By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
For the history buffs, today marks the tipping point 83 years ago for one of the key events of WW2. After 15 September the Germans abandoned any hope of gaining air superiority over this country and the proposed invasion was postponed soon after.
The battle was fought from July to October. By the end of it the German air force was weaker, the RAF growing ever stronger. While it might be starved out of the war, Britain could never be invaded.
The losses particularly in highly trained aircrew was something the German air force never really recovered from. They’d pay dearly for it. Their organisation, resupply, training set up in particular was geared towards a short, tactical war. In no way were they prepared for the strategic war to come. Nor did they have the equipment for it.
The 15 Sept is chosen primarily for the number of claims (185). The number actually lost was about 60 - still a considerable number. One particular incident was filmed - the falling of a Dornier 17 on Victoria Station/Buckingham Palace after being rammed by Sgt Ray Holmes. You can still see the scars on the outside wall of the station in Wilton Road from parts of the Dornier. Living history.
That wasn’t the only incident for Sgt Holmes that day. He earlier wound up with oil all over the windscreen of his Hurricane after Fw Rolf Heitch’s Dornier fired an improvised flame thrower at him. Heitch had nabbed one off the army to try out his idea of frying his attackers. The problem was that at height and speed it didn’t really ignite properly, hence the oil. It actually made him look like his aeroplane was damaged. Because of it the German pilot reckoned he was set upon by half the RAF.
His aircraft eventually came down near Shoreham in Kent and is known as the ‘Castle Farm Dornier’. The gunner on this aircraft died of a bullet wound, the other three survived. Ironically and sadly, the two Spitfire pilots that chased him down Darent Valley, Red Tobin and John Dundas, would be killed in action within a year.
They were all astonishingly brave men.
[Post edited 15 Sep 2023 9:07]
14
Today is Battle of Britain Day on 16:36 - Sep 15 with 766 views
Today is Battle of Britain Day on 15:46 - Sep 15 by blueasfook
I think you have gone off on a bit of a tangent there Hazzer.
I am not speculating on old Adolf's motives for invading Russia, just saying it was a tactically bad decision and ultimately lost him the war.
That makes no sense. The motive for WW2 was oil. meaning getting control of Russian oilfields and those in Rumania. Which you describe as going off tangent.
Dear god !
Explaining WHY the allies invaded Normandy in 1944 is also going a bit off tangent, I suppose
The Battle of Britain pilots made the mistake of taking to the air. A big tactical mistake. That's why some got shot down. The Lancasteer bomber. Tactical mistake adding the word bomber. Without that it could have been used as a commercial airline. Flying holiday makers to resorts in Europe.
Oh and I suggest you do not use that name (Hazza) as some might think you are the same rightwing poster(s) who also uses that name. One rightie using different log ins.
Who would have thought.
0
Today is Battle of Britain Day on 16:55 - Sep 15 with 743 views
Today is Battle of Britain Day on 13:40 - Sep 15 by ElephantintheRoom
The Battle of Britain was a PR exercise at a time when Britain had nothing much to crow about. Fighter command was split into five regions of which only 2 and a half saw any action. At no point in the entire conflict was it necessary to change that approach - meaning half of allied airmen had their feet up for the entire ‘battle’ and never at any point was there any danger of running out of fighters or pilots.
Indeed the greatest danger to Britain came a few years earlier when the RAF chose the Bolton Paul Defiant with no forward firing guns over the Hurricane as a front line fighter - a decision of such madness that Harry Hawker refused to accept it and built the Hurricane anyway as a private venture.
Even in the relatively busy south east 85% of allied fighter pilots never shot anything down - pilots spent most of their time getting lost or looking for something to shoot at. Contrast these largely ineffectual skirmishes over a short period with The Battle Of Germany - which shows just how far and fast air warfare developed
Factually incorrect on many counts and actually insulting to those who took part.
There was huge concern over the shortages of pilots and planes throughout the second half of 1940, due in no small part to the losses in and over France before the BoB began and the severe losses in BoB itself
As a previous poster has pointed out, squadrons were frequently rotated in and out of 11 Group in order to rest, refit, re equip and to give training to newly posted pilots. Pilots were at standby from sun up to sun down 7 days a week, 5 am to 10pm every day and were sometimes called upon to fly 5 or 6 times a day, each sortie being an hour or more duration. One doesn't have to read many accounts from pilots who endured this gruelling schedule to see why they needed to be sent from the most intensive area to somewhere a little quieter
No pilot "had their feet up" during the Battle and it is a very unpleasant assertion to make.
