• Re: Mathematicians put famous Battle of Britain 'what if' scenarios to

    From Byker@1:229/2 to SolomonW on Saturday, January 11, 2020 11:15:51
    XPost: alt.history.what-if, rec.aviation.military, soc.history.what-if
    XPost: alt.politics.uk
    From: byker@do~rag.net

    "SolomonW" wrote in message news:1onw1n05hoehl.1kh8gfizlghwm$.dlg@40tude.net...

    https://phys.org/news/2020-01-mathematicians-famous-britain-scenarios.html

    What if the switch to bombing London had not occurred? What if a more
    eager Hitler had pushed for an earlier beginning to the campaign? What if Goering had focused on targeting British airfields throughout the entire period of the Battle?

    From what I've learned about the Battle of Britain, the Luftwaffe, despite their high losses, had all but worn-out the RAF. Exhausted British pilots
    were getting so little sleep that they nodded off at the controls and
    shuffled around like zombies. By the time Der Fuhrer threw in the towel, the RAF hadn't so much "won" the Battle of Britain as the Luftwaffe LOST it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uCu7IT81gh8&t=21m22s

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: www.darkrealms.ca (1:229/2)
  • From Jim Wilkins@1:229/2 to Byker on Saturday, January 11, 2020 13:03:11
    XPost: alt.history.what-if, rec.aviation.military, soc.history.what-if
    XPost: alt.politics.uk
    From: muratlanne@gmail.com

    "Byker" <byker@do~rag.net> wrote in message news:bu-dnS0-LMBVn4fDnZ2dnUU7-LPNnZ2d@supernews.com...
    "SolomonW" wrote in message news:1onw1n05hoehl.1kh8gfizlghwm$.dlg@40tude.net...

    https://phys.org/news/2020-01-mathematicians-famous-britain-scenarios.html >>
    What if the switch to bombing London had not occurred? What if a
    more
    eager Hitler had pushed for an earlier beginning to the campaign?
    What if
    Goering had focused on targeting British airfields throughout the
    entire
    period of the Battle?

    From what I've learned about the Battle of Britain, the Luftwaffe,
    despite
    their high losses, had all but worn-out the RAF. Exhausted British
    pilots
    were getting so little sleep that they nodded off at the controls
    and
    shuffled around like zombies. By the time Der Fuhrer threw in the
    towel, the
    RAF hadn't so much "won" the Battle of Britain as the Luftwaffe LOST
    it:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uCu7IT81gh8&t=21m22s

    To be realistic the simulation would have to change Leigh-Mallory's
    stubborn support for the Big Wing approach and give 12 Group fighters
    a better opportunity to engage earlier in the battles. Only the 11
    Group's airfields near the Channel were seriously threatened, not 10,
    12 and 13 Groups' to the west and north.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: www.darkrealms.ca (1:229/2)
  • From Geoffrey Sinclair@1:229/2 to Byker on Monday, January 13, 2020 00:42:39
    XPost: alt.history.what-if, rec.aviation.military, soc.history.what-if
    XPost: alt.politics.uk
    From: gsinclairnb@froggy.com.au

    "Byker" <byker@do~rag.net> wrote in message news:bu-dnS0-LMBVn4fDnZ2dnUU7-LPNnZ2d@supernews.com...
    "SolomonW" wrote in message news:1onw1n05hoehl.1kh8gfizlghwm$.dlg@40tude.net...

    https://phys.org/news/2020-01-mathematicians-famous-britain-scenarios.html >>
    What if the switch to bombing London had not occurred? What if a more
    eager Hitler had pushed for an earlier beginning to the campaign? What if
    Goering had focused on targeting British airfields throughout the entire
    period of the Battle?

    From what I've learned about the Battle of Britain, the Luftwaffe, despite their high losses, had all but worn-out the RAF. Exhausted British pilots were getting so little sleep that they nodded off at the controls and shuffled around like zombies. By the time Der Fuhrer threw in the towel,
    the
    RAF hadn't so much "won" the Battle of Britain as the Luftwaffe LOST it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uCu7IT81gh8&t=21m22s

    Except we know the RAF was rotating units out of the front
    line in a way the Luftwaffe was not while receiving more
    replacement fighter pilots and fighters. Both sides were
    suffering major drops in the average quality of their fighter
    pilots.

