The Battle of Britain Was The First Defeat For The German Luftwaffe.

[DD_crash]

Doesnt this argument/contradiction issue remind anyone else of http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zKhEw7nD9C4&feature=fvsr (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zKhEw7nD9C4&feature=fvsr)
:)

[Triggaaar]

Doesnt this argument/contradiction issue remind anyone else of http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zKhEw7nD9C4&feature=fvsr (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zKhEw7nD9C4&feature=fvsr)
:)Perfect. Another draw.

[kendo65]

ok, let's make a short analogy here, maybe our islander friends will get it better this way:

if a tiger is fighting a cat, and at some point the tiger has to go away because he has to pee, that doesn't mean the cat won the fight.. right?!!

But go ahead, call it a THE GREATEST VICTORY EVER for my part.

Truth is.. brits always need their big thug nephews help to get our from the mess they've got themselves into (think any other WWII brit operations). Kind of like the italians :)

But they were great warriors, and look, they won BoB.. Of course they did, otherwise.. what else would have they to celebrate?!! The almighty colonial british empire? Battle of France? Dunkerque? Singapore? Dutch Indies? North Afrika? Market Garden?!!

Using another analogy, is like trying to get away from him the only rotten bone a skinny dog ever had.. of course he'll jump to bite you for trying to get his only reason for life away from him.

It's a normal denial behavior as we know it from kindergarten psychology.

Adonys, that post is more than a little insulting. You obviously have some issues with the British for whatever reason, but as the length of your ignore list continues to grow it is obvious that you also have issues with lots of people. Maybe you'd be kind enough to add my name to your list as well.

Cheers.

[MB_Avro_UK]

Gentlemen,

There seems to be great jubilation here from several posters at the 'evacuation' of the British Army at Dunkirk in May 1940.

Facts:

The British comprised only 10% of the allies at that time. It was not the whole British Army. It was the British Expeditionary Force (BEF).

The RAF in France comprised only 10% of the Allied Air Force.

And yes,the German army was superior to both the French and British. The German soldiers were ex-Hitler Youth and the products of a fanatical dictatorship. And had the experience of combat in Spain and Poland.

Does anyone here know about the murder of 250 rear guard British soldiers by the Waffen SS in May 1940? They ran out of ammunition and surrendered. The next day,the Waffen SS murdered all apart from 3 who managed to escape.

This puts the Battle of Britain into context.


And an important context.


Best Regards,
MB_Avro.

[JG52Krupi]

ok, let's make a short analogy here, maybe our islander friends will get it better this way:

if a tiger is fighting a cat, and at some point the tiger has to go away because he has to pee, that doesn't mean the cat won the fight.. right?!!

But go ahead, call it a THE GREATEST VICTORY EVER for my part.

Truth is.. brits always need their big thug nephews help to get our from the mess they've got themselves into (think any other WWII brit operations). Kind of like the italians :)

But they were great warriors, and look, they won BoB.. Of course they did, otherwise.. what else would have they to celebrate?!! The almighty colonial british empire? Battle of France? Dunkerque? Singapore? Dutch Indies? North Afrika? Market Garden?!!

Using another analogy, is like trying to get away from him the only rotten bone a skinny dog ever had.. of course he'll jump to bite you for trying to get his only reason for life away from him.

It's a normal denial behavior as we know it from kindergarten psychology.


WOW Just WOW what an ass...

I'm so happy to be on this ignorant tools ignore list, what a load of rubbish.

The USA doesn't exactly have a gleaming trophy, how many disastrous, pointless conflicts have they dragged the UK (there only supporter in some cases) into since WW2.

If any country/government is in denial IMHO its actually america (yes and UK too) and its ignorance of the effort and effect the Russians had in WW2.

[Al Schlageter]

Don't forget about helping the Germans as well.

