dam busters

[Hamisha3]

Not to take anything away from BarnesWallis but why does a simple torpedo not
do the same as the boune bomb, detonate against the dam wall at a pre set
depth?

Thanks in advance
H.

[Allen Epps]

In article >, Hamisha3
> wrote:

> Not to take anything away from BarnesWallis but why does a simple torpedo not
> do the same as the boune bomb, detonate against the dam wall at a pre set
> depth?
>
> Thanks in advance
> H.

Apparently the dams were protected by torpedo nets.

Pugs

[M. J. Powell]

In message >, Hamisha3
> writes
>Not to take anything away from BarnesWallis but why does a simple torpedo not
>do the same as the boune bomb, detonate against the dam wall at a pre set
>depth?

1. There may have been anti-torpedo nets.

2. Because there were no torpedoes carrying about 4 tons of H.E.

Mike
--
M.J.Powell

[ANDREW ROBERT BREEN]

In article >,
Hamisha3 > wrote:
>Not to take anything away from BarnesWallis but why does a simple torpedo not
>do the same as the boune bomb, detonate against the dam wall at a pre set
>depth?

The simple torpedo runs into a simple anti-torpedo net before it reaches
the dam. The bouncing bomb skips over the net. The germans had thought
of torpedo attack against the dams and laid nets. The bouncing bomb,
it may fairly be said, must have come as something of an unpleasent
suprise.

--
Andy Breen ~ Interplanetary Scintillation Research Group
http://users.aber.ac.uk/azb/
"Time has stopped, says the Black Lion clock
and eternity has begun" (Dylan Thomas)

[ANDREW ROBERT BREEN]

In article >,
M. J. Powell > wrote:
>In message >, Hamisha3
> writes
>>Not to take anything away from BarnesWallis but why does a simple torpedo not
>>do the same as the boune bomb, detonate against the dam wall at a pre set
>>depth?
>
>1. There may have been anti-torpedo nets.

*Were*, IIRC. Aren't they visible in some of the recon. photographs?

>2. Because there were no torpedoes carrying about 4 tons of H.E.

Could *possibly* have been done if you were content with a short/slow
run, maybe by starting with something like the big fortress torpedoes
which did for Bluecher in Oslofjord. It'd be a swine to lift, though
and probably even the lanc couldn't have hauled one that distance
and dropping it in a way which it was likely to survive would
be challenging to say the least and probably impossible.

--
Andy Breen ~ Interplanetary Scintillation Research Group
http://users.aber.ac.uk/azb/
"Time has stopped, says the Black Lion clock
and eternity has begun" (Dylan Thomas)

[Ken Duffey]

ANDREW ROBERT BREEN wrote:

> In article >,
> Hamisha3 > wrote:
> >Not to take anything away from BarnesWallis but why does a simple torpedo not
> >do the same as the boune bomb, detonate against the dam wall at a pre set
> >depth?
>
> The simple torpedo runs into a simple anti-torpedo net before it reaches
> the dam. The bouncing bomb skips over the net. The germans had thought
> of torpedo attack against the dams and laid nets. The bouncing bomb,
> it may fairly be said, must have come as something of an unpleasent
> suprise.
>
> --
> Andy Breen ~ Interplanetary Scintillation Research Group
> http://users.aber.ac.uk/azb/
> "Time has stopped, says the Black Lion clock
> and eternity has begun" (Dylan Thomas)

I think you have all missed the point of the bouncing bomb.

Not only did it skip over the anti-torpedo nets, but its backwards spin then drove
it against the wall of the dam as it sank - it was actually a depth charge, not a
'bomb'.

It was designed to explode at the BASE of the dam - underwater.

Trials had shown that exploding that amount of explosive against the top of the
dam had little effect - but put the same charge underwater - and the water acted
like a buffer - forcing the blast against the dam wall.

It multiplied the force of the charge by a large factor.

They also waited for the reservoir to be at its fullest before attacking - to get
maximum benefit from the resultant flooding.

So, given that you needed to place a charge underwater at the base of the dam, you
only had a few choices.

Use divers to place the charge - how to insert and recover them ??
Drop a mine - you couldn't do it accurately.
A torpedo would not work - because of the nets and its blast effect would be
neglible.
etc etc

There was an early plan to land a Sunderland flying boat - filled with explosives
- on the lake and 'taxy' it towards the dam - after the crew had taken to their
dinghies.

Thank heavens that scheme was rejected!

No, Barnes Wallis' brilliant scheme was the only practical way of doing it given
the technology at the time.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++++++++++
Ken Duffey - Flanker Freak & Russian Aviation Enthusiast
Flankers Website - http://www.flankers.co.uk/
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++++++++++

[Krztalizer]

Torpedos were thought of first, by both sides. So, the Jerries rigged
effective anti-torpedo nets in front of their dams, rendering the torpedo
threat moot. Enter Barnes Wallace....

[ANDREW ROBERT BREEN]

In article >,
Ken Duffey > wrote:
>ANDREW ROBERT BREEN wrote:
>> The simple torpedo runs into a simple anti-torpedo net before it reaches
>> the dam. The bouncing bomb skips over the net. The germans had thought

>I think you have all missed the point of the bouncing bomb.