    As far as I can see the paper takes the data from the real fighting,
    then allows the computer to draw out days in any sequence,
    including repeats. And then run this idea many times, including
    time shifting days well before their actual dates.

    They do not mention the weather related pauses, nor the
    way France did not surrender until mid/late June, nor the
    time taken to build and stock airfields within range of Britain,
    nor the need for the Luftwaffe to replace Battle of France
    losses, nor the need for the Luftwaffe to complete plans of
    attack given it was not a situation they expected and so on.
    Plus the big errors in the plans, including assumptions on
    production and loss rates. A big one was over estimates
    of average bomb damage, so the Luftwaffe could undertake
    multiple objectives, Fighter Command, Bomber Command,
    pre invasion strikes (say for example forcing the RN from
    channel area ports) and so on, then came aircraft factories,
    initially left alone as it was assumed the British economy was
    being so disrupted it would cut such production, which was
    of course already underestimated.

    Then comes replacements and learning curves on both sides.

    We know now an all out attack on the radar chain, bombing
    them repeatedly, followed by bombing fighter airfields would
    have made a big difference to Fighter Command's ability to
    base in the South East, but that is different to defeating it,
    let alone the RAF.

    I note the article does not even mention radar or fighter control.

    Essentially neither side could keep their aircrew quality up but the
    RAF held or increased its available pilots and fighters, the Luftwaffe decreased.

    Also at phys.org.

    https://phys.org/news/2019-10-plotting-air-raids-britain-devastating.html

    Which leads to

    http://www.warstateandsociety.com/Bombing-Britain

    Geoffrey Sinclair
    Remove the nb for email.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: www.darkrealms.ca (1:229/2)
  • From pyotr filipivich@1:229/2 to All on Sunday, January 12, 2020 22:09:25
    XPost: alt.history.what-if, rec.aviation.military, soc.history.what-if
    XPost: alt.politics.uk
    From: phamp@mindspring.com

    Keith Willshaw <keithwillshaw@gmail.com> on Sun, 12 Jan 2020 21:51:16
    +0000 typed in alt.history.what-if the following:

    Stephen Bungay is his book the 'The Most Dangerous Enemy' dug deep into
    the records of both the Luftwaffe and RAF came to the opposite
    conclusion. While the RAF had indeed taken heavier losses it was
    replacing both aircraft and pilots lost and at the end of August 1940
    had as many aircraft available as in May, indeed the obsolete types such
    as the Blenheim 1F and Defiants had been replaced by Hurricanes and >Spitfires. The result was that on Sept 1 1940 the RAF was at full
    strength with regard to aircraft (670) and had over 1100 pilots
    available. At the same time Erhard Milch was reporting that most
    Luftwaffe squadrons were seriously under strength particularly with
    regard to pilots.

    As has been pointed out many times: RAF pilots shot down, were
    shot down over their own country. If was possible for you to get shot
    down in the morning and be back up in the afternoon. Possible, I
    don't know if that happened.
    OTOH, Luftwaffe pilots got shot down mostly over enemy territory.
    Even if they made it to the channel, they weren't going to be getting
    back to the mess anytime soon. On going problem.
    --
    pyotr filipivich
    Next month's Panel: Graft - Boon or blessing?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: www.darkrealms.ca (1:229/2)
  • From Keith Willshaw@1:229/2 to Byker on Sunday, January 12, 2020 21:51:16
    XPost: alt.history.what-if, rec.aviation.military, soc.history.what-if
    XPost: alt.politics.uk
    From: keithwillshaw@gmail.com

    On 11/01/2020 17:15, Byker wrote:
    ?

