"Vanishing American Air Superiority"

Alexander wrote:
Ken S. Tucker wrote:
On Mar 17, 3:38 pm, "Paul J. Adam"
wrote:
In message
, Ken
S. Tucker writes

I was told the Nazi's could have easily taken England, no sweat.
In the same way that the Japanese could have conquered the US in five
days in 1941 if they'd only bothered to try? (Land in California,
commandeer weapons and transport from the cowardly fleeing populace,
race the bad news to Washington, impose Imperial hegemony, declare
victory while forcibly recruiting all white females between seven and
seventy for "recreational services"?)

I think whoever was telling you this, was pulling your leg so hard it's
still out of its socket, and they're still telling the story of "some
clueless guy called Tucker" who didn't just swallow the hook but took
the line, and the sinker, and tried to eat the rod as well.

I think the source is reliable, my Old Boy was a WW2 vet spook who
had more access to info than any historian will ever get, and
explained
it to me. That said, I don't want to play 'what if' games, ok.
But I'll let you in on a secret, the Brits had thousands of cannons
after
Dunkirk, available for Nazi photo recon, made of wood logs, that's all
the Brits had was bluff, but I think it was good in any case, the
croats
figured it was real.

The Brits, had a few rifles left after Dunkirk, 2 or 3.
Paint a few hundred barges black and gliders too, move out at 10 or
11 pm, and by 5 am the king is being raped in the ass by Nazi's.
As I said, no sweat.
But what ****un good is the that Island to Hitlers greater scheme,
nothing, but we know now he made a strategic military error, and
as Chruchill promised his bombers burned the black heart of Germany,
that was very unpleasant to all who were involved.
I request a polite response, as I gave.
Ken

You mean all those B17's, B24's, B25's, B26's etc were all Churchill's?
Don't forget the B29's. I have a few magazine clips showing thousands of
Aircraft at a time flying over Germany. And with US Markings. Some how I
do believe it was a Joint operation. I do wonder where all that avgas
came from?

Not very good at history, are you? Dunkirk evacuation was 24 May - 4
June 1940. The U.S. aircraft you mention didn't get to the UK until 1942
and B-29 never operated from there. The Brits had been striking the
Nazis for some time before the U.S. got there. As for your "magazine
clips" do try to think for a bit, the U.S. flew in daylight, the UK flew
at night. It was hard to photograph aircraft at night.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

On Mar 18, 1:32 pm, "Paul J. Adam"
wrote:
In message
, Ken
S. Tucker writes

On Mar 17, 3:38 pm, "Paul J. Adam"
wrote:
I think the source is reliable, my Old Boy was a WW2 vet spook who
had more access to info than any historian will ever get, and
explained
it to me.

That's one of maybe a dozen people, then. Why not just tell us his name?

But I'll let you in on a secret, the Brits had thousands of cannons
after
Dunkirk, available for Nazi photo recon, made of wood logs, that's all
the Brits had was bluff, but I think it was good in any case, the
croats
figured it was real.

Croats? Whiskey tango foxtrot, interrogative?

We certainly had a big deception plan going in Kent... in 1944 to create
FUSAG and keep the Germans waiting in the Pas de Calais.

As far as artillery went, *immediately* after Dunkirk - on 8 June - we
had about 400 tanks, 420 field guns and 163 medium and heavy guns
*immediately* available for use. We had fifteen infantry and one
armoured division in being.

Through June, the Navy brought back to the UK about another 200,000
troops, and some of their artillery and vehicles. (Common myth - Dunkirk
was by no means the end of the fighting in France)

The Brits, had a few rifles left after Dunkirk, 2 or 3.

About 70,000 after the Army's needs had been met.

Paint a few hundred barges black and gliders too, move out at 10 or
11 pm, and by 5 am the king is being raped in the ass by Nazi's.

Move out at 10pm in your three-knot barges, and by 5am you're not even
half-way across the Channel.

You have, however, met and felt the fire of the Auxiliary Patrol, and by
this point you're seeing destroyers by the dozen... and none of them
German.

I think you need to re-examine the credentials of your Old Boy. He
wasn't related to Baron Castleshortt VC, was he?
Paul

You have the benefit of wearing rose colored glasses, but be careful,
you may end up paying for "easy" wars in Iraq, Afghanistan and ...
OTOH, it's good to have realistic hard cold logical analysis.
Ken

On Mar 18, 2:59 pm, Chris wrote:
On Mar 18, 2:47 pm, "Ken S. Tucker" wrote:

The RN was pretty much useless, recall Pearl Harbor, suppose the

This feels like I'm being punked, but let's go ahead and treat this as
a real argument.

