Subject: WWII-L Digest - 20 Jan 1994 to 21 Jan 1994

From: Automatic digest processor <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 22 Jan 1994 00:00:33 -0500

There are 37 messages totalling 1244 lines in this issue.

Topics of the day:

  1. military ranks
  2. Waffen SS in Indochina (2)
  3. Fighters with rear gunners (13)
  4. Check your address!
  5. MEDIA:  Realism, or the Lack Thereof (6)
  6. USAAF 21-23 JAN 44
  7. AMERICAL Div. on Leyte
  8. re : IL-2 Stormovik
  9. re : USAAF 4 jan/B17 vs B24
 10. media
 11. Waffen-SS (2)
 12. Fighters with rear guns (+ other oddities)
 13. bullet speed
 14. Ju88 with upward firing cannon
 15. WEAP: Soviet BA-10
 16. NEWS Re: "This Week in the Navy"
 17. Addr: Patton
 18. MEDIA: Realism, or the Lack Thereof

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 20 Jan 1994 14:07:06 -0500
From:    Bob Smart <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: military ranks

> In Johannes' message of 17 Jan 1994 at 0555 CST, he writes:
>
> >     Is it true that field marshals and five-star generals are only created
> >     during war and not in peacetime?
>
> Its true in the US military.

It is not the state of war but rather the size of the military that determines
whether there are any 5 stars or not. Like all other ranks it is based on the
number of troops ( TO&Es, etc) You don't need 5 sttars if you have a small
army.  Now since the Army ( and the Navy) tend to grow in wartime you tend to
see 5 stars during wartime.

Bob Smart ([email-masked])

------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 20 Jan 1994 14:17:05 -0500
From:    Bob Smart <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Waffen SS in Indochina

>Ken and others,
>
>Regarding the former SS soldiers in Indochina, I recall a book
>called  _Legion of the Damned_ that is the life story of one of these men.
>I may be wrong about the title and will check on it.  (My brother has the book
>at the present time.)  The writer claims that the former SS were recruited
>through one of those mysterious networks that worked to get Germans out of
>Europe at the end of the war.  He also says that this group grew to be fairly
>large, maybe about 1000-2000 men.  The writer of the book was a German officer
> from this group who retired to an unnamed Asian country after the French
>disbanded the unit.  One operation of the former SS men took them a few
>days march into China where they caused quite a bit of havoc for the Red
>Chinese.  Any info on why the French disbanded this unit.  It seemed from
>the book that they were quite effective in fighting the Viet Minh.
>
> Jon Stevens
 Sounds like 'Devils Guard' by George Robert Elford. The story was told to him
by an ex SS officer known as Hans Joseph Wagemuller. Book reads okay but I have
a hard time beleiving all of it. I think there is probably some truth in it but
that it has grown through the retelling.  I am always suspicious of operations
'that are so secret there are no records'.

Dell put out the paperback in 1971. (Yes I have it right here, I found it the
other day when cleaning out some boxes of books)

Bob Smart ([email-masked])

------------------------------

Date:    Fri, 21 Jan 1994 00:16:59 -0600
From:    Jon Stevens <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Waffen SS in Indochina

Bob and all,

 Opps, I got the book _Devil's Guard_ from my brother yesterday.  I stand
corrected.  I was confused with the name of the unit in the book called the
'Battalion of the Damned'.  My cerebral fluid must have frozen in this 70
degrees below zero windchill factor.  Elford says this book is true and
that 'only the names have been changed to protect the innocent(!)'.  I agree
that this book must be taken-with-a-grain-of-salt but it is still a pretty
good adventure story.

It is claimed in the book that the 'world media' forced the French to breakup
the units composed solely of Wehrmacht and SS men.  Was there any outcry
by the 'world media' regarding employment of former German soldiers by the
French in Indochina?  Or is this a sort of 'scapegoating' by Wagemueller
whose story this book supposeedly tells?

Thanks for the other messages and information on former German military in
Indochina.  It was quite interesting.

Jon Stevens -- e-mail: [email-masked]

------------------------------

Date:    Fri, 21 Jan 1994 01:25:02 CST
From:    Steve Alvin <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Fighters with rear gunners

Besides the planes already mentioned, here are a few more:

French Potez 631
British Beaufighter
German Me 410 (had 2 rear firing remote control turrets on fuselage
               side)
       Ju-88 G7 nightfighter (ok, it did start out as a bomber)
Japanese Kawasaki Ki 102
Russian Petlyakov Pe-2

Interestingly, German planes, like the Do 217 night fighter
and the He-217 "Owl" had fixed guns that slanted upwards so
they can engage enemy bombers above them

--
Steve Alvin
[email-masked]

------------------------------

Date:    Fri, 21 Jan 1994 01:36:54 CST
From:    Steve Alvin <[email-masked]>
Subject: Check your address!

On a regular basis some people replying to my posts on the
list have their mail sent straigh to me instead of the list.  In
the past I've tried to hold on to the post until I've contacted
the writer and asked for permission to forward their post to the
list.  I don't mind doing this.  Unfortunately, my freenet, after
asking subscribers for $35 for expansion during 1994, has announced
that it will be reducing our mailboxes from 100k to 50 k :-(.  I
am afraid I will no longer have the space to store mail until
I get permission to forward it.  So, PLEASE check your address
and make sure that the mail intended for the list is sent to the
list!  Thanks.

--
Steve Alvin
[email-masked]

------------------------------

Date:    Fri, 21 Jan 1994 06:56:08 EST
From:    Lowe Barrett MAJ <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: MEDIA:  Realism, or the Lack Thereof

Ken,

I would say the two most realistic (as far as equipment, uniforms, etc.)
WWII movies are:

The Longest Day (because it was made in the early 60's, lots of the stuff
was still around - Sherman tanks - and a big effort was made on the uniforms.
In fact, many of those uniforms periodically show up in the uniform collecting
hobby because by now, they are 30 years old and do look aged).

The Cross of Iron (filmed in Yugoslavia, where lots of old German equipment
was captured and used, as well as the Yugoslav army still had some T-34s which
were used in the movie.)  NOTE:  A WWII US M36 tank destroyer was featured
in Janes Defence Weekly about 9-12 months ago in one of their reports on the
war in the former Yugoslavia).

As far as Vietnam movies, only Hamburger Hill would rate high in my book
for realism.

Bear
Barrett F. Lowe               RANGERS LEAD THE WAY!
MAJ, IN
Dept of Physics, West Point  (e-mail:  [email-masked])

------------------------------

Date:    Fri, 21 Jan 1994 13:24:00 CET
From:    Fred van Wetten <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Fighters with rear gunners

>
> There were quite a lot two-seat or three-seat fighters in service during
> WWII, but the additional crewmembers never had any credible armament to
> direct; instead, they served as radar operators, navigators, and the like.
> And most succesfull multi-seat fighters were twin-engined (Mosquito,
Fokker G-1,
> Beaufighter, He 219, J1N1-S, Ju 88, Ki-45, ...) In general, flexible guns
> aren't worth their weight in a fighter in combat, because of the enormous
> difficulties in aiming them; even on bombers they were soon abandoned
> after WWII.
>
> Emmanuel Gustin

Fred van Wetten           Netadress:[email-masked]

------------------------------

Date:    Fri, 21 Jan 1994 13:32:00 CET
From:    Fred van Wetten <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Fighters with rear gunners

>
> On a tangent - Was the U.S. navy the only service to operate single-seat radar
> equipped nightfighters during WW2? The F6F-3N, F6F-5N and the F4U-4N were
> deployed and used on a regular basis.

