Subject: WWII-L Digest - 23 Jan 1994 to 24 Jan 1994

From: Automatic digest processor <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 25 Jan 1994 00:00:22 -0500

There are 35 messages totalling 1140 lines in this issue.

Topics of the day:

  1. MEDIA
  2. Waffen-SS (2)
  3. media
  4. quotes from Joe's mails
  5. World War I (2)
  6. USAAF 24 JAN 44
  7. Navy News
  8. MEDIA:  Realism, or the Lack Thereof (3)
  9. Fighters with rear gunners
 10. bullet speed
 11. Kate ter Horst
 12. Causing the death of tank crews (6)
 13. media and Kelly's Heroes
 14. WEAP: Soviet BA-10
 15. Movie realism (3)
 16. Machinery of Destruction
 17. SUB DEPTHS
 18. NEWS Re: "This Week in the Navy"
 19. UK Opens Files on WWII Massacre
 20. TECH: Wet stowage (was MEDIA: Realism...)
 21. Schweinfurt raid and FW-190
 22. Wilhelmshaven 1943
 23. AMERICAL Div. on Leyte
 24. Ref: Robert Clary Speech

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

Date:    Sun, 23 Jan 1994 23:08:38 -0500
From:    Joe Barone <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: MEDIA

 From: Jon Stevens <[email-masked]>:
> [concerning the Tigers in "Kelly's Heroes"]
> A friend and I were trying to figure out exactly what these mock
> Tigers  were.  We concluded they were Pzkw 38t chasis.  This seemed
> plausable since according to Sqaudron/Signal's _Pzkpfw 38(t) in Action_ a
> variation was used by the Swiss well in the 1960's.  Also, the large
> wheels on the Kelly's Heroes Tiger tank were solid unlike a T34 which
> seemed to match with the photos of the Pzkw 38t.

Well, you gave me a good excuse to watch the movie again and I have
to argue the point with you!  The tanks in the movie had five road
wheels as a T-34 would instead four road wheels like a Pzkw 38(t).
Also, the road wheels were composed of an inner and outer wheel so
that the track teeth sit between them, rather than one wheel with
two sets of teeth on the inside and outside of the wheel.  As for the
statement about solid wheels, T-34s were produced with both solid
road wheels and drilled wheels.  Also, the road wheels of a T-34 are
"innies"; that is, concaved in; while the road wheels of a Pzkw 38(t)
are convexed outward.  Further, the movie was filmed in Yugoslavia in
1970 so there would have been ample supplies of T-34s to use.
--
Joe Barone
[email-masked]
It's a Mark 6!  And we got her by the ass!

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

Date:    Sun, 23 Jan 1994 22:49:14 -0500
From:    Joe Barone <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Waffen-SS

A quick way to figure out if the Hermann Goering Division was meant to be
an airborne unit would be to look at their helmets.  All airborne units
had helmets with the smaller "side skirts" even if they were never used
in that role.  As I recall, the Herman Goering Division used "regular"
helmets.
--
Joe Barone
[email-masked]
I thought I told you to get me a good-lookin' kid;
not this fat, sausage-chewin' wino!

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

Date:    Mon, 24 Jan 1994 03:51:11 -0500
From:    Akira Takiguchi <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: media

Jon Stevens wrote:
>Joe Barone writes:
>>"Kelly's Heroes"...used mock-Tigers which were really T34s chasis with
>>Tiger bodies....
>A friend and I were trying to figure out exactly what these mock
>Tigers  were.  We concluded they were Pzkw 38t chasis.

     Sorry, but Joe is correct.  They are T34s - count number of road wheels
and look at the track they wear.  It is amazing that these (supposedly
Mosfilm-made) mock Tigers have special Tiger-ish spare tracks on the hull
front!  As Jon pointed out, they even modified road wheels so that they
look more like Tiger {not interleaved, though} than T34.

