1944: Flak Alone Blasts the Allies out of the Sky

Discussions on alternate history, including events up to 20 years before today. Hosted by Terry Duncan.
ljadw
Member
Posts: 13122
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: 1944: Flak Alone Blasts the Allies out of the Sky

Post by ljadw » 06 Jun 2022 06:25

Getting a kill on a bomber or a fighter is not what matters . What matters is to prevent the bomber/fighter to accomplish its mission ,and if this can be done by forcing the enemy aircraft to fly higher, it is as good as a kill .

User avatar
Ironmachine
Member
Posts: 5718
Joined: 07 Jul 2005 10:50
Location: Spain

Re: 1944: Flak Alone Blasts the Allies out of the Sky

Post by Ironmachine » 06 Jun 2022 07:56

ljadw wrote:Getting a kill on a bomber or a fighter is not what matters . What matters is to prevent the bomber/fighter to accomplish its mission ,and if this can be done by forcing the enemy aircraft to fly higher, it is as good as a kill .
Well, a bomber/fighter that is not destroyed can always try again or in another place, while a destroyed bomber/fighter does not have that option. So good enough maybe, but certainly not "as good as a kill". :wink:

ljadw
Member
Posts: 13122
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: 1944: Flak Alone Blasts the Allies out of the Sky

Post by ljadw » 06 Jun 2022 11:36

Ironmachine wrote:
06 Jun 2022 07:56
ljadw wrote:Getting a kill on a bomber or a fighter is not what matters . What matters is to prevent the bomber/fighter to accomplish its mission ,and if this can be done by forcing the enemy aircraft to fly higher, it is as good as a kill .
Well, a bomber/fighter that is not destroyed can always try again or in another place, while a destroyed bomber/fighter does not have that option.
Should it not be : a bomber/fighter that is not destroyed/SEVERELY DAMAGED,can always try again or in another place,IF a crew is still available ? Most historians underestimated strongly the importance of the number of damaged aircraft .
From FLAK (by Edward B>Westermann ) P 286
From July 1942 to April 1945 German FLAK destroyed 1345 aircraft of Bomber Command in night sorties while German fighters destroyed 2278 aircraft of BC in night sorties .
In the same period BC lost 163 bombers damaged beyond repair by German fighters and 153 by the German FLAK.
Also in the same period,8842 bombers suffered ''minor ''damages from the Flak and 1731 by fighters .
A big part of these ''minor ''damages were serious ones .
3523 bombers were shot down and 15389 were damaged ,of which a great number severely .
27 percent of the First USAAF Air Division bombers that were damaged by the FLAK between May 1944 and March 1945
were seriously damaged (4115 0n a total of 15,042 )me source P 287 .
An other point is that NOT getting a kill on a bomber,does not mean that the damages by the bombers will be as serious as when the bomber was destroyed/severely damaged : the Allied air attacks on 3 Belgian cities (Mortsel,Merelbeke and Kortrijk ) resulted in minor damages,although the loses were very low, because of the absence of FLAK and fighters .
In Mortsel almost 1000 civilians were killed ,USAAF losses were low( 6 on 83 bombers were lost ) but the damage on the ERLA plants production was also low .
A year after Mortsel,the marshalling yard of Merelbeke ( near Gent ) was attacked by 118 Canadian bombers : only 9 % of the bombs fell on the marshalling yard ,which was only slightly hurt,but 428 civilians died .
In March 1944 109 aircraft attacked the railway station of Kortrijk ;the damage of the railway station was minor but 250 people died .The conclusion is that if a bomber is not destroyed and tries again elsewhere, this does not mean that the new attack will be ( more ) successful .

User avatar
Takao
Member
Posts: 3603
Joined: 10 Mar 2002 19:27
Location: Reading, Pa

Re: 1944: Flak Alone Blasts the Allies out of the Sky

Post by Takao » 06 Jun 2022 22:27

What is considered "seriously/severely damaged"?
What is considered "minor damage?"
How is minor damage considered severe damage?
How "big" a part of minor damages were "serious" - You seem to rewrite the dictionary on a daily basis.

Again, more questions than answers.
At Mortsel, 307 ERLA factory workers were killed. Hardly sounds like low damage to me.
When was Mortsel bombed again?
Also, at Morsel, their was not an absence of Flak & fighters.

ThatZenoGuy
Member
Posts: 327
Joined: 20 Jan 2019 10:14
Location: Australia

Re: 1944: Flak Alone Blasts the Allies out of the Sky

Post by ThatZenoGuy » 07 Jun 2022 01:10

Destroyer500 wrote:
05 Jun 2022 13:34
that had a massive range of 190km,according to wiki,range and if made for some kind of AA,could definitely be fired vertically to reach bomber height.
190 kilometers of range aimed vertically won't get you to the bombers, it'll launch that projectile into space. XD

User avatar
Destroyer500
Member
Posts: 199
Joined: 16 Oct 2018 10:14
Location: Athens

Re: 1944: Flak Alone Blasts the Allies out of the Sky

Post by Destroyer500 » 07 Jun 2022 01:14

ThatZenoGuy wrote:
07 Jun 2022 01:10
Destroyer500 wrote:
05 Jun 2022 13:34
that had a massive range of 190km,according to wiki,range and if made for some kind of AA,could definitely be fired vertically to reach bomber height.
190 kilometers of range aimed vertically won't get you to the bombers, it'll launch that projectile into space. XD
Hahahaha well yea if the time fuse fails to activate or activates later on we may kill some ufos :D

ljadw
Member
Posts: 13122
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: 1944: Flak Alone Blasts the Allies out of the Sky

Post by ljadw » 07 Jun 2022 06:20

Takao wrote:
06 Jun 2022 22:27
What is considered "seriously/severely damaged"?
What is considered "minor damage?"
How is minor damage considered severe damage?
How "big" a part of minor damages were "serious" - You seem to rewrite the dictionary on a daily basis.