If you are trying to say that airplanes will surely sink the RN and
allow Sealion to continue because a lot of ships were sunk at Pearl
Harbor, then your argument fails.

The Imperial Japanese Navy attacked Pearl Harbor. They would not be
involved in a Sealion invasion.

What you need to understand is that the IJN was the best in the world
at sinking ships at this time. The period from before Pearl Harbor
through to the middle of the Guadalcanal campaign or so is their high
water mark. Saying that because the Japanese in that time frame could
sink a lot of ships in a few hours (especially when they are
obligingly stationary in port during daylight) therefore the Germans
could to (at night while steaming at 20+ knots) is like saying that
because LeBron James and the Cleveland Cavaliers beat the Lakers, me
and my friend's who play pick-up basketball will too (even if we give
them a 15 point head start) .

Let's do a quick comparison of the Luftwaffe (and this is mighty
Fliegerkorps X a year later, specially trained for attacking ships-
but not in September 1940) and the IJN. During the evacuation of Crete
HMS Fiji and HMS Gloucester operated inside Luftwaffe air range for
over two days, with no fighter support, and were only sunk when the
two cruisers ran out of AA ammo. During Operation C the Kido Butai's
dive bombers (the torpedo bombers held their weapons, hoping for
better targets) put HMS Cornwall and HMS Dorsetshire both underwater
within a half-hour of the first bomb falling.

That is the level of difference we are talking about between the
Japanese and the Germans: an order of magnitude in effectiveness. And
then factor in the difference between hitting ships that are moving
and hitting ships that are berthed in port, and I begin to suspect
that you are not fully serious with this argument.

Nazi's
float a bunch of cheap boats, the RN responds and the Luftwaffe

Were would they get these cheap boats? They didn't have enough to
carry their invasion force, even by essentially ending all river
traffic and causing significant economic dislocation (in particular,
coal transport was seriously curtailed, meaning that steel production
was way down- see Tooze, _Wages of Destruction_). Barges were critical
for German economic activity, and they didn't have enough (largely
because Hitler had focused on other things, allowing most of the
transportation infrastructure to degrade severely- the Reichsbahn
suffered quite badly too).

I am leaning towards the conclusion that this argument of yours must
be some sort of elaborate hoax, though I am at a loss as to the
purpose.
Chris Manteuffel

As a hobby I build houses, cottages and track vehicles, here's pix,

http://www.flickr.com/photos/dynamics/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/3515661...7616995388478/

that's for fun.

An army of 100,000 could easily turn out 1000 barges a day!
Low skill labor, I could organize that.
Use math, 30,000/month, disposable on the beach of choice.
No hoax, brits would "likely" be overwhelmed.
Ken

Ken S. Tucker wrote:
On Mar 18, 1:32 pm, "Paul J. Adam"
wrote:
In message
, Ken
S. Tucker writes

On Mar 17, 3:38 pm, "Paul J. Adam"
wrote:
I think the source is reliable, my Old Boy was a WW2 vet spook who
had more access to info than any historian will ever get, and
explained
it to me.
That's one of maybe a dozen people, then. Why not just tell us his name?

But I'll let you in on a secret, the Brits had thousands of cannons
after
Dunkirk, available for Nazi photo recon, made of wood logs, that's all
the Brits had was bluff, but I think it was good in any case, the
croats
figured it was real.
Croats? Whiskey tango foxtrot, interrogative?

We certainly had a big deception plan going in Kent... in 1944 to create
FUSAG and keep the Germans waiting in the Pas de Calais.

As far as artillery went, *immediately* after Dunkirk - on 8 June - we
had about 400 tanks, 420 field guns and 163 medium and heavy guns
*immediately* available for use. We had fifteen infantry and one
armoured division in being.

Through June, the Navy brought back to the UK about another 200,000
troops, and some of their artillery and vehicles. (Common myth - Dunkirk
was by no means the end of the fighting in France)

The Brits, had a few rifles left after Dunkirk, 2 or 3.
About 70,000 after the Army's needs had been met.

Paint a few hundred barges black and gliders too, move out at 10 or
11 pm, and by 5 am the king is being raped in the ass by Nazi's.
Move out at 10pm in your three-knot barges, and by 5am you're not even
half-way across the Channel.

You have, however, met and felt the fire of the Auxiliary Patrol, and by
this point you're seeing destroyers by the dozen... and none of them
German.

