![]() |
#471
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
![]() Last edited by ATAG_Dutch; 09-22-2011 at 02:57 PM. Reason: typo |
#472
|
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#473
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
World war two was a victory for the Marsians....
![]() |
#474
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
It is probably impossible for anyone to attain complete objectivity - too often the conclusions reached are dependent on starting assumptions, etc, and it's very difficult for many people to rise above the cultural and societal baggage they have inherited. But, I would respect your opinion more if you could accept that your position is just as prone to assumptions and sometimes self-serving beliefs as many other people on this forum. You come across as somewhat elitest, especially when you ascribe those who genuinely disagree with your personal views as having been duped by propaganda. The way to get us to change our minds is to supply overwhelming evidence. You haven't been able to do that (so far!). Your views appear just as partial and agenda-driven as any other poster in this thread.
__________________
i5-2500K @3.3GHz / 8GB Corsair Vengeance DDR3-1600 / Asus P8P67 / GTX-260 (216) / WD 500GB Samsung 22" 1680x1050 / Win7 64 Home Premium CH Combat Stick / CH Pro Throttle / Simped Rudder Pedals |
#475
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
Someone, somewhere, is always going to raise objections, no matter what. ![]() |
#476
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
In my considered and (in as far as is possible, notwithstanding the apparently unavoidable subconscious and insipid subliminal influence of 'rabid Patriotism' lol) entirely objective opinion, based on an assessment of the facts, the Kriegsmarine did not stand a snowballs chance in hell against the Royal Navy; echoing the sentiments of one Grossadmiral Donitz, with air superiorty or not.
Royal Navy: 5 capital ships 11 cruisers 53 destroyers 23 destroyers on convoy duty Kriegsmarine: 1 capital ship 1 cruiser 10 destroyers 20-30 U-boats *Ineffective and at extreme disadvantage in the shallows of the Channel. Many ships also with unrepaired extensive damage from the Norwegian campaign* Not only vastly outnumbered, but outclassed too. Add to the RN mix a countless legion of auxilary craft, , adapted trawlers and sloops, minesweepers and motor torpedo boats . The MTB 102 alone for example was capable of 48 knts fully laden, and could be equipped variously with machine guns, depth charges, and the Swiss Oerlikon 20mm AA cannon. Nasty little bumblebee with quite a sting, small and extremely maneouvrable,.....Have fun 'precision bombing' or strafing those. In a barge vs 102 battle, I really don't fancy the barges chances. ![]() Interestingly, no mention has been made of the fact that the RN need not have fired a single shot in order to sink the rag tag German barge Armada (appallingly ill prepared and trained with no experience of amphibious assault). The mere proximity and wake of a destroyer, never mind a Capital Ship would be enough to capsize the craft. In fact, Mother Nature (with a strong channel current) could very easily do that too. Barges are designed for Rivers. I wouldn't like to be on that barge at night. Dunkirk (and to an extent the Norwegian Campaign) shows demonstrable precedent that air superiority alone cannot be a guarantor of operational success. Despite the immense tonnage of bombs dropped by the Luftwaffe at Dunkirk, against targets which were stationary for long periods of time, and at best extremely restricted in movement by the harbour.......a paltry 4 destroyers were sunk. This was a resounding Luftwaffe operational failure in terms of meeting an express military objective no matter which way you cut it; namely to prevent the evacuation of some 300,000 men, which they failed quite miserably to do. You can either hit a stationary or moving target or you can't.....an underwhelming performance to say the least, with substantial Lufwaffe casualties incurred too ( some 30 aircraft, with many more damaged). Ships are indeed vulnerable to aerial attack, but not entirely defenceless themselves. Yes, it is true to say that unfavourable weather played a part, (particularly the 27th and 30th May) but if perfect conditions and visibility are a prerequisite for effective bombing then circa Sept 1940.....you are out of luck. No Meteorologist, but Blighty is not exactly renowned for its blue skies, and 50% of the time we are shrouded in quite dismal overcast. If the 3rd Reich were in possession of some occult voodoo type 'sun dance' it could have swung the balance, but....Nah. ![]() ![]() Much has been made of the 'mine screen' tactic and their 'interdictive' deployment strategy, with no mention of the fact that the Channel had already been heavily mined by the RN (it's called the 'English Channel' for a reason) and thus would require their laborious and time consuming removal; further shortening the very brief 'window of opportunity' that seelowe had. The practice of 'Degaussing' ships hulls has received no consideration; the entire Dunkirk evac fleet including civilian ships underwent this process very swiftly, rendering them essentially impervious to magnetic mines. Not a single ship was lost to German mines. This could be done very swiftly, with a more thorough process resulting in a ship hulls demagnetisation for months at a time. The Kriegsmarine, as Donitz's testimony itself agrees, were on a hiding to nothing....air superiority or not. Seelowe was a terribly ill conceived 'plan' (used in the loosest sense of the word), with more holes than a collander, and more flaws than a teenagers pimpled face. ![]() Late in Blighty and I've had a few jars, but might come back to this one. I like a good debate, but for me personally (and I hope without prejudice lol ) this case is closed. The vast majority of historians agree that it would have resulted in catastrophic failure, and I entirely concur. You are of course welcome to draw your own conclusions, but in my opinion the end game is a logistical-supply nightmare for Germany (given the extremely unlikely hypothetical event of establishing an effective beach head) and the final result is comprehensive and emphatic defeat. Not to say there would not be RN casualties (there most certainly would), but the final outcome was quite inevitable. Cheers. |
#477
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
An account of the 1974 Sandhurst wargame of Operation Sealion.
Quote:
By its very nature a battle is, in military terms, a conflict of opposing objectives. Therefore it has inherent success and failure criteria. Midway is an excellent parallel to the Battle of Britain. Japan used its attempted invasion of the island as a way of bringing the USN to battle and destroying it and therefore acheiving a strategic victory in both political and military terms. Japan failed in this objective and therefore lost the battle. Germany attempted the same in 1940 and lost the battle. If one side was defeated, by definition the other side won. |
#478
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
![]() Regards Mike |
#479
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
![]() ![]() Midway was a turning point and a victory because of the changes and short term consequences that came right after the clash. There were NO changes whatsoever to the tactical situation or strength of the Luftwaffe, you just pushed them back as much as you could, and not fully anyway, since they dropped tons of bombs over Britain. They didn't stop because your opposition crippled them, they stopped cos it was a half-hearted, badly conceived and worst executed plan, and suddenly Barbarossa was more important for obvious resources reasons (and it's not like they stopped bombing you straight away anyway). Either you fail to understand the German logic about it, or you're in denial. |
#480
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
I talk about the two enemies in third person, I don't have this "faction approach", which others do and betrays an innate (and understandable) bias, but of little or no help for the sake of a fair appraisal of historical events. |
![]() |
|
|