Umm - request subtraction of "all" from that one, Ken :)

>Not only did it skip over the anti-torpedo nets, but its backwards spin then drove
>it against the wall of the dam as it sank - it was actually a depth charge, not a
>'bomb'.
>
>It was designed to explode at the BASE of the dam - underwater.

Not impossible, I'd have thought, to devise a torpedo that would drop its
head at end of run for the same effect. All added complication, of courrse
- and added weight, which is worse.

>Trials had shown that exploding that amount of explosive against the top of the
>dam had little effect - but put the same charge underwater - and the water acted
>like a buffer - forcing the blast against the dam wall.
>
>It multiplied the force of the charge by a large factor.

I've wondered whethewr a super-sized version of the Broach-Bomb - the
RN's super anti-ship weapon (so fearful a device that it was never used in
WW2, just in case the Germans picked up on the idea) would have worked
- this was a carefully-shaped free-fall bomb, designed to enter the water
off a ship's side, carry on underwater then rise up until it was resting
under then ship then <boom>. The 250lb was reckoned to be good for a
mission-kill (and impossible to protect against) on any ship. There were
also 1000lb and 2000lb versions.. (ouch). You'd need care in fusing
and obviously no point in having the bouyancy chamber, but a *big* broach
-bomb with a depth-fuse might have done it. Possibly not accurate enough.
The bouncing bomb was a brilliant solution to putting the bang where it
needed to be.

--
Andy Breen ~ Interplanetary Scintillation Research Group
http://users.aber.ac.uk/azb/
"Time has stopped, says the Black Lion clock
and eternity has begun" (Dylan Thomas)

[M. H. Greaves]

Because the germans had put torpedo nets, either that or the RAF had thought
that torpedo nets would be there, he needed the bomb to hit the wall, then
sink to a certain depth before exploding, the idea being that the explosion
itself wouldnt actually burst the dam but it would cause lets say a space,
where the explosion was, and the water pressure as it took up the space
would do the damage., to do this, the bomb had to actually be ON the wall,
and by it hitting the wall at above the surface then sinking down the wall
this could be achieved.
"Hamisha3" > wrote in message
...
> Not to take anything away from BarnesWallis but why does a simple torpedo
not
> do the same as the boune bomb, detonate against the dam wall at a pre
set
> depth?
>
> Thanks in advance
> H.

[Kirk Stant]

(Krztalizer) wrote in message >...
> Torpedos were thought of first, by both sides. So, the Jerries rigged
> effective anti-torpedo nets in front of their dams, rendering the torpedo
> threat moot. Enter Barnes Wallace....


Didn't the US Navy use Skyraiders (AD-2s or -4s, I believe) to
successfully torpedo a dam in North Korea during that war?

Guess the NKs didn't read RAM...

Kirk

[Krztalizer]

>
>Didn't the US Navy use Skyraiders (AD-2s or -4s, I believe) to
>successfully torpedo a dam in North Korea during that war?

those rice-paper torpedo nets were surprisingly effective during testing, but
failed miserably in operational use.

>Guess the NKs didn't read RAM...

They get their info from Channel Only One; "All the news you'll ever get to
hear".

v/r
Gordon
<====(A+C====>
USN SAR

Donate your memories - write a note on the back and send your old photos to a
reputable museum, don't take them with you when you're gone.

[Marc Reeve]

Kirk Stant > wrote:
> (Krztalizer) wrote in message
> >...
> > Torpedos were thought of first, by both sides. So, the Jerries rigged
> > effective anti-torpedo nets in front of their dams, rendering the torpedo
> > threat moot. Enter Barnes Wallace....
>
>
> Didn't the US Navy use Skyraiders (AD-2s or -4s, I believe) to
> successfully torpedo a dam in North Korea during that war?
>
Yep. Here's a photograph:
http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/images/g420000/g428678.jpg

Apparently they blew off one floodgate and damaged another.

The dam, however, remained intact.

-Marc

--
Marc Reeve
actual email address after removal of 4s & spaces is
c4m4r4a4m4a4n a4t c4r4u4z4i4o d4o4t c4o4m

[Mycroft]

If you watch the 1953? film it pretty much explains the reasoning behind the
bomb, the torpedo nets plus they needed a minimum of 5000lb of high
explosives to have a chance of breaching the dams. In an interview given by
Wallace he stated that his famous 10 & 5 ton "Grandslam" an Tallboy bombs
were originally considered but would only work with a direct hit, any sort
of near miss would do no damge because of the water cushioning effect.
Interestingly the scale model dam used by wallace complete with test
blast damage still exists in the Grounds of the UK Building Research
Establishment in Hertfordshire just out side Watford in the UK.

Myc

[Ken Duffey]

Mycroft wrote:

> If you watch the 1953? film it pretty much explains the reasoning behind the
> bomb, the torpedo nets plus they needed a minimum of 5000lb of high
> explosives to have a chance of breaching the dams. In an interview given by
> Wallace he stated that his famous 10 & 5 ton "Grandslam" an Tallboy bombs
> were originally considered but would only work with a direct hit, any sort
> of near miss would do no damge because of the water cushioning effect.
> Interestingly the scale model dam used by wallace complete with test
> blast damage still exists in the Grounds of the UK Building Research
> Establishment in Hertfordshire just out side Watford in the UK.
>
> Myc

Just a nitpick.......

