US leaders believed Germany would likely have been invulnerable had it defeated SU

Discussions on alternate history, including events up to 20 years before today. Hosted by Terry Duncan.
paulrward
Member
Posts: 474
Joined: 10 Dec 2008 20:14

Re: US leaders believed Germany would likely have been invulnerable had it defeated SU

Post by paulrward » 13 Nov 2020 18:34

Hello All ;

Mr. Anderson stated :
Um, I would call it a "re-evaluation and a decision made to limit deep-penetration
raids aimed at targets far beyond escort range". It was neither a "halt" or a "pause".
Strategic German targets were still being attacked and the Luftwaffe was still coming up
and contesting the air space. You quote was simply incorrect on many particulars.
In other words, " Our glorious forces made an orderly strategic withdrawal to more easily defensible
positions. The ragged, starving, demoralized enemy staggered behind in chaos..... "


No amount of war time propaganda by the Bomber Barons or post war ex post facto justification by
the House Historians of the USAF can conceal the fact that the two Schweinfurt Raids were disasters,
both in terms of the losses to aircraft and crews, and the resulting effect on the morale of the survivors.
After the October Raid, the USAAF puilled back, and for the rest of 1943, conducted only ' Milk Run '
missions while they rebuilt their crew and aircraft strength and tried to re-establish morale.
"Eighth Air Force halted raids into Germany" simply isn't true. Raids into Germany
never halted. Deep penetration raids into certain classes of targets ended until early 1944
and the arrival of large numbers of long-range escorts, but that is different.
Actually, if you look at the attached map, from Paul Kennedy's ' Engineers of Victory '. you can see how,
after 2nd Schweinfurt, the USAAF conducted raids only in France and the Netherlands, and in the areas
of Germany where they could have P-47 escort. ( The P-38 had turned out to be a dud as a fighter escort
over Germany )

And, it is significant, Schweinfurt was OUTSIDE the radius of the P-47 in 1943. It wasn't until the P-51 with
' Paper Tanks ' reached the theater that the USAAF went back on the offensive into Germany. And it took
Jimmy Doolittle to unscrew the USAAF Fighter Escort Doctrine and make the whole thing work.

USAAF Figther Range.jpg
Um, sorry, but no, the Eighth Air Force could not lose something it had not yet gained.

No, but the USAAF COULD lose more than 60 bombers and 600 trained crewmen in a single day,
shattering the myth of the ' Defensive Bomber Box ' and convincing the Fortress and Liberator crews that
none of them were ever going to get home after 25 missions. Kind of like Linebacker in VietNam, where
the B-52 crews got the hell shot out of them over Hanoi. It only takes one or two missions where a lot of
your friends get killed to give the ' guys in the back ' a bad case of The Fear.
After BODENPLATTE it could be argued the allies achieved air supremacy, but that may be
a stretch.

Um, sorry, no. The USAAF achieved air superiority starting in early December of 1943, when the first P-51Bs
were re assigned from support missions to long range bomber escort. At the end of February, 1944, the USAAF
fought Operation Argument ( ' Big Week ' ) against the Luftwaffe, and killed so many veteran Luftwaffe pilots
that the JagdFlieger Squadrons never fully recovered. Following this, throughout the spring, summer, and
autumn of 1944, the Eight and Ninth Air Forces essentially were able to bomb any target in Germany, with far
fewer losses than they had suffered in 1943.

.....BTW, its pretty embarrassing that whatever internet PAO flack at Maxwell that typed up
that egregious manure didn't bother to check it against the facts.

Yeah, what can you say ? Guy was probably a history major.....



Respectfully :

Paul R. Ward
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Information not shared, is information lost
Voices that are banned, are voices who cannot share information....
Discussions that are silenced, are discussions that will occur elsewhere !

History Learner
Member
Posts: 369
Joined: 19 Jan 2019 09:39
Location: United States

Re: US leaders believed Germany would likely have been invulnerable had it defeated SU

Post by History Learner » 15 Nov 2020 06:34

Richard Anderson wrote:
13 Nov 2020 07:25
History Learner wrote:
13 Nov 2020 05:03
Okay, so what else would you call "there was a re-evaluation and a decision made to limit deep-penetration raids aimed at targets far beyond escort range." other than a halt or a pause? Yes, overall sorties continued, but the limitation you specify rendered much of Germany free from bombing in that four month period. Also, of the sorties, what is the breakdown of that? Fighter sweeps, recon, etc.
Um, I would call it a "re-evaluation and a decision made to limit deep-penetration raids aimed at targets far beyond escort range". It was neither a "halt" or a "pause". Strategic German targets were still being attacked and the Luftwaffe was still coming up and contesting the air space. You quote was simply incorrect on many particulars.

