By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
Russian military deaths at 824 a day on 13:21 - Feb 14 by Churchman
Britain fought in the battle for France, North Africa, Italy, Normandy. It fought the battle of the Atlantic and conducted an air assault on Germany like no other. It also fought a World War, as did the US. Russia, Germany did not. Both US and U.K. also supported Russia to an extent that it may have been defeated by the Germans with out it.
Perhaps it was Russia’s good fortune that the US and U.K. also fought the Germans.
Britain and its allies could have fielded an army nearly as large of the Germans had it chosen to go that way, as it did in 1918. I.e. sending all its men to war, horses, marching etc. It deliberately chose not to go that way to avoid the carnage of WW1. Russia and Germany did not. The U.K. fought total war. The Germans did not.
That Russia paid the bill through people was as much due to incompetence and lack of care towards its own people stretching back decades, as Germany having the best army in the world in 1941. Aside from killing 1000s of its own people, it ignored warnings given to it.
As for Max Hastings, in my view he is one of the worst historical revisionists. A read of his book Chastise on the Dams raid is good evidence of that. There are plenty of authors for balance, such as Beevor and Holland.
Edit: An alternative to the Hastings view - rightly or wrongly.
As someone with uncles who fought in North Africa, Italy, Burma and the Normandy campaign, I realise the British war effort was immense.
The fact though is that history tends to be written by the victors, which, with the resulting Cold War, meant that in the West the role of the Soviet Union was downplayed, as was the role of the West in the Soviet Union.
The truth is presumably somewhere between the two extremes which seem to me to be largely influenced by politics.
EDIT: I am not a military expert but I am not so sure the UK and its allies had the capacity to take on the Germans early in the campaign, particularly as the US hadn't even entered the war at that stage. In my view, the Channel probably saved the UK from defeat, and I am not so sure we would have lasted that long had the UK been part of continental Europe.
[Post edited 14 Feb 2023 14:25]
0
Russian military deaths at 824 a day on 14:05 - Feb 14 with 1904 views
Russian military deaths at 824 a day on 23:29 - Feb 13 by HARRY10
That assumes Russi IS maintaining it's level of production. It is not
NATO has huge resources to draw upon. And can source armaments and ammunition from almost all over the world. Russia cannot.
Drawing on WW1 comparisons Germany was defeated because it could no longer supply its troops nor feed the populace at home. There were still 'enough' soldiers in the field, but without suplies they were finished.
I susoect what we will see is similar to the Michael offensive (Spring 1918) and the Ardennes attack (Winter 1944) where the intent was to grab as much as possible before the allies were obliged to sue for peace.
An all out blast of everything will leave Russia vulnerable to internal revolt, if not India and China adding to the threat. It could end as in 1990, where the former Soviet bloc shattered and countries broke away
Russia isn't maintaining its level of production. It's running short on ammunition and its ability to replenish is hampered by sanctions.
This post has been edited by an administrator
0
Russian military deaths at 824 a day on 14:29 - Feb 14 with 1865 views
Russian military deaths at 824 a day on 14:03 - Feb 14 by DJR
As someone with uncles who fought in North Africa, Italy, Burma and the Normandy campaign, I realise the British war effort was immense.
The fact though is that history tends to be written by the victors, which, with the resulting Cold War, meant that in the West the role of the Soviet Union was downplayed, as was the role of the West in the Soviet Union.
The truth is presumably somewhere between the two extremes which seem to me to be largely influenced by politics.
EDIT: I am not a military expert but I am not so sure the UK and its allies had the capacity to take on the Germans early in the campaign, particularly as the US hadn't even entered the war at that stage. In my view, the Channel probably saved the UK from defeat, and I am not so sure we would have lasted that long had the UK been part of continental Europe.
[Post edited 14 Feb 2023 14:25]
Actually, history is sometimes written by who gets their version out first. The 1916 battle of Jutland is a classic example of that.
I actually think the Soviet Union role in WW2 was overplayed by the revisionists and was the role of the west in the collapse of the USSR at the end of the Cold War.
The truth is out there somewhere! I guess the best we can do (those who are interested) is read as widely as possible about it.
