air attacks. In February 1935 an experiment was conducted in which a Heyford bomber was flown though the beam of a BBC radio transmitter at Daventry whilst the received radio signal strength was measured. It was noticed that the received signal varied as the aircraft flew in and out of the beam. Thus the principle of radar was discovered.

Much further work over the next few years led to the installation, by the start of WW2, of a chain of radars from Ventnor on the Isle of Wight to the Firth of Tay. This radar chain played a vital part in the defences of Britain during the second world war.

Last edited by Henri McPhee; 18th February 2018 at 04:13 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 18th February 2018, 04:21 AM   #618
Henri McPhee
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Bristol UK
Posts: 3,582
The German bombers would have got through in 1938 unescorted in 1938. Fighter Command of the RAF was not organised, and neither was radar:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1938_in_aviation

Quote:
General Maurice Gamelin, France's Chief of Staff of National Defense, puts before Prime Minister of France Édouard Daladier an assessment stating that Germany has 5,000 aircraft and France only 500, that the British Royal Air Force and French Air Force combined cannot match the German Luftwaffe, and that France cannot hope for even minimal security against German air attack before 1940 unless it embarks on a large, new aircraft procurement program.

Last edited by Henri McPhee; 18th February 2018 at 04:24 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 18th February 2018, 04:27 AM   #619
fagin
Philosopher
 
fagin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: As far away from casebro as possible.
Posts: 7,070
Your links don't say what you say.
__________________
There is no secret ingredient - Kung Fu Panda
fagin 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 18th February 2018, 04:34 AM   #620
Garrison
Illuminator
 
Garrison's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 4,720
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
I don't think that is scientifically reliable. There is a bit about British air defence capability at this website. It was not organised in 1938:

http://www.airdefence.org/
So this site has basically two paragraphs on the period 1935-39 and based on this you have somehow concluded that British air defence was not organized in 1938. Actually that is unfair on the website because nothing on that page supports your statement.

Again, please provide an explanation of your claim Britain would be beaten in a week.

Oh and following up on this it occurred to me to check and the Knickbein radio navigation system use by the Luftwaffe to guide bombers apparently wasn't available until 1939.

Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
The German bombers would have got through in 1938 unescorted in 1938. Fighter Command of the RAF was not organised, and neither was radar:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1938_in_aviation
Multiple things wrong with this post, saying there was no Fighter Command is not the same as saying British air defences were not organized. As has been pointed out before Chain Home radar was operating in 1938. Unless the Germans pull off a miracle it will be well into 1939 before they can mount any significant raids on the UK so the existence of Fighter Command in 1938 is probably academic. Gamelin was basing his statements on a wildly exaggerated estimate of Luftwaffe strength and quite possibly doing so to get more money for defence. Put it another way, you have yet again managed to be spectacularly wrong.

You consistently miss the larger picture, that comparing the overall military, economic and diplomatic picture of the real strength of Germany in 1938 versus its strength in 1939 Chamberlain's actions at Munich may well have benefited the Germans far more than the British.
__________________
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; 18th February 2018 at 04:44 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 18th February 2018, 05:53 AM   #621
Degeneve
Muse
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 868
I am still trying to understand how the UK could have been defeated in one week in 1938. The question has been raised almost a week ago and still did not get any answer. Not even the beginning of an answer. Maybe because there is no answer available. At least an answer which makes sense...
Degeneve 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 18th February 2018, 07:11 AM   #622
HansMustermann
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 15,280
I think a question that definitely wasn't solved in '38, or later for that matter, was how to bring the German army over the channel. Thing is, no matter how well you do with bombers, they can't actually hold ground.

And really, without troops on the ground, what are you going to do with any amount of bombers, to defeat the UK? They haven't ever made anyone want to surrender. Even a German report from the Spanish Civil War indicated that actually bombing cities just strengthens the people's resolve.

The 'domino theory' of knocking out key parts of the economy also wouldn't even work, when those bombers don't have the range to attack a significant part of the British industry.