It's Barnes Wallis - Wallace was the guy played by Mel Gibson in Braveheart
!!!!!!

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++++++++++
Ken Duffey - Flanker Freak & Russian Aviation Enthusiast
Flankers Website - http://www.flankers.co.uk/
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++++++++++

[Mycroft]

Oooooohhhhh eeeeeererrr, I ave treblle tribble wid my Wallllllllacccceess
Whoops Wallis's.

Myc


"Ken Duffey" > wrote in message
...
> Mycroft wrote:
>
> > If you watch the 1953? film it pretty much explains the reasoning behind
the
> > bomb, the torpedo nets plus they needed a minimum of 5000lb of high
> > explosives to have a chance of breaching the dams. In an interview given
by
> > Wallace he stated that his famous 10 & 5 ton "Grandslam" an Tallboy
bombs
> > were originally considered but would only work with a direct hit, any
sort
> > of near miss would do no damge because of the water cushioning effect.
> > Interestingly the scale model dam used by wallace complete with
test
> > blast damage still exists in the Grounds of the UK Building Research
> > Establishment in Hertfordshire just out side Watford in the UK.
> >
> > Myc
>
> Just a nitpick.......
>
> It's Barnes Wallis - Wallace was the guy played by Mel Gibson in
Braveheart
> !!!!!!
>
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++++++++++
> Ken Duffey - Flanker Freak & Russian Aviation Enthusiast
> Flankers Website - http://www.flankers.co.uk/
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++++++++++
>
>

[Jonathan Stilwell]

"Mycroft" > wrote in message
...
> If you watch the 1953? film it pretty much explains the reasoning behind
the
> bomb, the torpedo nets plus they needed a minimum of 5000lb of high
> explosives to have a chance of breaching the dams. In an interview given
by
> Wallace he stated that his famous 10 & 5 ton "Grandslam" an Tallboy bombs
> were originally considered but would only work with a direct hit, any sort
> of near miss would do no damge because of the water cushioning effect.

IIRC, the Paul Brickhill book mentions the 12,000 lb Tallboy being used
against the dam at Kembs in Germany; afraid that the sluice gates would be
opened and flood the area of the Allied advance, the powers that be
despatched 617 Sqn to drain the reservoir first. The bombs were dropped from
low level with delayed fuses and succeeded in destroying the sluice gates,
for the loss of two aircraft.

Jon.

[Krztalizer]

>
>Just a nitpick.......
>
>It's Barnes Wallis - Wallace was the guy played by Mel Gibson in Braveheart
>!!!!!!

I remember that one - his dog was named Gromit, right? :))

[Rich]

(Marc Reeve) wrote in message
> Apparently they blew off one floodgate and damaged another.
>
> The dam, however, remained intact.
>
> -Marc

Nice photo. The gates were the targets, not the dam itself.

Rich

[B2431]

>From: (Rich)
>Date: 2/19/2004 6:08 PM Central Standard Time
>Message-id: >
>
(Marc Reeve) wrote in message
>> Apparently they blew off one floodgate and damaged another.
>>
>> The dam, however, remained intact.
>>
>> -Marc
>
>Nice photo. The gates were the targets, not the dam itself.
>
>Rich
>
Hey, watch the dam language.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

[Eunometic]

"Emmanuel Gustin" > wrote in message >...
> "Hamisha3" > wrote in message
> ...
>
> > Not to take anything away from BarnesWallis but why does a simple torpedo
> not
> > do the same as the boune bomb, detonate against the dam wall at a pre
> set
> > depth?
>
> I was just reading 'Bombs Gone', an interesting history of
> British bombs. Chapter 7 (well, I had not reached that) is
> devoted to the dam-busting bomb, as well as appendices
> 4 and 5.
>
> Gravity dams are very hard to destroy because a small crack
> will be closed by the water pressure, instead of opened.
> A large hole must be made. Trials on miniature dams and
> on a disused dam in Wales indicated that it would take 6,500
> pounds of HE exploding in direct contact, of 30,000 pounds
> exploding at a distance of 50 ft. The replacement of Amatol
> by Torpex HE later allowed the bomb to be smaller. Still,
> this was much more than a torpedo could contain: The Mk.XII
> torpedo contained 545 lb of Torpex, about 1/10 of what was
> required.
>
> The RAF never bothered to properly document a bomb that
> was modified almost every other day and was used only once,
> so the best documents are apparently of German origin,
> descriptions of an unexploded example recovered from
> Fl.Lt Barlow's aircraft. 'Upkeep' weighed around 3900 kg
> and contained 2600kg of Torpex, had three water pressure
> fuses and a time fuse. Backspun at around 500 rpm and
> dropped 400 to 500 yards from its targt, it bounced four
> or five times before it hit the dams and sunk against it.

One of the side effects of the Dam busters on German FLAK was the
instigation of a 5.5cm FLAK cannon that could with one hit bring down
a heavy bomber and opperate effectively from short range to medium
altitudes with high accuracy and rate of fire. The weapon was to be
servo driven and automatically pointed by computer. It had a high
rate of fire and low recoil be the action of firing of the cannon
while the barrel was still returning to its home position: thus the
subsequent recoil would have to arrest the forward motion of the gun
as well as overcome the recoil shock. It was nearin completion or
entering production as the war ended.