0
Russian military deaths at 824 a day on 14:31 - Feb 14 with 1851 views
Russian military deaths at 824 a day on 14:29 - Feb 14 by Churchman
Actually, history is sometimes written by who gets their version out first. The 1916 battle of Jutland is a classic example of that.
I actually think the Soviet Union role in WW2 was overplayed by the revisionists and was the role of the west in the collapse of the USSR at the end of the Cold War.
The truth is out there somewhere! I guess the best we can do (those who are interested) is read as widely as possible about it.
That's a very fair view.
0
Russian military deaths at 824 a day on 16:09 - Feb 14 with 1784 views
Russian military deaths at 824 a day on 14:03 - Feb 14 by DJR
As someone with uncles who fought in North Africa, Italy, Burma and the Normandy campaign, I realise the British war effort was immense.
The fact though is that history tends to be written by the victors, which, with the resulting Cold War, meant that in the West the role of the Soviet Union was downplayed, as was the role of the West in the Soviet Union.
The truth is presumably somewhere between the two extremes which seem to me to be largely influenced by politics.
EDIT: I am not a military expert but I am not so sure the UK and its allies had the capacity to take on the Germans early in the campaign, particularly as the US hadn't even entered the war at that stage. In my view, the Channel probably saved the UK from defeat, and I am not so sure we would have lasted that long had the UK been part of continental Europe.
[Post edited 14 Feb 2023 14:25]
much depends on what is ntended to rove.
The Russians held off the Grrmans 41-43, much as the French took the bruntof the fighting in 1914-15, its army was around 10 times that of Britain in the early parts of 191I watched a very interedsting clip about Polish pilots in WW2, whixch explained much and also highlighted the difference between tho nationalities.
Polands pilots pre war were part of an elite who were recruited from thousands of applicants. Britain was mostly those wealthy and connected enough to be part of a flying club. The difference in approach to training and tactics is quite illuminating
Where the Poles fought and regarde their squardon as an 'all for one' the British pilots in the early days regarded it as a battle for individual scores - have a watch
very instructive
2
Russian military deaths at 824 a day on 17:23 - Feb 14 with 1729 views
Russian military deaths at 824 a day on 16:30 - Feb 14 by HARRY10
much depends on what is ntended to rove.
The Russians held off the Grrmans 41-43, much as the French took the bruntof the fighting in 1914-15, its army was around 10 times that of Britain in the early parts of 191I watched a very interedsting clip about Polish pilots in WW2, whixch explained much and also highlighted the difference between tho nationalities.
Polands pilots pre war were part of an elite who were recruited from thousands of applicants. Britain was mostly those wealthy and connected enough to be part of a flying club. The difference in approach to training and tactics is quite illuminating
Where the Poles fought and regarde their squardon as an 'all for one' the British pilots in the early days regarded it as a battle for individual scores - have a watch
very instructive
Given this, and other Polish contributions to the defeat of the Nazis, it was rather sad that the Poles became virtual pariahs before and during the Brexit referendum.
3
Russian military deaths at 824 a day on 17:38 - Feb 14 with 1710 views
Russian military deaths at 824 a day on 17:23 - Feb 14 by DJR
Given this, and other Polish contributions to the defeat of the Nazis, it was rather sad that the Poles became virtual pariahs before and during the Brexit referendum.
Check out the disgraceful way the pilots were treated after the war. Those who returned were regarded as 'spies' by the Russias, and those who stayed in the UK were ignored by the authories.
The irony with brexit is those pilots fled Poland to fight against the same views as held by many brexiters - see Lie Anderson MP
and the enigma machine was taken from the Germans by Polish intelligence (pre-war)
Russian military deaths at 824 a day on 14:03 - Feb 14 by DJR
As someone with uncles who fought in North Africa, Italy, Burma and the Normandy campaign, I realise the British war effort was immense.
The fact though is that history tends to be written by the victors, which, with the resulting Cold War, meant that in the West the role of the Soviet Union was downplayed, as was the role of the West in the Soviet Union.
The truth is presumably somewhere between the two extremes which seem to me to be largely influenced by politics.
EDIT: I am not a military expert but I am not so sure the UK and its allies had the capacity to take on the Germans early in the campaign, particularly as the US hadn't even entered the war at that stage. In my view, the Channel probably saved the UK from defeat, and I am not so sure we would have lasted that long had the UK been part of continental Europe.
