A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Space Science » History
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Advanced versions of the V-2 rocket



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #181  
Old July 26th 07, 12:25 AM posted to sci.space.history,rec.aviation.military
Dan[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 109
Default Advanced versions of the V-2 rocket

Rob Arndt wrote:
snip
p.s. You can even go backwards or forwards from WW2 and genocide has
happened all over the world, but you blame Germany also exclusively.
Don't use me as an excuse for your hatred of Germans.


Try reading what I write, not what you wish.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
  #182  
Old July 27th 07, 12:30 AM posted to sci.space.history
Darren J Longhorn
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 57
Default Advanced versions of the V-2 rocket

On Mon, 23 Jul 2007 16:21:25 -0500, Pat Flannery
wrote:

mercury, and crewed by pony-tailed Hitler youth girls cloned by the


Pig tails, plaited, surely?
http://www.germaniainternational.com...adheader01.jpg

--
Darren J Longhorn
It's all faked, I tell you, all of it!
You want proof? I'll give you your stinkin' proof...
http://www.geocities.com/darrenlonghorn/proof/nasa2.jpg
  #183  
Old July 27th 07, 01:36 AM posted to sci.space.history
Pat Flannery
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 18,465
Default Advanced versions of the V-2 rocket



Darren J Longhorn wrote:
Pig tails, plaited, surely?
http://www.germaniainternational.com...adheader01.jpg


That shows just how little you know!
That's only used when they are young to keep them from picking up the
extraterrestrial Vril rays before they are ready; once they are fully
trained like the Vril Chefins:
http://discaircraft.greyfalcon.us/Th...il%20Discs.htm
The hair is unplaited, and the rays from Aldebaran begin to be absorbed.
BTW, I made a color three-view drawing of that plane with all the specs
if you want me to send it to you.
I even put a asymmetrical parasite fighter on one wingtip, which
reincorporates a revolutionary feature.
In normal fight its prop drives a huge internal dynamo that provides
electrical power for the main aircraft.
On approach to the target, the whirling dynamo drives a giant siren like
those mounted on a Stuka, to warn the Jewish population of New York City
that their day has come.
If the aircraft is attacked, the fighter detaches, and uses the
tremendous amount of inertial energy in the spinning dynamo to drive its
prop as it takes on the enemy, shrieking like a banshee as it blows them
from the sky.
Its pilot then selects a worthwhile target as the dynamo spins down and
dives on it like avenging Alpine black eagle, crushing and electrocuting
its enemy in its own destruction.
A worthwhile target?
That's obvious: http://www.katzdeli.com/
There shall be no more salamis for the boys in the army. ;-)
And now, a bonus CPFM pictu http://poetry.rotten.com/refreshment/



Pat
  #184  
Old July 27th 07, 03:43 AM posted to sci.space.history,rec.aviation.military
BradGuth
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 21,544
Default Advanced versions of the V-2 rocket

On Jul 1, 4:42 pm, Scott Lowther
wrote:
Putting some of the documents I've dug up on eBay:

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...38340542&ssPag...

An early winged V-2, the A-8 and a sketch of a three-man A-9.


The V-2 was a terrific flying machine that ran primarily on h2o2, plus
a little of whatever else made the most energy density sense. It was
their own raw supply shortage of the h2o2 that kept the rest of us
from having to speak a somewhat Jewish from of German. WWII was
actually an energy based war, whereas essentially our energy reserves
and especially that of Russia outlasted their's.
- Brad Guth

  #185  
Old July 27th 07, 08:21 AM posted to sci.space.history,rec.aviation.military
Geoffrey Sinclair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3
Default Advanced versions of the V-2 rocket

wrote in message
ups.com...
On Jul 12, 7:03 am, Pat Flannery wrote:
Eunometic wrote:


(snip)


Note that the B-29 and particulary the Lancaster (as the Manchester)
was crap in it first year. The V1 never got the year.


You're forgetting one other factor he It was being built by slave
labor who were more than happy to do anything they could to sabotage it
during production if they though they wouldn't be caught doing it.
One technique was to urinate on the guidance system electronics. During
tests at the end of production this would pass fine; but within a few
days corrosion would set in that would make the unit unusable when the
missile was readied for launch.


That some forced workers were actively sabotaging V2 sub component
production in some plants is something that the V2 shared with some
other Nazi era plants.


The Nazis were not good at most things, not surprising they were
opposed.

It doesn't say anything about the cost effectiveness or potential cost
effectiveness of the V2. The V2, minus R+D costs, was much cheaper
to produce than an aircraft and even cheaper to opperate with less
risk to personel.


What I like is the way so much of it is "potential", rather than the
reality.

Like the resources the V2 pulled away from other missile development,
and other research projects. Like the real accuracy the type achieved,
like the "cheap" ignores the fundamental reality it was a 1 ton bomb
with a range of around 200 miles, using nearly 12 tons of structure
and fuel.

Rather ignores the other benefits the aircraft brought.

Junkers only employed 2% of foreign workers and they were
generally well treated. Several aerodynamicists and test pilots were
jewish for instance and they were clearly protected by Junkers personel.


So how about naming these people and how they were protected.
So Junkers employed around 65,000 workers in early 1944, correct?

Concentration Camp Prisoners Working and intended prisoner worker
numbers in the Aircraft industry, As of January 1944.

Table is Prison camp, firm, planned and actual prisoners working and
remarks,

Buchenwald,

Erla Leipzig // 2800 // 1550 // fuselages, wings, tails for Bf109
Junkers Schonebeck // 2000 // 1310 // parts for Junkers
Leichmetall Wernigerode // 1200 // 772 // cylinder blocks
Anhydrit Stollen // 10000 // 0 // parts for Junkers
Ago, Oschersleben // 1500 // 0 // Fw190

Dachau,

BMW, Munchen-Allach // 12000 // 3434 // engines
Dornier Neuaubing // 3000 // 60 // parts
Messerschmitt, Augsburg // 2400 // 2695 // Me410
Messerschmitt, Gablingen // 600 // 352 // parts
Messerschmitt, Dachau // 600 // 192 // parts
Messerschmitt, Kottern // 1000 // 341 /parts
Prazfix Dachau // 400 // 356 // parts
Sasche, Kempten // 1000 // 374 // parts

Flossenburg

Steinwerke, Flossenburg // 4000 // 1911 // Messerschmitt parts
Erla, Johanngeorgenstadt // 600 // 546 // Bf109 parts
Erla, Mulsen // 500 // 30 // Bf109 parts
Keramische Werke, Neurohlau // 100 // 100 Messerschmitt parts
Luftfahrtgeratewerke Zwodau // 1500 // 199 // Messerschmitt parts

Gross Rosen,

Famo Bunzlau // 1500 // 0 // Ta154 parts

Herzogenbusch

Steinwerke Herzogenbusch // 600 // 411 // repairs

Mauthausen,

Steinwerke Mauthausen // 500 // 423 // Fuselages for Messerschmitt
Flugmotoren, Wiener-Neudorf // 3000 // 1983 // engine parts
Heinkel Schwechat // 3200 // 2065 // He219 parts
Esche II // 10000 // 0 // aircraft

Natzweiler

Steinwereke Natzweiler // 400 // 261 // Jumo engine repair
Geratewerk Diedenhoffen // 600 // 0 // missiles

Neuengamme

Stram Hamburg-Bergdorf // 80 // 80 // parts

Ravensbruck

Erprobungstelle Peenemunde // 600 // 598 // V1, V2
Heinkel Barth // 2000 // 1721 // missiles
Mech. Werkstatten Neurbrandenb. // 4000 // 1981 // bomb-launchers
Siemens Ravensbruck // 2400 // 872 // radars
Maschinenbau Velten // 600 // 596 // parts

Sachsenhausen

Heinkel Oranienburg // 6500 // 5939 // He177

(probably a left over from the Hugo Junkers days)
It had the among the highest productivity of German aircraft plants.