I think you need to re-examine the credentials of your Old Boy. He
wasn't related to Baron Castleshortt VC, was he?
Paul

You have the benefit of wearing rose colored glasses, but be careful,
you may end up paying for "easy" wars in Iraq, Afghanistan and ...
OTOH, it's good to have realistic hard cold logical analysis.
Ken

When you locate a source for "hard, cold, logical analysis" feel free
to get back to us.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

Ken S. Tucker wrote:
On Mar 18, 2:59 pm, Chris wrote:
On Mar 18, 2:47 pm, "Ken S. Tucker" wrote:

The RN was pretty much useless, recall Pearl Harbor, suppose the
This feels like I'm being punked, but let's go ahead and treat this as
a real argument.

If you are trying to say that airplanes will surely sink the RN and
allow Sealion to continue because a lot of ships were sunk at Pearl
Harbor, then your argument fails.

The Imperial Japanese Navy attacked Pearl Harbor. They would not be
involved in a Sealion invasion.

What you need to understand is that the IJN was the best in the world
at sinking ships at this time. The period from before Pearl Harbor
through to the middle of the Guadalcanal campaign or so is their high
water mark. Saying that because the Japanese in that time frame could
sink a lot of ships in a few hours (especially when they are
obligingly stationary in port during daylight) therefore the Germans
could to (at night while steaming at 20+ knots) is like saying that
because LeBron James and the Cleveland Cavaliers beat the Lakers, me
and my friend's who play pick-up basketball will too (even if we give
them a 15 point head start) .

Let's do a quick comparison of the Luftwaffe (and this is mighty
Fliegerkorps X a year later, specially trained for attacking ships-
but not in September 1940) and the IJN. During the evacuation of Crete
HMS Fiji and HMS Gloucester operated inside Luftwaffe air range for
over two days, with no fighter support, and were only sunk when the
two cruisers ran out of AA ammo. During Operation C the Kido Butai's
dive bombers (the torpedo bombers held their weapons, hoping for
better targets) put HMS Cornwall and HMS Dorsetshire both underwater
within a half-hour of the first bomb falling.

That is the level of difference we are talking about between the
Japanese and the Germans: an order of magnitude in effectiveness. And
then factor in the difference between hitting ships that are moving
and hitting ships that are berthed in port, and I begin to suspect
that you are not fully serious with this argument.

Nazi's
float a bunch of cheap boats, the RN responds and the Luftwaffe
Were would they get these cheap boats? They didn't have enough to
carry their invasion force, even by essentially ending all river
traffic and causing significant economic dislocation (in particular,
coal transport was seriously curtailed, meaning that steel production
was way down- see Tooze, _Wages of Destruction_). Barges were critical
for German economic activity, and they didn't have enough (largely
because Hitler had focused on other things, allowing most of the
transportation infrastructure to degrade severely- the Reichsbahn
suffered quite badly too).

I am leaning towards the conclusion that this argument of yours must
be some sort of elaborate hoax, though I am at a loss as to the
purpose.
Chris Manteuffel

As a hobby I build houses, cottages and track vehicles, here's pix,

http://www.flickr.com/photos/dynamics/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/3515661...7616995388478/

that's for fun.

Toy tanks and play houses are a far cry from combat vehicles.



An army of 100,000 could easily turn out 1000 barges a day!
Low skill labor, I could organize that.
Use math, 30,000/month, disposable on the beach of choice.
No hoax, brits would "likely" be overwhelmed.
Ken

Perhaps if there were production lines, no sealant or paint cure
times and the like there could have been "1000 barges a day made." Where
does the wood come from? Are you thinking they should have used fresh
cut wood? If they are motorized where do the engines come from? Combat
vehicles and aircraft had priority. If they aren't motorized how do they
get across the Channel? For that matter, how long would they take to get
across?

The Higgins boats were far superior to anything the Nazis toyed with
for beach landings. They couldn't safely cross the Channel fast enough
to avoid detection and destruction.

Let's assume in Tucker World® the Nazis could have amassed 30,000
barges and got them across the Channel. How many could beach at a time?
Other than offloading men and man portable supplies and weaponry what
can you get on the beach in rapid succession? The Nazis had no plans for
Mulberry equivalents so any vehicles would have to be off loaded onto
that beach. Let's see, you have men on the beach securing a beach head,
a beach clogged with barges, barges off shore waiting en masse, very
limited Nazi naval gun support (if any), no AAA on the beach etc. and,
assuming the landing is at dawn, a bunch of collisions between the
barges. I suppose an unopposed landing might succeed, but there's the
rub, the locals would be able to out man the Nazis, the Nazis wouldn't
be able to stop the RAF from banging them up a bit and the RN wasn't far
away.

