If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#181
|
|||
|
|||
"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 |
#182
|
|||
|
|||
"Vanishing American Air Superiority"
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 |
#183
|
|||
|
|||
"Vanishing American Air Superiority"
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 |
#184
|
|||
|
|||
"Vanishing American Air Superiority"
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 |
#185
|
|||
|
|||
"Vanishing American Air Superiority"
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 WorldŽ 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 |
#186
|
|||
|
|||
"Vanishing American Air Superiority"
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 |
#187
|
|||
|
|||
"Vanishing American Air Superiority"
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 WorldŽ 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 |
#188
|
|||
|
|||
"Vanishing American Air Superiority"
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 WorldŽ 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 |
#189
|
|||
|
|||
"Vanishing American Air Superiority"
"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 WorldŽ 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. |
#190
|
|||
|
|||
"Vanishing American Air Superiority"
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. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
American Women Raped in Iraq by "Lawless" Bushite Grunters - 1.The ISI's General, Mahmoud Ahmad funded 911's Atta - 2. We have video of ironflowing like water from the towers - American Women Raped in Iraq by"Lawless" Bushite | frank | Naval Aviation | 1 | August 30th 08 12:35 PM |
American Women Raped in Iraq by "Lawless" Bushite Grunters - 1. The ISI's General, Mahmoud Ahmad funded 911's Atta - 2. We have video of iron flowing like water from the towers - American Women Raped in Iraq by "Lawless" Bushi | Charlie Wolf[_2_] | Naval Aviation | 0 | August 29th 08 03:19 AM |
Corporate News Whores are Evil to All Humans Being - PentagonWon't Probe KBR [GANG] Rape Charges - "Heaven Won't Take [bushite] Marines" -American corporations actively attempt to MURDER American women, and American"Men" refus | WiseGuy | Naval Aviation | 0 | January 9th 08 02:50 PM |