The Germans discovered that Germans were the most productive
overall, then came foreign workers, then came slave labour.

Heinkel on the other hand ended up with about 40% foreign workers with
Ernst Heinkel spending time in jail over this due to the harsher
conditions.


See the above list.

In part because they were told to stop He 111 and tool up for Me 210
production when that program was a temporary disaster (because Willy
Messerschmitt had shortened the tail and built fast tracked the tooling)
and as a result production had to be shifted to the Ju 88. They would
have been better of building the He 219 which was efficient to mass
produce.


Me210 first flight in September 1939.

He111 built at the Rostock plant, with 1,399 built in 1939, 827 in 1940,
930 in 1941 1,337 in 1942, 1,408 in 1943, to use the USSBS figures. This
was the only He111 production line.

Heinkel was producing Ju88s at its Oranenburg plant from 1940 to
1942, some 298 in 1941 and 150 in 1942.

The He177 came into production at the Arado Neuendorf plant at
the start of 1941, and the Heinkel Oranenberg at the end of 1942
about 6 months after the end of Ju88 production.

The Me210 had 3 German production lines, Messerschmitt at Augsberg
and Regensburg and Luther at Braunschweig, the latter building 10 of
them. The Augsburg line had been producing Bf110, as had the
Braunschweig line, the Regensburg line the Bf109. All these lines went
back to their original types in 1942, after starting Me210 production in the
second half of 1941.

So the Heinkel Ju88 production was phased out in favour of He177,
the Me210 production lines came from existing fighter lines, and it
was always understood the He111 would be replaced by later types,
line the Ju88 and He177. For example Ju88 production climbed from
2,184 in 1940 to 2,619 in 1941.

(snip)

Ever read the numbers that died making it versus the number it killed in
combat? They were depriving themselves of more workers than the allies
of citizens.


So the idea is to bring up death camps or holocaust issues to distract
from the argument as to whether the V2 could have been cost effective?


No, pointing out how ineffective the V2 was except as a method
of killing workers.

The Dora camp had 60,000 workers. The Nazi camp statistics
record 12,000 deaths whereas other statistics say 20,000.


So if these were the deaths at the camp how come deaths in
claimed marches away from the camp are used as an excuse
to lower their deaths during production figure?

The sources of those deaths we
1 Allied bombing.


I have seen German air raid casualties make it to well over 600,000
it depends on what is being measured, the borders chosen, whether
it is just German civilians for example. The 593,000 figure appears
to apply to Germany as defined by the 1937 borders, so it excludes
Austria for example, and it is people killed, including foreign workers
and PoWs.

Richard Sorge in the Other Price of Hitler's war claims 410,000
civilians killed and "hundreds of thousands" missing. The 410,000
figure appears to be German civilians killed, then add 23,000 police
and civilians working in the military, 32,000 foreign workers and
PoWs plus 128,000 displaced persons, total 593,000. This total
is from the post war investigations of the German Statistical Office.

Note the total of 32,000 foreign workers and PoWs, perhaps
Eunometic can tell us how come the allies managed to kill so
many of them in 1945 at the V2 production line.

2 Deaths of labourers foced to excavate the tunnels used to secure
production facilities.


Somehow these are not supposed to count.

3 Forced evacuations and marches as Soviet forces approached,


How come they end up as losses for the camps they have marched
away from?

4 Deaths arising from intimidating people into producing would seem to
be the least likely cause of deaths.


I note Eunometic has decided this, please provide the relevant statistics.
By the way who exactly occupied the plant in 1945?

In other works there was nothing about V2 production, even when using
forced labour, that directly caused such heavy deaths.


In other words Eunometic is going to avoid the lack of food and
sanitation for a start, the absurd work quotas to go on with and
of course the SS idea of discipline.

In a relatively short time much of the production would have been
reduced to series of automated operations as the designs and
manufacturing operations were productionised with large pressed
or stamped parts etc.


Even assuming this was possible it would have been needed
given the SS was killing so many of the workers.

To put that in context:


Translation, need to find something bad someone else did.

"During the latter stages of World War II, Pforzheim, a town in south
west Germany was bombed a number of times. The largest raid, and one
of the most devastating area bombardments of the war was carried out
by the Royal Air Force (RAF) on the evening of February 23, 1945.
About one fifth of the town's population, over 17,000 people, were
killed in the air raid, and about 83% of the town's buildings were
destroyed."


By the way the RAF harassed Pforzheim in October and November
1944 with 10 raids totalling 39 Mosquito sorties, then the single big
raid in February 1945.

The USSAF mounted raids of the Industrial area in April 1944,
the marshalling yard in October and December, There were 5
further raids January to March 1945, on the yards and industrial area.

Savagery develops where people are trying to survive themselves.


Stupidity develops when people like the Nazis are in power, well
cared for workers are more productive for a start, weapons like
the V2 appear as another example.

If you are going to use slave labor at least use it to make something
that you really can hope to change the war situation with.
They lost an estimated 20,000 slave workers at Mittlebau-Dora on V-1/V-2
production:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mittelbau-Dora
There's some info on bomber costs versus explosive delivered


hehttp://www.spacedaily.com/reports/
The_Totalitarian_Temptation_in_Spac...

Here the claim is 6 V2's could be produced for the cost of one
Lancaster. That would be the upper cost of a V2, which was still and
immature weapon yet a very simple weapon once the technology was
developed. Halving production costs was a target. Unlike an aircraft
there were no elaborate fuel injection systems, carefully machined
cylinder for the engine.


So in one sortie the Lancaster delivers 80% of the same bomb tonnage
as the claimed 6 V2s. Given the number of sorties the average Lancaster
you can see why the bomber is actually cost effective. Fire a V2 and
you have used it, most Lancaster sorties came back.

The USSBS noted the 8th Air Force bombers managed to deliver
around 150 tons of bombs per loss. This would be short tons so
call it 135 long tons, or 135 to 140 V2's. Now compare the costs.

Oh yes, note the Eunometic declaration the V2 costs are as high
as possible and could only go lower.

By the way, any adjustment for the fact the Lancaster builders were
paid real wages and the V2 builders were largely charged out at
slave labour prices? If indeed the SS charged itself.