0
Today is Battle of Britain Day on 17:21 - Sep 15 with 723 views
Today is Battle of Britain Day on 15:31 - Sep 15 by ElephantintheRoom
Sorry - but you’re just plain wrong on the Defiant/Hurricane issue. Britain came very close to having the gladiator as its front line fighter at the start of the war.
You misunderstand my use of ‘PR’. The planes in 1940 were generally very primitive and the Luftwaffe’s array of planes wholly unsuitable to the task of gaining air superiority. They had no heavy bombers, their ‘heavy fighters’ and Stukas were useless and the ME 109E lacked the range to fight on an equal footing for more than a few minutes - it was a feeble escort plane. The battle, or series of small skirmishes, was bigged up for the benefit of propaganda purposes …PR. There was never any danger of a German invasion as they didn’t have a functioning navy, a chronic lack of transport aircraft - and crucially no heavy bombers. Even their airborne troops parachuted into battle without weapons, hoping to find them on the ground.
Britain might have been at war for a year but it was largely a phoney war - and the army caved in at the first sight of the enemy, ran home and left all their equipment behind so a success was badly needed - hence never do much etc.
The almost part time nature of ‘the battle’ is shown by the impact of 303 squadron - when they were finally allowed to take part.
The design element is an interesting thought. In 1940 the RAF was still wedded to the Blenheim - even more useless than the German bombers. The USA by contrast, who weren’t at war with anyone were already two years into developing the B-29. On the other hand Chadwick who designed the Lancaster, also penned the Vulcan - and souped up engines from that went into concorde - so some things were moving on.
In 1940 the ‘big wing’ concept floundered because the RAF lacked the wherewithal to muster a few dozen fighters at a few thousand feet - assuming there was any point in the exercise. Within a few short years the Americans were sending many hundreds of planes several miles up on a near daily basis - and stopping them was an entirely different kettle of fish.
I’m not wrong. The order of 600 Hurricanes was made in June 1936. The spec for a defensive turret fighter was issued in 1935 in response to the belief that it would be effective in unescorted Bomber destruction (it was) as it was believed that was how Germany would attack. A limited order was made from the drawing board in 1937 and it started being delivered after the war started.
The Luftwaffe was a tactical air force idiotically wedded to the idea of dive bombing. The proponent of heavy bombers, Wever, had died so it went to war without. The Bf110 was not useless. It was badly used. Had it been given a free role operating at top speed, it would have been more effective through still vulnerable to anything above and behind, like all twin engined fighters were - even the wonderful P38 and Mosquito.
The 110 proved a good night fighter, bomber destroyer and fighter bomber where single seat fighter opposition was absent. Not as good as Goering hoped, but not as bad as some make out. The Ju87 was not useless. In fact it was the best close support aircraft of its time and was effective throughout the war. Look it up. It was a brilliant bit of design. But up against single seat aircraft? It wasn’t designed for that and couldn’t hope to survive, any more than any other of its type.
The Bf109E was not a feeble escort plane, provided it was used properly. Goering and co in their ignorance tried to tie it to the bombers. A stupid idea that negated all its considerable combat advantages. The commanders in the field correctly wanted to use it in free chase mode. In that, it was literally deadly.
As with all first gen single seaters, range was a real problem for 109s. 20 mins max over London. It needed the later developed drop tank. Free chase was exactly how the US used its P47s, P38s and later P51s over Germany. A lesson learned. Big Wing was a poor idea as assembling 50+ aircraft took too long. Height and time was everything. It is much more complex than you project.
Organising aircraft in daylight when you are attacking, as we did on the minor but costly rhubarb raids of 1941 and the Americans of 1942 on was still difficult, but easier than if you are defending. Notably the germans in attacking B17s and B24s streamed fighters in in much the same way as Britain did in 1940.
Release of the Polish squadrons was as Dowding admitted his biggest mistake of the battle. It nothing to do with ‘part time’ and everything to do with the sophisticated nature of airborne interception. He didn’t think the Poles would be anything but a liability in such an environment. He was wrong.