[Chad Irby]

In article >,
(B2431) wrote:

> Hey, watch the dam language.

Sorry, I've been under a lot of pressure lately.

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations.
Slam on brakes accordingly.

[[email protected]]

Chad Irby > wrote:

>In article >,
> (B2431) wrote:
>
>> Hey, watch the dam language.
>
>Sorry, I've been under a lot of pressure lately.

Maybe a little laxative would be in order?
--

-Gord.

[Rich]

(Rich) wrote in message >...
> (Marc Reeve) wrote in message
> > Apparently they blew off one floodgate and damaged another.
> >
> > The dam, however, remained intact.
> >
> > -Marc
>
> Nice photo. The gates were the targets, not the dam itself.
>
> Rich

from my post of 15 Oct 02

Eight AD-4 Skyraiders from the USS Princeton (CV-37), 5 from VA-195
and 3 from VC-35, led by Cdr R.C. Merrick (CAG19) carrying Mk 13
aerial torpedoes were launched on 1 May 1951 to attack the Hwachon
dam. They were escorted by 12 F4U-4 Corsairs from VF-192 and VF-193
armed with VT fuzed bombs for suppression. The attack began at
approximately 1130 hours (local) with the Corsairs making their
suppression runs. The Skyraiders made their attacks in pairs. All
eight torpedoes were dropped. One ran erratic; one was a dud. The
remaining six hit their intended target, the dam's sluice gates,
destroying one and putting a ten-foot hole in a second.

The attack was made because of 8th Army's concerns that the CCF would
be able to control the depth on the Pukhan and Han Rivers ... opening
the sluice gates and flooding the rivers t protect themselves ...
closing the gates and lowering river levels to facilitate their own
attacks.

8th Army had faced the situation before. In January ‘51 attacks by
USAF B-29's failed to damage the sluice gates. Although another
strike was requested, Far East AF considered the dam to be impervious
and rejected the request. In early April, 8th Army's concerns became
real when the CCF opened the sluice gates and flooded the Pukhan
River, raising the water level several feet within one hour, washing
away one engineer bridge and damaging another. On April 16th, 8th
Army captured the dam, but engineers were unable to jam it's sluice
gates open. The CCF counterattacked in force and 8th army forces
driven away from the reservoir.

On 30 April six AD-4's from VA-195 had tried to take out the sluice
gates with 2000 lb bombs. While blasting a hole in the dam, they were
unable to damage the sluice gates. The attack of 1 May was the
successful follow up to that day's disappointment. VA-195 proudly
carries the name ‘Dambusters' as a result of this action.

Regards,

Rich


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Google Home - - Business Solutions - Services & Tools - Jobs, Press, &
Help

©2004 Google

[Peter Kemp]

On Fri, 20 Feb 2004 04:21:51 GMT, Chad Irby > wrote:

>In article >,
> (B2431) wrote:
>
>> Hey, watch the dam language.
>
>Sorry, I've been under a lot of pressure lately.

Great, one bad joke trigger another, and then the floodgates open.

Peter Kemp

[Chad Irby]

In article >,
Peter Kemp > wrote:

> On Fri, 20 Feb 2004 04:21:51 GMT, Chad Irby > wrote:
>
> >In article >,
> > (B2431) wrote:
> >
> >> Hey, watch the dam language.
> >
> >Sorry, I've been under a lot of pressure lately.
>
> Great, one bad joke trigger another, and then the floodgates open.

Considering the subject of the thread, maybe we should just skip it.

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations.
Slam on brakes accordingly.

[Dave Kearton]

"Chad Irby" > wrote in message
...
| In article >,
| Peter Kemp > wrote:

| > Great, one bad joke trigger another, and then the floodgates open.
|
| Considering the subject of the thread, maybe we should just skip it.
|
| --
| cirby at cfl.rr.com
|



This is so sad, I didn't even _see_ Peter's joke until I saw Chad's
response - it IS saturday morning here, you know ...



It tends to put a different spin on things



Cheers


Dave Kearton

[Errol Cavit]

"Peter Kemp" > wrote in message
...
> On Fri, 20 Feb 2004 04:21:51 GMT, Chad Irby > wrote:
>
> >In article >,
> > (B2431) wrote:
> >
> >> Hey, watch the dam language.
> >
> >Sorry, I've been under a lot of pressure lately.
>
> Great, one bad joke trigger another, and then the floodgates open.
>
It's bad when things go over the top.


--
Errol Cavit |
"You should never bet against anything in science at odds of more than about
10^12 to 1."
Attributed to Ernest Rutherford.

[Peter Stickney]

In article >,
Peter Kemp > writes:
> On Fri, 20 Feb 2004 04:21:51 GMT, Chad Irby > wrote:
>
>>In article >,
>> (B2431) wrote:
>>
>>> Hey, watch the dam language.
>>
>>Sorry, I've been under a lot of pressure lately.
>
> Great, one bad joke trigger another, and then the floodgates open.

Man, that's, like, deep.