The empty, warheadless weight, gives some indication of the cost.


Just ignore the fuel weighed more than the empty carcass and what it
cost.

The V2 weighed less than most WW2 fighters and about a 6th of a
heavy bomber.


This appears to be the way to pretend the V2 was lightweight,
just measure it without fuel or warhead, so it comes in at around
2.87 long tons, this is still more than the weight of the early Bf109s
and Spitfires etc.

Go to the 12.65 tons loaded weight and it is more than the P-47
loaded weight, basically around the maximum weights of the
various twin engined types, like the Mosquito and P-38. And
a half to a third the loaded weight of things like the B-17 and
Lancaster.

Some 35% of the labour cost of a ww2 bomber was in the wings.
The v2 didn't have that nor did it have the complicated structural
connections to allow wing attachment. Apart from the autopilot
and fin/vane servos it was quite a simple device.


Ignore the fact the better guidance systems to produce the
claimed better results will up the costs. Just try and tell us
how much cheaper not fitting wings is.

As for the V-2's economics, from another posting:
"As a weapon the V-2 sucked. Even using your figures, we come to a
figure of total dead of
9,202 for Britain and Belgium, plus whatever the malfunctions amounted
to (say 500) so taking 9,702 and dividing it by your total production
and launch figures


There were barely 3000 V2's ever launched. Counting another 6000
produced but never completed or delivered or launched because they
got caught up in the final month or two of the war is absurd.


Except that the V2 needed to be fired within days of being built,
otherwise it was back to the factory.

Except that the claims about costs require the long production
run

we arrive at 1.6 deaths per V-2 produced; or 2.7
deaths per V-2 actually used- for a terror weapon it seems about as
efficient as a well-placed hand grenade.


It's as 'efficient' as any other bomber.


Eunometic has declared it to be so.

By the way the 570,000 deaths in Germany were the results of
hitting the country with well over a million tons of bombs, or under
half a death per ton of bombs, the V2 is well above that, thanks to
the lack of possible warning and its targets. Assuming the above
analysis is correct.

The tremendous amount of money
that was spent on them would probably have generated far more deaths if
it had been spent on other military weapons, or merely on thousands and
thousands more V-1s; which was a far more effective weapon from the cost
point of view- fromhttp://www.strandlab.com/buzzbombs/


The V1 was an effective weapon but it would have been countered
eventually and those counter measures were bound to become cost
effective. Hence the decision to produce both of them,


Try the V2 had lots to do with inter service rivalries and the Nazi
need for such symbols.

By the way I presume you are telling us the cruise missile is hopeless,
given the much better technology these days for shooting down the
type. Given the apparent idea that such defences would become cost
effective in WWII.

Improved versions of the
Fi.103 would have had midcourse guidance. (a minor course and range
update) higher speeds and longer range (up to 400 miles) and potentially
could have been made more difficult to intercept with radar altimeters to
allow low flights. The range was to be extended by disposable turbojets
(improving guidence accuracy due to less vibration as well) but with
these features the price increases as well.


As usual we have what the Germans did not do used as what they
could have done. But it is good to know even with these improvements
the allies were going to have cost effective defences against them.

'Afterwards, the Allies acknowledged that the V-1 was a tactical
success. It was also a very cost-effective weapon:
From a strictly dollar point of view, the V-1 cost the Germans less to
build and to operate than it cost the Allies in damage and
defense. A wartime British study [concluded that] using the German costs
as unity . . . it cost the defenders 1.46 for damage and loss of
production, 1.88 for the bombing, .30 for fighter interception, and .16
for static defenses, for a total ratio of 3.80:1 [in favor of the
Germans.]'


How long would that last?


Tell the USAF to remove its cruise missiles.

Oh I forgot, in order to make the German WWII technology look
good, technology from the 1950s or later will be selectively used
to show what could have been done.

Mittelwerk production costs per V-1 were around 6,000 marks per
unit...so that 2 billion marks used on the V-2's would have built around
another 333,333 of them; even taking 1/2 that money and using it for
more launch sites as well as destruction of V-1's in airstrikes before
they were launched and you could have around 166,000 more V-1s heading
toward Britain and Belgium- using the total number of ground and
air-launched V-1s used against Britain as a guide- 10,492; and the total
that reached Britain itself after malfunctions, interceptions, and
anti-aircraft fire- 5,822- we come


The argument is ludicrous in that the amount of material needed to
build 166,000V1's just wasn't available.


You mean the fact the V2s needed all that fuel for example, or all that
steel for a carcass?

Or just another attempt to avoid the problems of the Eunometic
economics, wish for a result and back fill the data.

V2 production costs were likely to
come down to RM50,000 and even RM28,000.


In other words around 4 to 8 times the cost of a V1. Even assuming
Eunometic's figures are correct, somewhat unlikely. And of course
the V1 could not have been made cheaper seems to be the other idea here.

The higher
costs of the V2 relate to a higher consumption of labour not so much
a higher consumption of material. Eventually costs are reduced to
the material costs and in the V2 a large amounts of materials were being
substituted for non strategic ones.


Consumption of labor has a rather sinister tone when to comes to V2s.
And the labour was cheaper than most of the usual workers building
V1s at Feisler.

By the way note the idea non strategic materials, as opposed to
cheaper materials.

(snip)

The V1 was not ready any earlier than the V2, the V1 would eventually
be countered by jets etc and V1 launch sites could be successfully
attacked whereas v2 launch sites were never ever found.


So in other words the fact the V1 was used in June 1944 is no
proof it was available earlier than the V2, first used in September
1944.

The allies were bound to develop jets and intercepting a
V1 with a jet is a relatively easy.


Yes folks, in the need to make the V2 a wonder weapon the V1 is
being written down. No point in mentioning the effort the allies
needed to prevent V1 attacks.

Oh yes, the allies did find and attack V2 launch sites, which were
harder to find than the V1 sites. Note the V1 sites were redesigned
to make them harder to find. And of course air launching of V1s
was used to extend their range but at a cost of relying on the
accurate navigation to the launch point by the aircraft.

At 1 and 3/4 people killed by each rocket (and the vast majority of
those civilians, not military personnel), this was a pathetically
inept
and unsuccessful weapon.


The records of Bomber Command and the 8th airforce are not better:
they killed mainly civilians. Infact their record is far worse.


At least at Hamburg and Dresden, it was their intention to cause as
much damage and as many casualties as possible in a terror campaign.


Try as much damage, if they wanted as many casualties try a mixture
of AP to hit shelters, fragmentation bombs to hit people. And also
hitting the surrounds of the city where people tended to move at night
to avoid the bombing.

Which was also the intention of the Luftwaffe once the attacks on
British airfields switched to London during the Battle Of Britain, years
earlier in 1940.


The attacks on London were directed against docks (in support
of the u-boat campaigne against supply commerce) and against specific
areas such as refineries.


This is nice, I like the way the 7 September attacks are taken as
the standard for the whole campaign. Ignoring the other attacks
and their effects on the city.

There was never a Luftwaffe "dehousing" campaigne.