As far as I know, the Luftwaffe had a (some) Fw 190 variant(s).
I will look it up and report it to the list.

> Bob Smart ([email-masked])

Fred van Wetten           Netadress:[email-masked]

------------------------------

Date:    Fri, 21 Jan 1994 07:33:00 EST
From:    mc killop <[email-masked]>
Subject: USAAF 21-23 JAN 44

COMBAT CHRONOLOGY OF THE US ARMY AIR FORCES
FRIDAY, 21 JANUARY, TO SUNDAY, 23 JANUARY 1944
FTP SITES
  1. ftp.rutgers.edu in directory pub/wwii/usaf
  2. byrd.mu.wvnet.edu (129.71.32.152) in pub/history/military/airforce/
     wwii_chronology

AIRCRAFT MENTIONED IN THIS REPORT:
  A-20, Douglas Havoc
  A-24, Douglas Dauntless
  A-36, North American Apache
  B-17, Boeing Flying Fortress
  B-24, Consolidated Liberator
  B-25, North American Mitchell
  B-26, Martin Marauder
  C-47, Douglas Skytrain
  F-5, Lockheed Lightning
  L-5, Stinson Sentinel
  P-38, Lockheed Lightning
  P-39, Bell Airacobra
  P-40, Curtiss
  P-47, Republic Thunderbolt
  P-51, North American Mustang
  Ventura, Lockheed

CHINA-BURMA-INDIA (CBI) THEATER OF OPERATIONS

  BURMA-INDIA (Tenth Air Force): In Burma, 11 P-40's score near misses on the
Loilaw bridge and strafe Budagon nearby, starting several fires. 16 A-36's and
P-51's support ground forces near Sumprabum, and 11 more bomb forces SW of
Kamaing.

EUROPEAN THEATER OF OPERATIONS (ETO)

  STRATEGIC OPERATIONS (Eighth Air Force): Mission 187: 36 V-weapon sites
in France, 34 in the Pas de Calais area and 2 in the Cherbourg area, are
targetted; 24 are attacked by 302 of 597 B-17's and 68 of 198 B-24's; 15
B-17's and 9 B-24's hit targets of opportunity (2 V-weapon sites and 3
airfields); they claim 5-1-2 Luftwaffe aircraft; 5 B-24's and a B-17 are
lost, 3 B-24's are damaged beyond repair, and 103 B-17's and 41 B-24's are
damaged; casualties are 2 KIA, 31 WIA and 74 MIA. This mission is escorted
by 49 P-38's, 531 P-47's and 48 Ninth Air Force P-51's; they claim 6-0-4
Luftwaffe aircraft in the air and 2-2-0 on the ground; 1 P-47 is lost, 1
is damaged beyond repair and 1 damaged; casualties are 1 MIA.
  Mission 188: During the night, 5 of 5 B-17's drop 1.2 million leaflets on
Reims, Nantes, Le Mans, Tours and Orleans, France without loss.

  TACTICAL OPERATIONS (Ninth Air Force): 119 B-26's bomb V-weapon sites in
France.

MEDITERRANEAN THEATER OF OPERATIONS (MTO)

  STRATEGIC OPERATIONS (Fifteenth Air Force): B-17's bomb airfields at Istres-
Le-Tube and Salon-de-Provence, France, and in Italy, railroad bridges at
Porto Civitanova, and a bridge and marshalling yard at Rimini, Italy; B-24's
attack the marshalling yards at Pontedera and Prato; P-38's fly escort; and
P-47's sweep over wide areas around Rome and Florence.
  738th and 739th Bombardment Squadrons (Heavy), 454th Bombardment Group
(Heavy) arrives at San Giovanni, Italy from the US with B-24's; first mission
is 8 Feb.

  TACTICAL OPERATIONS (Twelfth Air Force): In Italy, B-26's hit railroad
bridges N and S of Orvieto; B-25's bomb chokepoints around Rome and
unsuccessfully attack the Pontecorvo bridge; A-20's attack communications at
Atina; P-40's hit shipping at Povlje, Yugoslavia; other P-40's and A-36's
attack strongpoints, trucks, a command post, a HQ building, and radar station
in the battle area; P-40's also give close support to US Fifth Army troops
which are hardpressed at both Garigliano and the Rapido River bridgeheads;
and A-36's bomb Veletri, a concentration at Minturno, and the area S of Viterbo.
  "B" and "C" Flights of the 15th Combat Mapping Squadron, 5th Photographic
Reconnaissance Group, depart Colorado Springs, Colorado to join "A" Flight.
The 15th, based at Bari, Italy with F-5's and B-25's, has been in the MTO
since Dec 42.
  381st Bombardment Squadron (Medium), 310th Bombardment Group (Medium),
transfers from Philippeville, Algeria to Ghisonaccia, Corsica with B-25's.

PACIFIC OCEAN AREA (POA, Seventh Air Force): In the Marshall Islands, 16
B-24's staging through Tarawa Atoll, Gilbert Islands during the night of
20/21 Jan, bomb targets on Kwajalein Atoll; 6 Tarawa-based B-25's hit Arno
Atoll, and 12 bomb Aur Atoll; 9 B-25's from Abemama Island, Gilbert Islands,
hit gun positions, barracks, and runways on Mille Atoll; 23 A-24's and 11
P-40's from Makin Island, Gilbert Islands, attack gun positions, ammunition
and oil storage, barracks, and 2 small vessels at Jaluit Atoll.

SOUTH PACIFIC AREA (SOPAC, Thirteenth Air Force): 38 B-24's pound the runway
and revetment area at Borpop Airfield, New Ireland Island. On Bougainville
Island, P-39's strafe Kara and Kahili; and Royal New Zealand Air Force
(RNZAF) Ventura's and B-24's on armed reconnaissance bomb Kalakapisi, Nukiki,
and Buka on Buka Island.

SOUTHWEST PACIFIC AREA (SWPA, Fifth Air Force): In New Guinea, B-25's,
A-20's, and P-39's bomb the Madang area, and strafe villages near Saidor and
troops from Reiss Point to Erima. On New Britain Island, B-25's and P-39's
strafe barges from Cape Raoult to Rein Bay and hit targets of opportunity
along the the N coast; single B-24's on armed reconnaissance blast a control
tower at Hoskins airfield, and hit ships near Kavieng, New Ireland Island and
at Lorengau, Manus Island. 2 B-24's bomb Waingapoe, Sunda Island.