--
Pete Stickney
A strong conviction that something must be done is the parent of many
bad measures. -- Daniel Webster

[John Cook]

On Sat, 21 Feb 2004 12:46:52 +1300, "Errol Cavit" >
wrote:

>"Peter Kemp" > wrote in message
...
>> On Fri, 20 Feb 2004 04:21:51 GMT, Chad Irby > wrote:
>>
>> >In article >,
>> > (B2431) wrote:
>> >
>> >> Hey, watch the dam language.
>> >
>> >Sorry, I've been under a lot of pressure lately.
>>
>> Great, one bad joke trigger another, and then the floodgates open.
>>
>It's bad when things go over the top.

Don't be such a Mohne, or your Ruhr the day you mentioned it.

How low can you get!!..

Cheers

[Ken Duffey]

Peter Stickney wrote:

> In article >,
> Peter Kemp > writes:
> > On Fri, 20 Feb 2004 04:21:51 GMT, Chad Irby > wrote:
> >
> >>In article >,
> >> (B2431) wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hey, watch the dam language.
> >>
> >>Sorry, I've been under a lot of pressure lately.
> >
> > Great, one bad joke trigger another, and then the floodgates open.
>
> Man, that's, like, deep.
>
> --
> Pete Stickney
> A strong conviction that something must be done is the parent of many
> bad measures. -- Daniel Webster

I don't suppose any of you guys from overseas ever saw a great ad put out
in the UK by Carling Black Label ??

Carling makes a lager beer - and the thrust of their ads at the time had
someone doing some spectacular stunt or achieving something - all had the
punchline 'I bet he drinks Carling Black Label'

For instance, they had a good-looking guy driving a Ferrari, surrounding by
gorgeous girls etc etc - all done with consumate ease. His jealous mates
would grudgingly admire him - with the line- 'I bet he drinks.........etc'

Anyway, Carling put out an ad showing a German guard patrolling the top of
the Moehne dam on a cold night. He hears the sound on an aircraft....

In the Lancaster we see the RAF crew preparing to drop the mine, there is a
voiceover in a typically clipped British accent over the intercom (with a
crackling, echo sound) - "OK skipper, steady, left a bit, steady, down a
bit - bombs away".

The bomb is dropped and bounces towards the dam.........

The German guard on the dam ramparts, puts his rifle down, and as the bomb
bounces towards him, puts his hands up and palms the bomb away - like a
goalkeeper pushing the ball over the net!

This happens two or three time - as he 'saves' the dam - then comes the
punchline 'I bet he drinks Carling Black Label' !!!!!

The ad was very well made - in B&W - with wartime/training footage of the
bomb etc - all very real looking. In fact so real, that when you first see
it, it looks like a documentary - up until the guard palms the bomb away!!!

The very last bit of film shows the Lancaster climbing away - and bomb
aimer - without his mask on - talking in that same clipped voice that you
heard over the intercom - the joke being that he really does talk like that
!!!

(try talking into your cupped hands in a British wartime accent to create
the effect of an intercom and you will get what I mean)

The ad ran for only a few weeks - the veterans associations complained and
it was withdrawn.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++++++++++
Ken Duffey - Flanker Freak & Russian Aviation Enthusiast
Flankers Website - http://www.flankers.co.uk/
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++++++++++

[Robert Briggs]

Krztalizer wrote:

> > It's Barnes Wallis - Wallace was the guy played by Gibson ...

> I remember that one - his dog was named Gromit, right? :))

Nah!

Gibson's dog, because of his colour (and the fact that "political
correctness" hadn't been invented in '43), was named ******.

[Peter Kemp]

On Mon, 23 Feb 2004 18:35:45 +0000, Robert Briggs
> wrote:

>Krztalizer wrote:
>
>> > It's Barnes Wallis - Wallace was the guy played by Gibson ...
>
>> I remember that one - his dog was named Gromit, right? :))
>
>Nah!
>
>Gibson's dog, because of his colour (and the fact that "political
>correctness" hadn't been invented in '43), was named ******.

Did ****** like Wensleydale as well?

[Richard Brooks]

Robert Briggs wrote:
> Krztalizer wrote:
>
>>> It's Barnes Wallis - Wallace was the guy played by Gibson ...
>
Barnes Wallace was quite clever on the family front. His son's name happens
to be ..... Barnes Wallis.

[snipped]

Richard.

[Tacitus]

Didn't they do another version with the dog named Digger for the US?

"Robert Briggs" > wrote in message
...
> Krztalizer wrote:
>
> > > It's Barnes Wallis - Wallace was the guy played by Gibson ...
>
> > I remember that one - his dog was named Gromit, right? :))
>
> Nah!
>
> Gibson's dog, because of his colour (and the fact that "political
> correctness" hadn't been invented in '43), was named ******.

[PPowondra]

>Subject: Re: dam busters
>From: "Tacitus"
>Date: 2/23/2004 20:42 Eastern Standard Time

>Didn't they do another version with the dog named Digger for the US?
>
Actually they called the dog Sambo
here in the US. It was only a couple
of years ago that I learned that my
copy of "The Dam Busters" was
different from the UK version of
the book, wherein the dog's true
name is given. As far as the movie,
on the rare showings on TV, they
even dub out the name Sambo.