>when Hemmingway was entering Paris with French Resistance.  What was blocking
>their way looked exactly like a Pzkw 38t varient, the Hetzer Jgpz 38t.
>Anyone seen this movie? I don't remember the title.

     I haven't.  But it could be a G13, Swiss descendant of Hetzer.  some
G13s are shown in place of real "Hetzer" in some museums.
--
      Akira Takiguchi  VP, ATSON, Inc.  (a subsidiary of the Asahi Shimbun)
             CANAL TOWER  9-3 Nihonbashi-Koamicho Chuo-ku Tokyo 103  Japan
   +81 3 3666 2881(voice) 2882(fax)  EMAIL TO <[email-masked]>

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

Date:    Mon, 24 Jan 1994 05:52:32 EST
From:    Lowe Barrett MAJ <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Waffen-SS

Charles,

All the references I have indicate that the "Fallschirm" title of
the Hermann Goring Division was honorary only.

Bear

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

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

Date:    Mon, 24 Jan 1994 12:10:22 MET
From:    Ireneusz Jakobik <[email-masked]>
Subject: quotes from Joe's mails

Joe,
Would it be possible to put all quotes from your mails into one file and
send them to the list? (of course without quotes you're going to send in
your next mails) I think that many other WWII-L subscribers will agree
with my idea. Or maybe someone is collecting those quotes?
Irek.

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

Date:    Mon, 24 Jan 1994 11:25:05 GMT
From:    Stephen Baldwin <[email-masked]>
Subject: World War I

Ladies and Gentlemen!

A while back I posted some stuff re World War I. I am conscious that
this list is clearly entitled WWII-L. Is there a similar list
for the Great War or do we all enjoy fellowship on the WWII-L list?

all info gratefully received

steve baldwin
[email-masked]

**********************************************************************
Colemanball

"The grouse are in absolutely no danger from people who shoot grouse."
/ HRH The Duke of Edinburgh

**********************************************************************

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

Date:    Mon, 24 Jan 1994 07:17:00 EST
From:    mc killop <[email-masked]>
Subject: USAAF 24 JAN 44

COMBAT CHRONOLOGY OF THE US ARMY AIR FORCES
MONDAY, 24 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-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
  P-38, Lockheed Lightning
  P-39, Bell Airacobra
  P-40, Curtiss
  P-47, Republic Thunderbolt
  P-51, North American Mustang
  TBF, Grumman Avenger (USN)

CHINA-BURMA-INDIA (CBI) THEATER OF OPERATIONS

  CHINA (Fourteenth Air Force): In China, B-25's on sea sweeps claim sinking
of a merchant ship W of Nampang Island, 2 freighters, a cargo-passenger
vessel, and a coastal cargo boat anchored in Li-Shan Bay, and a cargo-
passenger vessel at Paichuan Island.

EUROPEAN THEATER OF OPERATIONS (ETO)

  STRATEGIC OPERATIONS (Eighth Air Force): Mission 191: 857 B-17's and B-24's
are put into the air with intentions of bombing transportation and
industrial targets at Frankfurt-Heddernheim, Frankfurt/Main and Russelsheim.
Most bombers had trouble forming up in bad weather and only 563 of the 857
airborne were dispatched; all of the B-24's were recalled. Because of
worsening weather all groups were recalled at 1020 hours but 58 B-17's bombed
the Zukunft Power Station near Eschweiler; they claimed 1-0-3 Luftwaffe
aircraft; 2 B-17's were lost, 2 damaged beyond repair and 5 damaged;
casualties were 5 KIA and 21 MIA.
  Escorting were 101 P-38's, 535 P-47's and 42 Ninth Air Force P-51's; the
fighters were assigned area patrol, protecting all bombers as they passed
through their designated area but this was abandoned when the bombers were
recalled; they claim 19-4-9 Luftwaffe aircraft; 4 P-38's, 3 P-47's and 2
P-51's were lost and 6 P-47's were damaged; casualties are 9 MIA.
  The Royal Air Force (RAF) and USAAF in the United Kingdom, agree to place
most of the available P-51's in the Eighth Air Force for long range escort of
heavy bomber's. Eventually the Eighth is to be equipped almost exclusively
with P-51's, with the P-38's and P-47's to be transferred to the Ninth Air
Force.