[ATAG_Dutch]

I don't know if America is exactly in denial, but our powers that be definitely put a spin on how we won the war. We fought in proxy, giving the Brits their 100 octane, which has already been proven to have defeated Germany by itself on these very forums (sarcasm off now). That and the other goodies through lend-lease that enabled Britain and Russia to continue the war in our stead, so we could come in at the end and get our share of the plunder (mostly just reinforcing the superiority of capitalism). America was a de facto participant in the war since early 1940, and if the Japanese didn't attack Pearl Harbor, who knows how much longer our boys would have stayed here before finally rolling up our sleeves to get involved in blood instead of just sweat.

Now that is something I have to take issue with (And i think I'm right in assuming that your irony tongue is well and firmly in your cheek!). I reckon America would've become involved at some stage anyway.

The role of America is all too often underplayed by the British, including members of my own family. I don't consider December 1941 to be the 'end' of the war, nor do I espouse the view that 'we won the war with the help of America and Russia', which in fairness is all too prevalent in some.

There are ordinary people in Britain who realise that but for the economic and industrial power of America, and the quite unbelievable resilience of the Russian people and their armies, Britain would have been hard put to continue the war in any form, which of course is why the UK ended the war in debt to America to the extent that rationing only totally ceased in 1958.

It also bankrupted the Empire, and I'm convinced that Churchill knew this when he said 'no matter what the cost, or the agonies may be', with which statement he made clear that he was willing to sacrifice that which he and the majority of the British populace held most dear.

I suppose that it's this level of sacrifice, to rid the world of a 'monstrous tyranny never surpassed in the dark and lamentable catalogue of human crime' that makes us Brits so adamant.

We bloody won the Battle though. So there.:-P

[Al Schlageter]

Destroyers? Those wouldn't be those clapped out 4 stackers would it. If it is, they were bought.

GM (Opel) as well.

Expenditure by the US for the lend-lease program totaled about $48,000,000,000.

70% went to Great Britain and 25% to USSR.

The US received $6,000,000,000 in reverse lend-lease, mostly from the British Commonwealth.

[adonys]

you guys are right, I'm sorry, the tone I've used wasn't proper, and I'm sorry for that, I've got carried away :(

yet.. those are facts, battles the english had lost. and I don't have anything against them, I've even lived in London for a year and a half, and maybe I'll live even more in the future. there's no shame in losing, as long as you fought with all you strength and gave your best.

also, let's not forget this is a game, and we all are united in here by the same thing we have in common: passion for WWII flight sims.

sons can not be blamed of the sins of their fathers and history is history, and can not be changed. we can just learn it true, to avoid doing the same mistakes again in the future.

[Triggaaar]

there's no shame in losing, as long as you fought with all you strength and gave your best.No indeed. And it wasn't our fight anyway.
sons can not be blamed of the sins of their fathers and history is history, and can not be changed. we can just learn it true, to avoid doing the same mistakes again in the future.Agreed again, although given the arguements here I guess we're not learning it truethfully.

yet.. those are facts, battles the english had lost.Which battles are you talking about?

[kendo65]

you guys are right, I'm sorry, the tone I've used wasn't proper, and I'm sorry for that, I've got carried away :(

yet.. those are facts, battles the english had lost. and I don't have anything against them, I've even lived in London for a year and a half, and maybe I'll live even more in the future. there's no shame in losing, as long as you fought with all you strength and gave your best.

also, let's not forget this is a game, and we all are united in here by the same thing we have in common: passion for WWII flight sims.

sons can not be blamed of the sins of their fathers and history is history, and can not be changed. we can just learn it true, to avoid doing the same mistakes again in the future.

Fair play to you for posting this. I think a few of us have had moments on this thread where the red mists have descended (myself included).

I just want to say that I think we all need to learn to let others have their own opinions on this matter. I don't have any problems with Stern and others holding different views from my own so long as they allow me the same freedom.

Also, holding the view that Britain actually did achieve something important in the BOB doesn't at all imply that many of us here think Britain won the war single-handedly or possessed overall superior military prowess to the other nations involved. By most reckoning Germany had the most formidable armed forces in terms of quality of equipment, leadership, tactics, etc.

Anyway things got a little out of hand in this thread. Hopefully the patch may appear today and we can all get back to the game.