Paul

[Chad Irby]

In article >,
(PPowondra) wrote:

> >Subject: Re: dam busters
> >From: "Tacitus"
> >Date: 2/23/2004 20:42 Eastern Standard Time
>
> >Didn't they do another version with the dog named Digger for the US?
> >
> Actually they called the dog Sambo here in the US. It was only a
> couple of years ago that I learned that my copy of "The Dam Busters"
> was different from the UK version of the book, wherein the dog's true
> name is given. As far as the movie, on the rare showings on TV, they
> even dub out the name Sambo.

I still think the book would make a *great* current movie or miniseries,
after successes like "Band of Brothers." Effects tech would let them
recreate some of the more interesting missions later in the war, too.
I'd like to see a "live" version of the Grand Slam/Tallboy missions,
like the Bielefeld Viaduct Grand Slam raid or some of hte U-boat pen
hits.

They'd definitely have to skip over the whole dog name thing, though...

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations.
Slam on brakes accordingly.

[David McArthur]

Did anyone see the TV show earlier this yr where they put a group of
RAF bods in a Lanc simulator and asked them to re-create the raid,
including navaigation to the target and the bomb run - really
interesting show, well put together.

David.

(ANDREW ROBERT BREEN) wrote in message >...
> In article >,
> Hamisha3 > wrote:
> >Not to take anything away from BarnesWallis but why does a simple torpedo not
> >do the same as the boune bomb, detonate against the dam wall at a pre set
> >depth?
>
> The simple torpedo runs into a simple anti-torpedo net before it reaches
> the dam. The bouncing bomb skips over the net. The germans had thought
> of torpedo attack against the dams and laid nets. The bouncing bomb,
> it may fairly be said, must have come as something of an unpleasent
> suprise.

[David McArthur]

One of the great commercials (all the best ones are adverising ...beer!)

Cheers
David

Ken Duffey > wrote in message >...
> Peter Stickney wrote:
>
> > In article >,
> > Peter Kemp > writes:
> > > On Fri, 20 Feb 2004 04:21:51 GMT, Chad Irby > wrote:
> > >
> > >>In article >,
> > >> (B2431) wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> Hey, watch the dam language.
> > >>
> > >>Sorry, I've been under a lot of pressure lately.
> > >
> > > Great, one bad joke trigger another, and then the floodgates open.
> >
> > Man, that's, like, deep.
> >
> > --
> > Pete Stickney
> > A strong conviction that something must be done is the parent of many
> > bad measures. -- Daniel Webster
>
> I don't suppose any of you guys from overseas ever saw a great ad put out
> in the UK by Carling Black Label ??
>
> Carling makes a lager beer - and the thrust of their ads at the time had
> someone doing some spectacular stunt or achieving something - all had the
> punchline 'I bet he drinks Carling Black Label'
>
> For instance, they had a good-looking guy driving a Ferrari, surrounding by
> gorgeous girls etc etc - all done with consumate ease. His jealous mates
> would grudgingly admire him - with the line- 'I bet he drinks.........etc'
>
> Anyway, Carling put out an ad showing a German guard patrolling the top of
> the Moehne dam on a cold night. He hears the sound on an aircraft....
>
> In the Lancaster we see the RAF crew preparing to drop the mine, there is a
> voiceover in a typically clipped British accent over the intercom (with a
> crackling, echo sound) - "OK skipper, steady, left a bit, steady, down a
> bit - bombs away".
>
> The bomb is dropped and bounces towards the dam.........
>
> The German guard on the dam ramparts, puts his rifle down, and as the bomb
> bounces towards him, puts his hands up and palms the bomb away - like a
> goalkeeper pushing the ball over the net!
>
> This happens two or three time - as he 'saves' the dam - then comes the
> punchline 'I bet he drinks Carling Black Label' !!!!!
>
> The ad was very well made - in B&W - with wartime/training footage of the
> bomb etc - all very real looking. In fact so real, that when you first see
> it, it looks like a documentary - up until the guard palms the bomb away!!!
>
> The very last bit of film shows the Lancaster climbing away - and bomb
> aimer - without his mask on - talking in that same clipped voice that you
> heard over the intercom - the joke being that he really does talk like that
> !!!
>
> (try talking into your cupped hands in a British wartime accent to create
> the effect of an intercom and you will get what I mean)
>
> The ad ran for only a few weeks - the veterans associations complained and
> it was withdrawn.
>
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++++++++++
> Ken Duffey - Flanker Freak & Russian Aviation Enthusiast
> Flankers Website - http://www.flankers.co.uk/
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++++++++++

[Ken Duffey]

PPowondra wrote:

> >Subject: Re: dam busters
> >From: "Tacitus"
> >Date: 2/23/2004 20:42 Eastern Standard Time
>
> >Didn't they do another version with the dog named Digger for the US?
> >
> Actually they called the dog Sambo
> here in the US. It was only a couple
> of years ago that I learned that my
> copy of "The Dam Busters" was
> different from the UK version of
> the book, wherein the dog's true
> name is given. As far as the movie,
> on the rare showings on TV, they
> even dub out the name Sambo.
>
> Paul

I also thought they'd called it 'digger' when shown on TV ??

At least here in the UK they did - or is my memory playing tricks -
again!