  TACTICAL OPERATIONS (Ninth Air Force): 175+ B-26's attack V-weapon sites
in the coastal area of France.

MEDITERRANEAN THEATER OF OPERATIONS (MTO)

  STRATEGIC OPERATIONS (Fifteenth Air Force): B-24's bomb the airfield and
town area at Skoplje, Yugoslavia. In Bulgaria, B-17's hit the marshalling
yard at Vrattsa and the Dolno Tserovene area, both targets of opportunity.
P-38's escort the B-24's while P-47's accompany the B-17's.
  736th and 737th Bombardment Squadrons (Heavy), 454th Bombardment Group
(Heavy), transfer from Torretto to San Giovanni, Italy with B-24's; first
mission is 8 Feb.

  TACTICAL OPERATIONS (Twelfth Air Force): Weather cancels all medium and
light bomber operations. In Italy, fighters maintain cover over the Anzio
beachhead (Anzio and Nettuno are captured during the day) and encounter
increased air attacks; 3 fighters are claimed destroyed in aerial combat,
while 1 Allied fighter is lost. P-40 fighter-bombers hit road at Penne, while
A-36's bomb Velletri and the road junction E of town, and hit other
communications targets.

PACIFIC OCEAN AREA (POA, Seventh Air Force): In the Marshall Islands, 24
A-24's from Makin Island, Gilbert Islands, supported by 12 P-39's and 7
P-40's, hit gun positions, storage areas, and barracks on Mille Atoll. In the
late afternoon, 8 B-25's, staging through Makin Island, bomb the airfield on
Wotje Atoll. During the night of 24/25 Jan, 9 B-25's from Tarawa Atoll,
Gilbert Islands, and 12 B-24's from the Ellice Islands, bomb several targets
in Maloelap Atoll. 1 other B-24 bombs Mille Atoll.

SOUTH PACIFIC AREA (SOPAC, Thirteenth Air Force): A large concentration of
US Army Air Forces (USAAF), US Navy (USN), US Marine Corps (USMC), and Royal
New Zealand Air Force (RNZAF) fighters support USN and USMC TBF's dive-
bombing shipping in Simpson Harbor and Keravia Bay, New Britain Island.
Several 300- to 500-ft (91 to 152 m) vessels are damaged or sunk. US aircraft
claim 20+ fighters shot down.

SOUTHWEST PACIFIC AREA (SWPA, Fifth Air Force): In New Guinea, 40+ B-24's
bomb airfields at Wewak and Boram; 50+ B-25's and P-47's hit Madang and
troops in the vicinity and bomb the Hansa Bay area; 38 other B-25's attack
shipping and harbor installations on Manus Island, Admiralty Islands.
  HQ 22d Bombardment Group (Medium) and 19th Bombardment Squadron (Medium)
transfer from Dobodura to Nadzab, New Guinea with B-26's. They are
transitioning to B-24's and will be redesignated a Heavy unit on 3 Feb.

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:    Mon, 24 Jan 1994 07:37:00 EST
From:    mc killop <[email-masked]>
Subject: Navy News

The Navy News Service publishes a weekly (?) news bulletin intended for
active duy members of the USN.  99.99% of the bulletins pertain to today;
it is only rarely that they publish something that pertains to WWII.

The USAF was publishing a weekly bulletin about WWII and I received several
of them from Kelly AFB but I have not seen them this year.  Let me check.

As far as Larry Jewell's suggestion that I "guard"  (Larry you sound like
a radioman) the USAF, USMC and USN lists for appropriate articles, I
volunteer.  (Jack, didn't you learn anything while you were in the
service!!!!!!)