The British were not ‘wedded’ to the Bristol Blenheim, any more than they were the Whitley, Hampden or Wellington. Designed as a private venture, the Blenheim’s limitations were well known by 1940 and while it was light years ahead of aircraft of the early 30s, design and development was moving on at a rapid pace. It was obsolete by 1940 and everyone knew it. There was nothing else in the light bomber cupboard. Comparing it to the B29 in a weak attempt to denigrate the RAF is ludicrous.
American aircraft of the 1940 period had just as many limitations and failures, if not more, than any other country’s. And they did some things brilliantly well too, not least licence building the Merlin and developing the Mustang. The air war over Germany, by day and by night, is a different topic for another time, though there are links. Rapid aircraft development was a constant.
To try and diminish Britain’s contribution to aviation bar the Lancaster and Concorde’s is to ignore reality. Nobody produced an aeroplane like the Mosquito. The Spitfire was superlative. Beaufighter, Hurricane, Wellington, Typhoon/Tempest, Halifax Bmk3 all good and that’s before we get to the first workable modern jet engine, air defence system development, engines, ordinance,code breaking and so much more.
To describe the BEF as ‘caved in at the first sight of the enemy’ is factually incorrect and insulting. But then you meant to insult those men, didn’t you. I don’t know how you could.
1
Today is Battle of Britain Day on 17:28 - Sep 15 with 702 views
“This could have led shortly after to an invasion of Britain, with Britain left with a much diminished army”
Albeit the state of the British Army would have been a side note. It was widely believed (and subsequently modelled in war games) that even with German air superiority over the channel, any attempt to move German troops across the sea would have suffered crippling losses at the hands of the Royal Navy with very few making it ashore (edit- and of course the heavy equipment needed for a successful invasion).
[Post edited 15 Sep 2023 16:36]
Indeed, the flotilla of barges they assembled (which reduced their ability to ship goods up and down the Rhine and other major rivers - so another cock up) wouldn't have lasted five minutes in the Channel, never mind being completely unsuited to an amphibious assault. Operation Sealion was a disaster in the making and I know that before I get round to reading Peter Fleming's book of the same title which is on my 2WW pile!
It's 106 miles to Portman Road, we've got a full tank of gas, half a round of Port Salut, it's dark... and we're wearing blue tinted sunglasses.
Today is Battle of Britain Day on 17:21 - Sep 15 by Churchman
I’m not wrong. The order of 600 Hurricanes was made in June 1936. The spec for a defensive turret fighter was issued in 1935 in response to the belief that it would be effective in unescorted Bomber destruction (it was) as it was believed that was how Germany would attack. A limited order was made from the drawing board in 1937 and it started being delivered after the war started.
The Luftwaffe was a tactical air force idiotically wedded to the idea of dive bombing. The proponent of heavy bombers, Wever, had died so it went to war without. The Bf110 was not useless. It was badly used. Had it been given a free role operating at top speed, it would have been more effective through still vulnerable to anything above and behind, like all twin engined fighters were - even the wonderful P38 and Mosquito.
The 110 proved a good night fighter, bomber destroyer and fighter bomber where single seat fighter opposition was absent. Not as good as Goering hoped, but not as bad as some make out. The Ju87 was not useless. In fact it was the best close support aircraft of its time and was effective throughout the war. Look it up. It was a brilliant bit of design. But up against single seat aircraft? It wasn’t designed for that and couldn’t hope to survive, any more than any other of its type.
The Bf109E was not a feeble escort plane, provided it was used properly. Goering and co in their ignorance tried to tie it to the bombers. A stupid idea that negated all its considerable combat advantages. The commanders in the field correctly wanted to use it in free chase mode. In that, it was literally deadly.
As with all first gen single seaters, range was a real problem for 109s. 20 mins max over London. It needed the later developed drop tank. Free chase was exactly how the US used its P47s, P38s and later P51s over Germany. A lesson learned. Big Wing was a poor idea as assembling 50+ aircraft took too long. Height and time was everything. It is much more complex than you project.