Incorrect. Try for example the use of Sea Mines on parachutes
because of their high blast effect. They came with low accuracy.

Some results,

Clydebank, only 7 out of 12.000 houses undamaged, 35,000 out of
45,000 inhabitants made homeless.

Plymouth, raids on April 21, 22, 23, 28 and 29. Total of damaged houses
reported exceeded the number of houses in the town as damaged houses
received more damage in later raids, up to 30,000 homeless.

In Bootle around 90% of the houses were damaged or destroyed. Note
the Bootle council had resisted its fire brigade amalgamating with
Liverpool's and this hurt the fire fighting efforts.

At Liverpool some 1,900 people killed, 1,450 seriously hurt, and up to
70,000 made homeless as a result of the raids.

Care to comment on how those claimed accurate Luftwaffe bombers
hit so many houses?

The term "dehousing" was the British euphemisim for area bombardment
of densely populated urban populations using a device (H2S) the USAF
bascially called "crap". if anything was used at all.


The RAF used various marking techniques, the idea of H2S was to
locate the general area then use better crews and flares to mark
the specific target.

By the way if the USAAF thought it was crap why did it use the
system so much?

On one occasion a lone He 111 strayed and
accidentally offloaded on london. This was to begin
the cycle of increasing violence you seem to approve of.


Both claims in the two sentences are wrong.

For a start the Luftwaffe was flying night bomber sorties against
England from May 1940 onwards. These kept building during the
July to September period, they were up to 500 sorties in the week
12 to 18 August, compared with 1,650 day bomber sorties.

On 10 May 1940 bombs fell near Canterbury. Middlesbrough was
raided on 24 May. The first bomb on the outskirts of London fell
on 19 June.

As time passed the bombs began falling closer to central London
until finally,

London on 24/25 August 1940,

"After dark on the 24th the attacks were stepped up, and
some 170 German aircraft ranged over England from the
borderland to Kent. Largely due to bad navigation bombers
directed to Rochester and the Thameshaven oil-tanks
dropped their loads on the City of London. For the first time
since the Gothas of 1918, Central London was damaged in
an air raid. Fires burned at London Wall, and boroughs like
Islington, Tottenham, Finsbury, Millwall, Stepney, East Ham,
Leyton, Coulsdon and Bethnel Green all received their share."

The Narrow Margin, Wood and Dempster.

The Peoples War by Angus Calder, notes "considerable fires".

If a single He111 could carry this sort of load, then why build the
He177?

The attack on Coventry was made with the idea of pretty much wiping the
city off of the map in retaliation for a RAF attack on Munich.


Again that's not quite true. Conventry was the center of machine tool
production and had a Rolls Royce engine plant. These were the targets.


Actually the city was one of the targets, plus specific ones within
the city.

The Coventry raid was part of a series codenamed Moonlight Sonata,
talk to the aircrew involved and they make it plain the night was so
bright there was little need for navigation aids.

"The raiders first fired the medieval centre, crowned by its beautiful
cathedral, which was gutted. They then poured hundreds of tons
of bombs into the city in an attack which lasted for ten hours.
Approaching one third of the city's houses were made uninhabitable,
over half its buses were damaged or wrecked, and six out of seven
telephone lines were put out of action. All the main railway lines
passing through the city were blocked. A hundred acres of the city
centre were destroyed. Five hundred and fifty four people were
killed, eight hundred and sixty five seriously wounded."

quote from Angus Calder, The People's War.

Coventry had 213,000 people in 1938 and the number had increased
considerably by the end of 1940.

Some 21 important factories were severely affected. Then come
all the smaller works.

One of the major effects the British noted was the destruction of things
like the shopping district having a major effect as people found it more
difficult to obtain their day to day needs. This proved more disruptive
than the damage to factories.

The Luftwaffe had accurate targeting aids. The X-garaet for instance
guided the bombers along a beam, an additional 3 intersecting beams
provided the following functions, the first provided a warning the second
started a timer and the third stopped the timer and initiated a
calculation
that solved wind speed and direction and then released the bombs. It was
quite an accurate system. Although the claim is made that it was jammed
it was rendered ineffective not by jamming (the German systems could hear
through the jamming) but by the real danger of allied fighters roaming
along
the beam.


Think of the above paragraph in this way, with Oboe the RAF had an
even more accurate system than X or Y Gerat. So therefore the RAF
could not have been bombing indiscriminately right? After all that
seems to be the idea behind the Luftwaffe claims.

Just ignore the X and Y systems were for the "pathfinders", not the
main force. Also the RAF tried flying along the beams but without
much luck, the target density was too small, better to use ground
controlled interception.

By the way when the Luftwaffe bombed Stratford-on-Avon on 12
August what was the military target it was after?

The RAF's conduct of its nighttime bombings was far more severe in
inflicting civilian losses as a matter of calculation rather than the
sum of extenuating circumstances.


No, the Luftwaffe understood the same realities, and was quite willing
to have the perceived effects of civilian casualties.

The bombing of Rotterdam. The targeting was deliberate, and was meant
to help the German troops fighting in the city. A few days later leaflets
were dropped on Utrecht threatening them with the same fate unless they
surrendered.

The V2 was no worse. The lack of a firestorm probably would keep
civilian casualties down.


The V2 was no worse than other bombers except that the lack of
warning meant it would catch more people out in the open, causing
more casualties.

In all the thousands of bombing raids in WWII firestorms resulted on
so few occasions they can generally be named. Think of it this way,
aV2 hits an ammunition dump killing hundreds of people, about the
same sort of probability as a firestorm raid. The usual thing, look for
the exceptional results, not the normal ones.

The big difference was that at the end of the war, attacks on London had
ceased and Germany had its rail infrastructure destroyed and its
petrochemical industry rendered useless.


As my calculations showed: 200 V2's with a CEP of
1km pretty much destroys an oil refinery in that area.
If the CEP is 2km then 800 missiles will be needed
though the destruction zone is wider.


Great, now add 10 to 20% for the missiles that go missing in flight
and once again try and understand such accuracy was beyond
the 1945 Germans.

And if the refinery is to be destroyed by such a light weight
attack go look at the bombing results of attack on German
oil refineries. And their ability to be repaired.

(big snip)

Page 29 of Holsken's V-Missile book.
It was from a lecture Dornberger presented on December 14, 1939.
He stated that the A4 would be capable of launching from trains and
ships, have a range of 270 km and would only deviate from its target by
"some 100 m with regard to longitude and latitude"


It's been possible since the late 1950s to do that and
probably 500m was possible with the best technology of 1943/44


Try about 10 times that.

If you disagree then tell us why the V2 bombardment of Antwerp
did almost nothing to the port based there, given the V2s did not
have to operate at maximum range to attack the target.

(big snip)

You seem to be arguing that no improvements in the v2 is possible.


Improvements were quite possible.

Clearly there were improvements that were at a late stage of
development:
better gyros, better accelerometers and a more comprehensive control
system.


The dispute here is the idea the improvements were "at a late stage"
and they would be as good as Eunometic wants them to be. I note
the usual appearance of missiles from well after WWII as examples
and then the heroic assumption the technology was available in 1945.
Actually 1944, in order for it to make the production line.