I'm sure you can organize the low skilled labour. I base that on the
workmanship of your playhouses.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

On Mar 18, 10:26 pm, Dan wrote:
Ken S. Tucker wrote:
On Mar 18, 1:32 pm, "Paul J. Adam"
wrote:
In message
, Ken
S. Tucker writes

On Mar 17, 3:38 pm, "Paul J. Adam"
wrote:
I think the source is reliable, my Old Boy was a WW2 vet spook who
had more access to info than any historian will ever get, and
explained
it to me.
That's one of maybe a dozen people, then. Why not just tell us his name?

But I'll let you in on a secret, the Brits had thousands of cannons
after
Dunkirk, available for Nazi photo recon, made of wood logs, that's all
the Brits had was bluff, but I think it was good in any case, the
croats
figured it was real.
Croats? Whiskey tango foxtrot, interrogative?

We certainly had a big deception plan going in Kent... in 1944 to create
FUSAG and keep the Germans waiting in the Pas de Calais.

As far as artillery went, *immediately* after Dunkirk - on 8 June - we
had about 400 tanks, 420 field guns and 163 medium and heavy guns
*immediately* available for use. We had fifteen infantry and one
armoured division in being.

Through June, the Navy brought back to the UK about another 200,000
troops, and some of their artillery and vehicles. (Common myth - Dunkirk
was by no means the end of the fighting in France)

The Brits, had a few rifles left after Dunkirk, 2 or 3.
About 70,000 after the Army's needs had been met.

Paint a few hundred barges black and gliders too, move out at 10 or
11 pm, and by 5 am the king is being raped in the ass by Nazi's.
Move out at 10pm in your three-knot barges, and by 5am you're not even
half-way across the Channel.

You have, however, met and felt the fire of the Auxiliary Patrol, and by
this point you're seeing destroyers by the dozen... and none of them
German.

I think you need to re-examine the credentials of your Old Boy. He
wasn't related to Baron Castleshortt VC, was he?
Paul

You have the benefit of wearing rose colored glasses, but be careful,
you may end up paying for "easy" wars in Iraq, Afghanistan and ...
OTOH, it's good to have realistic hard cold logical analysis.
Ken

When you locate a source for "hard, cold, logical analysis" feel free
to get back to us.
Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

IMO, pack up and go home, mission accomplished.
Ken

On Mar 18, 10:48 pm, Dan wrote:
Ken S. Tucker wrote:
On Mar 18, 2:59 pm, Chris wrote:
On Mar 18, 2:47 pm, "Ken S. Tucker" wrote:

The RN was pretty much useless, recall Pearl Harbor, suppose the
This feels like I'm being punked, but let's go ahead and treat this as
a real argument.

If you are trying to say that airplanes will surely sink the RN and
allow Sealion to continue because a lot of ships were sunk at Pearl
Harbor, then your argument fails.

The Imperial Japanese Navy attacked Pearl Harbor. They would not be
involved in a Sealion invasion.

What you need to understand is that the IJN was the best in the world
at sinking ships at this time. The period from before Pearl Harbor
through to the middle of the Guadalcanal campaign or so is their high
water mark. Saying that because the Japanese in that time frame could
sink a lot of ships in a few hours (especially when they are
obligingly stationary in port during daylight) therefore the Germans
could to (at night while steaming at 20+ knots) is like saying that
because LeBron James and the Cleveland Cavaliers beat the Lakers, me
and my friend's who play pick-up basketball will too (even if we give
them a 15 point head start) .

Let's do a quick comparison of the Luftwaffe (and this is mighty
Fliegerkorps X a year later, specially trained for attacking ships-
but not in September 1940) and the IJN. During the evacuation of Crete
HMS Fiji and HMS Gloucester operated inside Luftwaffe air range for
over two days, with no fighter support, and were only sunk when the
two cruisers ran out of AA ammo. During Operation C the Kido Butai's
dive bombers (the torpedo bombers held their weapons, hoping for
better targets) put HMS Cornwall and HMS Dorsetshire both underwater
within a half-hour of the first bomb falling.

That is the level of difference we are talking about between the
Japanese and the Germans: an order of magnitude in effectiveness. And
then factor in the difference between hitting ships that are moving
and hitting ships that are berthed in port, and I begin to suspect
that you are not fully serious with this argument.