[Sternjaeger II]

Fair play to you for posting this. I think a few of us have had moments on this thread where the red mists have descended (myself included).

I just want to say that I think we all need to learn to let others have their own opinions on this matter. I don't have any problems with Stern and others holding different views from my own so long as they allow me the same freedom.

Also, holding the view that Britain actually did achieve something important in the BOB doesn't at all imply that many of us here think Britain won the war single-handedly or possessed overall superior military prowess to the other nations involved. By most reckoning Germany had the most formidable armed forces in terms of quality of equipment, leadership, tactics, etc.

Anyway things got a little out of hand in this thread. Hopefully the patch may appear today and we can all get back to the game.

Absolutely. I have no problem with any of you guys either on the matter, I respect your opinion and see your point of view, I'm not in total denial! ;)
I suppose I'm a bit scared by how we manage to justify our atrocities "for the sake of the greater good", but firmly condemn other when they do it.

There's no perfection in this world, no absolute good and bad, that's what prompts my attitude towards assessment of historical events, it really has nothing to do with nationalism.

The thread has dangerously derailed more than once, but I'm surprised how far we got with this "hot topic" without getting banned/flamed/stabbed ;)

[ATAG_Dutch]

Well, as hostilities appear to have been suspended, maybe it's time for a short video intermission.

It's only at 360p so I wouldn't bother with full screen.

Respectfully dedicated to all contributors to the thread, and I never professed to be unbiased myself, by Jingo!!;)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l6RnzoGXMdU

[MB_Avro_UK]

Hi all,

You know what's not been mentioned so far? And it's a positive.

Neither side shot at parachuting airmen. There was some sort of mutual respect.

Any examples?

Perhaps 'Total War' was not part of the language then?

Best Regards,
MB_Avro.

[adonys]

Shooting parachutes no.. but I remember I've read some accounts saying that the brits were destroying the german life-buoys to not allow the germans to recover pilots downed into the Channel.

[MB_Avro_UK]

The life-buoys didn't work. Their mooring chains broke and they were carried away by the sea currents.

Maybe you are thinking about the luftwaffe rescue float planes for downed airmen? Such as the He-59?

Best Regards,
MB_Avro.

[arthursmedley]

Hi all,

You know what's not been mentioned so far? And it's a positive.

Neither side shot at parachuting airmen. There was some sort of mutual respect.

Any examples?

Perhaps 'Total War' was not part of the language then?

Best Regards,
MB_Avro.

Dowding wanted to order his pilots to shoot 'chutes but Churchill vetoed it.

[fruitbat]

it happened, from both sides from time to time. i've certainly read references to it regarding both sides.

theres also the nice taped conversations of a few Germans shot down during the BoB describing how they enjoyed shooting at houses, buses etc. I have no doubt in my mind that it happened the other way around at the end of the war.

you can still read the transcripts of these lovely people who didn't realise they were being taped.

war brings out the utter shit in some people. on all sides.

a couple of pleasant exerts.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/secret-tapes-of-professional-sadists-reveal-true-story-of-german-soldiers-war-brutality-2263579.html

[TomcatViP]

I don't want to be moralistic but it's hard to compare the brutality of the Axis forces and the deaths involved in teh liberation of those countries.

Pls see the diag there :

http://warchronicle.com/numbers/WWII/deaths.htm

8M killed by the allies including 1.6 M civilians causalities (yes far too much)

40M by the Axis regimes including 25.6M of civilians ! (and those countries did not really have strategic bomber forces)

Obviously you don't kill 40M of ppl just by signing your name on an order form (at that time there was no nuke to be feared). Millions of others had to be committed in the blood bath.

[Madfish]

I don't think morals are a solution. There will always be opinions anyways. In fact if you just go by numbers then you'd have to face the issue of our planet being overpopulated even though we had those wars anyways. And that is not an excuse but it's an indicator of what will happen again: conflicts!

Earth doesn't have unlimited rescources. There may be countries or individuals who are rich, e.g. have huge territories etc. but as long as they sit on it and don't distribute it there will be crime and there will be wars. Simple as that.