[Post edited 14 Feb 2023 14:25]
With regard to your edit, the French had the capacity to take on the Germans, but not the ability, especially at command level. It’s whole ethos was flawed. A shambles. Rotten. It’s tanks were as good, divisional strength in numbers was close, if not in quality. It’s airforce was mixed, but had some front line types, but wretched organisation and will to use it. France preferred Britain to waste its Air Force.
Britain had allowed its army to wither on the branch of appeasement, Great Depression and frankly denial. Votes to increase military spending throughout the 30s were violently opposed, not least by the Labour Party. Where money was spent was on expanding the Air Force and upgrading an obsolete but large navy. In particular, technology. Radar, aircraft types, airfields, aircrew training. The speed of change was astonishing.
It meant the Air Force went into the war small, but well organised and expanding. Organisation importance was obvious when you look at combat losses in France against those over Britain.
Yes, the Channel saved this country, but had it not existed, perhaps our approach in the 1930s, especially in maintaining an army, would have been different.
Germany was bankrupt by 1941. It was also being out produced by Britain and its Commonwealth by a huge margin by the end of 1940. It was operating at a level that Germany never got near, despite mistakes.
The Battle of the Atlantic offered Germany it’s only chance of winning. It certainly could never have invaded this country without considerably more resource, a means of paying for it and supplying it.
4
Russian military deaths at 824 a day on 23:54 - Feb 14 with 1586 views
Russian military deaths at 824 a day on 16:30 - Feb 14 by HARRY10
much depends on what is ntended to rove.
The Russians held off the Grrmans 41-43, much as the French took the bruntof the fighting in 1914-15, its army was around 10 times that of Britain in the early parts of 191I watched a very interedsting clip about Polish pilots in WW2, whixch explained much and also highlighted the difference between tho nationalities.
Polands pilots pre war were part of an elite who were recruited from thousands of applicants. Britain was mostly those wealthy and connected enough to be part of a flying club. The difference in approach to training and tactics is quite illuminating
Where the Poles fought and regarde their squardon as an 'all for one' the British pilots in the early days regarded it as a battle for individual scores - have a watch
very instructive
It’s well worth a listen. Lots of good stuff in it but also one or two things that I’m not sure are right.
Yes, Polish pilots were part of an elite and superbly trained. Yes, there was an element of flying club in the RAF in the early 30s because the RAF was tiny. By 1939 that was changing rapidly. Yes, you had your millionaires squadron, University Air Squadrons, Cranwell, but the RAF was also bringing in pilots from all over the place in addition to widening access to selection within the country.
Class, school, background made a huge difference (Guy Gibson of 617 fame notoriously loathed NCO crews) but the RAF was more modern and merit based in its thinking at the time than the navy or the army.
Being selected for pilot training was hideously difficult during the war and if you didn’t make the grade at any stage you were out. If you want to understand what it was like, I recommend Geoff Welham’s book First Light. It’s the only book I’ve ever read that truly explains what it was like to do it.
As the war progressed, the RAF training got more and more thorough. The Lufwaffe’s went the other way and the result was there for all to see. Training and experience was everything and as a generalism that showed when Polish squadron performance is compared with their more inexperienced RAF counterparts in 1940.
Aside from the pilots and ground crews keys to the Battle of Britain though we’re Dowding’s organisation, Park’s management of 11 Group and the integrated air defence system. It was astonishing.
1
Russian military deaths at 824 a day on 23:55 - Feb 14 with 1585 views
Russia is so desperate for equipment it is mobilising T62 tanks that Russia/USSR has not used on the front line since 1974, nearly half a century ago. The T62 is the equivilant of a later mark British Centurion, a tank that was introduced in May 1945, a World War Two tank albeit one that saw no active service in that war.
[Post edited 15 Feb 2023 0:40]
0
Russian military deaths at 824 a day on 00:44 - Feb 15 with 1577 views
The Russian armed forces are totally corrupt. Their only aircraft carrier kuznetsov was in such bog order a few years back the equivilant of £20 million was allocated to refurbish it. Today the carrier is still in bog order and the Russian defence minister has a £20 milion mansion outside of Moscow completed last year. Funny that.