Nazi's
float a bunch of cheap boats, the RN responds and the Luftwaffe
Were would they get these cheap boats? They didn't have enough to
carry their invasion force, even by essentially ending all river
traffic and causing significant economic dislocation (in particular,
coal transport was seriously curtailed, meaning that steel production
was way down- see Tooze, _Wages of Destruction_). Barges were critical
for German economic activity, and they didn't have enough (largely
because Hitler had focused on other things, allowing most of the
transportation infrastructure to degrade severely- the Reichsbahn
suffered quite badly too).

I am leaning towards the conclusion that this argument of yours must
be some sort of elaborate hoax, though I am at a loss as to the
purpose.
Chris Manteuffel

As a hobby I build houses, cottages and track vehicles, here's pix,

http://www.flickr.com/photos/dynamics/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/3515661...7616995388478/

that's for fun.

Toy tanks and play houses are a far cry from combat vehicles.



An army of 100,000 could easily turn out 1000 barges a day!
Low skill labor, I could organize that.
Use math, 30,000/month, disposable on the beach of choice.
No hoax, brits would "likely" be overwhelmed.
Ken

Perhaps if there were production lines, no sealant or paint cure
times and the like there could have been "1000 barges a day made." Where
does the wood come from? Are you thinking they should have used fresh
cut wood? If they are motorized where do the engines come from? Combat
vehicles and aircraft had priority. If they aren't motorized how do they
get across the Channel? For that matter, how long would they take to get
across?

The Higgins boats were far superior to anything the Nazis toyed with
for beach landings. They couldn't safely cross the Channel fast enough
to avoid detection and destruction.

Let's assume in Tucker World® the Nazis could have amassed 30,000
barges and got them across the Channel. How many could beach at a time?
Other than offloading men and man portable supplies and weaponry what
can you get on the beach in rapid succession? The Nazis had no plans for
Mulberry equivalents so any vehicles would have to be off loaded onto
that beach. Let's see, you have men on the beach securing a beach head,
a beach clogged with barges, barges off shore waiting en masse, very
limited Nazi naval gun support (if any), no AAA on the beach etc. and,
assuming the landing is at dawn, a bunch of collisions between the
barges. I suppose an unopposed landing might succeed, but there's the
rub, the locals would be able to out man the Nazis, the Nazis wouldn't
be able to stop the RAF from banging them up a bit and the RN wasn't far
away.

I'm sure you can organize the low skilled labour. I base that on the
workmanship of your playhouses.

How long does it take you to remove an engine?
It takes me about 10 minutes, 5 if I don't take a break.
I can do a 35 hp outboard myself, with no problem in about
3 minutes, including gas tank, done that as a kid.
Pulling up a 50hp off a boat is pretty much my limit.
So you assign a strong man to that task and send it back.

Danelda, the Nazi's could mass produce V2 rockets, do ya
really think mass producing 50 hp outboards motors would
be a problem?

So I mass produce barges, say 10'x40' from a forest (duh),
and put a few 50's on it and my stuff gets to england in 5 hrs,
using a compass on a foggy night, there's a lot of coast to
make 'numerous' beach heads.
Any RN is dead when He's, Dorniers, Me-110's equiped with Nazi
torpedoes with Me-109 cover, I'll toss in some Stuka's.
Nazi's torpedoes worked, and what's RN using, searchlights to
locate the barges at night, they is DOA. Even a ding-bat pilot
could toast a RN ship with a torpedo as soon as it lights up.

If I was in command of Sea Lion, england would be conquered
without doubt, fortunately your boyfriend Hitler wasn't interested,
and ****ed around with england and under that cover, planned
and assembled for attacking Russia.

Actually Dan I think you're right about that in a previous post.
That's new to me, so I appreciate that insight, Hitler doing
smoke and mirrors in Battle of Britain as Stalin wrings his ugly
hands in delight as Europeans fight, especially given the treaty
he had Hitler sign, no attacking for 10 years, hard to trust people,
as he moves to Barbarossa, almost worked.
Ken