Also keep in mind that almost a billion is in grave danger of starvation with about 5 million dying yearly. So all cruelties of the war aside the real killers out there are usually something the developed countries don't care about. We sit on our wealth and try to defend, expand and exploit.

From that perspective it doesn't even matter what happened during the war or who won what battle - if you want to be moralistic either defend earth and rid if from it's overpopulation or try to save these people dying from hunger. Of course you could add those who die from desease, exploitation and crimes etc. as well. It's just such a complex task that starting and fighting wars seems to be easier and certainly more lucrative to the people behind the wars. The industry e.g.

[MD_Titus]

Hi all,

You know what's not been mentioned so far? And it's a positive.

Neither side shot at parachuting airmen. There was some sort of mutual respect.

Any examples?

Perhaps 'Total War' was not part of the language then?

Best Regards,
MB_Avro.

not quite the case from what i read.

there were isolated instances, one where an RAF pilot came down after being machine gunned on his chute which was witnessed by a comrade, and another where a polish pilot shot at a luftwaffe pilot on his chute. emphasis on "isolated" though, as well as being unclear if they were actually hit intentionally, or simply hit by some of the stray lead that you are exposed to if falling through a battlespace.

stereotypically speaking (dangerous i know) our czech and polish pilots were a tad more bloodthirsty than the british ones. but generally it wasn't in the slightest "necessary" if the german pilots were bailing over UK territory - captured anyway - but there was always a certain level of surprise that the german pilots didn't do it, some sections even feeling they would have been within their rights to do so. one quote went so far as to say that he would've been a legitimate target on the end of his parachute, because that parachuting pilot could be back in the air by tea time.

i would guess it's an element of self-preservation in it though - you never know when you'll be dangling helpless in the middle of an air battle.


also coming down in teh channel was very dangerous. the north sea even more so - very very few pilots were pulled out of there.

[MD_Titus]

The life-buoys didn't work. Their mooring chains broke and they were carried away by the sea currents.

Maybe you are thinking about the luftwaffe rescue float planes for downed airmen? Such as the He-59?

Best Regards,
MB_Avro.

the ones that were painted with a red cross but also, allegedly, carried out recon missions...

[ATAG_Dutch]

Dowding wanted to order his pilots to shoot 'chutes but Churchill vetoed it.

That's a new one on me.:confused:

All accounts I've read say that Dowding's opinion was that German parachuting aircrew were prisoners, no longer combatants and should not be shot at, whereas the Germans would have been within their rights to shoot at British aircrew parachuting over England as they would soon be back in the fight.

Churchill was appalled at this notion but had no 'veto' to make, the Luftwaffe jagdflieger luckily held a different view also.

There are reports of it happening on both sides, although whether by accident or design is purely speculative. The Poles in particular had a 'reputation', but there's no concrete proof as far as I'm aware.

[kendo65]

Hi all,

You know what's not been mentioned so far? And it's a positive.

Neither side shot at parachuting airmen. There was some sort of mutual respect.

Any examples?

Perhaps 'Total War' was not part of the language then?

Best Regards,
MB_Avro.

More fuel for the fire Avro? ;)

[MB_Avro_UK]

I think that this thread has been through the 'fiery stage' and is back on track.

I've cetainly seen a few interesting posts on the topic.

[MD_Titus]

but the question remains - can we get to 100 pages?

[fruitbat]

but the question remains - can we get to 100 pages?

lets see,

Would the Battle of Britain been over in 1 week, if the RAF had had 50's:rolleyes:

[MB_Avro_UK]

What's a 50 ??

[bongodriver]

.50 calibre guns

[IvanK]

Careful chaps I fear the rise of the 50Cal debate :)

[ATAG_Dutch]

Or, would the Second World War have ended had the German nation actually attempted to invade Britain in September 1940?

My money's on 'Yes'.

Royal Navy, Fleet Air Arm, Bomber Command, Coastal Command, all thrown into the mix. And that's if they didn't make it to the shores. If they did make it, Then you would have the army too, and every civilian armed with a bread knife or better.

