Search found 317 matches

by Paul L
Mon Sep 12, 2011 8:59 pm
Forum: World War II
Topic: Strategic bombing during World War II
Replies: 127
Views: 37027

Re: Strategic bombing during World War II

The establishment of the strategic bomber force dates back to the 2nd Reamament phase that was authorised by the previous regime. Historically Lufthansa was selected as the defacto airforce in the event of a crises involving Polish and or French argression. A force of 400 multi engined bombers were ...
by Paul L
Sun Sep 11, 2011 6:19 am
Forum: Hypothetical Naval Scenarios
Topic: Tirpitz and Graf Zeppelin 1941
Replies: 335
Views: 48376

Re: Tirpitz and Graf Zeppelin 1941

In 1934 Germany had no tanks at all. How do you build a doctrine out of nothing with nothing. The argument about no doctrine for carriers is equally absurd. They would develope a doctrine the way the always did.They would make it up as they went along.The first order to build an German aircraft Carr...
by Paul L
Sun Sep 11, 2011 6:13 am
Forum: World War II
Topic: Strategic bombing during World War II
Replies: 127
Views: 37027

Re: Strategic bombing during World War II

Germany had a strategic bombing force already. It was established in 1935 when Lufthansa was converted into the core of the LW. Strategic bombing was seen as an alternative to naval spending not army spending. However all naval and LW spending was subordinated to Hitlers four year plan which wasted ...
by Paul L
Sat Sep 10, 2011 11:39 pm
Forum: Hypothetical Naval Scenarios
Topic: Tirpitz and Graf Zeppelin 1941
Replies: 335
Views: 48376

Re: Tirpitz and Graf Zeppelin 1941

How many decades of practice did the Germans have in fighter interception from a carrier platform? And in launching and recovering anti-ship strikes from a carrier? Pretty lame argument don't you think. One might as well ask…. How many decades of practice did the Germans have in tank attacks or def...
by Paul L
Sat Sep 10, 2011 8:09 pm
Forum: World War II
Topic: Strategic bombing during World War II
Replies: 127
Views: 37027

Re: Strategic bombing during World War II

According to the Butt Report http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Butt_Report The reason the RAF didn't inflict any damage on Germany up until 1942 was because of the terrible navigational errors in targeting by the RAF. Reportedly "The report found that on average only one in three bombers dispatched claim...
by Paul L
Tue Jun 28, 2011 12:44 am
Forum: Hypothetical Naval Scenarios
Topic: late 1943 Tirpitz instead of Bismarck in May 1941
Replies: 73
Views: 12426

Re: late 1943 Tirpitz instead of Bismarck in May 1941

http://www.navweaps.com/index_inro/INRO_Hood_p1.htm http://www.navweaps.com/index_inro/INRO_Hood_p2.htm http://www.navweaps.com/index_inro/INRO_Hood_p3.htm http://www.navweaps.com/index_inro/INRO_Hood_p4.htm Looking at the target based on the 10% hit chance , it reminds me of the same chance of the ...
by Paul L
Mon Jun 27, 2011 6:06 pm
Forum: Hypothetical Naval Scenarios
Topic: late 1943 Tirpitz instead of Bismarck in May 1941
Replies: 73
Views: 12426

Re: late 1943 Tirpitz instead of Bismarck in May 1941

The 'lucky hit' on HMS Hood was not THAT lucky, in fact it was inevitable given such a large 'weakened area'. The significant wave height exposed this area regularly so that it was only a matter of time before one enemy shell found the way through. This was not the first time the HMS Hood was in bat...
by Paul L
Mon Jun 27, 2011 2:24 am
Forum: Hypothetical Naval Scenarios
Topic: late 1943 Tirpitz instead of Bismarck in May 1941
Replies: 73
Views: 12426

Re: late 1943 Tirpitz instead of Bismarck in May 1941

O'Hara puts the exchange at 1847 hours and the range of the gun duel was 26,000 yards. Lutjens was distracting RN to allow Prince Eugen to escape. pp 85 Tirpitz will escape the shadowing Cruisers the same way Bismarck did in real life by using the GHG passive sonar to detect Cruiser movement and ini...
by Paul L
Thu Jan 07, 2010 4:45 am
Forum: Bismarck General Discussion
Topic: Less seriously torpedo damaged Bismarck
Replies: 64
Views: 6999

Re: Less seriously torpedo damaged Bismarck

From what I've read about Fulmars , they were no match for land based fighters with top speeds of only 275mph. While the Stuka might be vulnerable they would be escorted by Me-109s which had the range with econofuel comsumption and drop tanks. Also wasn't the Ju-88 available as effective slant bombe...
by Paul L
Wed Jan 06, 2010 8:41 pm
Forum: Bismarck General Discussion
Topic: Less seriously torpedo damaged Bismarck
Replies: 64
Views: 6999

Re: Less seriously torpedo damaged Bismarck

Isn't this pretty much what they did historically. I believe they sank at least one British DD returning to port after Bismarck sunk. However they aren't going to be intercepting swordfish attacking Bismarck if they aren't flying cap over it. Well in the Crete action battleships and Cruisers were a...
by Paul L
Wed Jan 06, 2010 2:05 am
Forum: Bismarck General Discussion
Topic: Less seriously torpedo damaged Bismarck
Replies: 64
Views: 6999

Re: Less seriously torpedo damaged Bismarck

...With regards LW airpower I would work from the assumption that rather than mount cap, they would go on the offensive just like around Crete at the very same time that Bismarck is being sunk.Attacking RN warships & battleships etc from 400km away. If they could do this off Crete, they could do th...
by Paul L
Tue Jan 05, 2010 4:09 am
Forum: Bismarck General Discussion
Topic: Less seriously torpedo damaged Bismarck
Replies: 64
Views: 6999

Re: Less seriously torpedo damaged Bismarck

Even if the Irish allow British BB to be refueled from tankers operating out of Irish ports, that would take the better part of a day in which the BB is cruising along at very slow speed. The British Replenishment at sea was just not that good. With regards LW airpower I would work from the assumpti...
by Paul L
Thu Dec 31, 2009 10:57 pm
Forum: Bismarck General Discussion
Topic: Less seriously torpedo damaged Bismarck
Replies: 64
Views: 6999

Re: Less seriously torpedo damaged Bismarck

That's by no means certain. I think you uderestimate the difficulties of flying CAP over a ship particularly for pilots lacking the training. First of al they have to find the Bismarck. Once found they have to spot and be in postion to intercept the incoming raids. Particularly if it's a first ligh...
by Paul L
Thu Dec 31, 2009 9:32 pm
Forum: Naval History (1922-1945)
Topic: Major Naval blunders of WW2; kept secret
Replies: 62
Views: 10896

Re: Major Naval blunders of WW2; kept secret

... They see the world wide drop from 40 million ton down to 28 million tons in this period. It would not take too much more to have pushed this down to 20 million tons which would have meant make or break for the UK. .... Not take too much more??? You are almost doubling the losses!!! And that's w...
by Paul L
Wed Dec 30, 2009 11:16 pm
Forum: Naval History (1922-1945)
Topic: Major Naval blunders of WW2; kept secret
Replies: 62
Views: 10896

Re: Major Naval blunders of WW2; kept secret

I have not heard good things about Clay Blair's "Hitler's U-boat War", but since I have not read it I will keep my lips sealed. However just going on the post it refers to late 1942 to the end of the war. If you reference the Operations group 51 ASW study you will see this is the dividing line betwe...