Again, more questions than answers.
At Mortsel, 307 ERLA factory workers were killed. Hardly sounds like low damage to me.
When was Mortsel bombed again?
Also, at Morsel, their was not an absence of Flak & fighters.
There is no proof that the death of 307 factory workers resulted in a big damage for the production .

ljadw
Member
Posts: 13122
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: 1944: Flak Alone Blasts the Allies out of the Sky

Post by ljadw » 07 Jun 2022 07:07

And, as only 6 Germans were killed, (civilians ? military ? ) this indicates that there was no Flak defending the Erla plant .

User avatar
Takao
Member
Posts: 3603
Joined: 10 Mar 2002 19:27
Location: Reading, Pa

Re: 1944: Flak Alone Blasts the Allies out of the Sky

Post by Takao » 07 Jun 2022 08:32

ljadw wrote:
07 Jun 2022 06:20
Takao wrote:
06 Jun 2022 22:27
What is considered "seriously/severely damaged"?
What is considered "minor damage?"
How is minor damage considered severe damage?
How "big" a part of minor damages were "serious" - You seem to rewrite the dictionary on a daily basis.

Again, more questions than answers.
At Mortsel, 307 ERLA factory workers were killed. Hardly sounds like low damage to me.
When was Mortsel bombed again?
Also, at Morsel, their was not an absence of Flak & fighters.
There is no proof that the death of 307 factory workers resulted in a big damage for the production .
You have provided no proof there wasn't.

User avatar
Takao
Member
Posts: 3603
Joined: 10 Mar 2002 19:27
Location: Reading, Pa

Re: 1944: Flak Alone Blasts the Allies out of the Sky

Post by Takao » 07 Jun 2022 08:35

ljadw wrote:
07 Jun 2022 07:07
And, as only 6 Germans were killed, (civilians ? military ? ) this indicates that there was no Flak defending the Erla plant .
It indicates Flak was not hit, not that it was not there.

Odd, that you claim 307 deaths of factory workers and the plant was not hit.
Yet,6 German deaths means that there was no Flak.

ThatZenoGuy
Member
Posts: 327
Joined: 20 Jan 2019 10:14
Location: Australia

Re: 1944: Flak Alone Blasts the Allies out of the Sky

Post by ThatZenoGuy » 07 Jun 2022 09:31

Does anyone else have more information/images of the "Brand Shrapnell" munition? It looks very effective, yet similar to the Japanese Type 3/4 projectiles.

User avatar
Takao
Member
Posts: 3603
Joined: 10 Mar 2002 19:27
Location: Reading, Pa

Re: 1944: Flak Alone Blasts the Allies out of the Sky

Post by Takao » 07 Jun 2022 10:00

Nothing outside of the usual German munition books.

The San-Shiki looked effective too, but it was more useful as a incendiary bombardment shell than as an AA shell.

ljadw
Member
Posts: 13122
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: 1944: Flak Alone Blasts the Allies out of the Sky

Post by ljadw » 07 Jun 2022 12:53

Takao wrote:
07 Jun 2022 08:35
ljadw wrote:
07 Jun 2022 07:07
And, as only 6 Germans were killed, (civilians ? military ? ) this indicates that there was no Flak defending the Erla plant .
It indicates Flak was not hit, not that it was not there.

Odd, that you claim 307 deaths of factory workers and the plant was not hit.
Yet,6 German deaths means that there was no Flak.
Why should there be a Flak unit to defend an insignificant plant ?
And the plant was hit .

User avatar
Takao
Member
Posts: 3603
Joined: 10 Mar 2002 19:27
Location: Reading, Pa

Re: 1944: Flak Alone Blasts the Allies out of the Sky

Post by Takao » 07 Jun 2022 13:17

ljadw wrote:
07 Jun 2022 12:53
Why should there be a Flak unit to defend an insignificant plant ?
And the plant was hit .
You have not proved that Flak was not there...

Why did fighters defend an insignificant plant? Stupid Germans?

ljadw
Member
Posts: 13122
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: 1944: Flak Alone Blasts the Allies out of the Sky

Post by ljadw » 07 Jun 2022 13:39

Takao wrote:
07 Jun 2022 08:32
ljadw wrote:
07 Jun 2022 06:20
Takao wrote:
06 Jun 2022 22:27
What is considered "seriously/severely damaged"?
What is considered "minor damage?"
How is minor damage considered severe damage?
How "big" a part of minor damages were "serious" - You seem to rewrite the dictionary on a daily basis.

Again, more questions than answers.
At Mortsel, 307 ERLA factory workers were killed. Hardly sounds like low damage to me.
When was Mortsel bombed again?
Also, at Morsel, their was not an absence of Flak & fighters.
There is no proof that the death of 307 factory workers resulted in a big damage for the production .
You have provided no proof there wasn't.
The factory resumed its production in a few weeks .

Return to “What if”