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

Date:    Sun, 23 Jan 1994 19:51:12 CST
From:    Terry Gett <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: MEDIA:  Realism, or the Lack Thereof

On Fri, 21 Jan 1994 16:06:00 EST, Charles Reace <[email-masked]> said:
>
> 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.
>

I remember being particularly impressed by the paratroop drop scenes...the
number of aircraft, and the realism was admirable.

Terry Gett <[email-masked]>
Sr. Software Engineer
LB&M Associates, Inc.
Lawton, OK  73507

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

Date:    Mon, 24 Jan 1994 08:23:09 EST
From:    Ingalls Steven CPT <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Fighters with rear gunners

I'll add another note to the banter on this subject:

This posting was in response to mine concerning the Hughes D-2.

>I believe that the Hughes DX-2 was never built in its fighter version, but
>was built as the A-37 attack aircraft.  It did fly -- I remember a story
>that H. Hughes took someone up on a test flight, but refused to let him
>see the airspeed indicator!

The recent book by Robert Dorr (US Fighters of World War II) leads one to
believe the D-2 was a project unto itself.  There is no listing for an A-37 in
the reference (probably means you have better sources than me).

Steve Ingalls
FLY ARMY!

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

Date:    Mon, 24 Jan 1994 08:56:46 EST
From:    Charles Reace <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: MEDIA:  Realism, or the Lack Thereof

> 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

Yes, I'm talking about solid shot AP, HVAP, APCBC, APDS, APDSFS, APCR, and
any other type of solid, non-explosive antitank round.  They *do* cause
tremendous amounts of heat when they hit armor, and are usually the ammo
of choice when shooting a high-velocity gun at a well-armored target at
all but the longest ranges (where air resistance may slow them down enough
that their HEAT round will have a better chance of penetrating).

Reports from Iraq/Kuwait indicate that most of the T-72's which were hit
by the M1A1's 120mm APFSDS rounds had their turrets blown off; I suspect
from having on-board ammo detonated by the penetration.  Granted, the
generally smaller and somewhat slower AP rounds of WWII would not have
the penetrating ability of an M1's sabot, the effects of penetrations by
any but the smallest calibers would have been similiar, if smaller in scale.
Also, most tanks of that period had relatively unsophisticated ammo stowage,
with the notable exception of late-war Shermans which had a "wet stowage"
system of questionable effectiveness.

You're probably correct that the initial impact by a solid round would
not result in an immediate fireball of Biblical proportions.  But if the
target tanks at Knox had had a load of main gun ammo on board, chances
are that ammo would have cooked off resulting in white-hot flames and
lots of internal explosions.

Disclaimer:  this is my opinion based on my knowledge of modern tank
weapons, so don't take this as absolute gospel concerning WW-II.

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

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

Date:    Mon, 24 Jan 1994 09:14:30 EST
From:    Charles Reace <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: bullet speed

> 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?  :)

The only reference I have at hand for a WW-II anti-aircraft gun is a
reference on the US 90mm tank gun, which was adapted from the 90mm AA
gun.  The muzzle velocity of its HE round was 2700 ft./sec., which was
the slowest of its rounds fired (and probably similiar to an AA round,
which is essentially an HE round with a fusing mechanism).  This converts
to an initial velocity of 1841 miles/hr., or approx. 2950 km/hr.  While
this would be enough velocity to damage a plane regardless of aspect, any
AA round over 20mm or so was bound to be an explosive HE type round,
causing damage from blast and fragmentation effects even on near misses.

Also, with regards to the prior message about forward firing vs. rear
firing guns, remember that in a majority of cases the forward guns are
firing at a plane flying at about the same speed and generally away from
the firer, while rear guns were usually fired at planes flying toward
the firer.  Therefore the firer's velocity is roughly cancelled out, and
the rear gun would have a slight advantage of less air resistance due
to an initially slower actual airspeed.

