A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

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.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Naval Aviation
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

"Vanishing American Air Superiority"



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #331  
Old March 22nd 10, 01:36 AM posted to rec.aviation.military,sci.military.naval,rec.aviation.military.naval
Jim Wilkins
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 57
Default "Vanishing American Air Superiority"

On Mar 21, 2:56*pm, William Black wrote:
...
it's hardly stories that you share with children.


It is stories that have to be shared with children.


After one of those hand-wringing nuclear aftermath movies on TV a
friend said his young son watched with growing impatience and finally
demanded "Where are all the mutants?"

jsw
Ads
  #332  
Old March 23rd 10, 05:49 AM posted to rec.aviation.military,sci.military.naval,rec.aviation.military.naval
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10
Default "Vanishing American Air Superiority"

"Ken S. Tucker" writes:

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.


duh! Do you have an F- in logic? :-) The Japanese proved that a
well-trained force could do what they did. Fact. And general
theory. Something others had to learn how to copy. The Germans sure did
not know how to. How about the Japs could overrun American positions
with their heavy tanks, the Germans 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.


Strafing alone would be near good enough. No AA defences except the odd
rifle that I daresay would be somewhere within 2 degrees of arc of the
target some of the time.

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.


Spits up high, Hurries down low.
  #333  
Old March 23rd 10, 05:55 AM posted to rec.aviation.military,sci.military.naval,rec.aviation.military.naval
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10
Default "Vanishing American Air Superiority"

Jim Wilkins writes:

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.


I'm not sure, maybe you know: I assumed the Japanese were good until
they lost their best attack and dive bomber pilots; and this problem was
coupled with the a) ease with which they aircraft would get shot down
owing to lack of armour and self-sealing tanks, plus b) the introduction
of VT fuses by the Americans.
Defending fighters breaking up attacks would be the norm anywhere I
suppose, regardless of how well-trained the attacking pilots are.
Gernot
  #334  
Old March 23rd 10, 06:03 AM posted to rec.aviation.military,sci.military.naval,rec.aviation.military.naval
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10
Default "Vanishing American Air Superiority"

Chris writes:

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


Edsall? Effectively sunk by Ryujo's aircraft after sailing extremely
unhappily all afternoon through the shell splashes from 14", 8" and
assorted smaller calibre fire....

OK, so not PH but still, a stirring story of a brave ship, that should
count for something!
  #335  
Old March 23rd 10, 06:06 AM posted to rec.aviation.military,sci.military.naval,rec.aviation.military.naval
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10
Default "Vanishing American Air Superiority"

Hermann writes:

Chris wrote:
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


Chris.. You keep proving yourself an idiot. Its fools like you that
always underestimate the competition.


Hey hey, not so fast young man. Chris is right, you could have been like
the John Law (or Ben Bernanke) or the time, giving people something for
nothing until they realize they are getting nothing for something.
  #336  
Old March 23rd 10, 06:10 AM posted to rec.aviation.military,sci.military.naval,rec.aviation.military.naval
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10
Default "Vanishing American Air Superiority"

"Paul J. Adam" writes:

In message , William Black
writes
Alexander wrote:
That has already been answered. Move on.


Well, no it hasn't.

How do you defeat the Royal Navy?

Magic pixies with ship destroying oofle dust?


The Germans have a plan. Their chief weapon is a cunning plan...a
cunning plan and cool uniforms...cunning plan and shiny
jackboots.... Their two weapons are a cunning plan and their nifty
uniforms...and their ruthless Teutonic efficiency.... Their *three*
weapons are a cunning plan, cool uniforms, and ruthless
efficiency...and an almost fanatical devotion to the Fuhrer.... their
*four*...no... *Amongst* their weapons.... Amongst their
weaponry...are such elements as cunning plans, smart uniforms.... I'll
come in again?


It's amazing how this stuff never gets old. That must mean it is
classic, or at least has some budding delusions of grandeur.
Gernot
  #337  
Old March 23rd 10, 07:37 AM posted to rec.aviation.military,sci.military.naval,rec.aviation.military.naval
Dan[_12_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 451
Default "Vanishing American Air Superiority"

-did-not-set--mail-host-address--so-tickle-me wrote:
Jim Wilkins writes:

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.