(snip)

1km was, I asser achievable. double the accuracy of the gyros and
initial alignment, introduce cross range acceleromters and instroduce
a ball and disk integrator and 2km is a dead certainty and 1km CEP
achievable.


Eunometic keeps telling us and uses 1950's technology to do it.
Just ignore the realities of 1945 technology.

Think of it this way, in 1940 North American should have been
building the F-86, it was only 7 years away, sort of ideas.

(snip)

Yeah...right...Hitler was a really nice guy.
I'm pretty sure I could find you several million ghosts who might
disagree with that, starting with the population of Lidice.


Lidice was revenge for some kind of anthrax based assassination of
Heidger. on Nazi orders, but carried out by Czech security forces
(not Germans) lackeys as they were.


This is becoming hysterical,

Richard Heydrich, killed by Czech agents flown in by the British.
Using good old fashioned grenades, and basically the wound
being contaminated by horsehair and upholstery from the car.

Heydrich meted out brutal punishment and torture to those
suspected of being in the resistance and those who failed
to make Nazi work quotas.

No Anthrax. And I like the way the Czechs are lackeys for actually
trying to rid their country of the Nazis.

Probably very effective at
preventing further assassinations it had the effect of turning Czechs
against the Germans who were trying to bring them on side. The is
probably the reaction the British wanted.


Try the Czechs were already anti Nazi. The British did not need
to bring them on side, what the Nazis demonstrated was the cost
to the world if any of their senior people were killed like Heydrich.
See Lidice and Lezaky.

Heydrich's name was used as the operation name when creating
the death camps.

Remember why Hitler didn't want them to build the V-2?
Because it might hit that sphere of ice that surrounds the Earth at
around 100 km altitude and all that water could fall in, like during
Noah's flood. Then the Moon might fall in next, the way that one did
that destroyed Atlantis.
That makes even Stalin look rational by comparison.


Hitler's intuition (and he lived by it) was right. SST's and rocket
launches damage the ozone layer. Quite seriously. It's a modern
concern.


So where exactly is the dome of ice. Try the aerosol propellants
and refrigerants designed to be very stable at sea level become
highly reactive at high level as the Ozone's problems.

By the way why the need to show Hitler was supposed to be "right"?

Hitler didn't kill or execute randomly the way Stalin did.


This seems to require a new definition of random.

It's as simple as that.


Apparently the fact the Nazi killing program was more efficient does
not count.

Hitler was predictable.


You could guarantee he would grab more power and break his word.
Stalin tended to keep his word at international level.

He was egocentric, self centered and could be ruthless and exhibit a
temper but he was a vegetarian, had charm and good manners.


You really should read how many people found Hitler coarse,
lacking manners and good grace.

Or are you talking about another Hitler, not the one in charge
of Germany during WWII?

Oh yes, it shows lots when being a vegetarian has to be put out as
a virtue, in stead of the achievements as leader.

Unlike stalin he didn't kill large number of his own people.


Apparently the millions of Germans killed in the war Hitler started do
not count.

(snip)

If they are saying "Germany did it first" they are correct.
And this isn't the only time something happened like this; during WW I
Germany bombers and Zeppelins hit cities without much concern for
civilian casualties, and a group of German battlecruisers opened fire on
British east coast resort towns with no naval facilities in them with
the intention of causing as much fear in the populace as possible, so
that the Royal Navy would be forced to defend them, and divert some of
its ships from the blockade of the Baltic ports.


Yes and German soldier raped every Belgium woman and threw babies onto
Bayonets.


As opposed to things like hostage taking and collective punishments.

It is illustrative that the naval raids are ignored.

The targets of the Gotha raids were military or factories. The
reality is that bombers miss more often than they hit something. This
wasn't properly understood at the time.


Yet the Germans could evaluate the results and know quite quickly
it was the result.

The reality is that British q-boats attacked without a flag and then
machine gunned survivors in the water to the last man without mercy.


Oh good, can you please give examples of no flag and machine gunning?

War is a savage thing.


Eunometic needs to embellish it though.

Those baltic ports that were causing famin issues in Germany at them
time.


What baltic ports? The reality was the German navy bombarded British
coastal towns that had little in the way of war related industry.

(snip)

They shoved Japanese, Italians and Germans and probably others into
camps and they made them work. Had conditions gotten hard enough they
would probably have forced them more and more to do harder work.


You see here Eunometic is full of additions, the allies used axis
PoWs for work under the terms of the Geneva convention, just as
the Germans used allied PoWs. Time to add the allies might have
been worse if pushed, no evidence. Sort of summarises the Eunometic
world, full of fiction with the Germans gaining lots and everyone else
losing.

Of course the millions of Soviet prisoners starved to death in Heer
custody, or worked to death or starved or died of neglect during the
war are another story.

(snip)

It's sort of like two people in a fight when the cop shows up.
First question: "Who threw the first punch?"
And the London Blitz came well before Hamburg and Dresden.
You remarked on Stalin earlier.
Considering the Germany invaded Russia twice inside of thirty years, and
were responsible for getting 1,700,000 Russians killed the first time
around, and another 23,600,000 killed in WW II (over 13% of the
population; Hitler really did literally decimate the Soviet population)
:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II_casualties


The communists were rather good at blaming the Nazis for their
own crimes. Hides a certain demographic and statistical problem.


I note nothing has been produced to show the Soviet WWII
casualty figures are too high. I note the loss of Soviet citizens
to Luftwaffe air raids appears to be higher than the German losses
to air raids in Germany. Take a look at the death toll from the air
raids against Stalingrad before the Heer arrived.

Instead somehow the communists did it, or at least a noticeable
part of it. No evidence given of course.

Incidentally Russia declared war on Germany the first time around


On 29 July 1914, after the Austrian Ultimatum to Serbia, the German
ambassador told Russia even partial Russian mobilisation would
provoke German mobilisation and war. The Russians began mobilising
on 30 July, and on 1 August Germany declared war.

and I have not doubt the Soviets, were going to do to Hitler what
Hitler did to them first only 1 year later.


But we know Eunometic's beliefs do not match with reality very well.

As shakspere would say: pox on both your houses.


Ah, that is why they were after Stratford-on-Avon.

...I think Stalin showed incredible restraint in the way he dealt with
Germany after the war...I would have expected him to kill every man,
woman, and child in the the part of the country the Soviets occupied,
and salt the soil.


They considered doing as much but what good would that do to
Stalin? Random violence cemented in place Stalins power and
taught people fear. In addition the world was watching this time,
unlike the Ukranian genocide when only Mussolini and Hitler drew the
world attention to it and the New York times even refused to mention
it.


Try others publicised the famine and it was hard to obtain any
sort of good evidence.

The same sort of barriers that enabled some people to think
Hitler was a nice person, or was at least the better alternative
to Stalin.

Certainly Hitler had something along those lines in mind for the
Russians, so it would only be turnabout of unfair play.


The policy was never implemented.


