Dowding's Costly Blunder in the Battle of France - Page 6




 
--
 
November 22nd, 2011  
BritinBritain
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by samneanderthal
The red bulbs to which Churchill refers during the attack on 15 September, 1940 showed the planes in the sector under Parks control, not all the planes in Britain. Of course all the few planes in the sector were engaged intercepting the German bombers. However, Dowding always kept at least half the planes in Britain in reserve, whether they were in North or West West Anglia, Wales or Scotland.
Any cretin should understand that one does not leave other sectors undefended.

Again you are talking complete and utter rubbish.
November 22nd, 2011  
samneanderthal
 
Any cretin knows that if you have hundreds of planes bombing London day in and day out in September 1940, it is not very smart to have a few pilots facing them and hundreds protecting unthreatened areas.

But forget it, you have your stupid heroes and since they got lucky thanks to Polish, Czech, NZ, SA, Canadian, etc, pilots and to Hitler's and Göring's stupidity won the battle of Britain, they did everything brilliantly.
You can continue worshipping these idiots, while I continue learning from their stupid mistakes.
November 22nd, 2011  
lljadw
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by samneanderthal
Any cretin knows that if you have hundreds of planes bombing London day in and day out in September 1940, it is not very smart to have a few pilots facing them and hundreds protecting unthreatened areas.

But forget it, you have your stupid heroes and since they got lucky thanks to Polish, Czech, NZ, SA, Canadian, etc, pilots and to Hitler's and Göring's stupidity won the battle of Britain, they did everything brilliantly.
You can continue worshipping these idiots, while I continue learning from their stupid mistakes.
a lot of nonsens
--
November 22nd, 2011  
MontyB
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by samneanderthal
The red bulbs to which Churchill refers during the attack on 15 September, 1940 showed the planes in the sector under Parks control, not all the planes in Britain. Of course all the few planes in the sector were engaged intercepting the German bombers. However, Dowding always kept at least half the planes in Britain in reserve, whether they were in North or West West Anglia, Wales or Scotland.
There are a number of things you seem to be continually overlooking here as well:
1) Many of the RAF's pilots were inexperienced and were assigned to "quieter" areas to gain experience in operational aircraft.

2) There simply was not the capacity at forward airfields to take the massed squadrons of the RAF approach you seem to be advocating, I am assuming you are a supporter of Leigh-Mallory's Big Wing theory?

3) You also seem to be ignoring the efforts of both Luftflotte 3 (Western France) and 5 (Norway) now I accept Luftflotte 5 did not commit greatly to the battle but its presence had to countered and 13 Group had a huge area to defend so the only real reserve the RAF had was Mallory's 12 Group and they were tasked with protecting 11 Groups bases and plugging any gaps.

So all in all you are just plain wrong on this one as the aircraft you seem to think were "reserves" were in fact performing their assigned role as I have said before I think you have a one dimensional view of warfare (if A does B then C loses, it just isn't as simple or black and white as you seem to make it).

Quote:
Originally Posted by VDKMS
You do not go into battle with everything you got unless it is necessary.
Do not forget that they were expecting a German invasion in which case they had to throw everything they got at it.
Probably the only area of contention here were 11 Groups complaints that 12 Group taking too long to form up when they persisted with the big wing idea and 11 Groups airfields were left unprotected.
November 22nd, 2011  
samneanderthal
 
Then the situation was indeed dire, if all the aerodromes of South and East Anglia cannot accomodate 500 fighters, fewer planes than were involved in some battles by US carriers (Operation Hailstorm, the attack on Truk involved 589 planes from 8 fleet and 4 light carriers). Preposterous arguments defending absurd decisions.

No pilots could have been less experienced flying British planes than many of the foreigners at the front. They gained experience or died quickly and would have had a better chance to gain experience had there been more planes on their side.
November 22nd, 2011  
MontyB
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by samneanderthal
Then the situation was indeed dire, if all the aerodromes of South and East Anglia cannot accomodate 500 fighters, fewer planes than were involved in some battles by US carriers (Operation Hailstorm, the attack on Truk involved 589 planes from 8 fleet and 4 light carriers). Preposterous arguments defending absurd decisions.

No pilots could have been less experienced flying British planes than many of the foreigners at the front. They gained experience or died quickly and would have had a better chance to gain experience had there been more planes on their side.
Umm as I understand it Truk is surrounded by what 1000 miles of water, the flight time from a Luftwaffe base in France to a RAF base in Southern England was what 25 minutes?

You try getting an extra 500 fighters off the ground, directed to targets then back down, refuelled, rearmed and back in the air to meet a challenge that close to your bases.

Hell why stop at 500 extra fighters they could have easily given every man and his bulldog a spitfire to go up and fight the Hun, its not like ammunition, fuel, trained ground crew, operational airfields or spare parts were important the British could have just blocked out the sun with Spitfires and Hurricanes and the war would have been over in minutes.

Seriously it is time you stopped the tunnel vision and started understanding logistics, training and the actual manpower required to keep just one spitfire in the air or one soldier in the field then you might understand how silly the argument you are trying to make is.

There is no doubt that the war could have been fought better but it was far from the cluster f**k you are portraying it as.
November 22nd, 2011  
samneanderthal
 
You are right it's definitely impossible for the British empire to supply ammo, spares, etc, for 500 stupid planes, much better to use 250 and lose 35 a day and 21 pilots.

Nobody spoke about an extra 500, there were only 500 and half of them in reserve, I am talking about using all the serviceable planes all the time, the sensible thing to do when you are losing your few pilots and planes attacked by large waves.

Only years of British and Soviet cluster f. can account for Germany being able to fight for years with a tiny fraction of the population, resources, etc, on several fronts, while the huge British empire and USSR fought on basically one front at a time (I don't count British activity in the Pacific before Germany capitulated as fighting, the Japs captured more in Rangoon, Singapore, etc, than they spent conquering them, hell they even recruited 30,000 Indians in Singapore, more than the men they lost conquering it).
November 22nd, 2011  
MontyB
 
 
Tell me how many people did it take to keep one spitfire in the air?
November 23rd, 2011  
samneanderthal
 
About 500 times fewer than it takes to build one. So it really pays to keep them flying.
How many millions were sitting on their asses while the few at the front fought?
Saying that the British could not keep flying 500 stupid planes a few hours away from the factories, most of them Hurricanes (which used a similar Merlin to that of the Spits) is an insult to the British people, much worse than the ones I direct at Dowding or Churchill.
November 23rd, 2011  
84RFK
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by samneanderthal
No pilots could have been less experienced flying British planes than many of the foreigners at the front. They gained experience or died quickly and would have had a better chance to gain experience had there been more planes on their side.
Now I can't possibly tell what the situation was like for the foreigners from Poland, France, Belgium, The Netherlands, Denmark, etc..
But what I know is that the Norwegian volunteers, like my Grand-uncle, was shipped from UK to Canada and recieved their training there.
Then they spendt weeks and months on operational training in the northern UK and Scotland before they were sendt out on their missions.
Sometimes with less than perfect equipment, but well trained and motivated for their task.
 


Similar Topics
Fiercest Battle in History
The Battle of Horseshoe Bend 1814
Timeline of Incompetent Leadership Contest in WW II
Riots in France offer wake-up call to U.S.
A tribute to France.