Churchill's rage over the loss of Singapore - Page 8




 
--
 
December 2nd, 2011  
samneanderthal
 
You vill shpell it vis a capital S: Sitzkrieg!
December 2nd, 2011  
George
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seehund
No! After Poland had lost, there was a lull in the fighting, and the period was jokingly called sitzkrieg.
Sorta what I said in post 63.
December 2nd, 2011  
samneanderthal
 
Another powerful weapon that the RN did not deploy properly in Singapore were its submarines, which could have made the invasion quite difficult. The RN did not make good use of torpedo boats either, which at night could have sunk many transport ships, etc, without risking attack by Jap planes.

In my opinion General Percival should have built better defenses but the fact is that the Japanese navy would have easily blasted them away with their artillery. As Churchill should have well known by costly experience, without planes to protect the British ships, the ships and the peninsula were doomed. Had Churchill had planes in Norway, his ships and army would not have been chased away, had Churchill had planes in France to protect his ships, the latter would have blasted Guderians tanks near the coast. Had Churchill had planes in Crete to shoot down the planes and gliders and to protect his ships he would not have lost the Island, many men and ships. Had Churchill had planes in Malaya-Singapore, his ships would have been protected and invaluable with their artillery.

Summing up, the UK had planes, ships, submarines, tanks, artillery, etc, to defend Singapore but they were elsewhere being less useful, while 130,000 men with rifles, mortars, machine guns and a few AT guns had to face hundreds of planes, dozens of ships, 200 tanks.
Both the USSR and the Generals in Africa used their abundant weapons rather poorly, while hundreds of thousands in the east were left without powerful weapons. Africa tied up enormous naval and air resources to defend Malta and stop the Italians from supplying Rommel, because the British Generals could not even defend themselves from Rommel, unless they had overwhelming artillery, plane, tank and men superiority. This left the rest of the British empire extremely vulnerable.
--
December 2nd, 2011  
84RFK
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by samneanderthal
Had Churchill had planes in Norway, his ships and army would not have been chased away.
As a matter of fact, Churchill had planes in Norway, what he didn't have was suitable airfields, good communications, and reliable supply lines.
And another interesting fact is that Curchill (who wasn't even there) his planes, ships and army wasn't chased away.
On the contrary, they were about to throw the Germans out accross the border and into Sweden, but the German attack on France forced them to evacuate and focus their strength on French soil instead.
December 2nd, 2011  
lljadw
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by samneanderthal
I already wrote that the British tanks with their narrow tracks and 40 mm cannon were pretty useless in the USSR and the Hurricanes were also of little use.

In any event, the USSR was immense, the Germans had lost most of their tanks and planes in Barabarossa and Stalin could continue withdrawing almost indefinitely, stretching more and more the German supply lines and their exposure to partisans, whereas the 130,000 men in Singapore had nowhere to withdraw. They were doomed.
It is absurd to send hundreds of inferior tanks to the generals who had lost 20,000 better tanks and thousands of cannon in 6 months, instead of sending them to face the toy Jap tanks, where there was not a single allied tank and very few pieces of field artillery. It makes less sense to send those inferior tanks to the incompetent Soviets than to send the best fighters to be used by the best British, French and Polish pilots in France. It makes much less sense to send hundreds of Hurricanes and some pilots to the USSR, where 20,000 planes had been lost and the weather allows for limited flight time than to send them to the chaps flying a few dozen Gladiators and Buffaloes, who are tasked with protecting the British ships and the troops from hundreds of jap planes.
If the Hurricanes were of little use in the SU,why would they have any use against Japan ?
If the British tanks sent to the SU were useless,why would they have any use in the jungle of Malaya?
Of course,asking this to some one claiming that the SU lost 20000 tanks and 20000 aircraft in 1941,is also useless (the SU lost 13405 tanks in 1941),because,it is almost certain that Sam is a descendant of Baron von Munchhausen,or is he a relative of Michelle Bachman ?
December 2nd, 2011  
samneanderthal
 