I presume you have looked into the food shortages in the German
occupied part of the Soviet Union, propelled by a deliberate policy
of the military living off the land and major exports of food to
Germany.

(snip)

Geoffrey Sinclair
Remove the nb for email.


  #186  
Old July 27th 07, 08:23 AM posted to sci.space.history,rec.aviation.military
Geoffrey Sinclair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3
Default Advanced versions of the V-2 rocket

"Eunometic" wrote in message
oups.com...
On Jul 25, 2:28 am, Dan wrote:
Eunometic wrote:

snip

Finally of course we have the allegation that the swiss knew that
there were concentration camps that were death camps in which
purposefull execution happened. The allegation is absurd. No one
knew this least of all the Swiss.


Through communications intercepts, concentration camp escapee
reports. photo reconnaissance and other sources the Allies were fully
aware the Holocaust was in progress. They may not have known the scope,
this is subject to debate, but they knew. Did the Swiss know? I don't
know. I do know the entire world, including the U.S., knew of the camps,
Nazi treatment of communists and Jews and the like. Newspapers in the
U.S. and U.K. had reported on the subject.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired


First of all Dan let me say this is a sad topic. I can only imagine
how it makes you feel. I can only say I've found myself taking some
uncomfortable and surprising positions on these newsgroups.


You mean like your attempts to make people like Zundel appear
the victim?

As far as I can tell no source claims there was a death camp till at
least mid or late 1942. There were concentration camps full of not
only Jews but political opponents (some who were released), partisans,
communists and Christians etc.


The as far as I can tell means zero research has been done on the subject.
It is easy to look up the names of the death camps and check their start
dates, this has been mentioned before

Belzec in March 1942.
Majdeanek in April 1942
Sobibor May 1942
Treblinka July 1942

That Jews were singled out, discriminated against and dispossesed is
of no doubt.


Along with several groups.

However look at the context of the times.


In other words something must be done to ease the Nazi crimes.

The Bolsheviks led the way
in this in scale and the allies had their own German, Italian and
Japanese internees.


So how many of the other people were running extermination
campaigns? How about having millions of PoWs die?

Compounding this was that 80% of German Jews
survived, they simply left before things got too serious while some
that stayed, amazingly, continued to remain free.


Of course the majority still in Germany in September 1939 did not
survive. Why not mention the survival rates of American Jews,
after all Hitler could not get to most of them just like he could not
get to most of the ex German Jews.

As to remain free try and understand the Nazi definition of Jewish
was not the normal one, made it hard to find all the Nazi defined
Jews.

The cover story
Germans were told was that they were being sent for re-settlement in
the east initially this may even have been the plan.


So you can provide the evidence.

There was
certainly a plant to place Jews in their own homeland in Madagascar
and many Nazis let alone swiss and germans surely believed this
themselves.


I like this, the Madagascar "plan" was hot air.

When the British decided they wanted to take South Africa as one of
their colonies they started the propaganda campaigns normal associated
with this sort of action.


Now we need to jump to another time and place, rather than dealing
with the Nazis, we try and find other people doing crimes.

Try reading more about the Boer war, like the way the Boers treated
the Africans (during the war the policy was to usually shoot Africans
taken captive), the way they kept denying newcomers rights in order to
keep control and the fact they had control of domestic affairs and the
British foreign affairs before the war. And of course the gold mines.
Imperialism all round, the peace treaty deprived the Africans of the
vote, the Boers insisted on this clause.

After burning the Boer farms the women and
children were placed in concentration camps where over 50% died from
the effects of inadequate food and sanitation shelter and the general
effects of not being in control of ones circumstances. Over half of
those were children. This, I think, is more or less what happened in
the initial to middle phases of the concentration camp system.
Remember this is the British acting on orders from Lord Kitchener.


The maths are simple, the camps did not have proper sanitation,
in October 1901 there were over 145,000 people in them and in
that month around 3,900 died. By February 1902 the death rate
was 1/6 of that, shortly after the death rate was "below Glasgow".
Lots of the victims were children to measles as well as the diseases
that killed the adults. Note the what happened when the condition
of the camps was made known. Oh yes, it was not 50% dead.

Then the Nazis, with this sort of knowledge still went ahead and
created the conditions in the camps.

After Stalingrad and after the mess got worse and worse and the whole
thing ended up bigger than they conceived of the whole slippery slope
to the abyss began.


No actually after Stalingrad the killing program began to be
questioned as the war economy needed the workers, hence the
dedicated killing camps were eventually shut down and slave
labour, working people to death employed more.

Yet at all times there was a plausible explanation. The Zyklon-B
insecticide was used in the tons in specially designed fumigation
cupboard to delouse clothes. The portable cupboards were widely
advertised and used. After the war the allies doused people in DDT to
save lives.


I presume this is the plausible explanation for the gas shipments,
not telling people the irritant normally put in the mixture to warn
people was removed for the SS orders.

The captain of the bismark. lindemann was of Jewish background while
Admiral Lutjens (presented as a nazi fanatic in sink the bismark) was
actually someone who wrote a stern letter of protest after
krystalnacht. You could always find the Nazi system being reasonably
tollerant at times.


You know Eunometic really needs to go live in North Korea or
somewhere else if this is really going to be the standard of
evidence being presented. It too can be reasonably tolerant
at times, there must be someone affected in a positive way.

What of those decrypts. The massive deaths in the camp system were
mentioned only once (I think in late 43 or 1944) and very briefly in
decrypts of ultra or enigma yet that source had to be protected with
plausible second sources.


Note we are now in a sideline, that has nothing to do with the
reality of the killing program but with how the allies found out.

By the way check out the intercepts of the killing units making
their reports from the USSR.

In the book "Delusions of Intelligence"
R.A. Ratcliff claims that strategic reconnaissance flights were flown
and aircraft developed simply to provide cover for ultra.


And this has what relevance?

In order to
decrypt enigma machines the allies needed to capture a machine with
its rotors, then use the brute force method of an electronic try all
simulation of the machine to work out the rotor setting for the day.


The allies did not need a machine, the Germans knew they would
have been lost at a steady rate.

And try and understand it was more than Brute force to crack
the daily settings.

When the Germans introduced a new rotor wheel Belechely park was able
to work out the wirings of the new rotor over a few weeks because the
same message went out via the old rotors to some destinations and they
they were able to work out the wirings of the new rotor from the fact
that they had a known message. Had the Germans introduced more new
rotors while withdrawing the old ones simultaneously the whole system
would have broken.


I note just after saying the allies needed a machine they now can
work it out without capturing it.

In my opinion 'shamming' may have been the best way to stop the
killing, yet what reaction could that have provoked?


Quite simple, the Nazis were not going to be stopped. Hitler was
not into shaming.

I think even Nazis would have found the whole thing repugnant. They
were into it because the Nazis got things done, made them feel good
and initially at least took care of people and communities.


Yes folks, the majority of the Nazi party were not Nazis. And they
would not have done it, no evidence of course, just a belief. Does
the same generous definition apply to the communists? Other
radical organisations? etc.

In the end the citizens of Switzerland of all creeds and religions
were safe.