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

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

Date:    Mon, 24 Jan 1994 09:38:39 EST
From:    Doug McCabe <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Kate ter Horst

                   Ohio University Electronic Communication

   Date:  24-Jan-1994 09:28am EST

     To:  Remote Addressee                     ( _MX%"[email-masked]" )

   From:  Doug McCabe                                Dept:  Library
          MCCABE                                   Tel No:  (614) 593-2715

Subject:  Re: Kate ter Horst

    I have just returned from The Nederlands visiting the MARKET-GARDEN
    sites and I must quickly correct what I had written about Kate and her
    husband, Jan, before I left.

    It is true Kate was killed two years ago while walking near her home in
    Oosterbeek.  Jan was hit by the vehicle as well and was very seriously
    injured.  (The driver was an Arnhem policeman who, according to my
    informant, was lightly let off.)

    I am pleased to report I met Jan ter Horst last week and he is very
    much alive.  And after all he has been through I was amazed at his
    pleasantness.  I am most sorry to have put him in his grave before his
    time.

    Doug McCabe
    [email-masked]

Received:  24-Jan-1994 09:38am

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

Date:    Mon, 24 Jan 1994 14:57:01 GMT
From:    Johannes van Vuren <[email-masked]>
Subject: Causing the death of tank crews

Further to the recent discussion of various armoured piercing tank ammo:-

Is it true that a shell did not have to penetrate the tank in order to kill
the crew or at least knock them unconscious. This theory says that the noise
made by an impacting shell on the tank can be enough to disable the crew if
not actually kill them. So, how load is the bang that the crew hear inside the
tank when the shell strikes and what effect does this this "acoustical" bomb
have? Were there any reports by survivors who experienced this sort of thing?

On the other hand, tank crews were probably fairly immune to noise since the
tank's own gun would disipate most of its noise inside the tank.

Johannes van Vuren,
Canterbury, England.

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

Date:    Mon, 24 Jan 1994 10:26:14 EST
From:    "William B. Thacker" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: MEDIA:  Realism, or the Lack Thereof

Charles Reace writes:

> Reports from Iraq/Kuwait indicate that most of the T-72's which were hit
> by the M1A1's 120mm APFSDS rounds had their turrets blown off; I suspect
> from having on-board ammo detonated by the penetration.  Granted, the
> generally smaller and somewhat slower AP rounds of WWII would not have
> the penetrating ability of an M1's sabot, the effects of penetrations by
> any but the smallest calibers would have been similiar, if smaller in scale.

It's my impression that there was a considerable evolution of this effect
during the war.  In 1939/40, the relatively small and low-velocity rounds,
and thin armor, produced less of a pyrotechnic effect than later
penetrators.  As the armor grew thicker and the velocities went up, there
was more interaction during penetration and as a result, a greater shower
of white-hot metal fragments inside the vehicle.

Nowadays the situation is even more extreme, and complicated by the
pyrophoric nature of the depleted uranium long-rod penetrators; DU
fragments burn vigorously when heated by penetration.

Of course, if a single hot splinter sets off your ammo or fuel, that's all
it takes.  It's just that the more "vigorous" penetrations have a greater
chance of doing this.

(It would be interesting to examine data on battlefield recoveries of
damaged tanks.  If my understanding is correct, the data should show that,
early in the war, a greater percentage of these wrecks could be repaired in
the field; later, more would be burned out and unrepairable.)

> Also, most tanks of that period had relatively unsophisticated ammo stowage,
> with the notable exception of late-war Shermans which had a "wet stowage"
> system of questionable effectiveness.

My reading suggests that the wet stowage system was quite successful and
made the Sherman much more survivable.  (Hmmm, the proof ought to be in the
pudding... did the later Chaffees and Pershings use wet stowage?)

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Bill Thacker             AT&T Network Systems       attmail!att!cbemf!wbt
(614) 860-5294           Columbus, Ohio              [email-masked]
                      Humpty Dumpty was pushed!