"As a result, leaders now knew that they could no longer conduct raids into Germany without fighter escorts. Their escorts during the raid, the P-47 Thunderbolt, required external fuel tanks. In June 1943, the Army Air Force had directed the addition of external fuel tanks to the P-51A Mustang to produce the P-51B, but sufficient numbers of the modified fighter would not be available until the winter of 1943. As a result, Eighth Air Force halted raids into Germany and would not resume them until mid-January 1944.
Um, sorry, but no, "Eighth Air Force halted raids into Germany" simply isn't true. Raids into Germany never halted. Deep penetration raids into certain classes of targets ended until early 1944 and the arrival of large numbers of long-range escorts, but that is different.
Essentially, up to that point, Eighth Air Force lost air superiority over Germany, a glaring admission that unescorted daylight precision bombing doctrine developed at the Air Corps Tactical School, Maxwell Field, in the 1930s was a failure.
Um, sorry, but no, the Eighth Air Force could not lose something it had not yet gained. The Allies did not gain "air superiority over Germany" until late spring 1944 and it was still contested by the Germans through the end of the the year. After BODENPLATTE it could be argued the allies achieved air supremacy, but that may be a stretch.

BTW, its pretty embarrassing that whatever internet PAO flack at Maxwell that typed up that egregious manure didn't bother to check it against the facts.
[/quote]

Question for you: during this "re-evaluation and a decision made to limit deep-penetration raids aimed at targets far beyond escort range", did raids beyond the escort range (which compromised two thirds of Germany, for the record) occur and how long did said raids not occur?

Richard Anderson
Member
Posts: 4225
Joined: 01 Jan 2016 21:21
Location: Bremerton, Washington

Re: US leaders believed Germany would likely have been invulnerable had it defeated SU

Post by Richard Anderson » 15 Nov 2020 07:23

History Learner wrote:
15 Nov 2020 06:34
Question for you: during this "re-evaluation and a decision made to limit deep-penetration raids aimed at targets far beyond escort range", did raids beyond the escort range (which compromised two thirds of Germany, for the record) occur and how long did said raids not occur?
So you want me to do the research for you?

Okay, at random, after the lull that ensued following Mission 80, 81, and 84, which struck Kassel, Bochum/Vereinigte Stahl, Bonn, Recklinghausen, Frankfurt-am-Main, and Heilbronn:

Mission 107 on 2 October 1943 targeted Munich.
Mission 108 on 4 October 1943, targeted Frankfurt-am-Main, Heddern, Saarbrucken/Sarreguemines, Saarlautern, and Wiesbaden.
Mission 113 on 9 October 1943, targeted Anklam, Danzig, and Marienburg.
Mission 115, on 14 October 1943, targeted Schweinfurt.
Mission 121 on 5 November 1943, targeted Gelsenkirchen, Buer, Nordstern, Haltern, and Munster.
Mission 143 on 30 November 1943, targeted Solingen.
Mission 145 on 1 December 1943, was a repeat of 143.
Mission 161 on 22 December 1943, targeted Munster, Osnabruck, and Rheine.

Among others.
"Is all this pretentious pseudo intellectual citing of sources REALLY necessary? It gets in the way of a good, spirited debate, destroys the cadence." POD, 6 October 2018

History Learner
Member
Posts: 369
Joined: 19 Jan 2019 09:39
Location: United States

Re: US leaders believed Germany would likely have been invulnerable had it defeated SU

Post by History Learner » 15 Nov 2020 10:33

Richard Anderson wrote:
15 Nov 2020 07:23
History Learner wrote:
15 Nov 2020 06:34
Question for you: during this "re-evaluation and a decision made to limit deep-penetration raids aimed at targets far beyond escort range", did raids beyond the escort range (which compromised two thirds of Germany, for the record) occur and how long did said raids not occur?
So you want me to do the research for you?

Okay, at random, after the lull that ensued following Mission 80, 81, and 84, which struck Kassel, Bochum/Vereinigte Stahl, Bonn, Recklinghausen, Frankfurt-am-Main, and Heilbronn:

Mission 107 on 2 October 1943 targeted Munich.
Mission 108 on 4 October 1943, targeted Frankfurt-am-Main, Heddern, Saarbrucken/Sarreguemines, Saarlautern, and Wiesbaden.
Mission 113 on 9 October 1943, targeted Anklam, Danzig, and Marienburg.
Mission 115, on 14 October 1943, targeted Schweinfurt.
Mission 121 on 5 November 1943, targeted Gelsenkirchen, Buer, Nordstern, Haltern, and Munster.
Mission 143 on 30 November 1943, targeted Solingen.
Mission 145 on 1 December 1943, was a repeat of 143.
Mission 161 on 22 December 1943, targeted Munster, Osnabruck, and Rheine.