Isn´t it strange that the Germans, who were reacting to the allied occupation managed to operate planes by the hundreds in Norway?
As I mentioned when I comented about the 263 squadron in Norway, it was sent only with Gladiators initially and its planes wiped out, then sent back with more Gladiators but at least backed by another squadron with Hurricanes and was doing fairly well ehen it was evacuated. Had plenty of Hurricanes been sent initially, things would have been harder for the Germans.
The Allied navy was pretty useless during the French campaign (until it was lost and they had to evacuate) and withdrawing from Norway allowed Germany to send hundreds of planes from Norway to France.
If German planes did not chase away the British navy, then what did? certainly not the crippled German navy.
The Norwegians had to fight for months without the British navy after the British and French troops left.
In my opinion, if Germany has 800 planes and Britain has 100 and mostly obsolete in Norway, the LW chased the RN.
Had Churchill planned the campaign a little better, he would have forced Hitler to fight there instead of in France, where the terrain was much more favorable for tanks and supplies were much easier for Germany. The UK should have finished off the German navy in weeks and controled the supplies, so that German planes and troops would have run out of supplies.
The idea that the allied troops performed well in Norway and were about to kick out the Germans is quite far from the truth. France simply served as an excuse to pull out of the Fiasco. Planes ruled in WW II and the LW ruled Norway.
December 2nd, 2011  
84RFK
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by samneanderthal
Isn´t it strange that the Germans, who were reacting to the allied occupation managed to operate planes by the hundreds in Norway?
As I mentioned when I comented about the 263 squadron in Norway, it was sent only with Gladiators initially and its planes wiped out, then sent back with more Gladiators but at least backed by another squadron with Hurricanes and was doing fairly well ehen it was evacuated. Had plenty of Hurricanes been sent initially, things would have been harder for the Germans.
The Allied navy was pretty useless during the French campaign (until it was lost and they had to evacuate) and withdrawing from Norway allowed Germany to send hundreds of planes from Norway to France.
If German planes did not chase away the British navy, then what did? certainly not the crippled German navy.
The Norwegians had to fight for months without the British navy after the British and French troops left.
In my opinion, if Germany has 800 planes and Britain has 100 and mostly obsolete in Norway, the LW chased the RN.
Had Churchill planned the campaign a little better, he would have forced Hitler to fight there instead of in France, where the terrain was much more favorable for tanks and supplies were much easier for Germany. The UK should have finished off the German navy in weeks and controled the supplies, so that German planes and troops would have run out of supplies.
The idea that the allied troops performed well in Norway and were about to kick out the Germans is quite far from the truth. France simply served as an excuse to pull out of the Fiasco. Planes ruled in WW II and the LW ruled Norway.
Well, I suppose you have never been to those particular parts of Norway.
Take a map, meassure the distance between Copenhagen in Denmark and Oslo in Norway, then you meassure the distance between Oslo and Trondheim (both in Norway) and finally you meaasure the distance between Trondheim and Narvik (also in Norway) then you have the distance the Luftwaffe had to "jump" in order to get their planes into action on the Narvik front.
Then you can meassure the distance between Scotland and Narvik (in Norway) and try to figure out what planes the RAF had able to negotiate that distance.

The few British planes engaged on the Narvik front was brought there by carriers, and as such the Hurricane was moderately fit for the task, while the Gladiators was a tad better suited.
Then you can add the fact that they had to operate from Bardufoss airbase, wich was more or less a dirt-strip where the undercarriage of the planes, especially the Hurricanes had a tendency to bog in.
In the beginning of the conflict it was still possible to land and take off on frozen lakes, but the logistics to these improvised airfields was a nightmare due to the snowy conditions.
Everything had to be either carried by horse drawn sleds, or carried on the back of some unfortunate soldiers tasked with being mules.
The attempts of making improvised airfields on other locations litterally bogged down as the ground was thawing.