    From what I've learned about the Battle of Britain, the Luftwaffe, despite their high losses, had all but worn-out the RAF. Exhausted British pilots were getting so little sleep that they nodded off at the controls and shuffled around like zombies. By the time Der Fuhrer threw in the towel,
    the
    RAF hadn't so much "won" the Battle of Britain as the Luftwaffe LOST it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uCu7IT81gh8&t=21m22s


    Stephen Bungay is his book the 'The Most Dangerous Enemy' dug deep into
    the records of both the Luftwaffe and RAF came to the opposite
    conclusion. While the RAF had indeed taken heavier losses it was
    replacing both aircraft and pilots lost and at the end of August 1940
    had as many aircraft available as in May, indeed the obsolete types such
    as the Blenheim 1F and Defiants had been replaced by Hurricanes and
    Spitfires. The result was that on Sept 1 1940 the RAF was at full
    strength with regard to aircraft (670) and had over 1100 pilots
    available. At the same time Erhard Milch was reporting that most
    Luftwaffe squadrons were seriously under strength particularly with
    regard to pilots.

    Essentially the RAF could sustain the loss rates while the Luftwaffe
    could not. Had things not changed the Germans would have run out of
    pilots by 1940. The difference was that Hugh Dowding considered that
    there should be 2 pilots available for each aircraft. Not only could the
    RAF rotate squadrons but RAF pilots were going on leave throughout the BOB.

    In WW2 the Germans never really got the hang of logistics in the way the
    RAF and USAAF did.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: www.darkrealms.ca (1:229/2)
  • From Geoffrey Sinclair@1:229/2 to SolomonW on Tuesday, January 14, 2020 01:47:16
    XPost: alt.history.what-if, rec.aviation.military, soc.history.what-if
    XPost: alt.politics.uk
    From: gsinclairnb@froggy.com.au

    "SolomonW" <SolomonW@citi.com> wrote in message news:1utwn4il0rcgn.1kfdmw6cgxcvh.dlg@40tude.net...
    On Mon, 13 Jan 2020 00:42:39 +1100, Geoffrey Sinclair wrote:

    Also at phys.org.

    https://phys.org/news/2019-10-plotting-air-raids-britain-devastating.html

    Which leads to

    http://www.warstateandsociety.com/Bombing-Britain

    Unfortunately when you go to the map you get

    "Due to high demand, we are experiencing technical difficulties. We hope
    to
    get the map back up and running as soon as possible. Apologies for any inconvenience."

    Frustrating, only their publicity agent must be sort of happy.

    The spreadsheet of their data is downloadable, it shows they are
    interested in "where" and include things like sea mines and later
    discoveries of unexploded bombs. If a report has multiple locations
    but only a casualty grand total then each location has an entry that
    includes the total, so summing them really overstates casualties. If
    you remove the duplicates their number killed total comes to around
    two thirds that in the UK official history Civil Defence.

    Hopefully they will add more details on casualties.

    Geoffrey Sinclair
    Remove the nb for email.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: www.darkrealms.ca (1:229/2)
  • From SolomonW@1:229/2 to Geoffrey Sinclair on Monday, January 13, 2020 19:48:52
    XPost: alt.history.what-if, rec.aviation.military, soc.history.what-if
    XPost: alt.politics.uk
    From: SolomonW@citi.com

    On Mon, 13 Jan 2020 00:42:39 +1100, Geoffrey Sinclair wrote:

    Also at phys.org.

    https://phys.org/news/2019-10-plotting-air-raids-britain-devastating.html

    Which leads to

    http://www.warstateandsociety.com/Bombing-Britain

    Geoffrey Sinclair
    Remove the nb for email.

    Unfortunately when you go to the map you get

    "Due to high demand, we are experiencing technical difficulties. We hope to
    get the map back up and running as soon as possible. Apologies for any inconvenience."

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: www.darkrealms.ca (1:229/2)
  • From Jim Wilkins@1:229/2 to Keith Willshaw on Saturday, January 18, 2020 17:06:31
    XPost: alt.history.what-if, rec.aviation.military, soc.history.what-if
    XPost: alt.politics.uk
    From: muratlanne@gmail.com

    "Keith Willshaw" <keithwillshaw@gmail.com> wrote in message news:qvvnaa$2t5$1@dont-email.me...
    On 13/01/2020 06:09, pyotr filipivich wrote:
    Keith Willshaw <keithwillshaw@gmail.com> on Sun, 12 Jan 2020
    21:51:16


    As has been pointed out many times: RAF pilots shot down, were
    shot down over their own country. If was possible for you to get
    shot
    down in the morning and be back up in the afternoon. Possible, I
    don't know if that happened.
    OTOH, Luftwaffe pilots got shot down mostly over enemy territory.
    Even if they made it to the channel, they weren't going to be
    getting
    back to the mess anytime soon. On going problem.