Plus, see above, even if you did somehow manage that, so what? You still need boots (and tanks) on the ground to actually defeat anyone. Some of the allies did have the unexplainable delusion that if you bomb enough of the countries, the rich will rather oust Hitler than see their wealth destroyed, but the Germans actually never did believe it would work that way. So exactly what campaign would they be planning against the UK at that point?
__________________
Which part of "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn" don't you understand?
HansMustermann 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 18th February 2018, 09:59 AM   #623
Henri McPhee
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Bristol UK
Posts: 3,582
Originally Posted by HansMustermann View Post
I think a question that definitely wasn't solved in '38, or later for that matter, was how to bring the German army over the channel. Thing is, no matter how well you do with bombers, they can't actually hold ground.
I agree with you that it is a strategic error to try to make an opposed landing unless you intend to stay there. That's where Eisenhower and Marshall went wrong with their proposal to cross the channel in 1942, and the fiasco of the Dieppe raid. General Alan Brooke had to try to persuade the Americans to try North Africa and Italy instead, which made more sense.

There are some interesting opinions about all this at:

http://www.city-data.com/forum/histo...ny-1938-a.html

Quote:
Except if Britain had made their stand in 1938, they would have had no air force capable of matching the Luftwaffe. That extra year bought the Brits the time they needed for the Spitfire fighters to come on line and be ready for the Battle of Britain.

Without the Spitfires to match the ME-109's, the Battle of Britain would have been lost.

As it was, it was pretty close.

Last edited by Henri McPhee; 18th February 2018 at 10:01 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 18th February 2018, 10:12 AM   #624
jimbob
Uncritical "thinker"
 
jimbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 20,702
Henri, you are quoting someone on an internet forum. With the greatest of respect, they could be on that forum quoting you to support their views.

It is no better than saying "a mate in the pub said this"
__________________
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 18th February 2018, 11:47 AM   #625
Garrison
Illuminator
 
Garrison's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 4,720
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
I agree with you that it is a strategic error to try to make an opposed landing unless you intend to stay there. That's where Eisenhower and Marshall went wrong with their proposal to cross the channel in 1942, and the fiasco of the Dieppe raid. General Alan Brooke had to try to persuade the Americans to try North Africa and Italy instead, which made more sense.

There are some interesting opinions about all this at:

http://www.city-data.com/forum/histo...ny-1938-a.html
You've offered a quote without any supporting evidence that simply reiterates your own claim about the RAF versus the Luftwaffe in 1938, for all we know that's you posting under a different name. And of course the quote is utterly irrelevant because again, the Bf109 can't reach Britain in 1938, you do understand that by now?

You need to offer a reasoned explanation as to why unescorted bombers of inferior types flying much further are going to bring about the defeat of Britain in a week.
__________________
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; 18th February 2018 at 11:51 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 18th February 2018, 01:48 PM   #626
ddt
Mafia Penguin
 
ddt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 19,576
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
I agree with you that it is a strategic error to try to make an opposed landing unless you intend to stay there.
I don't think Hans ever suggested that.

But how is that one-week-from-Berlin-to-London campaign going?
__________________
"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 18th February 2018, 06:44 PM   #627
HansMustermann
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 15,280
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
I agree with you that it is a strategic error to try to make an opposed landing unless you intend to stay there.
What I was saying is rather that it's a strategic error to even try that landing, if you don't have the ships to bring those troops there, nor the means to protect those ships from the Royal Navy, nor the means to keep those troops supplied. It's kinda like saying I could be leaving for Mars in a week, except I have no rocket and no means to support a base there
__________________
Which part of "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn" don't you understand?
HansMustermann 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 19th February 2018, 04:29 AM   #628
Henri McPhee
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Bristol UK
Posts: 3,582
Originally Posted by jimbob View Post
Henri, you are quoting someone on an internet forum. With the greatest of respect, they could be on that forum quoting you to support their views.