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

Date:    Mon, 24 Jan 1994 10:11:11 -0600
From:    Jon Stevens <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: media and Kelly's Heroes

Joe Barone wrote:

>you gave me a good excuse to watch the movie again

I guess it is not a good idea to argue with Joe Barone about anything
regarding 'Kelly's Heroes'.  Thanks for the info, that definately settles that
question for me.  Are there any books dealing with the use of armor and
the realism or lack of in WWII movies?

Jon Stevens  --  email [email-masked]

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

Date:    Mon, 24 Jan 1994 10:57:53 EST
From:    "William B. Thacker" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: WEAP: Soviet BA-10

Joe Barone writes:

>         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.

There are several wheeled vehicles, including the BA-10, which were
provided with optional tracks. These worked, essentially, like rubber bands
stretched over the two wheels, and provided extra traction and floatation.
The theory, I'm sure, was that they could be used to improve cross-country
performance and then removed to allow fast road driving.

I've seen photos of the BA-10 with and without tracks, but from my reading
I'm of the impression that the tracks were optional and rare.  I would
build your diorama vehicle without tracks.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Bill Thacker             AT&T Network Systems       attmail!att!cbemf!wbt
(614) 860-5294           Columbus, Ohio              [email-masked]
                      Humpty Dumpty was pushed!

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

Date:    Mon, 24 Jan 1994 08:27:54 -0800
From:    Jim Benn <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Movie realism

On Sat, 22 Jan 1994, Sidney Allinson wrote:

> For a sense of utter realism depicting the combat in the last few
> weeks of WW2, THE BRIDGE must rank near the top.  'Tells the tale
> based on fact, of a group of German schoolboys pressed into the
> Volksturm, and ordered to defend a bridge "to the last". Their
> equipment, weaponry, was mainly a set of panzerfausts. A weary old
> sergeant is put incharge, and his charaterization was superb.
> Realism was probably because it was a German production, late 1960s as I
> recall.
> Anyone see it?
>
Sidney, you beat me to the punch on Die Brucke (sp?) THE BRIDGE.  I agree
its one of the best WWII movies.  I've only seen it at college foreign
film showings, in German with subtitles.
On the subject of WWII films in general, I agree with the comment that
the best are B&W.  Not only are B&W films older, and hence more apt to
have authentic equipment, but they are more like our recollections of
WWII photos and film which originally formed our initial impressions.
Same reason Steven Speilberg made SHINDLER'S LIST in B&W (except for the
ending).
BTW, someone mentioned a B&W WWII movie with Bob Newhart; it was HELL IS
FOR HEROES, starring Steve McQueen.

 *=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-*> Jim Benn  [[email-masked]] <*-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=*
 |-=[        Auto-Graphics, Inc.       ]=[      /~~)       /~~)           ]=-|
 |-=[        8 West Main Street        ]=[     (__(_UTO - (__/RAPHICS     ]=-|
 |-=[        Niantic, CT  06357        ]=[              .___/             ]=-|
 *=-=-=-=-=-=-=-*>  PHONE: 800-733-6939 = FAX: 203-691-0183  <*-=-=-=-=-=-=-=*

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

Date:    Mon, 24 Jan 1994 11:49:00 -0500
From:    David Rising <[email-masked]>
Subject: Machinery of Destruction

I am doing some research on the bureaucracy surrounding the Holocaust.
Specifically, I am interested in the role played by the German rail
system-such as what they charged to deport people, how they set their
priorities as to who got the trains etc.  Does anybody know of any
resource materials which may be helpful?  If so, please send me E-mail at
[email-masked]    Thanks in advance,
David Rising

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

Date:    Mon, 24 Jan 1994 12:47:16 -0500
From:    Wayne Young <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Causing the death of tank crews

> Further to the recent discussion of various armoured piercing tank ammo:-
>
> Is it true that a shell did not have to penetrate the tank in order to kill
> the crew or at least knock them unconscious. This theory says that the noise
> made by an impacting shell on the tank can be enough to disable the crew if
> not actually kill them. So, how load is the bang that the crew hear inside the
> tank when the shell strikes and what effect does this this "acoustical" bomb
> have? Were there any reports by survivors who experienced this sort of thing?