Among others.
Black Thursday was the October 14th raid on Schweinfurt, so after that is the relevant timeframe because that's when the Bombing Halt occurred. My exact question to you was if raids occurred outside of escort range. Let's review:

Mission 121 was in fighter escort range, specifically in the Rhineland-Westphalia range. All locations listed are around the city of Gelsenkirchen, for the record.

Mission 143 and 145 were at Solingen, which is also in Rhineland-Westphalia, so again in escort range.

Mission 161 is again directed at cites in the Rhineland/Westphalia region.

Again, my question to you was if any raids beyond fighter escort region occurred during this time; none of the missions/locations provided fit the criteria. Now, you can quibble with me over my original statement not being precise; it was four months instead of six months and raids continued into areas of Germany that escorts could reach, so on those specific points there is justifiable criticism and for which I've already conceded upon. Overall, however, my charge as of right now stands because for a four month period, there was a Bombing Halt over most of Germany. Euphemisms to hide such do not work.

Richard Anderson
Member
Posts: 4225
Joined: 01 Jan 2016 21:21
Location: Bremerton, Washington

Re: US leaders believed Germany would likely have been invulnerable had it defeated SU

Post by Richard Anderson » 15 Nov 2020 17:19

History Learner wrote:
15 Nov 2020 10:33
Again, my question to you was if any raids beyond fighter escort region occurred during this time; none of the missions/locations provided fit the criteria. Now, you can quibble with me over my original statement not being precise; it was four months instead of six months and raids continued into areas of Germany that escorts could reach, so on those specific points there is justifiable criticism and for which I've already conceded upon. Overall, however, my charge as of right now stands because for a four month period, there was a Bombing Halt over most of Germany. Euphemisms to hide such do not work.
Quibble? Seriously? Your "original statement" was "One wonders why there was a six month halt to bombing in late 1943 into early 1944, then." You then modified the time frame to four months and now apparently agree that "raids continued into areas of Germany" and that the number of sorties and tons of bombs dropped on German industry continued to increase, that heavy American and German losses in the campaign continued, but still insist it was a "Bombing halt", because they did not fly beyond escort range. I think the quibble is on the other foot.
"Is all this pretentious pseudo intellectual citing of sources REALLY necessary? It gets in the way of a good, spirited debate, destroys the cadence." POD, 6 October 2018

Tom from Cornwall
Member
Posts: 2623
Joined: 01 May 2006 19:52
Location: UK

Re: US leaders believed Germany would likely have been invulnerable had it defeated SU

Post by Tom from Cornwall » 15 Nov 2020 17:45

History Learner wrote:
15 Nov 2020 10:33
it was four months instead of six months and raids continued into areas of Germany that escorts could reach, so on those specific points there is justifiable criticism and for which I've already conceded upon. Overall, however, my charge as of right now stands because for a four month period, there was a Bombing Halt over most of Germany.
Hmmm, wasn't the Ruhr the most important economic target in Germany? Don't see much point in just sending bombers to "most of Germany" whilst the Ruhr is available as a target.

Regards

Tom

History Learner
Member
Posts: 369
Joined: 19 Jan 2019 09:39
Location: United States

Re: US leaders believed Germany would likely have been invulnerable had it defeated SU

Post by History Learner » 15 Nov 2020 21:58

Richard Anderson wrote:
15 Nov 2020 17:19
History Learner wrote:
15 Nov 2020 10:33
Again, my question to you was if any raids beyond fighter escort region occurred during this time; none of the missions/locations provided fit the criteria. Now, you can quibble with me over my original statement not being precise; it was four months instead of six months and raids continued into areas of Germany that escorts could reach, so on those specific points there is justifiable criticism and for which I've already conceded upon. Overall, however, my charge as of right now stands because for a four month period, there was a Bombing Halt over most of Germany. Euphemisms to hide such do not work.
Quibble? Seriously? Your "original statement" was "One wonders why there was a six month halt to bombing in late 1943 into early 1944, then." You then modified the time frame to four months and now apparently agree that "raids continued into areas of Germany" and that the number of sorties and tons of bombs dropped on German industry continued to increase, that heavy American and German losses in the campaign continued, but still insist it was a "Bombing halt", because they did not fly beyond escort range. I think the quibble is on the other foot.
Yes, because while I was wrong on some of the details, the meat of my claim remains. Let us also not put words into my mouth on the matter either, because most of those statements are things I did not say nor did I just randomly modify it; I admitted I confused the dates and apologized for that. Again, however, you have not refuted the base of the argument. As I asked in my last response: do you have missions (daylight bombing raids, not recon, etc) during the timeframe that occurred beyond fighter escort range?