Speculations are cordially invited.;)

[Sternjaeger II]

Or, would the Second World War have ended had the German nation actually attempted to invade Britain in September 1940?

My money's on 'Yes'.

Royal Navy, Fleet Air Arm, Bomber Command, Coastal Command, all thrown into the mix. And that's if they didn't make it to the shores. If they did make it, Then you would have the army too, and every civilian armed with a bread knife or better.

Speculations are cordially invited.;)

uhmm I dunno, personally I would have avoided the invasion by sea initially, I would have used Fallschirmjaeger units with gliders and Me321s to transport troops and tanks. They could have poured in thousands of men in a day, establishing bridgeheads and carried on the invasion.

It would still have been necessary to gain air superiority though, and concentrate attacks on RAF bases and aircraft factories.

But before all this, the introduction of external fuel tanks for the fighters would have been of paramount importance.

So, the technological needs were:

1) droptanks for the Luftwaffe
2) development of gliders and glider systems

strategy:

1) converge bombers on airfields and aircraft factories
2) establish air superiority
3) arrange massive para-drops
4) capture airfields and/or prepare improvised land strips
5) combined attacks of bombers and u-boote towards the RN
6) mine channel
7) ask for support from the Italian Navy


all in all it would have been too much of a logistic strain and effort in 1940/41, but still feasible, had they decided to avoid the invasion of Russia.

Occupying Great Britain would have left only two frontlines to defend: southern Italy and the East, but had GB actually fallen, the US would have never intervened in the ETO and would have instead tried to find a truce with Germany (at least until the atomic bomb was ready..).

Fortunately the German high command was very narrow sighted and led by an impulsive psychopath, but it still remains that under a military point of view, the Reich's one was a formidable armed force which was appallingly wasted.

[MD_Titus]

you missed hitting the radar, thus leaving the massive 321s open to interception.

did they have gigants in 1940?

this was in fact the thing about the battle, the only time the luftwaffe actually kicked a hole in the radar net was a chance raid by epgrp 210, which took out a generator. however the luftwaffe never realised what they did, and utterly failed to exploit it.

drop tanks would have allowed the fighters more time over london, but that was at a stage when the battle was already shifting in the UK's favour - hitting london took the pressure off the airfields. a fair chunk of those hit had in fact not been active fighter command fields, but the pressure was off the ones that were. it would have allowed the fighters to cover the bombers for longer, but they would've been stripped away by the methods park used (and which 8th airforce would face over europe later in the war), in that he sent many smaller formations to intercept bombers along the course of their ingress and egress. this also relates to the myth of the big wing's success and how it was not the way to deal with the battle of britain.

so, stages 1 and 2 of your plan are what they tried to do, although they didn't know about the shadow spit factory elsewhere in the country and only hit southampton iirc.

simply carrying out the plan they had, but actually targeting only active fighter command fields and radar stations, as well as aircraft factories, and not being goaded into bombing london. that could have gained them the ability to surprise RAF fighters on the deck more often, get raids in and hit targets without being intercepted as effectively, and possibly led to local air superiority over the south coast of england, idea being that fighter command pulls out of the most affected airfields. then sending paratroops to capture the southern bases that have been bombed out of use, and resupplying the landing force that way... that could've ended badly.

it relies on intelligence the germans didn't have on quite what chainhome was and how it could be knocked out - not hitting the masts themselves, but going for buildings around them

[JimmyBlonde]

The whole battle was probably one of those "false flag" things that you hear guys with tinfoil taped to their heads talking about.

You know what I mean, the government just let the Luftwaffe pound London so that the populace would hate the Nazis more. I bet that MI5 were planting most of the bombs themselves.

I'm also going to speculate that, had the Nazis invaded, the long lost kingdom of Avalon would have probably re-emerged from the mist and a glorious host of Arthurian warriors, clad in resplendent, glittering armour would have sallied forth to smite the beastly Huns and turn the tide in favour of their beloved Chrisendom.

By the way, Hitler was a reptilian you know, that whole silly moustache thing was just a ploy to divert attention from his peculiar lizard tongue.