It is no better than saying "a mate in the pub said this"
It's not a question of " a mate in the pub said this" but more a question of hard documentary evidence. I agree that there was a widespread view at the time that bombers would get through, and force a surrender. That proved not to be the case against Germany, and even in more recent years, like Vietnam. The point is that the RAF fighter defences were in a woefully inadequate state in 1938, and radar was in its infancy. Chamberlain had to make a military judgment in 1938 and not just to choose between war and dishonour as Churchill would have done:

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

Quote:
In 1937, Bowen's team set their crude ASV radar, the world's first airborne set, to detect the Home Fleet in dismal weather.[20] Only in spring 1939, "as a matter of great urgency" after the failure of the searchlight system Silhouette,[21] did attention turn to using ASV for air-to-air interception (AI).[21] Demonstrated in June 1939, AI got a warm reception from Air Chief Marshal Hugh Dowding, and even more so from Churchill.

This proved problematic.[21] Its accuracy, dependent on the height of the aircraft, meant that CH, capable of only 4 sm (0.0068 km), was not accurate enough to place an aircraft within its detection range, and an additional system was required.[22] Its wooden chassis had a disturbing tendency to catch fire (even with attention from expert technicians),[23] so much so that Dowding, when told that Watson-Watt could provide hundreds of sets, demanded "ten that work".[24] The Cossor and MetroVick sets were overweight for aircraft use[21] and the RAF lacked night fighter pilots, observers,[25] and suitable aircraft.[26][page needed]

Last edited by Henri McPhee; 19th February 2018 at 04:32 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 19th February 2018, 05:54 AM   #629
Border Reiver
Philosopher
 
Border Reiver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 6,605
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
I agree with you that it is a strategic error to try to make an opposed landing unless you intend to stay there. That's where Eisenhower and Marshall went wrong with their proposal to cross the channel in 1942, and the fiasco of the Dieppe raid. [/url]
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.
__________________
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 19th February 2018, 06:19 AM   #630
Hubert Cumberdale
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,092
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
It's not a question of " a mate in the pub said this" but more a question of hard documentary evidence. I agree that there was a widespread view at the time that bombers would get through, and force a surrender. That proved not to be the case against Germany, and even in more recent years, like Vietnam. The point is that the RAF fighter defences were in a woefully inadequate state in 1938, and radar was in its infancy. Chamberlain had to make a military judgment in 1938 and not just to choose between war and dishonour as Churchill would have done:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_radar
As has repeatedly been pointed out to you, the Germans had no fighters at all capable of reaching mainland UK in 1938.

None.

At all.

And you do realise your quoted passage relates to airborne intercept radar and not the Chain Home system?

Given that you concede that the ability of bombers to force a nation to surrender was vastly overestimated, how then was Germany going to force Britain to surrender in 1 week.

Again Henri, you made the claim that Germany could defeat Britain in 1 week but you have failed to provide even the flimsiest explanation for how this could be achieved.

Please provide an explanation or be good enough to admit that you were mistaken and withdraw the assertion.
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 19th February 2018, 06:52 AM   #631
Captain_Swoop
Penultimate Amazing
 
Captain_Swoop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 20,762
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
It's not a question of " a mate in the pub said this" but more a question of hard documentary evidence. I agree that there was a widespread view at the time that bombers would get through, and force a surrender. That proved not to be the case against Germany, and even in more recent years, like Vietnam. The point is that the RAF fighter defences were in a woefully inadequate state in 1938, and radar was in its infancy. Chamberlain had to make a military judgment in 1938 and not just to choose between war and dishonour as Churchill would have done:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_radar
Air to Air radar is not the same as the Chain Home system

Here is a site hat will tell you all you ever need to know about British Radar in WW2 and the Cold War.

http://www.radarpages.co.uk/
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 19th February 2018, 09:45 AM   #632
Henri McPhee
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Bristol UK
Posts: 3,582
I still think Chain Home radar was in its infancy in 1938:

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

Quote:
During early tests against Chain Home in 1938, RAF pilots had noticed they could escape detection by flying at low altitudes. This was due to the minimum angle of the CH being about 1.5 degrees above the horizon, which meant aircraft were below the radar's sight until they approached within a few miles. They could escape detection entirely by flying between two CH stations at altitudes around 1,500 feet (460 m). At first this was not considered to be a serious limitation, as bombers typically flew at altitudes of 15,000 feet or greater, and at that altitude they could be detected over France.