0
Russian military deaths at 824 a day on 01:19 - Feb 15 with 1556 views
Russian military deaths at 824 a day on 23:55 - Feb 14 by HARRY10
Without cluttering up the thread by quoting, an exellent and very accurate comment, Churchman
That comment was to your first post, Churchman
Your second I would add thatwhile the RAF made considerable leaps and bounds in upgrading between '38-40, the Germans did not When you compare a windbag like Goring who owed his position to contacts with that of Parl/Dowding it is no surprise
How the RAF developed and used Radar and Beaverbrook pushed aircraft production you can see why the Germans fell behind. The Stukk was shown to be almost useless when faced with an aerial challenge.
The problem with the Getman forces was there were far too many big egos defending their patch, Stuff was often over prouced, and costly to manufacture. T34 v Panther.
As well as Poles and Czechs the RAF was bolstered by French, Aus/NZ. S African even US pilots. And it was rather a futile battle for the German pilots, as the hope, not among them, was that Britain would sue for peace allowing the Germans a free hand to attack Russia, specifically capture the much needed oil.
And while the image of ex public school chaps in the RAF was true, it was not most off the fighter pilots, nor did it affect the magnificient job down by ground crew and other auxiliary staff at various stations.
To paraphrase
Never before...has so much been owed by so many to quite a few
2
Russian military deaths at 824 a day on 09:25 - Feb 15 with 1512 views
Russian military deaths at 824 a day on 01:19 - Feb 15 by HARRY10
That comment was to your first post, Churchman
Your second I would add thatwhile the RAF made considerable leaps and bounds in upgrading between '38-40, the Germans did not When you compare a windbag like Goring who owed his position to contacts with that of Parl/Dowding it is no surprise
How the RAF developed and used Radar and Beaverbrook pushed aircraft production you can see why the Germans fell behind. The Stukk was shown to be almost useless when faced with an aerial challenge.
The problem with the Getman forces was there were far too many big egos defending their patch, Stuff was often over prouced, and costly to manufacture. T34 v Panther.
As well as Poles and Czechs the RAF was bolstered by French, Aus/NZ. S African even US pilots. And it was rather a futile battle for the German pilots, as the hope, not among them, was that Britain would sue for peace allowing the Germans a free hand to attack Russia, specifically capture the much needed oil.
And while the image of ex public school chaps in the RAF was true, it was not most off the fighter pilots, nor did it affect the magnificient job down by ground crew and other auxiliary staff at various stations.
To paraphrase
Never before...has so much been owed by so many to quite a few
Agree with most of that Harry. Especially praising ground crews and support staff. I’d add in people who manned the ops rooms, often working in extreme danger, those who did recovery and resupply. Too many to mention. It was a total effort.
You are right to point out Germanys inadequacies both in organisation and equipment. It was set up on competitive lines often based around who was in favour. There was a ramshackle, poor repair and recovery system. If a Hurricane was damaged, it would be graded, repaired on squadron or taken away and replaced usually overnight. We were never short of aircraft - thanks to Beaverbrook’s short term production push and Dowding’s marvellous rotation system.
The Germans didn’t operate that way to any effective level. It just flew its crews until they died and relied on their excellent ‘black men’ (mechanics who wore black overalls) to keep what they had flying. Great engineers though they are, the Germans did sometimes over engineer - e.g. Panther, Tiger, MG42 and sometimes back the wrong idea e.g. He177, Bf210, under engined Hs129, King Tiger (far to heavy and under powered)
Equipment wise, the Bf109 was excellent for its time, especially in the hands of a good pilot. It was tricky to fly but it’s biggest weakness in the battle was range. The Bf110 was the best heavy fighter in the world, but couldn’t compete 121 with a Hurricane or Spitfire and the way it was used was all wrong. The bombers carried a small pay load and Goering’s stupidity on how best to defend them just negated his fighters’ best qualities. The Ju87 was a brilliantly successful aeroplane, but only if there was no fighter opposition. It was impossible to defend and should never have been exposed in the battle.