I'm not sure, maybe you know: I assumed the Japanese were good until
they lost their best attack and dive bomber pilots; and this problem was
coupled with the a) ease with which they aircraft would get shot down
owing to lack of armour and self-sealing tanks, plus b) the introduction
of VT fuses by the Americans.
Defending fighters breaking up attacks would be the norm anywhere I
suppose, regardless of how well-trained the attacking pilots are.
Gernot


They also lost their best maintainers.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
  #338  
Old March 23rd 10, 02:01 PM posted to rec.aviation.military,sci.military.naval,rec.aviation.military.naval
Jeff Crowell[_5_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4
Default "Vanishing American Air Superiority"

Alexander wrote:
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.


Keith Willshaw wrote:
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.


Alexander wrote:
Good God...Don't you read the whole story or just what suites you? There
is even a plaque in the Admin building at Pearl. You missed the Fleet
tug that was in Floating Drydock along with 2 subchasers.



Alexander... dude, keep it coming, you have me in stitches. I haven't
laughed so hard over someone's misbegotten posts in, like, forever.
Do you read this stuff before you hit 'Send'?

You asserted that Japanese aircraft "did a real job" on 'fast-moving
destroyers' during the Pearl Harbor attack. When Keith properly showed
that no moving destroyers were damaged other than by strafing, the best
you can do is talk about tugs and subchasers?


Keep it coming!




Jeff
--
Ignorance killed the cat. Curiosity was framed.
Robert Heinlein
  #339  
Old March 23rd 10, 04:21 PM posted to rec.aviation.military,sci.military.naval,rec.aviation.military.naval
Chris
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 14
Default "Vanishing American Air Superiority"

On Mar 23, 12:55*am, -did-not-set--mail-host-address--
so-tickle-me wrote:

I'm not sure, maybe you know: I assumed the Japanese were good until
they lost their best attack and dive bomber pilots; and this problem was


It's hard to say precisely: but looking at losses, the Japanese lost
somewhere between 100 and 150 carrier qual'd aircrew at each of the
first couple of carrier battles. The Guadalcanal campaign as a whole
cost the Japanese Navy over 2800 planes, though, so you can see that
it would be where the majority of the pre-war elite died.

Defending fighters breaking up attacks would be the norm anywhere I
suppose, regardless of how well-trained the attacking pilots are.


What is impressive about the Japanese early war aircrew is that
defending fighters often didn't break up the attacks, even when they
were in a position to intercept. Examine the Hiryu's airgroup pair of
attacks on Yorktown at Midway and notice that despite intense losses,
on both occasions the crews got in and hit their targets and did their
damage.

Chris Manteuffel
  #340  
Old March 23rd 10, 07:51 PM posted to rec.aviation.military,sci.military.naval,rec.aviation.military.naval
Jim Wilkins
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 57
Default "Vanishing American Air Superiority"

On Mar 23, 11:21*am, Chris wrote:
On Mar 23, 12:55*am, -did-not-set--mail-host-address--

so-tickle-me wrote:
I'm not sure, maybe you know: I assumed the Japanese were good until
they lost their best attack and dive bomber pilots; and this problem was


It's hard to say precisely: but looking at losses, the Japanese lost
somewhere between 100 and 150 carrier qual'd aircrew at each of the
first couple of carrier battles. The Guadalcanal campaign as a whole
cost the Japanese Navy over 2800 planes, though, so you can see that
it would be where the majority of the pre-war elite died.

Defending fighters breaking up attacks would be the norm anywhere I
suppose, regardless of how well-trained the attacking pilots are.


What is impressive about the Japanese early war aircrew is that
defending fighters often didn't break up the attacks, even when they
were in a position to intercept. Examine the Hiryu's airgroup pair of
attacks on Yorktown at Midway and notice that despite intense losses,
on both occasions the crews got in and hit their targets and did their
damage.

Chris Manteuffel


The relevance is if known Japanese experience predicts how well the
Germans might have done against the RN. To what extent had the skilled
attack pilots been lost during the BoB?

jsw
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

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 03:50 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:58 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2021 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.