Bardufoss airfield was essentially the only available airfield, and even if they could have managed to bring more planes in on carriers, it simply wasn't room for more at Bardufoss.

While it is true that Norwegian forces fought in the mountains around Narvik, and also captured the city, for nearly two months, it's not entirely corrct that they did so on their own.
Both the Polish and the French troops made quite an effort in the snowy terrain, while the British troops were mostly left to areas near the coast due to the lack of real winter equipment.
The allied forces were evacuated between 4. and 8. of june, and on the 8. of june the Norwegian commanders had to surrender to the Germans since a prolonged fight would have proven futile.

While the importance of the allied forces may appear insignificant to you, we still choose to honour the foreign troops who came all the way and and fought on, gave their life on, and was buried in, Norwegian soil.
Just as we keep an special place in our hearts for the Polish destroyer ORP Grom and her crew, all resting beneath the surface in the Rombak Fjord outside Narvik.
December 3rd, 2011  
George
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by lljadw
If the British tanks sent to the SU were useless,why would they have any use in the jungle of Malaya?
,because,it is almost certain that Sam is a descendant of Baron von Munchhausen,or is he a relative of Michelle Bachman ?
Quality of German tanks vs the Japanese tanks? Thought he was arguing with the clarity of Joe Biden.
December 3rd, 2011  
samneanderthal
 
Excuse my insistance, but the Germans most have faced the same thawing ground, rugged terrain, mule transport, etc, and they had far fewer ships to transport their supplies and were facing a huge navy. Yet the Germans managed to use 800 planes and the British a tiny fraction of that.
Moreover, the Bf-109 was far more difficult than the Hurricane to land and take off in poor conditions, given its very narrow landing gear and higher stalling speed.

Hurricanes were transported both assembled in carriers and packed in crates. When Churchill realized Singapore was lost without planes, he desperately tried to send Hurricans both ways. The carrier Hurricanes were too few and too late and destroyed piecemeal and the Japs captured some in crates (they didn't have time to assemble them).
Given the time, distance, number of carriers and the possibility of sending planes in crates and assembling them in Norway, I don't see any justification to risk a single pilot's life in a Gladiator and to waste shipping and aerodrome space on Gladiators and mechanics to service them. By February 1940 (5 months into the war) Churchill and, Dowding, etc, had to know that Gladiators were inadequate against the LW and their pilots much too valuable to fly it. Precisely because the number of planes is limited, only the best would do. If it was no possible to send them, then you forget about the campaign. You don't send thousands of men and risk many ships and planes without hope of success.
It is easy to claim that you cannot tell the future, but after the Polish campaign the allies had realized that without enough planes the fight was hopeless. The French army leaders repeatedly told the British that without more and better fighters the situation was extremely difficult. So the failure in Norway could have been predicted in the planning stage (with Gladiators), the same as France, Greece, Singapore, Burma, etc,
Similarly, Rommel knew that the fight in Africa was hopeless when the allies gained complete air superiority. Rommel realized the same when the allies gained air control in France. Göring knew that the war was definitely lost when he saw P-51s over Berlin.

Given the fact that Churchill routinely ignored his generals and admirals, it is surprising that almost not many generals simply refused to obbey his orders on the grounds that they were absurd, as for example in Greece, when all the generals knew that it was a certain debacle, when he sent the Repulse and PoW to singapore without air cover, etc, On Hitler's side Guderian, Leeb, Hoth, Manstein and very many generals and field marshals were dismissed or resigned, but that does not seem to be the case with Churchill.
December 3rd, 2011  
84RFK
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by samneanderthal
Excuse my insistance, but the Germans most have faced the same thawing ground, rugged terrain, mule transport, etc, and they had far fewer ships to transport their supplies and were facing a huge navy. Yet the Germans managed to use 800 planes and the British a tiny fraction of that.
Moreover, the Bf-109 was far more difficult than the Hurricane to land and take off in poor conditions, given its very narrow landing gear and higher stalling speed.