SATURDAY, 22 JANUARY 1944

AMERICAN THEATER OF OPERATIONS

  ALASKA (Eleventh Air Force): HQ 343d Fighter Group transfers from Amchitka
Island, Aleutian Islands to Alexai Point, Alaska.

CHINA-BURMA-INDIA (CBI) THEATER OF OPERATIONS

  BURMA-INDIA (Tenth Air Force): In Burma, 16 B-24's bomb an encampment at
Prome; 16 A-36's and P-51's and a single B-25 attack communications and
supply dumps between Kumnyen and Ngamaw Ga; 12 A-36's and P-51's support
ground forces in the Sumprabum area; 11 P-40's severely damage the Namkwin
railroad bridge.
  492d Bombardment Squadron (Heavy), 7th Bombardment Group (Heavy), transfers
from Panagarh to Madhaiganj, India with B-24's.

  CHINA (Fourteenth Air Force): In China, 11 P-40's and 5 P-51's strafe the
newly opened Nanchang airfield, killing about 20 troops and destroying an
airplane and a truck; 12 P-38's knock out bridges at Shektan and Sheklung.

EUROPEAN THEATER OF OPERATIONS (ETO)

  STRATEGIC OPERATIONS (Eighth Air Force): HQ 457th Bombardment Group (Heavy)
arrives at Glatton, England from the US.

  TACTICAL OPERATIONS (Ninth Air Force): HQ 363d Fighter Group and 382d
Fighter Squadron transfer from Keevil to Rivenhall, England with P-51's;
first mission is 24 Feb.

MEDITERRANEAN THEATER OF OPERATIONS (MTO)

  STRATEGIC OPERATIONS (Fifteenth Air Force): In Italy, unescorted B-17's and
B-24's bomb the Terni and Arezzo marshalling yards, Pontedera marshalling
yard and airfield, a road and rail junction NW of Frascati, Terracina road
defile and Pontecorvo bridge and town area; P-38's strafe targets in the
Arce-Frosinone area, including several vehicles and train cars; P-47's on a
sweep over the Rome area encounter several fighters, and claim 5 shot down; 2
P-47's are lost.

  TACTICAL OPERATIONS (Twelfth Air Force): In Italy, maximum support is given
to Allied landings at Anzio, which are begun by the US Fifth Army's VI Corps
at 0200; fighter-bombers, light and medium bombers direct efforts toward
isolating the landing area by cutting roads, bridges, and railroads and
obstructing towns in the surrounding region, at Valetri, Valmontone,
Colleferro, Ceprano, and Fondi and hitting traffic and communications
throughout the area; fighters maintain a patrol over shipping and beachhead
and successfully intercept several enemy fighter-bomber missions directed
against the landings.

PACIFIC OCEAN AREA (POA, Seventh Air Force): In the Marshall Islands, 18
B-24's, flying from Tarawa Atoll, Gilbert Islands, hit targets on Kwajalein,
Jaluit and Mille Atoll; 10 B-25's from Abemama Island, Gilbert Islands hit
Maloelap Atoll; 9 others, flying out of Tarawa, bomb shipping and shore
installations at Wotje Atoll; 3 B-25's are lost during the day's missions; 10
Japanese aircraft are claimed shot down.

SOUTH PACIFIC AREA (SOPAC, Thirteenth Air Force): On New Britain Island, 27
B-25's, with 90+ supporting fighters, attack Lakunai Airfield, doing
considerable damage to runway and revetment areas; they claim 18 Japanese
aircraft; 1 B-25 and 4 fighters are lost. 6 B-25's and 30+ B-24's pound the
town of Rabaul.

SOUTHWEST PACIFIC AREA (SWPA, Fifth Air Force): B-25's strafe villages,
bridges, and barges from Cape Gourdon to Cape Croisilles, New Guinea, and hit
shipping at Papitalai, Los Negros Island, sinking a small vessel and a barge
and severely damaging a jetty. A-20's, P-40's and Royal Australian Air Force
(RAAF) aircraft hit numerous scattered targets of opportunity on New Britain
Island.

SUNDAY, 23 JANUARY 1944

CHINA-BURMA-INDIA (CBI) THEATER OF OPERATIONS

  BURMA-INDIA (Tenth Air Force): In Burma, 19 B-24's, in 2 waves, attack
shipping at Mergui, claiming a 350-ft (107 m) vessel and 2 small boats
destroyed; 6 B-25's and 16 P-38's knock out a bridge at Myittha, damage a
bridge at Samon, and damage several trucks and railroad cars; 28 A-36's and
P-51's and a single B-25 pound supply dumps at Kamaing and Mogaung, achieving
excellent results; 16 P-40's hit Myitkyina Airfield, railroad cars at
Pidaung, and a railroad bridge at Loilaw.

  CHINA (Fourteenth Air Force): In China, 28 P-40's and 9 B-25's from Kweilin
pound Kai Tek Airfield in the Hone Kong-Kowloon area; and 2 B-25's heavily
damage 3 merchant vessels S of Wenchow.

EUROPEAN THEATER OF OPERATIONS (ETO)

  STRATEGIC OPERATIONS (Eighth Air Force): Mission 232: 5 B-17's drop 250
bundles of leaflets on Rennes, Le Mans, Chartres, Lille and Orleans, France
at 2136-2232 hours without loss.

  TACTICAL OPERATIONS (Ninth Air Force): Nearly 200 B-26's bomb V-weapon
sites in the French coastal area.
  75th and 77th Troop Carrier Squadrons, 435th Troop Carrier Group, transfer
from Langer to Welford Park, England with C-47's.

MEDITERRANEAN THEATER OF OPERATIONS (MTO)

  STRATEGIC OPERATIONS (Fifteenth Air Force): In Italy, B-17's bomb road
bridges at Pontecorvo and Ceprano, railroad line and bridge at Falconara,
Marittima, and marshalling yards at Poggibonsi and Siena; P-47's escort the
B-17's to the latter 2 targets; B-24's bomb Rieti Airfield, Porto Civitanova
marshalling yard, and targets of opportunity, including a bridge near Cagli,
marshalling yard N of Perugia, and landing strip S of Iesi; P-47's and P-38's
carry out sweeps in wide areas around Rome and Florence, reaching out to
Viterbo, Rieti, Orte, and Terni.

  TACTICAL OPERATIONS (Twelfth Air Force): Colonel William S Gravely takes
command of XII Air Force Training and Replacement Command.
  B-26's bomb the area S of Avezzano while B-25's hit the town of Avezzano
and road junction at Monte Cornacchia; A-20's bomb Vallecorsa with good
results; A-36's attack Vallecorsa, road junctions at Fondi and in the
Priverno area, the town of Ceccano, and railroad at Sezze; P-47's bomb the
bridge at Skradin, Yugoslavia; Royal Air Force (RAF) Desert Air Force (DAF)
fighters strafe tanks and trucks on the British Eighth Army front, and XII Air
Support Command fighters cover the US Fifth Army's Anzio beachhead during the
day.