For the British, the Hurricane is the bridesmaid in popular opinion against the beautiful and deadly Spitfire. But the Hurricane was competitive in 1940, it supplied two thirds of Fighter Command and shot down two thirds of the the numbers brought down. It was an effective aeroplane. Strong, easier to maintain, good gun platform, manoeuvrable, fewer vices than the Spitfire. Pilots loved them.
In addition to having to persist with obsolete types like Blenheim, Whitley, Hampden, Britain produced many a failure (Defiant, Manchester, Botha, Battle, Skua, Roc), as did all countries, but plenty of successes too.
The RAF was changing Public Schoolboy wise. It was opening up. Sgt Ray Holmes who rammed the Do17 over Buckingham Palace (both aircraft fell on and near Victoria Station and it was filmed) was not a public schoolboy.
You are right to praise pilots of other nations. There were too many to mention. Brave, skilled men, one and all.
[Post edited 15 Feb 2023 9:52]
1
Russian military deaths at 824 a day on 16:42 - Feb 15 with 1437 views
Russian military deaths at 824 a day on 09:25 - Feb 15 by Churchman
Agree with most of that Harry. Especially praising ground crews and support staff. I’d add in people who manned the ops rooms, often working in extreme danger, those who did recovery and resupply. Too many to mention. It was a total effort.
You are right to point out Germanys inadequacies both in organisation and equipment. It was set up on competitive lines often based around who was in favour. There was a ramshackle, poor repair and recovery system. If a Hurricane was damaged, it would be graded, repaired on squadron or taken away and replaced usually overnight. We were never short of aircraft - thanks to Beaverbrook’s short term production push and Dowding’s marvellous rotation system.
The Germans didn’t operate that way to any effective level. It just flew its crews until they died and relied on their excellent ‘black men’ (mechanics who wore black overalls) to keep what they had flying. Great engineers though they are, the Germans did sometimes over engineer - e.g. Panther, Tiger, MG42 and sometimes back the wrong idea e.g. He177, Bf210, under engined Hs129, King Tiger (far to heavy and under powered)
Equipment wise, the Bf109 was excellent for its time, especially in the hands of a good pilot. It was tricky to fly but it’s biggest weakness in the battle was range. The Bf110 was the best heavy fighter in the world, but couldn’t compete 121 with a Hurricane or Spitfire and the way it was used was all wrong. The bombers carried a small pay load and Goering’s stupidity on how best to defend them just negated his fighters’ best qualities. The Ju87 was a brilliantly successful aeroplane, but only if there was no fighter opposition. It was impossible to defend and should never have been exposed in the battle.
For the British, the Hurricane is the bridesmaid in popular opinion against the beautiful and deadly Spitfire. But the Hurricane was competitive in 1940, it supplied two thirds of Fighter Command and shot down two thirds of the the numbers brought down. It was an effective aeroplane. Strong, easier to maintain, good gun platform, manoeuvrable, fewer vices than the Spitfire. Pilots loved them.
In addition to having to persist with obsolete types like Blenheim, Whitley, Hampden, Britain produced many a failure (Defiant, Manchester, Botha, Battle, Skua, Roc), as did all countries, but plenty of successes too.
The RAF was changing Public Schoolboy wise. It was opening up. Sgt Ray Holmes who rammed the Do17 over Buckingham Palace (both aircraft fell on and near Victoria Station and it was filmed) was not a public schoolboy.
You are right to praise pilots of other nations. There were too many to mention. Brave, skilled men, one and all.
[Post edited 15 Feb 2023 9:52]
Maybe the RAF was less public school in WW1, or maybe they just ran out of pilots.
My grandfather was a working class lad from Glasgow, and was in Royal Naval Air Service before it merged with the Royal Flying Corps on 1 April 1918 to form the Royal Air Force.
He trained as a pilot but, with the end of WW1, his service was terminated for obvious reasons before he completed his training. Those in his position, including himself, were awarded an honorary second lieutenantship after the war.
EDIT: I only found out about his second lieutenantship (notice of which was published in the London Gazette) after his death when I did some digging into my ancestry. Even my mother didn't know anything about it.