Richard Anderson
Member
Posts: 4225
Joined: 01 Jan 2016 21:21
Location: Bremerton, Washington

Re: US leaders believed Germany would likely have been invulnerable had it defeated SU

Post by Richard Anderson » 16 Nov 2020 00:17

History Learner wrote:
15 Nov 2020 21:58
Yes, because while I was wrong on some of the details, the meat of my claim remains. Let us also not put words into my mouth on the matter either, because most of those statements are things I did not say nor did I just randomly modify it; I admitted I confused the dates and apologized for that. Again, however, you have not refuted the base of the argument. As I asked in my last response: do you have missions (daylight bombing raids, not recon, etc) during the timeframe that occurred beyond fighter escort range?
Why would I, when I have repeatedly said they did not? That is not a "halt". That is not a halt of operations "over Germany". I think you are better on ignore. Toodles!
"Is all this pretentious pseudo intellectual citing of sources REALLY necessary? It gets in the way of a good, spirited debate, destroys the cadence." POD, 6 October 2018

Carl Schwamberger
Host - Allied sections
Posts: 8708
Joined: 02 Sep 2006 20:31
Location: USA

Re: US leaders believed Germany would likely have been invulnerable had it defeated SU

Post by Carl Schwamberger » 16 Nov 2020 02:22

Tom from Cornwall wrote:
15 Nov 2020 17:45
...
Hmmm, wasn't the Ruhr the most important economic target in Germany? Don't see much point in just sending bombers to "most of Germany" whilst the Ruhr is available as a target.

Regards

Tom
Been my thought. I can recall a claim there was a bombing halt in any of the literature I've read from the 190s & later. Price & al the others describe hitting targets inside the P47 escort range, and often the attritional battles with the German fighter arm. But I can't recall mention of a "halt" in bombing German industry.

It does occur to men the weather of November/December did cause a number of missions to be canceled and days to be left blank on the calendar as the overcast & weather over the fields in OK was bad. The big Week corresponds to a period when the January weather clears a bit with a few more good flying days.

Richard Anderson
Member
Posts: 4225
Joined: 01 Jan 2016 21:21
Location: Bremerton, Washington

Re: US leaders believed Germany would likely have been invulnerable had it defeated SU

Post by Richard Anderson » 16 Nov 2020 03:19

halt
/hôlt/
verb: halt; 3rd person present: halts; past tense: halted; past participle: halted; gerund or present participle: halting

bring or come to an abrupt stop.
"there is growing pressure to halt the bloodshed"

noun: halt; plural noun: halts

a suspension of movement or activity, typically a temporary one.
"a halt in production"

This isn't rocket science.
"Is all this pretentious pseudo intellectual citing of sources REALLY necessary? It gets in the way of a good, spirited debate, destroys the cadence." POD, 6 October 2018

History Learner
Member
Posts: 369
Joined: 19 Jan 2019 09:39
Location: United States

Re: US leaders believed Germany would likely have been invulnerable had it defeated SU

Post by History Learner » 17 Nov 2020 04:13

Richard Anderson wrote:
16 Nov 2020 00:17
History Learner wrote:
15 Nov 2020 21:58
Yes, because while I was wrong on some of the details, the meat of my claim remains. Let us also not put words into my mouth on the matter either, because most of those statements are things I did not say nor did I just randomly modify it; I admitted I confused the dates and apologized for that. Again, however, you have not refuted the base of the argument. As I asked in my last response: do you have missions (daylight bombing raids, not recon, etc) during the timeframe that occurred beyond fighter escort range?
Why would I, when I have repeatedly said they did not? That is not a "halt". That is not a halt of operations "over Germany". I think you are better on ignore. Toodles!
Which is exactly what I said? I think it's agree to disagree time.
Last edited by History Learner on 17 Nov 2020 04:15, edited 1 time in total.