But as the magnitude of the problem became clear, Watt became concerned.

Last edited by Henri McPhee; 19th February 2018 at 09:47 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 19th February 2018, 10:01 AM   #633
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: 28,998
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
I still think Chain Home radar was in its infancy in 1938:
Missing the point. In 1938, Germany had not occupied France or the Low Countries, so the only German aircraft with a sufficient range to operate over Britain from bases available to the Luftwaffe - that is to say, bases in Germany - were the Dornier Do17 and the Henikel He111. Both of these were extremely vulnerable to fighter attack even from the Hurricanes and Gladiators equipping Fighter Command at the time (though Gladiators might have found the Do17 hard to catch), and both would have to approach over the North Sea, giving the defences plenty of time to react and to harry them on the way home. And even had they been able to operate completely undisturbed, at best they could only have done serious damage in south-eastern England. The Luftwaffe's anti-shipping capability, quite inadequate even in 1940, was nonexistent in 1938, so the Royal Navy could have prevented any landing attempt. There is no realistic means, therefore, by which Germany could have forced Briatin to surrender in 1938 at all, let alone "within a week."

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 19th February 2018, 10:23 AM   #634
Henri McPhee
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Bristol UK
Posts: 3,582
I agree that the German fighters did not have the range at first to be much use to the Germans in escorting their bombers, even from France. I disagree that the RAF were capable of stopping the German bombers in 1938. The number of Hurricanes in 1938 was woefully adequate, and the rest of the RAF fighters were a load of crap. There were practically no Spitfires then. Hitler's strategy would have been to force Britain to accept his will, or London would have been bombed with terrible damage.

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

Quote:
On 12 October 1937, the maiden flight took place of the first production Hurricane I, which was powered by a Merlin II engine and flown by Flight Lieutenant Philip Lucas. Production deliveries had been delayed by roughly six months due to a decision to equip the Hurricane only with the improved Merlin II engine, while the earlier Merlin I had been prioritised for the Fairey Battle and the Hawker Henley.[15] By the following December, the first four aircraft to enter service with the RAF had joined No. 111 Squadron, stationed at RAF Northolt. By February 1938, No. 111 Squadron had received 16 Hurricanes.

Last edited by Henri McPhee; 19th February 2018 at 10:25 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 19th February 2018, 10:31 AM   #635
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: 28,998
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
I agree that the German fighters did not have the range at first to be much use to the Germans in escorting their bombers, even from France.
Not "not much use," no use at all. They couldn't make the journey. Escort fighters three hundred miles away are completely ineffective.

Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
I disagree that the RAF were capable of stopping the German bombers in 1938. The number of Hurricanes in 1938 was woefully adequate, and the rest of the RAF fighters were a load of crap.
Stopping them from doing what, precisely?

Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
There were practically no Spitfires then.
For shooting down bombers, Spitfires weren't actually as good as Hurricanes; their wings tended to flex, reducing accuracy and concentration of fire. Hurricanes were better gun platforms. There's no particular reason to get so hung up on Spitfire numbers.

Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
Hitler's strategy would have been to force Britain to accept his will, or London would have been bombed with terrible damage.
The Luftwaffe didn't have the strength to do a tenth the amount of damage that Bomber Command inflicted on German cities for a couple of years later in the war, yet Germany didn't surrender in a week; in fact, it didn't surrender till Berlin was over-run. One of the great lessons of WW2 was that conventional bombing of cities simply couldn't force a nation to surrender. Even two atom bombs just barely did the trick when Japan had no oil, no raw materials, no navy and no hope.

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 19th February 2018, 10:43 AM   #636
Hubert Cumberdale
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,092
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
I agree that the German fighters did not have the range at first to be much use to the Germans in escorting their bombers, even from France. I disagree that the RAF were capable of stopping the German bombers in 1938. The number of Hurricanes in 1938 was woefully adequate, and the rest of the RAF fighters were a load of crap. There were practically no Spitfires then. Hitler's strategy would have been to force Britain to accept his will, or London would have been bombed with terrible damage.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawker_Hurricane
Its not that they didn't have the range "at first" its that they didn't have the range at all without bases in North East France which they didn't have at all in 1938.