Organising aircraft in daylight when you are attacking, as we did on the minor but costly rhubarb raids of 1941 and the Americans of 1942 on was still difficult, but easier than if you are defending. Notably the germans in attacking B17s and B24s streamed fighters in in much the same way as Britain did in 1940.
Release of the Polish squadrons was as Dowding admitted his biggest mistake of the battle. It nothing to do with ‘part time’ and everything to do with the sophisticated nature of airborne interception. He didn’t think the Poles would be anything but a liability in such an environment. He was wrong.
The British were not ‘wedded’ to the Bristol Blenheim, any more than they were the Whitley, Hampden or Wellington. Designed as a private venture, the Blenheim’s limitations were well known by 1940 and while it was light years ahead of aircraft of the early 30s, design and development was moving on at a rapid pace. It was obsolete by 1940 and everyone knew it. There was nothing else in the light bomber cupboard. Comparing it to the B29 in a weak attempt to denigrate the RAF is ludicrous.
American aircraft of the 1940 period had just as many limitations and failures, if not more, than any other country’s. And they did some things brilliantly well too, not least licence building the Merlin and developing the Mustang. The air war over Germany, by day and by night, is a different topic for another time, though there are links. Rapid aircraft development was a constant.
To try and diminish Britain’s contribution to aviation bar the Lancaster and Concorde’s is to ignore reality. Nobody produced an aeroplane like the Mosquito. The Spitfire was superlative. Beaufighter, Hurricane, Wellington, Typhoon/Tempest, Halifax Bmk3 all good and that’s before we get to the first workable modern jet engine, air defence system development, engines, ordinance,code breaking and so much more.
To describe the BEF as ‘caved in at the first sight of the enemy’ is factually incorrect and insulting. But then you meant to insult those men, didn’t you. I don’t know how you could.
I'm a big fan of the Blenheim. But that's not down to its effectiveness - once it was converted to a military plane but because: * It's so ugly, it's pretty * The one at Duxford has an amazing story https://www.flickr.com/photos/perryolf/4850098884 * It was effective as a night fighter - those guys were incredibly brave * It played a massive role in the development of radar I'm on a mission to find a bakelite recognition model if such a thing exists
[Post edited 15 Sep 2023 17:34]
It's 106 miles to Portman Road, we've got a full tank of gas, half a round of Port Salut, it's dark... and we're wearing blue tinted sunglasses.
Today is Battle of Britain Day on 17:28 - Sep 15 by Plums
Indeed, the flotilla of barges they assembled (which reduced their ability to ship goods up and down the Rhine and other major rivers - so another cock up) wouldn't have lasted five minutes in the Channel, never mind being completely unsuited to an amphibious assault. Operation Sealion was a disaster in the making and I know that before I get round to reading Peter Fleming's book of the same title which is on my 2WW pile!
The difficulty of seaborne invasion has been demonstrated throughout history. Never more so than WW2. Just look at how hard it was to do DDay. We will never know how serious Sealion was, but certainly in Luftwaffe and Kriegsmarine circles it had little support - not that you questioned a nutjob dictator.
0
Today is Battle of Britain Day on 17:40 - Sep 15 with 687 views
"Britain might have been at war for a year but it was largely a phoney war - and the army caved in at the first sight of the enemy, ran home and left all their equipment behind so a success was badly needed - hence never do much etc."
That is as innaccurate as it is insulting to those who were there.
British and French troops fought all the way back to Dunkirk. In fact it was the French First Army at Lille who, vastly unnumbered, allowed the allies to get away.
At the Battle of Arras British troops chased the Germans off the oark. Their Panzer 3s being no matcg for the Brirish Matildas. It was the failure of the French to use radios that saw the Germans survive. How did the Germans get through the Ardennes, when the French had calculated that it could not be done in less that 3 days. They had counted without Perotin, which saw the Geramns staying awake for 3 days as well as making suicidal crossings over the Meuse.
Thanks to the battering at Arras and the effects of using Perotin the GEman army was in no fit to continue in to pursue the Allies to Dunkirk. The sound reasioning that the Allies would not be effected by losing more troops, they were alaready beaten whereas the Germans neede there's for tghe following Barrle for France.
History is not served best by people repeating blatant misrepresentations (lies). Maybe an apology to those who lost their lives fighting a rear guard action for days on end, against troops of a country that had been preparing for war for years, whereas they were in an army starved of resources for years.