History Learner
Member
Posts: 369
Joined: 19 Jan 2019 09:39
Location: United States

Re: US leaders believed Germany would likely have been invulnerable had it defeated SU

Post by History Learner » 17 Nov 2020 04:14

Tom from Cornwall wrote:
15 Nov 2020 17:45
History Learner wrote:
15 Nov 2020 10:33
it was four months instead of six months and raids continued into areas of Germany that escorts could reach, so on those specific points there is justifiable criticism and for which I've already conceded upon. Overall, however, my charge as of right now stands because for a four month period, there was a Bombing Halt over most of Germany.
Hmmm, wasn't the Ruhr the most important economic target in Germany? Don't see much point in just sending bombers to "most of Germany" whilst the Ruhr is available as a target.

Regards

Tom
The Ruhr was the single most important target, but consider in terms of overall; the Ruhr might be worth 30% of German industrial output but if the rest of Germany is 70% and you're not hitting it at all...

Carl Schwamberger
Host - Allied sections
Posts: 8708
Joined: 02 Sep 2006 20:31
Location: USA

Re: US leaders believed Germany would likely have been invulnerable had it defeated SU

Post by Carl Schwamberger » 17 Nov 2020 17:04

Concentrating on on 30% of the industrial capacity seems to be a desirable thing under the circumstance. Leaving that aside, the nominal 375 mile range of the P47 extends beyond the Ruhr, including industrial cities like Bremen, Hannover, Kassel, and Frankfort. Maybe that covers 30%, maybe 50%+ of the Reichs industrial capacity, either way trying to trivialize 'just attacking a important portion' just doesn't work.

Richard Anderson
Member
Posts: 4225
Joined: 01 Jan 2016 21:21
Location: Bremerton, Washington

Re: US leaders believed Germany would likely have been invulnerable had it defeated SU

Post by Richard Anderson » 17 Nov 2020 19:39

Carl Schwamberger wrote:
17 Nov 2020 17:04
Concentrating on on 30% of the industrial capacity seems to be a desirable thing under the circumstance. Leaving that aside, the nominal 375 mile range of the P47 extends beyond the Ruhr, including industrial cities like Bremen, Hannover, Kassel, and Frankfort. Maybe that covers 30%, maybe 50%+ of the Reichs industrial capacity, either way trying to trivialize 'just attacking a important portion' just doesn't work.
The P-47C with internal fuel was very limited in range, a maximum of 200 miles at 10,000 feet and minimum of 160 miles at 30,000 feet. The first external tanks used was the 75-gallon type in July 1943, which increased the radius to about 275 miles. It was October 1943 that the 108-gallon drop tanks for the P-47 became common, which is what extended its combat radius to 375 miles. The development of the P-47D-25 with expanded internal tankage and revised 165-gallon external tanks gave it a combat radius of 600 miles, but not until the late fall of 1944.

By March 1944, the P-38 had a useful radius of 585 miles, the P-51B 650 with 75-gallon tanks. The 108-gallon tanks were first used on a mission 29 May extending range to 700 miles and the appearance of the P-51D extended that to 850 miles.
"Is all this pretentious pseudo intellectual citing of sources REALLY necessary? It gets in the way of a good, spirited debate, destroys the cadence." POD, 6 October 2018

Carl Schwamberger
Host - Allied sections
Posts: 8708
Joined: 02 Sep 2006 20:31
Location: USA

Re: US leaders believed Germany would likely have been invulnerable had it defeated SU

Post by Carl Schwamberger » 18 Nov 2020 19:16

Richard Anderson wrote:
17 Nov 2020 19:39
The P-47C with internal fuel was very limited in range, a maximum of 200 miles at 10,000 feet and minimum of 160 miles at 30,000 feet. The first external tanks used was the 75-gallon type in July 1943, which increased the radius to about 275 miles. It was October 1943 that the 108-gallon drop tanks for the P-47 became common, which is what extended its combat radius to 375 miles. The development of the P-47D-25 with expanded internal tankage and revised 165-gallon external tanks gave it a combat radius of 600 miles, but not until the late fall of 1944.

By March 1944, the P-38 had a useful radius of 585 miles, the P-51B 650 with 75-gallon tanks. The 108-gallon tanks were first used on a mission 29 May extending range to 700 miles and the appearance of the P-51D extended that to 850 miles.
It appears to be in October 43 this putative bombing halt occurred. Which is when the bombers could be escorted across the NW quadrant of Germany & its densest industrial regions. In Oct the unescorted deep penetration ballbearing raids were still underway.

Wish I had replaced my purloined copy of Ellis 'Brute Force'. It had a nice chart that showed the quarterly weight of bombs dropped on German industry, and the changes in overall industrial output within Germany.

Return to “What if”