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++++++++++
Ken Duffey - Flanker Freak & Russian Aviation Enthusiast
Flankers Website - http://www.flankers.co.uk/
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++++++++++

[James Hart]

David McArthur wrote:
> Did anyone see the TV show earlier this yr where they put a group of
> RAF bods in a Lanc simulator and asked them to re-create the raid,
> including navaigation to the target and the bomb run - really
> interesting show, well put together.
>
> David.

There's also another one where they put some recruits through the Spitfire
training program.

--
James...
www.jameshart.co.uk

[Jim Doyle]

"James Hart" > wrote in message
...
> David McArthur wrote:
> > Did anyone see the TV show earlier this yr where they put a group of
> > RAF bods in a Lanc simulator and asked them to re-create the raid,
> > including navaigation to the target and the bomb run - really
> > interesting show, well put together.
> >
> > David.
>
> There's also another one where they put some recruits through the Spitfire
> training program.

A good mate of mine was on that show, Ben WB (the ugly UAS guy). The joke at
the time was since he is such a bad pilot, he'd been streamed vintage.

Jim D

> --
> James...
> www.jameshart.co.uk
>
>

[Richard Brooks]

Ken Duffey wrote:
> PPowondra wrote:
>
>>> Subject: Re: dam busters
>>> From: "Tacitus"
>>> Date: 2/23/2004 20:42 Eastern Standard Time
>>
>>> Didn't they do another version with the dog named Digger for the US?
>>>
>> Actually they called the dog Sambo
>> here in the US. It was only a couple
>> of years ago that I learned that my
>> copy of "The Dam Busters" was
>> different from the UK version of
>> the book, wherein the dog's true
>> name is given. As far as the movie,
>> on the rare showings on TV, they
>> even dub out the name Sambo.
>>
>> Paul
>
> I also thought they'd called it 'digger' when shown on TV ??
>
> At least here in the UK they did - or is my memory playing tricks -
> again!

No it's not! They did re-jig the name in a previous showing but I think in
the more recent showing they went back to the original name.

Richard.

>
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++++++++++
> Ken Duffey - Flanker Freak & Russian Aviation Enthusiast
> Flankers Website - http://www.flankers.co.uk/
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++++++++++

[PPowondra]

>Subject: Re: dam busters
>From: "Richard Brooks"



>No it's not! They did re-jig the name in a previous showing but I think in
>the more recent showing they went back to the original name.
>
>Richard.

"Digger" sounds like how someone
would say the original name if they
had a touch of the sniffles...

Paul

[Krztalizer]

>
>"Digger" sounds like how someone
>would say the original name if they
>had a touch of the sniffles...

"Digger" was an uncomplementary name for either dark-skinned or mixed race
folks in Australia, or at least it was in the past. Perhaps it was the local
equiv of "Sambo", who, when I was a kid, was a savvy and rather brave youg kid
that defeated a hungry pride of lions using only his wits. How that ever got
turned into a racial slur, I will never know!

v/r
Gordon
<====(A+C====>
USN SAR

Donate your memories - write a note on the back and send your old photos to a
reputable museum, don't take them with you when you're gone.

[Errol Cavit]

"Krztalizer" > wrote in message
...
> ><re PC versions of Gibson's dog ******>
> >"Digger" sounds like how someone
> >would say the original name if they
> >had a touch of the sniffles...
>
> "Digger" was an uncomplementary name for either dark-skinned or mixed race
> folks in Australia, or at least it was in the past.

First time I've seen that version! More typical is this example:

From 'Anzacs at War: The Story of Australian and New Zealand Battles' John
Laffin (C)1965

"The term 'Digger' is not so easy to pin down. It became common among
Australian and New Zealand soldiers in France in 1917, but was probably in
use during 1916. Bean [Australian official historian] said that the word
evolved from the professional gum-diggers[1] of New Zealand. Many old
soldiers believe that the word came about as a natural result of their
trench-digging activities in France and Flanders [2]. Others claim that some
West Australian soldiers, gold-miners in civilian life, started the word on
its way. At one time it was slang expression for a plodder, which could make
it an apt term for an infantryman. Whatever its beginning, the word has a
much stronger connection with Australian soldiers than with New Zealanders,
who were more commonly known to allies and even to enemies as 'Kiwis'.[3]"

[1] the gum involved here is from the kauri tree. The gum was generally
recovered from swampy ground, hence the need to dig. Googling on 'kauri gum'
will find you lots of people eager to sell you examples, as well as a better
explanation.

[2] I've seen a claim that it was particularly linked with the WWI Maori
Pioneer Battalion.

[3] 'Enzeds' was also in use in WWI.


--
Errol Cavit | | "The Battle of Romani was the
decisive engagement of the entire Sinai and Palestine Campaign. Before
Romani British policy, strategy and tactics were all defensive, those of the
Turks were offensive. The stand of the 1st and 2nd Light Horse brigades and
the counter-attack of the New Zealanders reversed the situation." Anzacs at
War, J Laffin

[Richard Brooks]

PPowondra wrote:
>> Subject: Re: dam busters
>> From: "Richard Brooks"
>
>
>
>> No it's not! They did re-jig the name in a previous showing but I
>> think in the more recent showing they went back to the original name.
>>
>> Richard.
>
> "Digger" sounds like how someone
> would say the original name if they
> had a touch of the sniffles...
>
> Paul

They cut out the WAAF with the cold who spilt the coffee then said "oh
boddocks!"