Ken S. Tucker wrote:
On Mar 18, 10:48 pm, Dan wrote:
Ken S. Tucker wrote:
On Mar 18, 2:59 pm, Chris wrote:
On Mar 18, 2:47 pm, "Ken S. Tucker" wrote:
The RN was pretty much useless, recall Pearl Harbor, suppose the
This feels like I'm being punked, but let's go ahead and treat this as
a real argument.
If you are trying to say that airplanes will surely sink the RN and
allow Sealion to continue because a lot of ships were sunk at Pearl
Harbor, then your argument fails.
The Imperial Japanese Navy attacked Pearl Harbor. They would not be
involved in a Sealion invasion.
What you need to understand is that the IJN was the best in the world
at sinking ships at this time. The period from before Pearl Harbor
through to the middle of the Guadalcanal campaign or so is their high
water mark. Saying that because the Japanese in that time frame could
sink a lot of ships in a few hours (especially when they are
obligingly stationary in port during daylight) therefore the Germans
could to (at night while steaming at 20+ knots) is like saying that
because LeBron James and the Cleveland Cavaliers beat the Lakers, me
and my friend's who play pick-up basketball will too (even if we give
them a 15 point head start) .
Let's do a quick comparison of the Luftwaffe (and this is mighty
Fliegerkorps X a year later, specially trained for attacking ships-
but not in September 1940) and the IJN. During the evacuation of Crete
HMS Fiji and HMS Gloucester operated inside Luftwaffe air range for
over two days, with no fighter support, and were only sunk when the
two cruisers ran out of AA ammo. During Operation C the Kido Butai's
dive bombers (the torpedo bombers held their weapons, hoping for
better targets) put HMS Cornwall and HMS Dorsetshire both underwater
within a half-hour of the first bomb falling.
That is the level of difference we are talking about between the
Japanese and the Germans: an order of magnitude in effectiveness. And
then factor in the difference between hitting ships that are moving
and hitting ships that are berthed in port, and I begin to suspect
that you are not fully serious with this argument.
Nazi's
float a bunch of cheap boats, the RN responds and the Luftwaffe
Were would they get these cheap boats? They didn't have enough to
carry their invasion force, even by essentially ending all river
traffic and causing significant economic dislocation (in particular,
coal transport was seriously curtailed, meaning that steel production
was way down- see Tooze, _Wages of Destruction_). Barges were critical
for German economic activity, and they didn't have enough (largely
because Hitler had focused on other things, allowing most of the
transportation infrastructure to degrade severely- the Reichsbahn
suffered quite badly too).
I am leaning towards the conclusion that this argument of yours must
be some sort of elaborate hoax, though I am at a loss as to the
purpose.
Chris Manteuffel
As a hobby I build houses, cottages and track vehicles, here's pix,
http://www.flickr.com/photos/dynamics/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/3515661...7616995388478/
that's for fun.
Toy tanks and play houses are a far cry from combat vehicles.



An army of 100,000 could easily turn out 1000 barges a day!
Low skill labor, I could organize that.
Use math, 30,000/month, disposable on the beach of choice.
No hoax, brits would "likely" be overwhelmed.
Ken
Perhaps if there were production lines, no sealant or paint cure
times and the like there could have been "1000 barges a day made." Where
does the wood come from? Are you thinking they should have used fresh
cut wood? If they are motorized where do the engines come from? Combat
vehicles and aircraft had priority. If they aren't motorized how do they
get across the Channel? For that matter, how long would they take to get
across?

The Higgins boats were far superior to anything the Nazis toyed with
for beach landings. They couldn't safely cross the Channel fast enough
to avoid detection and destruction.

Let's assume in Tucker World® the Nazis could have amassed 30,000
barges and got them across the Channel. How many could beach at a time?
Other than offloading men and man portable supplies and weaponry what
can you get on the beach in rapid succession? The Nazis had no plans for
Mulberry equivalents so any vehicles would have to be off loaded onto
that beach. Let's see, you have men on the beach securing a beach head,
a beach clogged with barges, barges off shore waiting en masse, very
limited Nazi naval gun support (if any), no AAA on the beach etc. and,
assuming the landing is at dawn, a bunch of collisions between the
barges. I suppose an unopposed landing might succeed, but there's the
rub, the locals would be able to out man the Nazis, the Nazis wouldn't
be able to stop the RAF from banging them up a bit and the RN wasn't far
away.

I'm sure you can organize the low skilled labour. I base that on the
workmanship of your playhouses.

How long does it take you to remove an engine?
It takes me about 10 minutes, 5 if I don't take a break.
I can do a 35 hp outboard myself, with no problem in about
3 minutes, including gas tank, done that as a kid.
Pulling up a 50hp off a boat is pretty much my limit.
So you assign a strong man to that task and send it back.

Danelda, the Nazi's could mass produce V2 rockets, do ya
really think mass producing 50 hp outboards motors would
be a problem?