This is supposed to be some sort of excuse? Germany, Italy, Holland,
Belgium, Luxembourg, Britain, Denmark, Norway, Poland, Latvia,
Lithuania, Estonia, Hungary, Yugoslavia, Greece.

Seen what happened to their citizens when the Nazis could control
their territory.

Oh yes. Note the killing of some US PoWs for being Jewish.

Geoffrey Sinclair
Remove the nb for email.


  #187  
Old July 27th 07, 05:35 PM posted to sci.space.history,rec.aviation.military
Pat Flannery
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 18,465
Default Advanced versions of the V-2 rocket



Geoffrey Sinclair wrote:
(Huge snip of top-notch research)
The bombing of Rotterdam. The targeting was deliberate, and was meant
to help the German troops fighting in the city. A few days later leaflets
were dropped on Utrecht threatening them with the same fate unless they
surrendered.

One way to see what the Nazis were up to is to look at their own propaganda.
I have a book that reprints a number of articles from their propaganda
magazine "Signal".
This isn't a translation; this is the English language version of the
magazine, so this is in their own words.
In the article "The soldier with the camera - unexampled documents from
the Propaganda Companies" there is a page and a quarter wide spread of
an aerial photograph of bomb devastated Rotterdam.
Under it is this text:
'The spectacle of 'total' war.
After Warsaw, it was Rotterdam that, issuing a challenge, learned how
hopeless it was to resist the German Luftwaffe - and paid for the lesson
by the destruction of the centre of the city.
P.K. Carstensen"
I think that gives a pretty fair idea as to what they were up to, even
at that early stage of the war.
Meanwhile, here in the U.S., we've just hit our own little slave labor
embarrassment:
http://blog.wired.com/defense/2007/0...slave-lab.html

Unlike stalin he didn't kill large number of his own people.


Apparently the millions of Germans killed in the war Hitler started do
not count.


Nor all the German citizens who ended up in the concentration camps.
But of course they weren't _real_ Germans, were they?
They were untermensch.
Just like Stalin knew that those people in the Gulags weren't real Soviets.
They were Trotskyites.

Pat

  #188  
Old July 28th 07, 07:11 AM posted to sci.space.history,rec.aviation.military
Eunometic
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 24
Default Advanced versions of the V-2 rocket

On Jul 28, 3:35 am, Pat Flannery wrote:
Geoffrey Sinclair wrote:

(Huge snip of top-notch research) The bombing of Rotterdam. The targeting was deliberate, and was meant
to help the German troops fighting in the city. A few days later leaflets
were dropped on Utrecht threatening them with the same fate unless they
surrendered.


One way to see what the Nazis were up to is to look at their own propaganda.
I have a book that reprints a number of articles from their propaganda
magazine "Signal".
This isn't a translation; this is the English language version of the
magazine, so this is in their own words.
In the article "The soldier with the camera - unexampled documents from
the Propaganda Companies" there is a page and a quarter wide spread of
an aerial photograph of bomb devastated Rotterdam.
Under it is this text:
'The spectacle of 'total' war.
After Warsaw, it was Rotterdam that, issuing a challenge, learned how
hopeless it was to resist the German Luftwaffe - and paid for the lesson
by the destruction of the centre of the city.
P.K. Carstensen"


You do seem to go of half cocked a bit as if you were involved in the
propaganda of the times on one specific side. Rotterdam was a
surrounded and besieged city, the Dutch Government had been issued an
ultimatum that Government buildings and the city center would be
bombed by a specific time and in a specific area unless they
conditionally surrendered. This should have given time for
evacuation of that part of the city. This is quite different from
bombing a populated part of an unknown non specific city which doesn't
give a realistic chance to seek safety. It didn't help that the
Dutch officers were prevaricating and considering their position at
leisure or that the the Dutch were operating on two time zones and the
Germans a third. In the end the deadline was extended but some
bombers were on their way and the abort flares were fired were not
seen by the first wave. The second wave turned back.

The bombing was a botch up, notable also for its tragic deaths but
also with the speed a it was used to abolish Britain's US encourage
policy of not bombing cities within 48 hours.

The exact reasons for the haste and reprehensible rashness aren't
understood as Richthofen's died a short time latter. Perhaps the fear
of a counter invasion. The Dutch didn't have much of an air force but
they did have an anti-aircraft artillery system that caused so many
casualties that it may have cost the Luftwaffe the battle of Britain

The problem with pointing the finger and "uping the ante" is that as
many fingers point back and the ante actually is upped; often on false
assumptions. Unfortunately cooler heads often do not prevail. I'm
not sure you would be a cooler head?

Just ask how many civilians were killed during the shock and awe
opperation. I've heard 4000 casualties?

  #189  
Old July 29th 07, 06:36 AM posted to sci.space.history,rec.aviation.military
Geoffrey Sinclair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3
Default Advanced versions of the V-2 rocket

"Eunometic" wrote in message
ups.com...
On Jul 28, 3:35 am, Pat Flannery wrote:
Geoffrey Sinclair wrote:

(Huge snip of top-notch research)
The bombing of Rotterdam. The targeting was deliberate, and was meant
to help the German troops fighting in the city. A few days later
leaflets
were dropped on Utrecht threatening them with the same fate unless they
surrendered.


One way to see what the Nazis were up to is to look at their own
propaganda.
I have a book that reprints a number of articles from their propaganda
magazine "Signal".
This isn't a translation; this is the English language version of the
magazine, so this is in their own words.
In the article "The soldier with the camera - unexampled documents from
the Propaganda Companies" there is a page and a quarter wide spread of
an aerial photograph of bomb devastated Rotterdam.
Under it is this text:
'The spectacle of 'total' war.
After Warsaw, it was Rotterdam that, issuing a challenge, learned how
hopeless it was to resist the German Luftwaffe - and paid for the lesson
by the destruction of the centre of the city.
P.K. Carstensen"


You do seem to go of half cocked a bit as if you were involved in the
propaganda of the times on one specific side.


No, it shows us what the Germans told the world about the raid.
Not that it was tactical support, but rather what it cost.

The idea was to scare opponents, given how feared air attack on
civilians was at the time. The non Germans noted what had happened
and how the Germans reported the attack.

Rotterdam was a
surrounded and besieged city, the Dutch Government had been issued an
ultimatum that Government buildings and the city center would be
bombed by a specific time and in a specific area unless they
conditionally surrendered.


So tell us the ultimatum date and how the Germans knew it
had been delivered and therefore how much time the Dutch
had to move people.

Try surrender negotiations were ongoing and General Student
realised the Dutch forces were waiting on permission from the
Dutch Government to surrender.

By the way, if the city centre is supposed to be bombed isn't
that a direct attack on the city, not a target in the city? Also the
Rotterdam raid left around 800 dead and 78,000 homeless, can it be
explained why so many people were living in things like government
buildings and the city centre? Is it not the case if the city is
surrounded there must be lots of civilians in places like the city
centre trying to avoid the fighting?

This should have given time for
evacuation of that part of the city.