A more accurate account can be seen here -
We have to assume the German soldiers killed and captured, the German equipment destroyed was done by some other soldiers, and not those that supposedly " caved in at the first sight of the enemy, ran home "
Today is Battle of Britain Day on 11:28 - Sep 15 by Kievthegreat
The German aircrew situation in WW2 was especially dire and is best summed up by their aces. German aces had huge kill tallies (obviously all tallies should be taken with pinches of salt), but a large number never made it to the end of the war. German pilots were essentially thrown out at a ridiculous tempo, exhausting them until they inevitably died. They ended up with huge kill totals because they flew so many more sorties than allied equivalents, but with no system to bring through replacements of similar quality.
The Luftwaffe (or Goering at least) never grasped that it's far easier to replace a plane than it is to replace a pilot.
The WW2 Luftwaffe is also proof that financial bonuses drive sub-optimal behaviour rather than achievement of an organisation's real goals.
Luftwaffe pilots got bonuses for the number of 'kills' they achieved. That meant that several pilots would claim the same kill.
As a consequence the German High Command grossly over-estimated the number of planes shot down.
This explains at least in past the huge kill tallies, which were also over-stated for propaganda reasons.
Overall, what's astonishing about WW2 is how well the Germans did given their repeated and monumental strategic and tactical errors.
Today is Battle of Britain Day on 17:34 - Sep 15 by Plums
I'm a big fan of the Blenheim. But that's not down to its effectiveness - once it was converted to a military plane but because: * It's so ugly, it's pretty * The one at Duxford has an amazing story https://www.flickr.com/photos/perryolf/4850098884 * It was effective as a night fighter - those guys were incredibly brave * It played a massive role in the development of radar I'm on a mission to find a bakelite recognition model if such a thing exists
[Post edited 15 Sep 2023 17:34]
Ahh, the Blenheim boys were astonishingly brave. As were all the lads in Bomber Command. It shouldn’t be underestimated what they did, though no doubt the Elephant bloke will find a way.
Would you want to rumble over Germany in a slow drafty old Whitley V? The Blenheim was a good aeroplane for its time and quite ground breaking. That it was out of date shows the pace of development. Still, it was worse in the death trap that was the Fairy Battle or the navy’s hideous Blackburn Roc.
I think Blenheim was pretty in Mk1 form too. Mk4 looks a bit out of proportion. Its problem as a night fighter was its speed. It wasn’t quick enough. It’s design also didn’t lend itself as well to radar installation as the later Beaufighter or carry the devastating weaponry.
1
Today is Battle of Britain Day on 19:10 - Sep 15 with 627 views
Today is Battle of Britain Day on 10:29 - Sep 15 by ElephantintheRoom
The Germans also lost a huge number of planes invading Poland and France which they didn’t recover from either - particularly transport planes. Principally because their planes weren’t very good. Even the me 109 which was developing into a fine fighter by the time of the spread out minor sorties we like to call the Battle of Britain had two glaring flaws. It was virtually running out of range when it wheezed across the channel - and it’s hopeless to undercarriage design made landing something of a lottery leading to vast losses of planes and pilots in landing accidents.
"Spread out minor sorties we like to call the Battle of Britain"
Yep, you definitely win the Edgelord prize by willfully disrespecting the few hundred people who risked their lives so that you could have the freedom to spout a different kind of contrarian guff every single day, on the one day a year when we are asked to remember them, and their sacrifice, respectfully.
3
Today is Battle of Britain Day on 08:05 - Sep 16 with 538 views
Today is Battle of Britain Day on 17:40 - Sep 15 by HARRY10
"Britain might have been at war for a year but it was largely a phoney war - and the army caved in at the first sight of the enemy, ran home and left all their equipment behind so a success was badly needed - hence never do much etc."
That is as innaccurate as it is insulting to those who were there.
British and French troops fought all the way back to Dunkirk. In fact it was the French First Army at Lille who, vastly unnumbered, allowed the allies to get away.
At the Battle of Arras British troops chased the Germans off the oark. Their Panzer 3s being no matcg for the Brirish Matildas. It was the failure of the French to use radios that saw the Germans survive. How did the Germans get through the Ardennes, when the French had calculated that it could not be done in less that 3 days. They had counted without Perotin, which saw the Geramns staying awake for 3 days as well as making suicidal crossings over the Meuse.