    That was important but equally important in the long term was the
    inception of the British Commonwealth Air Training Plan at the
    beginning of the war. By Sept 1940 the first batch of pilots being
    trained in Australia, Canada and Rhodesia were graduating. One thing
    that is not well known is that Fleet Air Arm and RAF pilots were
    being trained in the still neutral USA. All of this was additional
    to the 7000 pilots trained in the UK by the end of August 1940.


    Thanks, I didn't know that. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Army_Air_Forces_Contract_Flying_School_Airfields

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: www.darkrealms.ca (1:229/2)
  • From Keith Willshaw@1:229/2 to pyotr filipivich on Saturday, January 18, 2020 19:46:15
    XPost: alt.history.what-if, rec.aviation.military, soc.history.what-if
    XPost: alt.politics.uk
    From: keithwillshaw@gmail.com

    On 13/01/2020 06:09, pyotr filipivich wrote:
    Keith Willshaw <keithwillshaw@gmail.com> on Sun, 12 Jan 2020 21:51:16


    As has been pointed out many times: RAF pilots shot down, were
    shot down over their own country. If was possible for you to get shot
    down in the morning and be back up in the afternoon. Possible, I
    don't know if that happened.
    OTOH, Luftwaffe pilots got shot down mostly over enemy territory.
    Even if they made it to the channel, they weren't going to be getting
    back to the mess anytime soon. On going problem.


    That was important but equally important in the long term was the
    inception of the British Commonwealth Air Training Plan at the beginning
    of the war. By Sept 1940 the first batch of pilots being trained in
    Australia, Canada and Rhodesia were graduating. One thing that is not
    well known is that Fleet Air Arm and RAF pilots were being trained in
    the still neutral USA. All of this was additional to the 7000 pilots
    trained in the UK by the end of August 1940.

    The Germans always had this idea that it was going to be a short
    victorious war. The British like the Soviets and Americans were under no
    such illusion. They geared up both pilot training and aircraft
    production for a war of attrition.

    Both the Luftwaffe and RAF developed organised systems for recovering
    downed pilots from the channel and it was often a race to see which
    service would pull pilots out of the water first but this was still not
    fully in place in 1940.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: www.darkrealms.ca (1:229/2)
  • From Stephen Harding@1:229/2 to Keith Willshaw on Sunday, January 19, 2020 09:10:35
    XPost: alt.history.what-if, rec.aviation.military, soc.history.what-if
    XPost: alt.politics.uk
    From: smharding@verizon.net

    On 1/19/20 8:21 AM, Keith Willshaw wrote:

    He was one of the first pilots to fly a Corsair off a carrier as the USN
    only used them from land bases until much later.

    The USN VF-12 initially flew the Corsair off carriers for a brief time
    before the Navy passed the aircraft over to the Marines.

    My understanding is the RN was already using the curved carrier approach technique for other aircraft (Swordfish?) and it wasn't something
    developed specifically for the Corsair.


    SMH

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: www.darkrealms.ca (1:229/2)
  • From Ramsman@1:229/2 to Stephen Harding on Sunday, January 19, 2020 14:54:01
    XPost: alt.history.what-if, rec.aviation.military, soc.history.what-if
    XPost: alt.politics.uk
    From: nospam@nowhere.com

    On 19/01/2020 14:10, Stephen Harding wrote:

    On 1/19/20 8:21 AM, Keith Willshaw wrote:

    He was one of the first pilots to fly a Corsair off a carrier as the
    USN only used them from land bases until much later.

    The USN VF-12 initially flew the Corsair off carriers for a brief time
    before the Navy passed the aircraft over to the Marines.

    My understanding is the RN was already using the curved carrier approach technique for other aircraft (Swordfish?) and it wasn't something
    developed specifically for the Corsair.


    SMH

    It was used for the Seafire because of the limited visibility over the
    nose, so it was nothing new for the FAA when it came to use the Corsair.