Hurricanes were transported both assembled in carriers and packed in crates. When Churchill realized Singapore was lost without planes, he desperately tried to send Hurricans both ways. The carrier Hurricanes were too few and too late and destroyed piecemeal and the Japs captured some in crates (they didn't have time to assemble them).
Given the time, distance, number of carriers and the possibility of sending planes in crates and assembling them in Norway, I don't see any justification to risk a single pilot's life in a Gladiator and to waste shipping and aerodrome space on Gladiators and mechanics to service them. By February 1940 (5 months into the war) Churchill and, Dowding, etc, had to know that Gladiators were inadequate against the LW and their pilots much too valuable to fly it. Precisely because the number of planes is limited, only the best would do. If it was no possible to send them, then you forget about the campaign. You don't send thousands of men and risk many ships and planes without hope of success.
It is easy to claim that you cannot tell the future, but after the Polish campaign the allies had realized that without enough planes the fight was hopeless. The French army leaders repeatedly told the British that without more and better fighters the situation was extremely difficult. So the failure in Norway could have been predicted in the planning stage (with Gladiators), the same as France, Greece, Singapore, Burma, etc,
Similarly, Rommel knew that the fight in Africa was hopeless when the allies gained complete air superiority. Rommel realized the same when the allies gained air control in France. Göring knew that the war was definitely lost when he saw P-51s over Berlin.

Given the fact that Churchill routinely ignored his generals and admirals, it is surprising that almost not many generals simply refused to obbey his orders on the grounds that they were absurd, as for example in Greece, when all the generals knew that it was a certain debacle, when he sent the Repulse and PoW to singapore without air cover, etc, On Hitler's side Guderian, Leeb, Hoth, Manstein and very many generals and field marshals were dismissed or resigned, but that does not seem to be the case with Churchill.
I suppose your insistance is based on the fact that you didn't check the map as I asked you to?
The Luftwaffe captured and gained access to a number of air-ports and military air-fields in Denmark and Norway, hence they were able to fly their planes all the way from Germany to the battle zone on the Narvik front, and had plenty of chances to land, refuel and load their planes both en-route, and between their attacks.
The air-fields they captured and used wasn't hampered with the same problem as the allies had in the north, buildt on steady ground with proper sand-fill and/or wooden runways, they even managed to build longer runways in Trondheim in order to accommodate larger planes.
Add that the Luftwaffe also utilized a great number of sea-planes.

Since they had control over Denmark, the southern part of Norway, and Skagerak, they had a short shipping route in controled waters, plenty harbours to unload, and control over the railway system up to Trondheim.
The German troops on the Narvik front suffered worse conditions regarding the supplies, but they were resupplied by air-drops and the Swedish railway system.
They also deployed paratroopers, and when those fell short in number, they trained Gebirgsjäger troops in parachuting and air-dropped them as well.

In short, the Luftwaffe could fly their planes in via conquered air-fields and directly into the combat zone.
And the Germans had shorter shipping routes in order to supply their troops.

The allies had to rely on the planes they could haul over by carriers, planes that shouldn't actually be ale to either land or take off form a carrier.
And they had a long and dangerous shipping lane over open and unsecured waters.
As for sending Hurricanes in crates....the only port able to take loads like that was the German controlled port of Narvik.
And even if they had managed to somehow unload Hurricanes in crates on the beaches or fishing harbours further north, there was no facilities for the assembly of aircraft anywhere up there.
Even if they had the planes completely dismanteled it would be nearly impossible to transport them to Bardufoss.
 


Similar Topics
New weight loss program
Singapore bans military blogs
Indian Navy mulls joint patrol with Singapore, Malaysia
Rage Report - 9/11 and al Qiada
EF Typhoon jets to arrive in Singapore for evaluation