[Post edited 15 Feb 2023 17:02]
1
Russian military deaths at 824 a day on 16:54 - Feb 15 with 1425 views
Russian military deaths at 824 a day on 08:26 - Feb 14 by itfcjoe
Was listening to a podcast about the Wagner group and they were just saying how they can just treat life so cheaply - i.e. send 6 men forwards into a danger zone, knowing they will all be killed but it allows them to find out where the shooters are etc so then fight back with more men.
It's like they are playing a computer game, just horrid and unthinkable
Battleground is great isn't it? Really insightful and great sources. Some of the things which are going on are equally horrifying and mind boggling. Seeing the funeral of the 21 year old Ukranian body collector on the news a couple of weeks ago after his work had been described on the pod was heartbreaking.
It's 106 miles to Portman Road, we've got a full tank of gas, half a round of Port Salut, it's dark... and we're wearing blue tinted sunglasses.
Russian military deaths at 824 a day on 16:42 - Feb 15 by DJR
Maybe the RAF was less public school in WW1, or maybe they just ran out of pilots.
My grandfather was a working class lad from Glasgow, and was in Royal Naval Air Service before it merged with the Royal Flying Corps on 1 April 1918 to form the Royal Air Force.
He trained as a pilot but, with the end of WW1, his service was terminated for obvious reasons before he completed his training. Those in his position, including himself, were awarded an honorary second lieutenantship after the war.
EDIT: I only found out about his second lieutenantship (notice of which was published in the London Gazette) after his death when I did some digging into my ancestry. Even my mother didn't know anything about it.
[Post edited 15 Feb 2023 17:02]
I think there maybe echoes of Normandy '44 in this war. The Russians are able to go toe to to with the wet until it suddenly snaps
There, the Germans were worn down. Unable to replace lost men and mtaerial as were the allies
As both sides slugged it out around Caen the US was able to break out and encircled the Gerans leading to the almost complete destruction of 7th Army at Falaise.
The question is how long can Russia hold out before it is unable to sustain the fighting any more. The best Putin can achieve now is to push westward, secure the Ukraine oil fieds and then try to sue for peace.
0
Russian military deaths at 824 a day on 18:59 - Feb 15 with 1369 views
Russian military deaths at 824 a day on 16:42 - Feb 15 by DJR
Maybe the RAF was less public school in WW1, or maybe they just ran out of pilots.
My grandfather was a working class lad from Glasgow, and was in Royal Naval Air Service before it merged with the Royal Flying Corps on 1 April 1918 to form the Royal Air Force.
He trained as a pilot but, with the end of WW1, his service was terminated for obvious reasons before he completed his training. Those in his position, including himself, were awarded an honorary second lieutenantship after the war.
EDIT: I only found out about his second lieutenantship (notice of which was published in the London Gazette) after his death when I did some digging into my ancestry. Even my mother didn't know anything about it.
[Post edited 15 Feb 2023 17:02]
You could get into being a pilot in WW1 when the RFC and RNAS then RAF were expanding so rapidly. The value of air power fully showed itself by 1918. It’d gone from a fledgling force flying a variety of death traps to observe to a force carrying out all the duties we associate to an air force to this day.
During the inter war period, there are examples of ‘Halton Brats’ becoming pilots and most air crew of larger aircraft were NCOs. With a tiny Air Force though, like today it was much harder.
That’s a fascinating story about your grandfather. Aviation even in 1918 was highly dangerous, even if the enemy weren’t shooting at you. It’d be interesting to know what he trained on - possibly an Avro 504 and how his training went. Shame you don’t have his log book.
0
Russian military deaths at 824 a day on 19:07 - Feb 15 with 1362 views
Russian military deaths at 824 a day on 17:43 - Feb 15 by HARRY10
I think there maybe echoes of Normandy '44 in this war. The Russians are able to go toe to to with the wet until it suddenly snaps
There, the Germans were worn down. Unable to replace lost men and mtaerial as were the allies
As both sides slugged it out around Caen the US was able to break out and encircled the Gerans leading to the almost complete destruction of 7th Army at Falaise.
The question is how long can Russia hold out before it is unable to sustain the fighting any more. The best Putin can achieve now is to push westward, secure the Ukraine oil fieds and then try to sue for peace.
I thoroughly recommend James Holland’s book Normandy 44 which picks up on your correct point about the German army’s inability to resupply. It’s a fascinating book and by far the best I’ve read on the topic.
