Bomber Command

Discussions on all aspects of the The United Kingdom & its Empire and Commonwealth during the Inter-War era and Second World War. Hosted by Andy H
User avatar
Maple 01
Member
Posts: 928
Joined: 19 Nov 2002, 00:19
Location: UK

#91

Post by Maple 01 » 15 Jan 2003, 18:26

interestingly, the question has not been noted at all!.
True enough, for my money there was nothing else possible on the western front. A larger Dieppe? No, no landings until '44, Commando raids – used more resources than they were worth most of the time.

On the subject of Harris I'll post an article from the BBC History magazine that rips apart Logan's prejudices, it written a few months back. Also an aircrew ditty – (song)

Regards
-Nick

Anthony EJW
Member
Posts: 157
Joined: 31 Aug 2002, 23:52
Location: Great Britain

#92

Post by Anthony EJW » 15 Jan 2003, 18:35

I don't think there was much other option to Bomber Command's strategy at the time- at the time, it was the only way to get directly at Germany.

However, Bomber Command took up 1/3 of Britain's industrial production during WW2. I think a bit of this could be divereted to other areas - such as getting a decent tank into the line, or a good carrier aircraft - without significantly effecting the bomber offensive.


kelty90
Member
Posts: 171
Joined: 11 Mar 2002, 15:04
Location: Hampshire, England

#93

Post by kelty90 » 15 Jan 2003, 22:37

it's not my field!...but, regarding the British getting a "good aircraft carrier"...I am under the impression that the British carriers were as good as any others during WW2. After all "our" carriers had armoured decks unlike the US ones and we invented the angled flight deck and power assissted take-off.
But, feel free to shoot me down...I seem to have a zillion books about various armies but none on carriers!!!.

Anthony EJW
Member
Posts: 157
Joined: 31 Aug 2002, 23:52
Location: Great Britain

#94

Post by Anthony EJW » 15 Jan 2003, 23:38

A good carrier aircraft :D

Actually, the Seafire was a fairly decent plane, but it could have been introduced sooner.

User avatar
lisset
Member
Posts: 339
Joined: 11 Oct 2002, 00:13
Location: U.K

Bomber Command as per Logan's post.

#95

Post by lisset » 14 Mar 2003, 02:45

Logan's post .....when I read it I was angry , very angry and still am.
I sent Logan a p.m. , from read further via Marcus (who I also sent a p.m. to) it appears Logan will not be returning to the Forum for some time.
I wish Logan no ill and for whatever reason he is off line I trust he will return in good time.
Regarding his post ...his understanding is completely wrong and does not reflect the reality of the situation.
Bomber Command.....a great many of those he gunned for had nothing to do with the bombing policy as persued by the 8th , he has no reason to lay the dog at their feet.
Bomber Command had the same experience as had the Luftwaffe , daylight bombing without effective fighter escort did not work.......the bomber would not always get through ...without taking high losses.
This did not direct the 8th to bomb by day , it was American policy not British.
The men he attacked would have been at Group level at least men who would have seen service at Squadron level.

I am taking my 12 year daughter to the Netherlands in May so that we can take part in a memorial service on Ameland to remember the Allied aircrew buried on Nes General Cemetery.
What would Logan have me tell her about my late uncle who is buried in that cemetery ?
The man in question I was named after him , he was an Air Gunner with 158 squadron ...he died when his Halifax was blown apart from a direct hit...radar predicted flak...his body was the only trace of the aircraft or crew to be found , he was 20 years of age.
Do I tell her that he took the soft option ?

Logan said that the night bombing was dangerous......very true.....did he examine the losses sustained by Bomber Command even the most superficial look would demolish any faith in the arguement he was making , the facts don't support him , certainly a walk through the ReichwaldCemetery near Cleves or the Runneymede Memorial moer than counters his view of the facts.

Not going to say anything further on this matter but without making a reply I don't think I could go and stand by the poor lads grave.
James Stewart

User avatar
Marcus
Member
Posts: 33963
Joined: 08 Mar 2002, 23:35
Location: Europe
Contact:

#96

Post by Marcus » 22 Mar 2003, 11:10

There is no need to discuss this further until Logan returns.

/Marcus

Post Reply

Return to “The United Kingdom & its Empire and Commonwealth 1919-45”