*Disclaimer*

This post is in no way intended to belittle, demean or otherwise deride the imaginative and somewhat plausible contemplative fantasies contained in this thread. It's just that it's Sunday afternoon and the author is in a slightly bemused frame of mind. His primary motivation here is simply to push this behemoth of a thread just one post closer to the 100 page barrier and, hopefully, make a few people laugh along the way.

[MB_Avro_UK]

The British feared invasion even as late as 1942.

I spotted these Tank Traps outside the London Road Railway Station in the town of Guildford, a few miles south of London.

They have a commemorative metal plate attached to one of them which dates their construction as being from 1942.

http://i885.photobucket.com/albums/ac58/MB_Avro_UK/118.jpg

http://i885.photobucket.com/albums/ac58/MB_Avro_UK/117.jpg

http://i885.photobucket.com/albums/ac58/MB_Avro_UK/120.jpg

[Skoshi Tiger]

Jimmy! You are a very naughty boy!

The whole battle was probably one of those "false flag" things that you hear guys with tinfoil taped to their heads talking about.


If you listen to wiki leeks you deserve to believe every thing that you do!


You know what I mean, the government just let the Luftwaffe pound London so that the populace would hate the Nazis more. I bet that MI5 were planting most of the bombs themselves.


MI5 are public servants! Logic would have told us that they would have been too busy waiting for the Tea Trolly to wheel past their desks to go and plant bombs anywhere.


I'm also going to speculate that, had the Nazis invaded, the long lost kingdom of Avalon would have probably re-emerged from the mist and a glorious host of Arthurian warriors, clad in resplendent, glittering armour would have sallied forth to smite the beastly Huns and turn the tide in favour of their beloved Chrisendom.


This may have been the case but since Henry the 8th renounced the pope and set himself up as head of the Church of England I'm afraid those Authurian warriors probably have better things to do! (See my note about MI5!)


By the way, Hitler was a reptilian you know, that whole silly moustache thing was just a ploy to divert attention from his peculiar lizard tongue.


Unfortunately without DNA evidence your 'V' theory cannot be validated!


*Disclaimer*

This post is in no way intended to belittle, demean or otherwise deride the imaginative and somewhat plausible contemplative fantasies contained in this thread. It's just that it's Sunday afternoon and the author is in a slightly bemused frame of mind. His primary motivation here is simply to push this behemoth of a thread just one post closer to the 100 page barrier and, hopefully, make a few people laugh along the way.
[/quote]

Ditto!

;)

[Al Schlageter]

uhmm I dunno, personally I would have avoided the invasion by sea initially, I would have used Fallschirmjaeger units with gliders and Me321s to transport troops and tanks. They could have poured in thousands of men in a day, establishing bridgeheads and carried on the invasion.

It would still have been necessary to gain air superiority though, and concentrate attacks on RAF bases and aircraft factories.

But before all this, the introduction of external fuel tanks for the fighters would have been of paramount importance.

So, the technological needs were:

1) droptanks for the Luftwaffe
2) development of gliders and glider systems

strategy:

1) converge bombers on airfields and aircraft factories
2) establish air superiority
3) arrange massive para-drops
4) capture airfields and/or prepare improvised land strips
5) combined attacks of bombers and u-boote towards the RN
6) mine channel
7) ask for support from the Italian Navy


all in all it would have been too much of a logistic strain and effort in 1940/41, but still feasible, had they decided to avoid the invasion of Russia.



The 321 glider didn't make its first flight til Feb 1941 so would be hard for them to be used in Sept 1940.

The 7th Flieger Division and the German 22nd Air Landing Division had taken losses during the preceding campaign battle of France), and were now understrength.

Do you know how much supplies are required by a Division when in combat? I don't think so.

The Channel was already mined by the Germans and the British.

[MD_Titus]

You.

Shall.

NOT.

Die.

[ATAG_Dutch]

You.

Shall.

NOT.

Die.