Yes folks, the city is surrounded, besieged but it is the Dutch fault
the civilians were not moved from where the Luftwaffe is supposed
to have told the Dutch it was going to bomb. No thought of the
area having more than its usual population thanks to trapped and
displaced persons I gather. Tell us all, are the Dutch supposed
to move the civilians closer to the front line? Where are the safe
zones capable of taking say 20% or more of the city population?

So I gather it is the German civilian's fault for not evacuating their
cities as well when hit by USAAF and RAF attacks? None of
those cities were surrounded, plenty of chances to move.

Pre war Rotterdam had a population of around 600,000 so around
15% of the city's population was caught up in the raid. How about
explaining how long such an evacuation would take and where the
safe zones were?

This is quite different from
bombing a populated part of an unknown non specific city which doesn't
give a realistic chance to seek safety.


No, it is just someone trying to blame the Dutch for the bombing.
While excusing German bombings.

It didn't help that the
Dutch officers were prevaricating and considering their position at
leisure or that the the Dutch were operating on two time zones and the
Germans a third.


Try the garrison was waiting on permission to surrender, and
understand how communications were disrupted by the fighting.

Please provide the evidence of prevarication and leisure, as
opposed to not following German demands, which seems to be
the definition being applied.

In the end the deadline was extended but some
bombers were on their way and the abort flares were fired were not
seen by the first wave. The second wave turned back.


The recall signal was sent too late, the bombers had stopped
listening in order to concentrate on their bomb runs, and
despite flying at 2,300 feet they failed to see the signal rockets
and some 54 He111's unloaded. As noted the second wave did
see the signal flares.

The bombing was a botch up, notable also for its tragic deaths but
also with the speed a it was used to abolish Britain's US encourage
policy of not bombing cities within 48 hours.


Yes folks, you see the British decided to lift their policy against
attacking
targets in cities, they understood at the time some bombs would miss,
hence the restrictions to things like ships and targets well away from
major civilian populations, these restrictions were removed. The Germans
had never been bound by such rules, for example see the Ju52's shovelling
incendiary bombs out their cargo doors over Warsaw.

You see under the Eunometic rules we are supposed to decide when
the Luftwaffe has orders to attack a target in a city they attack the
targets, in other words count the bombs that hit, when the USAAF
or RAF do the same they are supposed to be attacking the city, count
the bombs that missed.

Simple really. Using the centre of Rotterdam is apparently not
targeting the city, well when it is the Luftwaffe anyway.

The exact reasons for the haste and reprehensible rashness aren't
understood as Richthofen's died a short time latter.


Richthofen? He was around for the war, his death was on 12 July
1945 from a brain tumour.

Not bothered to read the 18th Army directive to break the resistance
at Rotterdam "by any means", or OKW directive 11 demanding the
rapid crushing of Dutch resistance I gather.

Perhaps the fear
of a counter invasion.


Eunometic is writing fiction again.

The Dutch didn't have much of an air force but
they did have an anti-aircraft artillery system that caused so many
casualties that it may have cost the Luftwaffe the battle of Britain


Ah more fiction, the Dutch certainly made a mess of the Luftwaffe
transport fleet, with help from the Luftwaffe, some 125 Ju52's. The
airborne forces lost 4,000 men, including 1,200 prisoners sent to
England. The idea these losses, plus some combat aircraft types,
caused the loss of the Battle of Britain is a joke.

The problem with pointing the finger and "uping the ante" is that as
many fingers point back and the ante actually is upped; often on false
assumptions. Unfortunately cooler heads often do not prevail.


Go read the way the Germans presented the attack to the world, go
read about the various speeches about what the Nazis would do to
win the war.

I'm not sure you would be a cooler head?


Cooler head is being defined as agreeing with Eunometic fiction.

Just ask how many civilians were killed during the shock and awe
opperation. I've heard 4000 casualties?


Which shock and awe attacks, the 21st century attack on Iraq?

By the way I presume the next time the Dresden or Hamburg
attack is discussed I doubt we will see Eunometic bringing up
Luftwaffe attacks on places like Warsaw etc., amazingly only
when the Germans are doing something wrong there seems to
be this innate need to tell of other wrong doings. even if they
need to be embellished.

Geoffrey Sinclair
Remove the nb for email.


  #190  
Old July 29th 07, 05:27 PM posted to sci.space.history,rec.aviation.military
Pat Flannery
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 18,465
Default Advanced versions of the V-2 rocket



Geoffrey Sinclair wrote:

In the end the deadline was extended but some
bombers were on their way and the abort flares were fired were not
seen by the first wave. The second wave turned back.


The recall signal was sent too late, the bombers had stopped
listening in order to concentrate on their bomb runs, and
despite flying at 2,300 feet they failed to see the signal rockets
and some 54 He111's unloaded. As noted the second wave did
see the signal flares.


They didn't really need the second wave anyway; here's some photos of
what the first wave accomplished:
http://www.ushmm.org/outreach/images/51422.jpg
http://www.humobisten.nl/weblog/archives/bombing.jpg
http://www.annefrank.org/upload/Them..._rotterdam.jpg
Here's a view after all the destroyed buildings had been demolished and
the debris removed:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...-Rotterdam.jpg
Here's some shots of what Warsaw looked like after the Luftwaffe got
done with it:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...aw_burning.jpg
http://en.wikivisual.com/images/6/69/Warsaw_siege3.jpg
http://www.worldfuturefund.org/Import/warsaw.jpg
.... and Guernica:
http://www.spanishrefugees-basquechi...uildings_4.jpg
http://lacucaracha.info/scw/diary/19...guernica_5.jpg
http://lacucaracha.info/scw/diary/19...guernica_1.jpg
http://lacucaracha.info/scw/diary/19...guernica_3.jpg
http://www.sindromedistendhal.com/La...-bombardeo.jpg
So this approach to bombardment by the Luftwaffe "do what we say
immediately, or we'll kill you all."
Goes back to day one of WW II and even before.
And well before British bombs start falling on German cities.
Eunometic reminds me very much of the character Maximilian Schell plays
in the movie "Judgment At Nuremberg"
Defense attorney Hans Rolfe, whose defense tactic is:
1.) They were just following orders.
2.) They didn't know what was going on.
3.) You did it too.
....and, at the end...
4.) They probably had it coming, anyway.
One thing that is very noticeable in those "Signal" articles is how
resistance on the part of the military forces of the invaded countries
is described. They are never "opposing forces", they are never
"defending forces"... they are "the enemy", even when they are defending
their own country, which was invaded without provocation.

Pat

 




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
Classic and Digital Versions of GLOBE at Night Thrive in 2007 (Forwarded) Andrew Yee[_1_] News 0 June 13th 07 04:38 PM
Versions of the Vision Monte Davis Policy 1 March 13th 05 09:27 PM
Lava Lakes Could Be Ionian Versions of Earth's Mid-Ocean Ridges Ron Astronomy Misc 7 March 22nd 04 03:55 AM
eBook versions of space history titles Eugene Dorr History 3 January 29th 04 12:14 AM
Client versions Zachary Antolak SETI 2 September 1st 03 01:59 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:29 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.