        Partly true... the round doesn't have to penetrate a tank (with a
simplistic armour scheme) to kill the crew, but it is not really the noise
that does the harm.  The round impacting on the outside of the armour shell
would cause incredible shock waves to rupture the other side of the armour
(the inside) and cause spalling (chunks and flakes of metal break off and
bounce around the hull/turret compartment, killing the vehicle crew in the
process).  This is true for basic low-penetration rounds.  Armour piercing
and HEAT rounds are a different matter altogether.  As for the noise, it's
just a matter of what the ear drums can take.  I've hear accounts of tread-
heads taking a hit from an ineffective round, surviving, _and_ being
functionally deaf for as much as two days...

> On the other hand, tank crews were probably fairly immune to noise since the
> tank's own gun would disipate most of its noise inside the tank.
>
> Johannes van Vuren,
> Canterbury, England.

Wayne Young         [Rifraf]  | "In my opinion, we don't devote nearly
CS3, Northern College, Ont.   |  enough scientific research to finding
[email-masked]  |  a cure for jerks."  - Calvin

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

Date:    Mon, 24 Jan 1994 11:54:06 CST
From:    William Crozier <[email-masked]>
Subject: SUB DEPTHS

The development of the Balao class fleet type submarine was a major
development in submarine warfare in 1942 because it increased the
operating depth of the fleet-type boats from 300 to 400 feet. Test
depth of these boats exceeded operating depth and collapse depth was
predicted at 900 feet. In a model test the boat failed at 909 feet.
        Capt Andrew McKee in charge of ss construction--was concerned
about reports from the skipper of the Bowfin (SS 287) that he would
take his boat to 1,000 feet. McKee believed that the boats were "good for
600 feet" but he discouraged going deeper unless "forced to do so by
circumstances."
        On 30 October 1944 the USS Salmon (SS182) dove to over 600
feet off Kyushu as a result of depth charging which damaged the after
torpedo room hatch. The stern of the boat reached 620 feet. The
operating depth of this class was 250 feet. After surfacing and a
running battle with surface craft it reached home port and was
designated as unfit for sea.
        The USS Chopper (SS342) had a "deep submergence" incident in
the 60's or 70's but not much is known about it. Clancy refers to it
in "The Hunt for Red October."

Source: John D. Alden, The Fleet Submarine in the U. S. Navy,
Annapolis: Naval Institute Press, 1976

William Crozier                         St. Mary's College of Minnesota
Chair, History Department               Department of History #27
[email-masked]               700 Terrace Heights
(507)457-1524                           Winona, MN 55987-1399
Fax (507)457-1633

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

Date:    Mon, 24 Jan 1994 13:32:27 EST
From:    Charles Reace <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Causing the death of tank crews

> Is it true that a shell did not have to penetrate the tank in order to kill
> the crew or at least knock them unconscious. This theory says that the noise
> made by an impacting shell on the tank can be enough to disable the crew if
> not actually kill them. So, how load is the bang that the crew hear inside the
> tank when the shell strikes and what effect does this this "acoustical" bomb
> have? Were there any reports by survivors who experienced this sort of thing?

Interesting question.  I don't recall reading any accounts of this, but I've
played a set of WW-II tactical wargaming rules which had a tank crew stunned
for a turn or two when hit by an HE round of 120mm caliber or greater.