Hehe,heh. Top bump mate.:grin:

[Sternjaeger II]

The 321 glider didn't make its first flight til Feb 1941 so would be hard for them to be used in Sept 1940.

well I suppose it was developed because of the logistic needs of Barbarossa, if we're going by speculation I'd say that, had an airborne invasion planned before, they might have been able to deliver the 321 earlier.


The 7th Flieger Division and the German 22nd Air Landing Division had taken losses during the preceding campaign battle of France), and were now understrength.

same as above, despite the losses, if they knew they needed more paras, they would have concentrated on that.

Do you know how much supplies are required by a Division when in combat? I don't think so.

I think I might have a faint idea, I was only 18 when I served in the Army initially, but I've seen enough divisions to know what the logistic needs are ;)
You can appreciate that massive drops from the Ju52s and capturing strategic enemy facilities/vehicles etc.. could have been part of the invasion. Paras are renown for improvising with what they find available.

The Channel was already mined by the Germans and the British.
well, not enough to cause a complete blockade afaik.

[Al Schlageter]

You.

Shall.

NOT.

Die.

Must try to get to 100 pages. :)

[Al Schlageter]

well I suppose it was developed because of the logistic needs of Barbarossa, if we're going by speculation I'd say that, had an airborne invasion planned before, they might have been able to deliver the 321 earlier.

During the preparations for a possible invasion of Britain during World War II (Operation Sea Lion) it became obvious to the Luftwaffe's Transport Command that there was a need for a larger capacity cargo- and troop-carrying aircraft than its mainstay, the Junkers Ju 52.

In December 1939, the German Army issued its own study paper (designated Nordwest) and solicited opinions and input from both the Kriegsmarine and Luftwaffe. The paper outlined an assault on England's eastern coast between The Wash and the River Thames by troops crossing the North Sea from Low Country ports.

same as above, despite the losses, if they knew they needed more paras, they would have concentrated on that.

see the above

I think I might have a faint idea, I was only 18 when I served in the Army initially, but I've seen enough divisions to know what the logistic needs are ;)
You can appreciate that massive drops from the Ju52s and capturing strategic enemy facilities/vehicles etc.. could have been part of the invasion. Paras are renown for improvising with what they find available.

German Infantry divisions required 80 tons per day when inactive and 1,100 tons a day in heavy fighting. (in Russia) (Source: "German Tanks at War" by Bob Carruthers).

Junkers Ju 52 had a lift capacity of ~2 tons. How many Ju52s were there. Then there is losses due to enemy, crashes, mechanical failures, ......

well, not enough to cause a complete blockade afaik.

see bold text

[MD_Titus]

Must try to get to 100 pages. :)

it's close

[MD_Titus]

how about if they had conducted their air assault using the smaller low level raids that gave a better cost/benefit than the massed raids? hitting multiple targets at as little interval as possible would've played havoc with plotting intercepts, and could have allowed fighters sweeping shortly after to catch the RAF in the air or landing after scrambling in response to the first wave of attacks.

was always one of the problems with fighter sweeps, radar could usually pick out what was bombers and what was a trap. rarely afforded the the luftwaffe the chance to get the required 5-1 k/d ratio that would've been needed to destroy the RAF as a fighting force, and using 109s as close escorts just shackled them. better to use the bf110 and ju88 as the low level raiders unescorted, and rely on not getting picked up by radar, only the less efficient observer corps.

[JimmyBlonde]

Jimmy! You are a very naughty boy!



If you listen to wiki leeks you deserve to believe every thing that you do!



MI5 are public servants! Logic would have told us that they would have been too busy waiting for the Tea Trolly to wheel past their desks to go and plant bombs anywhere.



This may have been the case but since Henry the 8th renounced the pope and set himself up as head of the Church of England I'm afraid those Authurian warriors probably have better things to do! (See my note about MI5!)



Unfortunately without DNA evidence your 'V' theory cannot be validated!




Ditto!

