"Vanishing American Air Superiority"

On Mar 19, 9:35*am, Peter Skelton wrote:
On Fri, 19 Mar 2010 05:32:45 -0700 (PDT), Jack Linthicum



wrote:
On Mar 19, 8:22 am, Jim Wilkins wrote:
On Mar 18, 11:45 pm, Chris wrote:

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

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.
...
Chris Manteuffel

Pearl Harbor was an unexpected attack on close-packed stationary
ships, inspired by the British success at Taranto. The Japanese
weren't that good at bombing defended shipping at sea, Guadalcanal for
example. One can assume that Spitfires would be at least as effective
as Wildcats at protecting the ships.

jsw

Ask the HMS Prince of Wales and *HMS Repulse how good the Japanese
were at bombing ships in the open sea.

Jack, he said defended shipping and clarified his meaning by a
comment about defending aircraft.

You really must start reading the stuff you respond to.

Peter Skelton

And the aircraft defending the Prinzu Walsu and Repulsu?

I would not call the ships sunk at Guadalcanal "shipping". They were
warships. Chicago, Quincy, Vincennes, Canberra and Astoria all Cruisers

"Dan" wrote in message
news
Keith Willshaw wrote:


"Ken S. Tucker" wrote in message
...


An army of 100,000 could easily turn out 1000 barges a day!
Low skill labor, I could organize that.

Who would make the oars ?

Use math, 30,000/month, disposable on the beach of choice.
No hoax, brits would "likely" be overwhelmed.
Ken

I think its very nice that the asylum allows you access to the internet
but they really should take more care about your medication.

Keith



Can you imagine 30,000 underpowered barges drifting around the Channel
at night with the RN running laps through the herd swamping them for
sport? No need to shoot, just raise a wake.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired


When I lived in Kent we used to watch with amusement the
launching of boats built by people like Ken. The idea that
building a sea going boat can be done just as easily as
building a garden shed leads to rapid disillusionment.

We used to take bets on how far they would get before sinking.
the record was 10 miles, most started to disintegrate as soon
as they left the beach. Fortunately for them the local coastguard
volunteers would usually call the RNLI and a lifeboat would
pick them up.

Keith

Keith Willshaw wrote:


"Dan" wrote in message
news
Keith Willshaw wrote:


"Ken S. Tucker" wrote in message
...



An army of 100,000 could easily turn out 1000 barges a day!
Low skill labor, I could organize that.

Who would make the oars ?

Use math, 30,000/month, disposable on the beach of choice.
No hoax, brits would "likely" be overwhelmed.
Ken

I think its very nice that the asylum allows you access to the internet
but they really should take more care about your medication.

Keith



Can you imagine 30,000 underpowered barges drifting around the
Channel at night with the RN running laps through the herd swamping
them for sport? No need to shoot, just raise a wake.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired


When I lived in Kent we used to watch with amusement the
launching of boats built by people like Ken. The idea that
building a sea going boat can be done just as easily as
building a garden shed leads to rapid disillusionment.

We used to take bets on how far they would get before sinking.
the record was 10 miles, most started to disintegrate as soon
as they left the beach. Fortunately for them the local coastguard
volunteers would usually call the RNLI and a lifeboat would
pick them up.

Keith

If you rescue them they will reproduce and vote.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

On Mar 19, 6:04*am, Alexander wrote:

The outer Harbor is obviously past the antisub gates.

On which end of the channel? The harbor side or the ocean side?

[ USN Destroyers hit by the Japanese]

Still took hits.

Please provide the name of any maneuvering destroyer hit by a Japanese
bomb or torpedo.

Chris Manteuffel

On Mar 19, 12:49*am, "Ken S. Tucker" wrote:

An army of 100,000 could easily turn out 1000 barges a day!
Low skill labor, I could organize that.

Man, Ken, you are really unlucky. If you had been born in the 1760's
you would have been a *superstar.* You see, in the 1790's and 1800's
there were a lot of people trying to build lots blue water hulls for
some big wars they had going on at the time. They thought, because of
their hundreds of years of accumulated experience and lifetimes spent
actually building ships, that it required a great deal of time,
specialized materials and highly skilled labor demanding large wages.
If only you had been there with your experience gained doing something
completely different as a hobby, you could have shown them the errors
of their ways. Any navy would have been thrilled with your ability to
produce a sloop or frigate type hull with a hundred unskilled workers
in a single day.

Chris Manteuffel

Ken S. Tucker wrote:
On Mar 19, 1:17 am, -did-not-set--mail-host-address--
so-tickle-me wrote:
"Ken S. Tucker" writes:
On Mar 18, 10:48 pm, Dan wrote:
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.
...
I'm sure you can organize the low skilled labour. I base that on the
workmanship of your playhouses.

Military is all about organizing draftees (low skilled labor),
that's how people like me create employment opportunity
for people like you Dan

Not to put too fine a point on things neither your country nor mine
has had a draft for decades. Then again, you have no military experience
so you wouldn't understand.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

On Mar 19, 3:37 am, "Keith Willshaw"
wrote:
"Alexander" wrote in message

...



Paul J. Adam wrote:
In message
, Ken
S. Tucker writes
On Mar 18, 12:36 am, "William Black"
wrote:
Aren't we forgetting someone?
This being a naval group and all...