PACIFIC OCEAN AREA (POA, Seventh Air Force): In the Marshall Islands, 21
B-25's from Tarawa Atoll and Abemama Island, Gilbert Islands, hit Taroa
Island, Maloelap Atoll; the B-25's claim 3 fighters shot down; 23 B-24's,
flying out of Makin and Abemama Islands, Gilbert Islands, bomb Wotje Atoll at
dusk; 1 B-24 bombs Mille Atoll during return flight after developing engine
trouble.

SOUTH PACIFIC AREA (SOPAC, Thirteenth Air Force): On New Britain Island, 80
AAF, US Navy (USN) and US Marine Corps (USMC) fighters support 60+ USN dive
bombers in a strike on the Lakunai Airfield and Matupi Harbor area; they
claim 30+ Japanese aircraft; 3 Allied fighters are lost; later, 40+ fighters
sweep the Rabaul area; during the night of 23/24 Jan, 7 B-25's hit Tobera and
Lakunai. 20 P-39's strafe targets of opportunity in the Shortland Island area.
  67th Fighter Squadron, 347th Fighter Group, transfers from Woodlark
Island to Russell Island, Solomon Islands with P-39's.

SOUTHWEST PACIFIC AREA (SWPA, Fifth Air Force): In New Guinea, 35 B-24's,
with fighter escort, bomb Wewak; 50 Japanese fighters intercept; in the
ensuing air battle US aircraft claim 12 of the fighters shot down; 5 US
fighters are lost; P-39's strafe barges and AA positions at Uligan Harbor and
on the Rai Coast. In New Britain, A-20's hit forces and AA positions near
Cape Raoult and Gasmata Island. B-24's hit Flores Island, Lesser Sunda
Islands.
  25th Liaison Squadron, V Bomber Command attached to 5212th Photographic
Wing (Provisional), begins moving from Brisbane, Australia to Lae, New Guinea
with L-5's.

SOURCES:
AIR FORCE COMBAT UNITS OF WORLD WAR II, Office of Air Force History,
  Headquarters USAF, 1961, ISBN 0-912799-02-1
COMBAT SQUADRONS OF THE AIR FORCE, WORLD WAR II, Office of Air Force
  History, Headquarters USAF 1982
THE ARMY AIR FORCES IN WORLD WAR II: COMBAT CHRONOLOGY, 1941-1945 by the
  Office of Air Force History, Headquarters USAF, 1973
THE MIGHTY EIGHTH WAR DIARY by Roger A. Freeman, ISBN 1-85409-071-2

Jack McKillop
USAF (Airways and Air Communications Service)
1955-59

-------------------------------------------------------------------
|  Jack McKillop              |  Those who have long enjoyed such |
|  Bellcore                   |  privileges as we enjoy forget in |
|  Piscataway, NJ USA         |  time that men have died to win   |
|  [email-masked]  |  them.                     FDR    |
-------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------

Date:    Fri, 21 Jan 1994 14:56:39 +0100
From:    Emmanuel Gustin <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Fighters with rear gunners

On Thu, 20 Jan 1994, Sidney Allinson wrote:

> The most notable type of *fighter* to have been designed with a rear
> turret was the RAF's Boulton-Paul Defiant. Its very name tells much,
> as Boulton-Paul was a firm that originally manufactured gun-turrets. Whence the

Not exactly. Bouton-Paul was an aircraft manufacturer; they
became involved with gun turrets by testing one in the nose
of one of their biplane bombers -- Overstrand or
Sidestrand, I don't remember exactly (and there is little
difference). The Overstrand was the first RAF bomber with
a gun turret.

Emmanuel Gustin

------------------------------

Date:    Fri, 21 Jan 1994 08:42:13 EST
From:    Ron Babuka <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Fighters with rear gunners

>> direct; instead, they served as radar operators, navigators, and the like.
>> And most succesfull multi-seat fighters were twin-engined (Mosquito,
>> Beaufighter, He 219, J1N1-S, Ju 88, Ki-45, ...) In general, flexible guns
>> aren't worth their weight in a fighter in combat, because of the enormous

I guess I would have a slight problem attaching the the title "fighter" to
any of these aircraft.  In general these aircraft were used as ground/sea
attack, recon, and "night" interdiction roles.  The reason they were used
in these roles of course is due to their ranges and/or payload
capabilities.  In reality they were attack aircraft.  The very heavy
forward-firing cannons that they could lug into the air gave them the
appearence of a "fighter", but I think that we could agree that they could not
be used within the traditional roles of a fighter with any great chance
of prolonged survival.  In fact the reason that many of these aircraft were
succesful is that they stayed away from the fighter roles that some would
have wished for them and developed those fringe missions that were more
apprpriate for their airframes.

National Warplane Museum                                 Ron Babuka
Geneseo, New York                                        Cornell University

------------------------------

Date:    Fri, 21 Jan 1994 08:35:50 -0600
From:    "Sue Hattabaugh, Valparaiso University" <[email-masked]>
Subject: AMERICAL Div. on Leyte

Hello from a new subscriber.
I have enjoyed all the discussions in this group. Maybe someone
can help me. I am looking for info on the Americal Division. I believe it was
164th Inf. Was on Leyte end of January, 1945.  I've read Eichelberger's
"Under the Southern Cross" where there is some info, but would like
more.  My father was in this div. and wounded on Leyte during this period.
If anyone has any more info, please contact me.
Thank you so much in advance.  Sue Hattabaugh  [email-masked]

------------------------------

Date:    Fri, 21 Jan 1994 08:34:06 -0600
From:    Joe Pohlmann <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Fighters with rear gunners

        The only American fighter I can think of in WWII with a rear gunner was the
 P-61 Black Widow.  The aircraft was outfitted with 4 forward firing 20mm
cannons (for the pilot) and 4 .50 cal machine guns in a dorsal turret for the
extra gunner.  This turret was capable of firing anywhere in the upper
quadrants that the gunner wished.  This means that the turret could spin 180
degrees, with a pitch of 0 to 90 degrees straight up.  This meant that all 8
guns could be fired forward (and could be fired from the pilot's seat when
wanted), or the dorsal turret could be used for rear firing, etc.
        The P-61 was so large (arount 27,000 lbs I believe) that it could carry this
 turret effectively, although it still slowed the plane down quite a bit
(I believe it had a top speed of approx. 340 mph).  This configuration did
wonders against enemy bombers on night missions (during one mission, a single
P-61B downed 7 Japanese bombers), but was not designed to fight with small,
single engined fighters like the Bf-109 or Fw-190.
        In fact, to speed up the P-61 and make it an acceptable day fighter,
aircraft were built without the dorsal turret (I believe this was also due to
problems with turret design).

        Just my $.02 worth (if it's worth even that).

Joe Pohlmann
Process Systems Engineer
Monsanto Port Plastics
[email-masked]

------------------------------

Date:    Fri, 21 Jan 1994 10:17:56 EST
From:    Ingalls Steven CPT <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Fighters with rear gunners

Mr. van Vuren,

>I was wondering if this was the only fighter in WW2 with a rear gun/gunner.