So I mass produce barges, say 10'x40' from a forest (duh),

There's a reason woodworkers use wood with a low moisture content.

and put a few 50's on it and my stuff gets to england in 5 hrs,
using a compass on a foggy night, there's a lot of coast to
make 'numerous' beach heads.

And lots of ways to miss the landing areas entirely. Ever heard of
currents or wind? What you would wind up with is several landings none
with sufficient strength to hold what they take. Add to that the
problems with supply trying to locate the barges that landed in the
wrong place. Take a look at England's Channel coast sometime and see if
you can figure out how many bad places there are to beach.


Any RN is dead when He's, Dorniers, Me-110's equiped with Nazi
torpedoes with Me-109 cover, I'll toss in some Stuka's.
Nazi's torpedoes worked, and what's RN using, searchlights to
locate the barges at night, they is DOA. Even a ding-bat pilot
could toast a RN ship with a torpedo as soon as it lights up.

Right, I'm sure you believe the Nazis sank a lot of RN at night from
the air. They had a hard enough time hitting slow moving cargo ships in
daylight. "World at War" had a rather amusing clip of them trying.


If I was in command of Sea Lion, england would be conquered
without doubt, fortunately your boyfriend Hitler wasn't interested,
and ****ed around with england and under that cover, planned
and assembled for attacking Russia.

Not if you can't come up with a plausible plan.

Actually Dan I think you're right about that in a previous post.
That's new to me, so I appreciate that insight, Hitler doing
smoke and mirrors in Battle of Britain as Stalin wrings his ugly
hands in delight as Europeans fight, especially given the treaty
he had Hitler sign, no attacking for 10 years, hard to trust people,
as he moves to Barbarossa, almost worked.
Ken

"Almost worked?" Not even close. Take a look at what really happened.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

"Ken S. Tucker" writes:

On Mar 18, 10:48 pm, Dan wrote:
Ken S. Tucker wrote:
On Mar 18, 2:59 pm, Chris wrote:
On Mar 18, 2:47 pm, "Ken S. Tucker" wrote:

The RN was pretty much useless, recall Pearl Harbor, suppose the
This feels like I'm being punked, but let's go ahead and treat this as
a real argument.

If you are trying to say that airplanes will surely sink the RN and
allow Sealion to continue because a lot of ships were sunk at Pearl
Harbor, then your argument fails.

The Imperial Japanese Navy attacked Pearl Harbor. They would not be
involved in a Sealion invasion.

What you need to understand is that the IJN was the best in the world
at sinking ships at this time. The period from before Pearl Harbor
through to the middle of the Guadalcanal campaign or so is their high
water mark. Saying that because the Japanese in that time frame could
sink a lot of ships in a few hours (especially when they are
obligingly stationary in port during daylight) therefore the Germans
could to (at night while steaming at 20+ knots) is like saying that
because LeBron James and the Cleveland Cavaliers beat the Lakers, me
and my friend's who play pick-up basketball will too (even if we give
them a 15 point head start) .

Let's do a quick comparison of the Luftwaffe (and this is mighty
Fliegerkorps X a year later, specially trained for attacking ships-
but not in September 1940) and the IJN. During the evacuation of Crete
HMS Fiji and HMS Gloucester operated inside Luftwaffe air range for
over two days, with no fighter support, and were only sunk when the
two cruisers ran out of AA ammo. During Operation C the Kido Butai's
dive bombers (the torpedo bombers held their weapons, hoping for
better targets) put HMS Cornwall and HMS Dorsetshire both underwater
within a half-hour of the first bomb falling.

That is the level of difference we are talking about between the
Japanese and the Germans: an order of magnitude in effectiveness. And
then factor in the difference between hitting ships that are moving
and hitting ships that are berthed in port, and I begin to suspect
that you are not fully serious with this argument.

Nazi's
float a bunch of cheap boats, the RN responds and the Luftwaffe
Were would they get these cheap boats? They didn't have enough to
carry their invasion force, even by essentially ending all river
traffic and causing significant economic dislocation (in particular,
coal transport was seriously curtailed, meaning that steel production
was way down- see Tooze, _Wages of Destruction_). Barges were critical
for German economic activity, and they didn't have enough (largely
because Hitler had focused on other things, allowing most of the
transportation infrastructure to degrade severely- the Reichsbahn
suffered quite badly too).

I am leaning towards the conclusion that this argument of yours must
be some sort of elaborate hoax, though I am at a loss as to the
purpose.
Chris Manteuffel

As a hobby I build houses, cottages and track vehicles, here's pix,

http://www.flickr.com/photos/dynamics/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/3515661...7616995388478/

that's for fun.