Thanks to the battering at Arras and the effects of using Perotin the GEman army was in no fit to continue in to pursue the Allies to Dunkirk. The sound reasioning that the Allies would not be effected by losing more troops, they were alaready beaten whereas the Germans neede there's for tghe following Barrle for France.
History is not served best by people repeating blatant misrepresentations (lies). Maybe an apology to those who lost their lives fighting a rear guard action for days on end, against troops of a country that had been preparing for war for years, whereas they were in an army starved of resources for years.
A more accurate account can be seen here -
We have to assume the German soldiers killed and captured, the German equipment destroyed was done by some other soldiers, and not those that supposedly " caved in at the first sight of the enemy, ran home "
The story of the BEF is interesting. It was tiny by comparison with the French and German army but was professional and mechanised. It’s commander, Lord Gort VC wasn’t the best but in Brooke and Montgomery he had two superb subordinates. The BEF came under French command.
The battle for France was astonishing. The French had some good kit and excellent divisions. It also had some poor ones some of whom were posted in front of the impenetrable Ardennes. Whoops. The leadership of the French was woeful.
Tired incompetent old men fighting 1940 with WW1 tactics. The corrosive Maginot spirit. The Maginot line stopped at Belgium so while the principal of fortifications and tech making up for manpower shortage was good, it wasn’t complete.
The German assault was audacious and totally overwhelmed the allies with its speed, use of armoured spearhead (most of the army moved by horse and foot) and air power. Guderian’s tactics also scared the German command. That partially explains the halt order.
The other reason was men an machinery were getting worn out. The Germans had no real system of resupply. The Runstedt was scared of losing men and kit unnecessarily and so was Adolf. Nobody is quite certain who gave the order though Hitler gets the nod.
The decision to disobey the French and retreat to the coast was correct though it enraged the French. The British on the ground had a better idea of what was happening than the French Commander in his Chateau. History forgets that the French were only delivering half the divisions promised for the counter attack. It was doomed and the British knew it.
The retreat of the BEFis an amazing story, as is the the evacuation itself. The bravery of the defenders of the Dunkirk perimeter, mostly French divisions and knowing they faced almost certain death, was incredible. The work of Ramsey and his beach master was brilliant and though not appreciated at the time, the effort of the RAF was good too.
For a certain poster describe the BEF as he did is disgraceful. As Harry says, maybe an apology to those who fought the rearguard action is required.
As a postscript, the way the German army was organised and particularly the training of its NCOs gave it massive flexibility. Most armies are organised like that now. It flexibility allowed commanders in the field to make decisions and time their friend. Ironically when Hitler took direct command of the army, that flexibility and freedom of action was lost. The results of that were clear to see in June 1944.
2
Today is Battle of Britain Day on 10:56 - Sep 16 with 502 views
Today is Battle of Britain Day on 13:40 - Sep 15 by ElephantintheRoom
The Battle of Britain was a PR exercise at a time when Britain had nothing much to crow about. Fighter command was split into five regions of which only 2 and a half saw any action. At no point in the entire conflict was it necessary to change that approach - meaning half of allied airmen had their feet up for the entire ‘battle’ and never at any point was there any danger of running out of fighters or pilots.
Indeed the greatest danger to Britain came a few years earlier when the RAF chose the Bolton Paul Defiant with no forward firing guns over the Hurricane as a front line fighter - a decision of such madness that Harry Hawker refused to accept it and built the Hurricane anyway as a private venture.
Even in the relatively busy south east 85% of allied fighter pilots never shot anything down - pilots spent most of their time getting lost or looking for something to shoot at. Contrast these largely ineffectual skirmishes over a short period with The Battle Of Germany - which shows just how far and fast air warfare developed
Literally everything you say is wrong, as per usual. Read the books by (for example) Al Deere, Bob Tuck, Tom Neil, Geoffrey Wellum, Johnnie Johnson, Paul Richey, Johnny Kent or Adolf Galland.
Of course most of the action was in 10 and 11 Group's areas. Have you ever looked at a map of Europe?
I rarely post here these days but it was worth doing so in order to tell you what a prize idiot you are.
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