I'll add to the list.  Hughes attempted to market an aircraft to the
Air Force known as the D-2.  Billed as a 'convoy' fighter, it employed four
remotely-controlled rear machineguns.  'Hap' Arnold asked Hughes to bring the
aircraft to Washington, but Hughes refused.  Some say the airplane never flew.

Finally, an attempt to expand the P-38's role resulted in two prototypes called
the XP-58 Chain Lightning.  President Roosevelt's son (Colonel Elliott
Roosevelt) had an active role and strongly supported the aircraft.  Photos do
not show rear machineguns, although there is an aft facing crew compartment
clearly in the picture.

CPT Stephen Ingalls
FLY ARMY!

------------------------------

Date:    Fri, 21 Jan 1994 16:23:00 CET
From:    Peter de Lange <[email-masked]>
Subject: re : IL-2 Stormovik

The Russians give their fighters odd-numbers and their bombers even
numbers, thus the IL-2 Stormovik is a bomber.
It got big fame as tank destroyer on the battlefield.

The Boulton Paul Defiant was designed as a fighter with turret.
It should fly next to a bomber and shoot him down.
This was done by a Avro Anson, liason aircraft attacked by 2 Bf-109
When they passed the slow Anson they were shot down with a mg in a
open window in the passenger cabin.
The Defiant was very succesfull in his first fight.
This was over Duinkerke and it shoot down 17 Ju-87.
Also the Bf-109 was surprised as mentioned by others.
But in the BoB they were useless and after heavy losses withdrawn.

In the Pacific the first Grumman TBM Avanger were attacked from
down under, mistaken for F4F Wildcat, when the Japs were close, they
were shot down by their big surprise.

This way, down under and very close is the only way you can use a
tailgun.

Assume the gun give the bullet a speed of 500 km/h and the plane
goes 500 km/h, the frontguns give the bullet a speed of 500+500=1000
km/h and you have a good chance to hit, but the tailgun gives the
bullet a speed of 500-500=0 km/h so the bullet drops straight to
the earth and you cant hit anything.

------------------------------

Date:    Fri, 21 Jan 1994 11:12:14 EST
From:    Charles Reace <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Fighters with rear gunners

> There were quite a lot two-seat or three-seat fighters in service during
> WWII, but the additional crewmembers never had any credible armament to
> direct; instead, they served as radar operators, navigators, and the like.
> And most succesfull multi-seat fighters were twin-engined (Mosquito,
> Beaufighter, He 219, J1N1-S, Ju 88, Ki-45, ...) In general, flexible guns
> aren't worth their weight in a fighter in combat, because of the enormous
> difficulties in aiming them; even on bombers they were soon abandoned
> after WWII.

You really can't compare the various multi-seat "fighters" with the pure
single engine/single seat fighters of WWII (or the single seat multi-engine
P-38).  Though planes such as the ME210 or Beaufighter were loosely calledd
fighters, they would never want to get in a dogfight with pure fighters
(Me109, Spitfire, P47, etc.).  The true fighter had a primary purpose of
shooting down enemy planes, and all other design considerations were very
secondary to those of speed, maneuverability, and forward firepower.

Most of the multi-engine/seat "fighters" were either really multi-purpose
aircraft with decent anti-bomber effectiveness, or were used for attack
and/or recon purposes.  They also made good night fighters because WWII
nightfighting did not require maneuverability, but did find extra eyeballs
and space for radar sets to be useful.

It was not until modern jet engines came along that it became practical to
put a second crew member in an air superiority plane, and it's still not
done very often.

  __|  __|  __|  |  Charles Reace <[email-masked]>
_|   _|   _|     |
 |       | |     |  Computer Sciences Corp., Integrated Systems Div.
 ___|____/ ___|  |  304 W. Rte. 38, Moorestown, NJ 08057

------------------------------

Date:    Fri, 21 Jan 1994 17:03:00 CET
From:    Peter de Lange <[email-masked]>
Subject: re : USAAF 4 jan/B17 vs B24

B-17 vs B-24
Well in the first place I do agree with all your remarks about the
difference between the B-17 and B-24, but
for the B-17, 11 missed out of 439
        B-24,  6 missed out of 115,
        that gives ratio b-17:b-24 = 3:1
        number missed              = 2:1
but this gives a Xsquare of 1.4349 with a p-value of 0.22

In normal language this means there is no significant difference
between the losses of B-17 and B-24 on the raid on Kiel.

Peter de Lange

------------------------------

Date:    Fri, 21 Jan 1994 08:25:51 PST
From:    rod holmes <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Fighters with rear gunners

Howdy,

< Interestingly, German planes, like the Do 217 night fighter
< and the He-217 "Owl" had fixed guns that slanted upwards so
< they can engage enemy bombers above them

Makes perfect sense to me. British night bombers (Lancaster, Whitneys,...)
didn't have belly guns like their American counter-parts. This made British
bombers vulnerable to attacks from below. I don't know what the percentage
of British night-bombers were lost to these attacks. Anybody out there
know?

Rod Holmes                      | The boredom eats me like cancer down
[email-masked]        | here on the farm. --U.K. Subs & GNR

------------------------------

Date:    Fri, 21 Jan 1994 10:45:39 -0500
From:    Joe Barone <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: media

 From: Ireneusz Jakobik <[email-masked]>:
> The only real vehicle is Kubelwagen but it's painted dark
> grey (I think it should be wehrmacht olive, because all events take
> place after 1942, when there was ordered to re-paint all vehicles)

        I think a better name for the color of German armor after 1942
would be dark yellow.

 From: Ken Koester <[email-masked]>
> I suppose what
> annoys me the most are depictions of armored actions--the ranges are too
> close, which I can accept as a practical limitation of the cinematic art,
> but every time a tank is hit, it goes up in flames, and most of the time
> everyone is using the wrong tanks to begin with--M-48s & 60s for Germans,
> Russians, Brits, Americans, etc.

        The movie that really makes me grind my teeth is "Battle of the
Bulge".  The Germans used M-48s and the Americans used M-41s.  But the
scenes that were really irksome was the "huge" tank battle.  At any moment,
I expected Godzilla to stroll by and start kicking all the clunky toy
tanks!

        While not strictly a WWII movie, "Raiders of the Lost Ark" made
me crinch in the theater when Germans in Afrika Korp uniforms armed with
MP-40s were strutting around in Egypt in 1936!  Rommel should have tapped
these hidden resources in 1942!

        Movies that went out of their way for hardware realism are
(surprise!) "Kelly's Heroes" where the Germans used mock-Tigers which
were really T-34s chasses with Tiger bodies.  The turrets even look
authentic!  They also modified an M3 halftrack to look like a Hanomag --
and it was only in the background!

        Another movie that seems pretty faithful is "Bridge at Remagen"
starring Robert Vaughn and Burt Lancaster.  In the opening scenes,
the Germans are manning 88s and the Americans are using M-24s which
did make an appearance in WWII.