On what basis do you think the RAF was not capable of stopping German bombers in 1938?

The RAF had 4 operational Hurricane squadrons and even 1 squadron re-fitting with the Spitfires you seem to love so much.

But they didn't need either of these, as since the Germans would have had literally not one single fighter in the air, the Gladiators would have been more than capable of tearing through He111's.

And again, how is Germany going to defeat Britain in a week?
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 19th February 2018, 10:46 AM   #637
Hubert Cumberdale
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,092
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
How is Germany going to defeat Britain in week?
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 19th February 2018, 10:57 AM   #638
Garrison
Illuminator
 
Garrison's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 4,720
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
I agree that the German fighters did not have the range at first to be much use to the Germans in escorting their bombers, even from France. I disagree that the RAF were capable of stopping the German bombers in 1938.
And if you could offer a shred of the 'hard documentary evidence' you seem so keen on to support your belief it might have some weight.

Quote:
The number of Hurricanes in 1938 was woefully adequate, and the rest of the RAF fighters were a load of crap.
Versus a Bf109 yes they were crap. Against the bombers that they would actually have had to engage, probably quite effective. Bear in mind they don't have to shoot them down in one day, as long as they can inflict a rate of attrition higher than the Lufwaffe's replacement rate their winning. They don't even have to shoot a bomber down to destroy, make them burn fuel dodging fighters and they may not get home. Also flying from Germany in 1938 British fighters may not be the only ones they have to worry about.


Quote:
There were practically no Spitfires then.
You really need to get past the myths that have grown up around the Spitfire. It was a great fighter, but it was not a wonder weapon and if I recall correctly it was the Hurricane that did the heavy lifting in the Battle of Britain.

Quote:
Hitler's strategy would have been to force Britain to accept his will, or London would have been bombed with terrible damage.
Yes that might have been Hitler's strategy, doesn't mean it stood any more chance than Sealion did in 1940.

You keep avoiding the bigger picture. The question is not whether Munich was 'dishonourable', its who benefited most from it, Britain or Germany.

Oh and of course we are still awaiting your explanation of how Germany could defeat Britain in a week.
__________________
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
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 19th February 2018, 11:27 AM   #639
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: 28,998
Originally Posted by Garrison View Post
You really need to get past the myths that have grown up around the Spitfire. It was a great fighter, but it was not a wonder weapon and if I recall correctly it was the Hurricane that did the heavy lifting in the Battle of Britain.
From what I can tell, the outer four machine guns on a Spitfire were very good at scattering bullets throughout the sky, because of the way the wings flexed in a turn. Wing flexure was also why it took a while for cannon installations to be effective; at first they simply weren't rigid enough. The Hurricane, on the other hand, had tightly grouped batteries of guns in stiffer wings, so tended to concentrate all its firepower in the place a good pilot expected it to go, making it a much better proposition as a bomber destroyer. But, hell, a Gladiator could catch an He111 and put a good few bullets into 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 19th February 2018, 03:33 PM   #640
Rincewind
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Adirondacks, NY - with Magrat!
Posts: 8,051
Henri,

I thought that perhaps you might find this interesting.

London to Essen directly over Holland is around 400 miles.

The Dornier 17Z, with a bomb load of 1,000 Kg had a combat range of around 410 miles.

With a bomb load of 500 KG, it was 628 miles.

It had a top speed of 264 mph, but would spend most of it's time cruising at around 186.

So - even if it had the range it could be caught by more nimble fighters.

Oh - and I couldn't find numbers for earlier versions - the Do-17Z was actually introduced into service in 1939.

The He111H had a maximum speed of 243 mph, so would likely be cruising at less than 180 mph.

The Gladiator had a top speed of 253, so with planning ought to be able to hit the Luftwaffe bombers before they could accelerate to maximum speed.

If they could have made the journey....

[all hail Wikipedia!]
__________________
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
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 04:25 PM.
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.