Toy tanks and play houses are a far cry from combat vehicles.



An army of 100,000 could easily turn out 1000 barges a day!
Low skill labor, I could organize that.
Use math, 30,000/month, disposable on the beach of choice.
No hoax, brits would "likely" be overwhelmed.
Ken

Perhaps if there were production lines, no sealant or paint cure
times and the like there could have been "1000 barges a day made." Where
does the wood come from? Are you thinking they should have used fresh
cut wood? If they are motorized where do the engines come from? Combat
vehicles and aircraft had priority. If they aren't motorized how do they
get across the Channel? For that matter, how long would they take to get
across?

The Higgins boats were far superior to anything the Nazis toyed with
for beach landings. They couldn't safely cross the Channel fast enough
to avoid detection and destruction.

Let's assume in Tucker World® the Nazis could have amassed 30,000
barges and got them across the Channel. How many could beach at a time?
Other than offloading men and man portable supplies and weaponry what
can you get on the beach in rapid succession? The Nazis had no plans for
Mulberry equivalents so any vehicles would have to be off loaded onto
that beach. Let's see, you have men on the beach securing a beach head,
a beach clogged with barges, barges off shore waiting en masse, very
limited Nazi naval gun support (if any), no AAA on the beach etc. and,
assuming the landing is at dawn, a bunch of collisions between the
barges. I suppose an unopposed landing might succeed, but there's the
rub, the locals would be able to out man the Nazis, the Nazis wouldn't
be able to stop the RAF from banging them up a bit and the RN wasn't far
away.

I'm sure you can organize the low skilled labour. I base that on the
workmanship of your playhouses.

How long does it take you to remove an engine?
It takes me about 10 minutes, 5 if I don't take a break.
I can do a 35 hp outboard myself, with no problem in about
3 minutes, including gas tank, done that as a kid.
Pulling up a 50hp off a boat is pretty much my limit.
So you assign a strong man to that task and send it back.

Danelda, the Nazi's could mass produce V2 rockets, do ya
really think mass producing 50 hp outboards motors would
be a problem?

So I mass produce barges, say 10'x40' from a forest (duh),
and put a few 50's on it and my stuff gets to england in 5 hrs,
using a compass on a foggy night, there's a lot of coast to
make 'numerous' beach heads.
Any RN is dead when He's, Dorniers, Me-110's equiped with Nazi
torpedoes with Me-109 cover, I'll toss in some Stuka's.
Nazi's torpedoes worked, and what's RN using, searchlights to
locate the barges at night, they is DOA. Even a ding-bat pilot
could toast a RN ship with a torpedo as soon as it lights up.

If I was in command of Sea Lion, england would be conquered
without doubt, fortunately your boyfriend Hitler wasn't interested,
and ****ed around with england and under that cover, planned
and assembled for attacking Russia.

Actually Dan I think you're right about that in a previous post.
That's new to me, so I appreciate that insight, Hitler doing
smoke and mirrors in Battle of Britain as Stalin wrings his ugly
hands in delight as Europeans fight, especially given the treaty
he had Hitler sign, no attacking for 10 years, hard to trust people,
as he moves to Barbarossa, almost worked.
Ken

I'm sure Hitler would have loved you to death Ken, for your prompt
advice. Hint: the emphasis among the nazi elite was hardly efficiency.

Chris wrote:
On Mar 18, 10:05 pm, Alexander wrote:

Japanese aircraft did a real job at
Pearl harbor on both anchored ships and fast moving destroyers in the
outer harbor at Pearl Harbor.

As I already noted in another post, please don't base your ideas for
what the Germans could do based on the successes of the Japanese Navy.
The Japanese Navy was so much better than the Luftwaffe at sinking
ships that the comparison is ludicrous.

But the real question here is what the hell are you talking about with
respect to "fast moving destroyers in the outer harbor at Pearl
Harbor"? First of all, what is the "outer harbor at Pearl Harbor"?
Second of all, please name the destroyers the IJN sank at Pearl
Harbor. Then please note how many of them were moving.

I anxiously await your no doubt well researched and footnoted
response.

Chris Manteuffel

I think you are well enough endowed with time to read up on Pearl Harbor
yourself. The outer Harbor is obviously past the antisub gates. There
were 3 or 4 hot Iron cans that made it past the gates. Still took hits.
You are close enough to Great Lakes Naval station to go pull up the
archived films of much of the attack. Do so and learn. There is a lot
more to Pearl Harbor then Ford Island and Baker Docks.