        "Combat!" has been airing on Nostalgia Television and seems
to vascillate in authenticity (if you overlook the fact that most of
the Germans can't shoot straight and like to charge Kirby's BAR!).
Early episodes have the Germans using Vickers machine guns while later
episodes arm them with M-42s.  On the other hand, early episodes seemed
to do a better job at portraying distances.  One group would watch the
other and they would appear as dots in the distance.  The show relies
heavily on stock WWII footage, which is really nice, but the editors
tended to mix stuff -- in one scene, they'd show a Panther in bocage
country followed by Pzkw 38(t)s on maneuvers!
--
Joe Barone
[email-masked]
He may be nuts, but he's not crazy enough to put Shermans up against Tigers!

------------------------------

Date:    Fri, 21 Jan 1994 11:59:05 EST
From:    Charles Reace <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Waffen-SS

> I don't think the Hermann Goering Division was classed as a falschirm unit.
> Rather, it's my understanding that it was one of the Luftwaffe field units.
> Strictly ground-pounder.

I know.  It was a major player at Salerno, being a well-equipped panzer
division.  But I still like the image evoked by "falschirmpanzer".  Perhaps
in the early years of its inception it was intended to be an airborne unit
with glider-borne tanks and such, but later became a pure ground unit.
Does anybody know if the HG division was ever intended to be truly airborne?

  __|  __|  __|  |  Charles Reace <[email-masked]>
_|   _|   _|     |
 |       | |     |  Computer Sciences Corp., Integrated Systems Div.
 ___|____/ ___|  |  304 W. Rte. 38, Moorestown, NJ 08057

------------------------------

Date:    Fri, 21 Jan 1994 11:22:06 -0500
From:    Warren Thompson <[email-masked]>
Subject: Fighters with rear guns (+ other oddities)

The Ju88C-6c variant was a 3-seat night fighter. Its armamemt included
two 20mm cannon firing upward at a fixed 70-degree angle.

-- Warren Thompson

------------------------------

Date:    Fri, 21 Jan 1994 12:08:09 EST
From:    Charles Reace <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: MEDIA:  Realism, or the Lack Thereof

> What do you actually see when a tank gets hit with solid shot
> but doesn't brew up?  From firepower demos I watched as a boy, I seem to
> remember a certain amount of dust, maybe some bits of metal flying about,
> & that's about it.  You can take it from there, I suspect (-:

Don't underestimate the power of solid shot. A several-pound piece of
steel traveling at supersonic speeds and hitting a solid chunk of armor
plating generates a *lot* of heat.  What penetrates that armor is not
just a piece of solid metal, but rather a jet of molten metal.  That jet
has a great propensity for setting things on fire when it hits or comes
near them, such as gasoline and ammunition.  I've seen some test range
films of tanks being hit when they had ammo on board, and the resulting
pyrotechnics were amazing.  This was probably the most dangerous thing
for the tankers, with fuel/engine fires second.  They were always in
fear of burning to death.

  __|  __|  __|  |  Charles Reace <[email-masked]>
_|   _|   _|     |
 |       | |     |  Computer Sciences Corp., Integrated Systems Div.
 ___|____/ ___|  |  304 W. Rte. 38, Moorestown, NJ 08057
h

------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 21 Jan 1993 17:55:00 MET
From:    Ireneusz Jakobik <[email-masked]>
Subject: bullet speed

Peter de Lange writes:

>Assume the gun give the bullet a speed of 500 km/h and the plane
>goes 500 km/h, the frontguns give the bullet a speed of 500+500=1000
>km/h and you have a good chance to hit, but the tailgun gives the
>bullet a speed of 500-500=0 km/h so the bullet drops straight to
>the earth and you cant hit anything.

It looks mathematically correct, but how it really looks like? Isn't
a bullet faster than 500 km/h? And I've got another similar situation:
Plane goes 500 km/h, passes anti-aircraft gun, which starts shooting
at it after 1.65 seconds. Bullets leave gun with the speed of 527 km/h.
Will the bullets reach the plane? Will they have enough kinetic energy
to damage it? Will anyone answer my questions?  :)
-Irek.

------------------------------

Date:    Fri, 21 Jan 1994 11:27:42 -0500
From:    Warren Thompson <[email-masked]>
Subject: Ju88 with upward firing cannon

I forgot to mention: the fixed armament was known as "schraege Musik"
[= jazz music].

-- Warren Thompson

------------------------------

Date:    Fri, 21 Jan 1994 12:47:04 EST
From:    Ken Koester <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: MEDIA:  Realism, or the Lack Thereof

On Fri, 21 Jan 1994 12:08:09 EST Charles Reace said:
>> What do you actually see when a tank gets hit with solid shot
>> but doesn't brew up?  From firepower demos I watched as a boy, I seem to
>> remember a certain amount of dust, maybe some bits of metal flying about,
>> & that's about it.  You can take it from there, I suspect (-:
>
>Don't underestimate the power of solid shot. A several-pound piece of
>steel traveling at supersonic speeds and hitting a solid chunk of armor
>plating generates a *lot* of heat.  What penetrates that armor is not
>just a piece of solid metal, but rather a jet of molten metal.

Ok, are we really talking about the same thing?  I'm talking AP, not HEAT
rounds.  My second-hand impression is that, inside, you would get spalling
possibly, and a chunk of metal ricocheting around the crew compartment--
no fun for anyone in the way, obviously--if the round penetrates, but no
flames unless the shot happens to send up the ammo or hydraulics.  The
molten jet business, OTOH, is the way HEAT does its business.  (Actually,
"molten" seems a bit of a misnomer--I've read the jet is momentarily at
27,000 degrees.  More like a plasma, would seem.  I could do with one to
rid me of a good many cubic yards of ice between me and the nearest cleared
road, I can tell you. (-: )

In the first case, I wouldn't expect to see an artillery HE type explosion
w/ lots of flames *nearly* as often as you see in Hollywood, ie, every time
a vehicle is hit (-:  But my memories of Knox are a bit dim to figure out
what I should be seeing, so I'm picking the memories/experiences of
others, instead (-:  Furthermore, I'm casting back in time:  I wouldn't
necessarily expect WWII-era ordnance to make exactly the same boom! as
today's uranium-depleted slugs, etc.

ken koester
[email-masked]

------------------------------

Date:    Fri, 21 Jan 1994 13:29:58 -0500
From:    Joe Barone <[email-masked]>
Subject: WEAP: Soviet BA-10

        I'm looking for some info concerning the Soviet BA-10
turreted armored car.  My motivation is to build a 1/35 scale model
of it.  From photos that I have seen of the vehicle, I'm uncertain
as to whether it was tracked or not.  I've seen photos where the two
rear wheels look like giant intertubes (no treads) and I've seen
others where the two rear wheels were tracked.  I'm not certain if
these where different variations or if the vehicle merely had
alternate modes of travel (take the tracks off when on roads; put
them on when going cross-country).  The other possibility is that
it is only tracked and the photos showing only the wheels are of
vehicles with thrown tracks (captions don't in this regard).