It was critical in that Germany’s best divisions faced less than half their number in the Caen area (British and Canadians) and were as you rightly say worn down. In fact, largely destroyed. It was the pinning of those divisions that allowed the US to break out.
Part of this was an inability to resupply. Air power was of course crucial, particularly ground attack Hawker Typhoons and P47 Thunderbolts that made daytime movement a grisly affair.
1
Russian military deaths at 824 a day on 22:01 - Feb 15 with 1292 views
Russian military deaths at 824 a day on 18:59 - Feb 15 by Churchman
You could get into being a pilot in WW1 when the RFC and RNAS then RAF were expanding so rapidly. The value of air power fully showed itself by 1918. It’d gone from a fledgling force flying a variety of death traps to observe to a force carrying out all the duties we associate to an air force to this day.
During the inter war period, there are examples of ‘Halton Brats’ becoming pilots and most air crew of larger aircraft were NCOs. With a tiny Air Force though, like today it was much harder.
That’s a fascinating story about your grandfather. Aviation even in 1918 was highly dangerous, even if the enemy weren’t shooting at you. It’d be interesting to know what he trained on - possibly an Avro 504 and how his training went. Shame you don’t have his log book.
I know that my grandad did some of his training in Eqypt. Digging a little further by reference to what is said on the back of a photo at the time, I think his unit must have been No 16 TDS 69th 26 (Training) Group Egypt Abu Sueir.
I have no idea what he flew but I know there is a lot of stuff out there on this type of thing, so now I know his unit, I will try to dig further.
Rather amusingly, my aunt once told me that he often used to say how much he liked Egypt and with a glint in his eye, the Egyptian ladies.
[Post edited 15 Feb 2023 22:04]
0
Russian military deaths at 824 a day on 23:18 - Feb 15 with 1211 views
Russian military deaths at 824 a day on 22:01 - Feb 15 by DJR
I know that my grandad did some of his training in Eqypt. Digging a little further by reference to what is said on the back of a photo at the time, I think his unit must have been No 16 TDS 69th 26 (Training) Group Egypt Abu Sueir.
I have no idea what he flew but I know there is a lot of stuff out there on this type of thing, so now I know his unit, I will try to dig further.
Rather amusingly, my aunt once told me that he often used to say how much he liked Egypt and with a glint in his eye, the Egyptian ladies.
[Post edited 15 Feb 2023 22:04]
He was clearly a bit of a lad then! A tiny bit of information here.
One of the whole aircraft is possibly an Avro, the other is definitely a Maurice Farman Shorthorn. No brakes, few gauges, no heating, little power, unreliable but stable. Basic! A bit like flying a tea chest.
0
Russian military deaths at 824 a day on 23:32 - Feb 15 with 1200 views
There was a documentary on RTE this evening with civilians talking about the destruction of Mariupol. It is truly heartbreaking and reminded me about all the WW2 docs I had watched over the years. I had to take a break from watching it....
I'll try and see if there is a link I can share and post it. Horrifying!
0
Russian military deaths at 824 a day on 23:39 - Feb 15 with 1192 views
Russian military deaths at 824 a day on 19:07 - Feb 15 by Churchman
I thoroughly recommend James Holland’s book Normandy 44 which picks up on your correct point about the German army’s inability to resupply. It’s a fascinating book and by far the best I’ve read on the topic.
It was critical in that Germany’s best divisions faced less than half their number in the Caen area (British and Canadians) and were as you rightly say worn down. In fact, largely destroyed. It was the pinning of those divisions that allowed the US to break out.
Part of this was an inability to resupply. Air power was of course crucial, particularly ground attack Hawker Typhoons and P47 Thunderbolts that made daytime movement a grisly affair.
Carpet bombing virtually wiped out Panzer Lehr, though the Yanks did kill 300 allied soldiers through bombing the wrong place.
being stuck in hospital some while back I did listen* to James Hollands ' The War in the West' and ''Brothers in Arms' - Sherwood Foresters (tanks), D-Day to VE Day, and a couple of other audiobooks re Normany etc
What did come out was why German soldiers continued to fight when it should have been obvious the war was lost.