;)[/QUOTE]

http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTUETzYmIFx3qnlOxfl79o-xtRFUPT3BG89nvr3g9YuJUBcNsUYbI73NtXZ1g

[raaaid]

i think the brilliant tactic by churchill was porovcking hitler into bombing his cities( did the luftwaffe really got their bombs wrong when the 1st city was bombed or was it staged?)

it deviated attention form main targets and he new the war of terro actually contrary to its intend boosts morale

edit:


theres no stronger weapon than the moral that gives knowing your self righteous :) and the divine justice that that brings

[MB_Avro_UK]

Didn't Galland say something about the Battle of Britain from his perspective did not end? And that the invasion of Russia just changed priorities?

After reading Spitfire on my Tail by a German Me109 pilot, I get the impression that Galland as a tactition was not highly regarded.

For instance, Galland opposed the use of radios in 109s during the BoB due to their weight penalty.

Best Regards,
MB_Avro.

[MD_Titus]

Steinhilper seemed to have a rather low opinion of galland as a tactician... and as a flight leader. The luftwaffe aces tended to put a kill above the poor katschmareks.

Wasn't the main issue with radios that the fighters and bombers had different crystald, leading to tragedy as missions were called off, and bombers left unescorted. in one case the fighters received the recall, butdespite aerobatics and the fighter formation leader's best efforts to get the bombers to turn back they advanced aline and got torn to shreds.

[Sternjaeger II]

Steinhilper seemed to have a rather low opinion of galland as a tactician... and as a flight leader. The luftwaffe aces tended to put a kill above the poor katschmareks.

Wasn't the main issue with radios that the fighters and bombers had different crystald, leading to tragedy as missions were called off, and bombers left unescorted. in one case the fighters received the recall, butdespite aerobatics and the fighter formation leader's best efforts to get the bombers to turn back they advanced aline and got torn to shreds.

As much as I like Steinhilper's book,I still do believe he had a somehow narrow view of the war,since he spent most of it as an escaping POW. Galland had his quirks,but together with Mölders he had a great understanding of aerial warfare, millions of times better than the RLM. I often wonder how Möelders would have been like, had he not died prematurely.

[SNAFU]

Reading the "First and the Last" and other books like the mentioned "Their most dangerous enemies", "Spitfire", "The BoB" Marce l Lullian, "Operation Eagle" Len Deigthon..., I tend to put Galland rahter in the education of the days between WWI and its remains.

I guess Galland was still in his hype of the "easy" days in Spain with "Legion-Condor,-we-just-waggel-our-wings-and-everything-is-right". He was opposing the use of radios in fighters (and I can understand the KISS/S philosophy), but for opposing the first sohisticated air defence, I guess he was not prepared nor was any of the LW stuff, hanging to the beliefs of knight duells. Even if he understood the basics of aerial warfare, he didn´t seem to be great teamplayer. And the team play was, what made the RAF and the FC strong, or not?

[MD_Titus]

Reading the "First and the Last" and other books like the mentioned "Their most dangerous enemies", "Spitfire", "The BoB" Marce l Lullian, "Operation Eagle" Len Deigthon..., I tend to put Galland rahter in the education of the days between WWI and its remains.

I guess Galland was still in his hype of the "easy" days in Spain with "Legion-Condor,-we-just-waggel-our-wings-and-everything-is-right". He was opposing the use of radios in fighters (and I can understand the KISS/S philosophy), but for opposing the first sohisticated air defence, I guess he was not prepared nor was any of the LW stuff, hanging to the beliefs of knight duells. Even if he understood the basics of aerial warfare, he didn´t seem to be great teamplayer. And the team play was, what made the RAF and the FC strong, or not?
this is the crux of it i think.

[MD_Titus]

As much as I like Steinhilper's book,I still do believe he had a somehow narrow view of the war,since he spent most of it as an escaping POW. Galland had his quirks,but together with Mölders he had a great understanding of aerial warfare, millions of times better than the RLM. I often wonder how Möelders would have been like, had he not died prematurely.

granted, although i think the impressions he gives are relevant early on in the war. möelders would've had a better handle later on latter war tactics as well i suspect...

the team play thing could be linked to the luftwaffe ethos of individual glory and the cult of the individual, i guess.