        A few years ago, Schmidt Vacuforms produced a model of this
armored car, but it is now out of production and I have not been able
to obtain one of these kits.  I would appreciate any help from the
mailing list in tracking one of these babies down.  The diorama I
have in mind is from a photo of a German grenadier scrambling for
cover between a knocked out KV-2 and BA-10.  The BA-10 is behind
the KV-2, so I cannot see its rear wheels but I want to make sure
I get it right.  Thanks.
--
Joe Barone
[email-masked]
It was a wasted trip, baby.  Nobody said
nothing about locking horns with no Tigers.

------------------------------

Date:    Fri, 21 Jan 1994 16:06:00 EST
From:    Charles Reace <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: MEDIA:  Realism, or the Lack Thereof

Another film I remember for realism is "A Bridge Too Far".  They used a lot
of actual Shermans (most of which did not run, just sat there and looked
good), and I recall Horrocks riding up in a scout car that looked like a
Humber.  I don't recall though how realistic the German vehicles were,
though you didn't see very many.

  __|  __|  __|  |  Charles Reace <[email-masked]>
_|   _|   _|     |
 |       | |     |  Computer Sciences Corp., Integrated Systems Div.
 ___|____/ ___|  |  304 W. Rte. 38, Moorestown, NJ 08057

------------------------------

Date:    Fri, 21 Jan 1994 16:09:56 EST
From:    "CARL WERNKE (TCWERNC@VCCSCENT)" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: NEWS Re: "This Week in the Navy"

 X-TO: [email-masked]
 TO: MULTIPLE RECIPIENTS OF LIST WWII-L ([email-masked])

 Larry,

 Please establish a weekly or periodic routine of publishing to the list
 "This Week in the Navy," obtained from THE U.S.NAVY NEWS SERVICE.

 The Mc Killup post, 20 Jan 94 at 08:47:10, was very interesting and
 informative :-). An advantage is that I have a print made from this news for
 promulgation to my history students. I understand this type of printing
 can't be accomplished when using Byrd. Is this correct, Larry ?

  CARL WERNKE                   +  Creative imagination is the basic
  [email-masked]       +  characteristic of genius, in the
                                +  military sphere as well as in others.
                                +
                                +  Captain B.H.Liddell Hart
                                +
                                + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +

------------------------------

Date:    Fri, 21 Jan 1994 14:59:23 -0800
From:    Julian E Gomez <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Fighters with rear gunners

It wasn't quite a fighter, but the Fieseler Storch could be equipped with a
rear facing machine gun, handled by whomever was sitting in the back seat.

"I was a precocious child and obviously destined to be a scientist."

        Dr. Julian "a tribble took it" Gomez
        Apple Computer, Inc.  408/862-1289 or 996-1010
        [email-masked]  [email-masked]

------------------------------

Date:    Fri, 21 Jan 1994 14:59:49 -0800
From:    Julian E Gomez <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Addr: Patton

>     A student wanted information several months ago about a
>rumor that Patton was actually killed by U.S. intelligence forces
>to prevent him starting WWIII (so the student said). He was
>surprised I had never heard about this. Several months ago members
>of this list were collecting WWII folklore and legends (whether
>true or not) and ghost stories. Maybe this would qualify as one
>of those pseudo legends, but I wonder if anyone has heard about
>Patton's alleged murder?

One of the rumors was that he was shot with a wooden bullet, in the neck,
and the jeep accident was staged to cover it up. Supposedly his injuries
were consistent with the kind of damage a wooden bullet would cause.

"I was a precocious child and obviously destined to be a scientist."

        Dr. Julian "a tribble took it" Gomez
        Apple Computer, Inc.  408/862-1289 or 996-1010
        [email-masked]  [email-masked]

------------------------------

Date:    Fri, 21 Jan 1994 15:36:37 PST
From:    Sidney Allinson <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: MEDIA:  Realism, or the Lack Thereof

Mainly because of the availability of weapons/equipment still, the
movies made between 1945 and 1965 are not  , correction, now the
best examples of accuratethe-way-it-really-was movies.
Two particularly good movies that come to mind, both British, are:
THEIRS IS THE GLORY, 1946, that was in effect a re-creation of the
Arnhem landings and battle.  Many of the "actors" portrayed
themselves in recreations of actual battlefield incidents.
THEY WERE NOT DIVIDED, 1948, was about the Ga Guards Armored Div.
in WW2.  The title stemmed from the two protagonists, both officer (on an American volunteer) from initial training through the final battles in Belgium and
germany. The movie was "stolen" by the performance of Regimental
Sergeant Major Brittain, who played himself. His horror at recruits
drew from him the horrorfied bull-throatedscream -- "Never saw
anything so 'orrible in all me *life*!" The phrase became a catch-
phrase in Britain for years afterwards.
Bloody good movies, both. Lost in limbo now, of course.

------------------------------

Date:    Fri, 21 Jan 1994 15:15:47 PST
From:    Sidney Allinson <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: MEDIA:  Realism, or the Lack Thereof

The evr very man!
A Ranger.
Could you help me, please?
I am trying to find information of any kind about the first Ranger
battalion that was raised in Northern Ireland from among US troops
there in the spring of 1942.
I would be most grateful if you could suggest any source of info
about these early Rangers of that particular units.
Thank you.

------------------------------

Date:    Fri, 21 Jan 1994 16:20:11 PST
From:    rod holmes <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Waffen-SS

< > I don't think the Hermann Goering Division was classed as a falschirm
< > unit. Rather, it's my understanding that it was one of the Luftwaffe
< > field units. Strictly ground-pounder.
<
< I know.  It was a major player at Salerno, being a well-equipped panzer
< division.  But I still like the image evoked by "falschirmpanzer".  Perhaps
< in the early years of its inception it was intended to be an airborne unit
< with glider-borne tanks and such, but later became a pure ground unit.
< Does anybody know if the HG division was ever intended to be truly
< airborne?

The Hermann Goering Division was never meant to be airborne unit. It was
designed orginally as Goering's personal bodyguards. It was made up of
volunteers from Luftwaffe and varied in quality during the war. When the
unit was first founded it could be considered an elite unit but most of the
units experienced troops were lost before Sicily. During the opening phases
of the Sicily invasion 2 of the division's regiment commanders were sacked
for incompetance and the Italian mobile troops on the island launched an
attack before the Hermann Goering Division._1_

At Salerno the only well equipped panzer unit was the 15th (or was it the
16th). The Hermann Goering had lost a fair amount of equipment in Sicily
and fighting against the British 8th Army up the boot of Italy._2_

_1_ Carlo D'Este, _A_Bitter_Victory_
_2_ Martain Blumenson, _Salerno_to_Cassino_

Rod Holmes                      | Maggots are falling like rain.
[email-masked]        |   -GWAR

------------------------------

Date:    Fri, 21 Jan 1994 20:57:12 -0500
From:    Bob Smart <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Fighters with rear gunners

> Mr. van Vuren,
>
> >I was wondering if this was the only fighter in WW2 with a rear gun/gunner.
>
> I'll add to the list.  Hughes attempted to market an aircraft to the
> Air Force known as the D-2.  Billed as a 'convoy' fighter, it employed four
> remotely-controlled rear machineguns.  'Hap' Arnold asked Hughes to bring the
> aircraft to Washington, but Hughes refused.  Some say the airplane never flew
.
>
> Finally, an attempt to expand the P-38's role resulted in two prototypes call
ed
> the XP-58 Chain Lightning.  President Roosevelt's son (Colonel Elliott
> Roosevelt) had an active role and strongly supported the aircraft.  Photos do
> not show rear machineguns, although there is an aft facing crew compartment
> clearly in the picture.