Firstly Goebbels had told them that post war Germany would be turned into a fairly low grade agarian society should they be defeated and that as they would be nothing left then it was a case of taking as many of the enemy as possible before you were killed.
There was laso the belief in the new wonder weapons, that they beleieved had already flattened New York and were in the process of doing so to London, so hang in there and the Allies would sue for peace. There was also the belief that at some point the allies would have to fight the Russians so better to join forces with the Germans.
The panzerfaust was a development of the US bazooka captured in Tunis. And it was from that battle, Torch and after, that the US learnt vital lessons for D-Day (see Kasserine). Supply was honed to a very high standard. The Germans in Normandy bemoaned the fact that the Allies could pull knocked out tanks from the battle and have them back in service within days.
A British soldier records that the Allies were able to use artillery etc to clear any obstacle ahead. The level was coded X, Y Z. The chap on the radio had given the wrong code on the net, everything in range let loose from mortars upwards. Instead of being local artillery hitting what was a couple of guns in a wood, 11 inch cruisers lying off shore joined in. Suffice to say once the air cleared it resembled a WW1 battlefield.No more guns, no more wood either. And altgough the target was nearly half a mile away it was testament to the incredible accuracy on the part of all involved.
It also went on to explain why captured Panthers, MK4s were not put back into action by the allies - lack of parts and ammunition. There were more important things to do than go looking for German amunition.
One of the books also adds a fascinating bit about 'souvenirs'. How allied troops would often strip captured German stuff of anything that had German markings on. That could then be traded with supply blokes who would then trade it with those crossing the channel to flog in ports along the south coast. Lugers, watches and insignia one way, whisky and fags the other.
* Audible co.uk, you can get one book free if you join...... naughty types get friends etc to join, get a free book then cancel before the month is up
0
Russian military deaths at 824 a day on 02:31 - Feb 16 with 1153 views
Russian military deaths at 824 a day on 23:39 - Feb 15 by HARRY10
Carpet bombing virtually wiped out Panzer Lehr, though the Yanks did kill 300 allied soldiers through bombing the wrong place.
being stuck in hospital some while back I did listen* to James Hollands ' The War in the West' and ''Brothers in Arms' - Sherwood Foresters (tanks), D-Day to VE Day, and a couple of other audiobooks re Normany etc
What did come out was why German soldiers continued to fight when it should have been obvious the war was lost.
Firstly Goebbels had told them that post war Germany would be turned into a fairly low grade agarian society should they be defeated and that as they would be nothing left then it was a case of taking as many of the enemy as possible before you were killed.
There was laso the belief in the new wonder weapons, that they beleieved had already flattened New York and were in the process of doing so to London, so hang in there and the Allies would sue for peace. There was also the belief that at some point the allies would have to fight the Russians so better to join forces with the Germans.
The panzerfaust was a development of the US bazooka captured in Tunis. And it was from that battle, Torch and after, that the US learnt vital lessons for D-Day (see Kasserine). Supply was honed to a very high standard. The Germans in Normandy bemoaned the fact that the Allies could pull knocked out tanks from the battle and have them back in service within days.
A British soldier records that the Allies were able to use artillery etc to clear any obstacle ahead. The level was coded X, Y Z. The chap on the radio had given the wrong code on the net, everything in range let loose from mortars upwards. Instead of being local artillery hitting what was a couple of guns in a wood, 11 inch cruisers lying off shore joined in. Suffice to say once the air cleared it resembled a WW1 battlefield.No more guns, no more wood either. And altgough the target was nearly half a mile away it was testament to the incredible accuracy on the part of all involved.
It also went on to explain why captured Panthers, MK4s were not put back into action by the allies - lack of parts and ammunition. There were more important things to do than go looking for German amunition.
One of the books also adds a fascinating bit about 'souvenirs'. How allied troops would often strip captured German stuff of anything that had German markings on. That could then be traded with supply blokes who would then trade it with those crossing the channel to flog in ports along the south coast. Lugers, watches and insignia one way, whisky and fags the other.
* Audible co.uk, you can get one book free if you join...... naughty types get friends etc to join, get a free book then cancel before the month is up
Yanks killing aliied soldiers, surely not? During the Gulf War more British soldiers were killed by American forces than were killed by The Iraqis.
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
