![]() |
As I recall from earlier postings...
Quote:
Quote:
From the NA: cab68/6/11 "War Cabinet Oil Position: Thirty-third Weekly Report: 23 April 1940" (http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/r...-1939-1945.htm Scroll down to 4.Cabinet Papers or Memoranda, click on cab68; enter reference no. "cab68/6/11" in this format in top l/h corner of new page, click on "Go to reference"; click on "View digital image" then "+Add to shopping"; it is free and downloadable) "The process of bringing Norwegian tankers under Allied control has advanced during the week, and of a total fleet of 212 Norwegian tankers 119 are now under Allied control, while 18 are proceeding to Allied ports; 93 are in neutral ports or reported to be proceeding to neutral ports..." Meaning in April 1940 Britain had already gained the use of 119 Norwegian tankers, 41 more than were sunk between Sept 1939 and November 1940, and more were expected. cab68/7/31 "War Cabinet Oil Position Monthly Report: November 1940" (issued 20 December) (http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/r...-1939-1945.htm) Table I: "Imports Into the United Kingdom (Services and Civil)" Shows the total number of tankers arriving in UK ports in the year between September 1939 and August 1940 = 947: (Total shown in table = 1,079 minus 132, June to August 1939.) March to May 1940 = 109 tankers; 1,112,300 tons imported; June to August = 100 tankers; 1,058,900 tons total tonnage of oil products imported = 9,986,900. (11,126,900 minus 1,140,000 tons, imported June to August 1939.): an average of 10,546 tons per tanker. September and October 1940: 124 tankers (62 per month) arrived and in November 80: September = 640,500 tons of imports; October = 651,600; November = 890,300 tons Grand Total of Tankers arriving in UK Sept 1939 to November 1940 = 1,151 Grand Total of Oil Products Imported = 12,169,300 tons: 10,573 tons of oil product per tanker Total number sunk Sept 1939 - Nov 1940 = 78(!!); 385,957 tons of oil product = roughly 6.8% tankers; roughly 3.2% of tons imported to Britain. The amount of oil product per tanker destroyed was 4,948 tons, meaning on average the tankers sunk were carrying less than half the weight of cargo each tanker that arrived in port was discharging; the tankers being sunk were either smaller than average, or, more likely, at least half of them were sunk in ballast. Losses were serious - particularly for the crews - but hardly crippling, and how many were carrying 100 Octane avgas? Explains why fuel stocks continued to rise right throughout the B of B, and shows that Morgan and Shacklady were right in that tankers were sunk; problem is that the numbers were paltry compared with the numbers arriving in Britain and unloading their cargo. Nor is there any cross referencing used by M & S providing sources for their claim that large numbers of tankers carrying 100 octane were sunk. http://i38.photobucket.com/albums/e1...00octane_2.jpg |
Good stuff NZt. Nothing like the facts over sensationalism. :)
|
calm down little jedi
|
Quote:
|
Well it seems like you had a decomplexed way to speak about other untill now. Don't tell me you'd feel embarrassed today :shock:
|
Quote:
May I suggest reading Badder story or an old cheap book right on the subject (I might hve got it at somthing like 9£ in the 90's at London Foyle's) : Hurricane versus Bf109 the Osprey series is also not tht bad. But I am sry : books they are! |
Quote:
http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchi...0-%202891.html "De Havillands then had 400 Hurricane conversion sets in hand and expected to convert a total of 700, after which constant speed airscrews would be embodied in the new aircraft. The worst of the rush was over, six days before the Luftwaffe's mass attacks began, and a chance diary entry records that the company was already busy on another urgent job, of fitting airscrews to 24 Hurricanes to be sent at once to the Middle East!" Or Morgan and Shacklady, which says almost exactly the same thing. |
Quote:
In general offical records are better. I am sure if I look I will find a book that says the earth is flat and Rome was built in a day. PS all the sheets extracted from a certain website as you put it, I checked in the NA for context and completeness before quoting them. Where possible I try to check everything I quote or at least find two sources. However I do agree with you, it would be nice if others did the same. |
Quote:
|
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 06:45 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2007 Fulqrum Publishing. All rights reserved.