If you look directly above the rear crew compartment you should be able to see
the dummy sheetmetal that would be a remote control turret (similar to an
A-26/B-26) It shows clearly on the photos in my books. I can't see if there is
a corresponding lower turret although the data sheet says 4x.5 MG which would
indicate 2 turrets.  This aircraft is listed as armed with 4 37mm autocannon
as forward armament!

Bob Smart ([email-masked])

------------------------------

Date:    Fri, 21 Jan 1994 21:32:56 -0500
From:    Bob Smart <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Fighters with rear gunners

>     The only American fighter I can think of in WWII with a rear gunner was
>the P-61 Black Widow.  The aircraft was outfitted with 4 forward firing 20mm
>cannons (for the pilot) and 4 .50 cal machine guns in a dorsal turret for the
>extra gunner.  This turret was capable of firing anywhere in the upper
>quadrants that the gunner wished.  This means that the turret could spin 180
>degrees, with a pitch of 0 to 90 degrees straight up.  This meant that all 8
>guns could be fired forward (and could be fired from the pilot's seat when
> wanted), or the dorsal turret could be used for rear firing, etc.
>     The P-61 was so large (arount 27,000 lbs I believe) that it could carry
> this turret effectively, although it still slowed the plane down quite a bit
> (I believe it had a top speed of approx. 340 mph).  This configuration did
> wonders against enemy bombers on night missions (during one mission, a single
> P-61B downed 7 Japanese bombers), but was not designed to fight with small,
> single engined fighters like the Bf-109 or Fw-190.
>         In fact, to speed up the P-61 and make it an acceptable day fighter,
> aircraft were built without the dorsal turret (I believe this was also due to
> problems with turret design).

I remember reading somewhere that the P-61 had a tremendous roll rate due to
full span leading edge slats. In the hands of a good pilot it could give a lot
of more maneuverable aircraft a hard time by using the tremendous power of the
two R-2800s and use of the roll rate to improve turning. I can't remember where
I saw it, and I was never able to talk to anyone that flew with or against a
P-61

Bob Smart ([email-masked])
>
>
>         Just my $.02 worth (if it's worth even that).
          add my  $.02 and we still don't have enough for a Hershey bar
          before inflation!

------------------------------

Date:    Fri, 21 Jan 1994 21:25:22 -0500
From:    Bob Smart <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: MEDIA: Realism, or the Lack Thereof

> Ken,
>
>I would say the two most realistic (as far as equipment, uniforms, etc.)
>WWII movies are:
>
>The Longest Day (because it was made in the early 60's, lots of the stuff
>was still around - Sherman tanks - and a big effort was made on the uniforms.
>In fact, many of those uniforms periodically show up in the uniform collecting
>hobby because by now, they are 30 years old and do look aged).

I remember several films made in the 50s that had a more realistic appearance
to them. Unfortunatly I don't remember the names. Most were placed in the
winter of 44/45, all were infantry, squad/platoon level, and had folks in them
that later became stars ( I remember Bob Newhart in one as a clerk that was
lost and ended up in the frontline in an understaffed platoon) One thing that
seemed 'right' about these is the wear and use of equipment. whether it was
because enough of these actors had served time on active duty or just real good
low level technical assistance it appeared that they were comfortable  wearing
web gear, carrying M-1s, etc Maybe it was because I saw them in Black and
white, the same as I see photos in books. But when they were moving down a farm
lane it had the right 'look' When they were sitting around waiting for the
Lieutenant to get back it looked like they knew how to collapse comfortably
while wearing the old long bayonet, canteen, E-tool, and haversack. When you
look at them each one is different. One has a field Jacket, one a long coat,
the Sergeant (usually with a Thompson or M-3 grease Gun) has on a tanker
jacket.  The plots weren't always real good, but the wardrobe equipment, and
ambiance were there.

>
> The Cross of Iron (filmed in Yugoslavia, where lots of old German equipment
> was captured and used, as well as the Yugoslav army still had some T-34s whic
h
> were used in the movie.)  NOTE:  A WWII US M36 tank destroyer was featured
> in Janes Defence Weekly about 9-12 months ago in one of their reports on the
> war in the former Yugoslavia).

And then there are the Naval movies. what about The one about Graff Spee at the
River Platte. Exeter played herself, a sister ship played Achilles, I can't
remember who played Ajax. They had to get a standin for Graff Spee. I think
they used an American 8" Gun Cruiser.

And there is the Humphrey Bogart movie about an M-3 Grant tank that gets lost
just before El-Alimain I think it was done in 1944. They actually used a
riveted M-3.

The most realistic military movie I can remember was Private Benjaman. Don't
laugh. When I ran a flightline shop at Langley I would have sworn I had her
sister in my shop. Rich kid who joined the air Force to get away from home.
Penney told us about the time she forgot to put her fathers Mercedes 450SL in
park and it rolled into the lake. And then there was the time she wore Pink
fuzzy mittens with fatigues ( She was alergic to wool and couldn't wear issue
gloves) I didn't believe Private Benjaman when I saw it but within a year I was
living the life of that sergeant!

Bob Smart ([email-masked])

------------------------------

Date:    Fri, 21 Jan 1994 22:52:31 -0500
From:    Bob Smart <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Fighters with rear gunners

> Howdy,
>
> < Interestingly, German planes, like the Do 217 night fighter
> < and the He-217 "Owl" had fixed guns that slanted upwards so
> < they can engage enemy bombers above them
>
> Makes perfect sense to me. British night bombers (Lancaster, Whitneys,...)
> didn't have belly guns like their American counter-parts. This made British
> bombers vulnerable to attacks from below. I don't know what the percentage
> of British night-bombers were lost to these attacks. Anybody out there
> know?
 Not offhand but I think Martin Middlebrooks books on The Battle of Hamburg
and/or The Nuremburg Raid cover this in some detail. I have read three of his
books, The two just mentioned and one on Scheinfurt-Regensburg. I have fornd
them to be very good. Plenty of techie details, including very detailed maps
combined with first person narratives. I believe they are well worth the time
of anyone interested in the strategic bombing campaign.

Bob Smart ([email-masked])

------------------------------

End of WWII-L Digest - 20 Jan 1994 to 21 Jan 1994
*************************************************