Richard.

[Richard Brooks]

Krztalizer wrote:
>> "Digger" sounds like how someone
>> would say the original name if they
>> had a touch of the sniffles...
>
> "Digger" was an uncomplementary name for either dark-skinned or mixed
> race folks in Australia, or at least it was in the past. Perhaps it
> was the local equiv of "Sambo", who, when I was a kid, was a savvy
> and rather brave youg kid that defeated a hungry pride of lions using
> only his wits. How that ever got turned into a racial slur, I will
> never know!
>
> v/r
> Gordon
> <====(A+C====>
> USN SAR

Sadly, everything gets turned into something derogative as I remember it
being turned into a taunt from the white neighbour against his black
neighbour on the crap Brit comedy of some decades ago entitled "Love Thy
Neighbour"! The point of this comedy (like the Alf Garnett character in
"'til Death Us Do Part") was to take the **** out of the bigotted white male
but sometimes these things can be too subtle for most folks.

http://www.phill.co.uk/videos/garnett.html

Richard.

[Eunometic]

(Krztalizer) wrote in message >...
> >
> >"Digger" sounds like how someone
> >would say the original name if they
> >had a touch of the sniffles...
>
> "Digger" was an uncomplementary name for either dark-skinned or mixed race
> folks in Australia, or at least it was in the past. Perhaps it was the local
> equiv of "Sambo", who, when I was a kid, was a savvy and rather brave youg kid
> that defeated a hungry pride of lions using only his wits. How that ever got
> turned into a racial slur, I will never know!

On the contrary. "Digger" in Australia is very complimentary and
affectionate term though it is somewhat an anachronism that is applied
to older war vetrans.

I believe the origin can be traced the Goldfield rush of Australia
where the term also became associated with the Eureka Stockage
Rebellion. (Basically men had stopped servicing the needs of the
Elites and there was a manpower shortage as men worked for Gold and
their own fortune: this was seen as a problem by the Government and
tensions built up between the Golddiggers and the Government which
wanted more work and discouraged mining with buerocratic measures)

However the term is associated most strongly with the soldiers of the
ANZAC (Australian and New Zealand Army Core) who in 1915 were landed
due to British aristocratic military incompetence at Galliolli into
whithering fire in a ferrociously defended turkish beach whose
defensive strategy was designed by the Germans for the Turks. The
ANZACS suffered heroic losses while displaying courage and
determination. "Digger" I believe refers to the act of digging a
trench.

The day of the landings and the events sorounding it is solemly
celebrated every year in Australia as a national holiday as it marks a
turning point in History and perhaps a point at which many Australians
saw them self more Australian than British. The American equivalent
would be Iwo Jima or the Alamo.


Almost any term, outside of the frame work of political correctness,
that a person of European-Western genetic and civilisational hertiage
uses if it can be construed or contextualised as 'racist' will be
construed or contextualised as racist. It simply provides moral
leverage to extract both protections and priveledges and we live in a
well peversely discredited guilt ridden western culture accutely
sensitive to such sophistry.

[Howard Berkowitz]

In article >,
(Eunometic) wrote:

> (Krztalizer) wrote in message
> >...
> > >
> > >"Digger" sounds like how someone
> > >would say the original name if they
> > >had a touch of the sniffles...
> >
> > "Digger" was an uncomplementary name for either dark-skinned or mixed
> > race
> > folks in Australia, or at least it was in the past. Perhaps it was the
> > local
> > equiv of "Sambo", who, when I was a kid, was a savvy and rather brave
> > youg kid
> > that defeated a hungry pride of lions using only his wits. How that
> > ever got
> > turned into a racial slur, I will never know!
>
> On the contrary. "Digger" in Australia is very complimentary and
> affectionate term though it is somewhat an anachronism that is applied
> to older war vetrans.

> However the term is associated most strongly with the soldiers of the
> ANZAC (Australian and New Zealand Army Core) who in 1915 were landed
> due to British aristocratic military incompetence at Galliolli into
> whithering fire in a ferrociously defended turkish beach whose
> defensive strategy was designed by the Germans for the Turks. The
> ANZACS suffered heroic losses while displaying courage and
> determination. "Digger" I believe refers to the act of digging a
> trench.

From my non-ANZAC position, if anything, you understate their
accomplishments. Even in spite of being against some of the most
difficult opposition, their command and control was vastly superior to
that of the other landing forces. Battalion/brigade commanders appeared
to know what they were doing.
>
> The day of the landings and the events sorounding it is solemly
> celebrated every year in Australia as a national holiday as it marks a
> turning point in History and perhaps a point at which many Australians
> saw them self more Australian than British. The American equivalent
> would be Iwo Jima or the Alamo.

I'd respectfully put it somewhere in between. The similarity to Iwo
Jima is that they made a relatively unopposed landing and ran into
vicious opposition as they tried to move inland--and did to some extent.
As opposed to Iwo and other WWII operations, the doctrine of amphibious
operations simply was too immature for there to have been real success.
With no disrespect, the ANZAC force managed a very tough withdrawal, as
opposed to the near-panic on other landing zones.

On the other hand, as opposed to the Alamo, there were survivors.