The RN was pretty much useless, recall Pearl Harbor,

Ships sunk in port on a Sunday. Relates to ships at night, mixed in with
your invasion force, how?
suppose the
Nazi's
float a bunch of cheap boats, the RN responds and the Luftwaff
would've put
a lot of iron in the channel.

At night?

The Luftwaffe was pretty poor at sinking ships in 1940.

Stukas did a very credible job.

They got four of
forty destroyers at Dunkirk over days, when they were stopped to take on
troops: here they have to sink forty destroyers very fast, at night,
while they're making thirty knots.

I would more attribute that to your air cover. Ships then as now were
sitting ducks. Or did you forget massive air battles at the Coral Sea,
Wake Island, Midway Island etc. Japanese aircraft did a real job at Pearl
harbor on both anchored ships and fast moving destroyers in the outer
harbor at Pearl Harbor.

List of fast moving destroyers sunk at Pearl Harbor

Start of List
End of List

The 3 destroyers 'sunk' at Pearl Harbor were all in dry dock at the
time and were repaired and returned to service.

The only destroyer on patrol damaged was the USS Helm. The
bombs aimed at her missed but some damage was done by
strafing. It was minor and she stayed on patrol joining the escort
group of the USS Saratoga.
Keith

I read that Brit's used biplanes carrying torpedoes to get Bismarck,
Brits practically invented torpedoing ships from air.
Nazi torps were likely better than the Brits torps any brit stuff in
the
channel would be luftwaffe fodder, japs proved that.
The notion of using expensive a/c (bombers, spits, whatever) to sink
a channel barge(s) in light of Luftwaffe air superiority is near
suicidal.
Consider the tactics, low flying strafing a cheap barge that could be
empty, and getting pounced by Me-109's.
Kiss the RAF good-bye.
Ken

In message
, Ken
S. Tucker writes
I read that Brit's used biplanes carrying torpedoes to get Bismarck,
Brits practically invented torpedoing ships from air.
Nazi torps were likely better than the Brits torps

Not in 1940. Fuzing problems and depth-keeping difficulties nearly as
bad as those of US weapons, though fixed much more urgently.

any brit stuff in
the
channel would be luftwaffe fodder, japs proved that.

Unfortunately the Luftwaffe of 1940 lacked either AP bombs for attacking
ships, or air-dropped torpedo capability. I think there was one squadron
of German torpedo-bombers in 1940, and they were He115 seaplanes... not
exactly fast, lethal death-dealers.

It was a Navy role, not a Luftwaffe task (the Luftwaffe didn't demand an
airborne torpedo until 1942) and the torpedoes, frankly, sucked: in
October 1939 52 were dropped in an exercise with 26 failures. Production
of the F5 torpedo ran at an awe-inspiring five per month in 1939, and
was cancelled altogether in the spring of 1940; then restarted, slowly,
later that year.

The notion of using expensive a/c (bombers, spits, whatever) to sink
a channel barge(s) in light of Luftwaffe air superiority is near
suicidal.

Which is why that wasn't the plan.

--
He thinks too much, such men are dangerous.

Paul J. Adam

On Mar 19, 8:32*am, Jack Linthicum
wrote:
On Mar 19, 8:22*am, Jim Wilkins wrote:
...

Ask the HMS Prince of Wales and *HMS Repulse how good the Japanese
were at bombing ships in the open sea.

No air cover. The Type 97 and 99 land-based bombers weren't nearly as
effective on shipping in the Southwest Pacific if they were
intercepted.

Without air cover even Musashi and Yamato with their upgraded AA and
escorts were sunk at sea by small carrier-based bombers without heavy
losses.

jsw

In message , Alexander
writes
Paul J. Adam wrote:
The Luftwaffe was pretty poor at sinking ships in 1940.

Stukas did a very credible job.

Not really, no: the Stukas needed a lot of sorties. Eventually, when
ships were running out of ammunition, they became more vulnerable; but
Stukas couldn't quickly or reliably sink many ships.

They got four of
forty destroyers at Dunkirk over days, when they were stopped to take
on troops: here they have to sink forty destroyers very fast, at
night, while they're making thirty knots.

I would more attribute that to your air cover.

Which would still be in place: the Luftwaffe can't reach past London.

Ships then as now were sitting ducks. Or did you forget massive air
battles at the Coral Sea, Wake Island, Midway Island etc. Japanese
aircraft did a real job at Pearl harbor on both anchored ships and fast
moving destroyers in the outer harbor at Pearl Harbor.

The Japanese had trained ruthlessly to sink ships underway at sea. The
Germans hadn't. So, what the Japanese could do in 1941 tells us very
little about the Luftwaffe's capability.

The Germans couldn't keep the RN from evacuating Norway or Dunkirk or
Crete. More to the point, the Germans sent an amphibious force to
Crete... and they were stopped by the RN, despite total Luftwaffe air
superiority. Why will the troops get through to Britain when they
couldn't get to Crete?

You also seem to forget that Hitler himself ordered a stand down at
Dunkirk allowing you to get off that beach. His troops could well have
slaughtered the English and French troops to a man.

Of course he did. This masterpiece of Teutonic inspiration won him the
war...

....oh, it didn't?

Curious. Maybe there's more than

Hell, even Argentina made some good scores against the mighty Royal
Navy.

Which Navy was out and fighting, and which spent the war hiding in port?

Which Navy won, and which lost?


--
He thinks too much, such men are dangerous.

Paul J. Adam