    --
    Peter

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: www.darkrealms.ca (1:229/2)
  • From Keith Willshaw@1:229/2 to Jim Wilkins on Sunday, January 19, 2020 13:21:58
    XPost: alt.history.what-if, rec.aviation.military, soc.history.what-if
    XPost: alt.politics.uk
    From: keithwillshaw@gmail.com

    On 18/01/2020 22:06, Jim Wilkins wrote:
    "Keith Willshaw" <keithwillshaw@gmail.com> wrote in message


    Thanks, I didn't know that. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Army_Air_Forces_Contract_Flying_School_Airfields



    Norman Hanson who as a carrier pilot flew Corsairs off RN carriers in
    the Pacific during the invasion of Okinawa was actually in training on
    the Brewster Buffalo at Pensacola NAS on Dec 7 1941. After a period
    flying Fairey Fulmars he was sent back to the USA in 1943 where he
    learned to fly the Corsair at Quonset Point, Rhode Island.

    He was one of the first pilots to fly a Corsair off a carrier as the USN
    only used them from land bases until much later. https://www.tangmere-museum.org.uk/artefact-month/lieutenant-commander-norman-hanson


    He was onboard HMS illustrious off Okinawa when she was hit by a
    Kamikaze. While casualties were thankfully small in number and the
    carrier was able to resume operations the damage proved to be more
    severe when surveyed in port. as it occurred at almost the same point
    that had been damaged when she was hit by 6 bombs off Malta at least 2
    of which were 500kg SAP and the others 250kg. She was a tough old cookie
    who had a long hard war and was hit harder than many ships that went to
    the bottom.

    http://www.armouredcarriers.com/hms-illustrious-kamikaze http://www.armouredcarriers.com/adm26783/2014/10/16/illustrious-january-10-damage-report-bomb-shell

    Norman had a long and interesting war. I heard him speak once and recall
    him telling the group that such was the performance and firepower of the
    Corair that when he shot down a Zero he felt like a murderer. The IJN
    pilot never even saw him as he dived down out of the sun at almost 500
    mph and when he opened fire a short burst turned the once dreaded zero
    into a burning ball of confetti.

    If you can find his book 'Carrier Pilot' give it a read. Amazon UK have
    it available so its still in print and its one of the best books about
    the air war off Okinawa you can get.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: www.darkrealms.ca (1:229/2)
  • From Keith Willshaw@1:229/2 to Stephen Harding on Thursday, January 23, 2020 00:39:22
    XPost: alt.history.what-if, rec.aviation.military, soc.history.what-if
    XPost: alt.politics.uk
    From: keithwillshaw@gmail.com

    On 19/01/2020 14:10, Stephen Harding wrote:

    On 1/19/20 8:21 AM, Keith Willshaw wrote:

    He was one of the first pilots to fly a Corsair off a carrier as the
    USN only used them from land bases until much later.

    The USN VF-12 initially flew the Corsair off carriers for a brief time
    before the Navy passed the aircraft over to the Marines.

    My understanding is the RN was already using the curved carrier approach technique for other aircraft (Swordfish?) and it wasn't something
    developed specifically for the Corsair.


    SMH

    According to Norman Hanson the main problem with the Corsair was Oleo
    Bounce which was fixed by mods to the oil valves which Vought then
    included on the production line.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: www.darkrealms.ca (1:229/2)
  • From David Lesher@1:229/2 to pyotr filipivich on Monday, February 03, 2020 22:41:58
    XPost: alt.history.what-if, rec.aviation.military, soc.history.what-if
    XPost: alt.politics.uk
    From: wb8foz@panix.com

    pyotr filipivich <phamp@mindspring.com> writes:

    As has been pointed out many times: RAF pilots shot down, were
    shot down over their own country. If was possible for you to get shot
    down in the morning and be back up in the afternoon. Possible, I
    don't know if that happened.

    Not just pilots, but aircraft. The UK would actively salvage fighters
    and haul them back to be rebuilt.

    This actually caused a morale issue; the public would see many lorries
    carrying RAF aircraft wrecks but none with German ones.
    --
    A host is a host from coast to coast.................wb8foz@nrk.com
    & no one will talk to a host that's close..........................
    Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433
    is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: www.darkrealms.ca (1:229/2)