Probably more important was the spalling effect of non-penetrating hits.
This was when there was an impact of sufficient force to cause bits of the
interior of the armor plating to splinter off and fly about inside the tank.
In fact, the British invented the HESH (High Explosive Squash Head) round
specifically to take advantage of this phenomenon.  This shell consisted
a hunk of plastic explosive with a detonator at the rear.  Upon impact the
plastic would spread out onto the armor plate, then the detonator would
set it off.  This resulted in a greatly increased spalling effect, even
when striking armor which was virtually impenetrable otherwise.  This was
also the weapon of choice for the Britsih "Petard" spigot mortar, which
was used on the AVRE tanks for destroying pillboxes, obstacles, etc.

> On the other hand, tank crews were probably fairly immune to noise since the
> tank's own gun would disipate most of its noise inside the tank.

Hopefully the gun dissipates most of its noise out the "business end" and
not inside the tank!  From a noise viewpoint, I'd rather be inside the
tank than standing nearby outside when it fires.  B^)

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

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

Date:    Mon, 24 Jan 1994 12:07:12 -0600
From:    CAPT Tim Taylor USN <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: NEWS Re: "This Week in the Navy"

I'm following up on several of the notes about the Navy News
Service.

I agree with the comments that relaying the entire NavNews via wwii-l is
probably not appropriate because so little is directly related to World War
II.

We appreciate and endorse the idea that subscribers pick out items and
relay them to other places when it seems appropriate to do so.  Like all
other "publishers" we especially appreciate it when the individual items
are left intact and credited to the Navy News Service.  Larry and Jack
(among others) are very good about this.

One of the responses (I think it was Larry's ) mentioned that NavNews is
always posted to soc.veterans and to the dialup BBS here in CHINFO.  Some
other options:
  -- the sci.military moderator routinely posts it in his group
  -- you can telnet to fedworld.gov and then use Fedworld's gateway
service to connect to our dialup BBS.
  -- the Library of Congress maintains a NavNews archive which is
accessible by gopher (marvel.loc.gov, port 70) or by telnet
(marvel.loc.gov, login marvel).
  -- or you can ask for an email subscription, by sending a note to
[email-masked].

The Navy's World War II office is immediately adjacent to mine here in the
Pentagon.  All of the materials they've produced have been uploaded to
byrd, and we'll do the same with new materials as they become available.

CAPT Tim Taylor, USN           Email:  [email-masked]
Navy Office of Information     Phone: 703-695-2078 DSN 225-2078
Washington, DC  20350-1200       Fax: 703-697-2767 DSN 227-2767
  - Please send NavNews email to [email-masked] -

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

Date:    Mon, 24 Jan 1994 13:26:42 EST
From:    Ron Babuka <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Causing the death of tank crews

I recall reading an article where Isreali tanker in the Golan Heights
became quite good at "disabling" Syrian tanks by using HE rounds on the
turret.  They found that the HE rounds would knock the turret off its
ring and basically freeze the turret.  At that point either the Isreali
tank would close in close enough to finish it off, the infantry would close
in and knock it off, or the Syrians would withdrawal from the field.

Ron Babuka

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

Date:    Mon, 24 Jan 1994 13:59:21 EST
From:    "William B. Thacker" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Causing the death of tank crews

Johannes van Vuren writes:

> Is it true that a shell did not have to penetrate the tank in order to kill
> the crew or at least knock them unconscious. This theory says that the noise
> made by an impacting shell on the tank can be enough to disable the crew if
> not actually kill them.

You can disable a tank crew without penetrating the armor, it is true, but
not because of the noise.  Non-penetrating hits can cause "scabs" of metal
to spall off the interior of the armor place with lethal velocity.  In
fact, the British developed the HESH (High Explosive Squash Head,
equivalent to the US HEP, High Explosive, Plastic) round to take advantage
of this tendency.  Still, these aren't very effective relative to actually
penetrating.

Alternately, the shock of the impact can injure a crewman who is in contact
with the armor plate near the impact point.

The "clang" of the round hitting, though, is not enough to injure the
crew.

> On the other hand, tank crews were probably fairly immune to noise since the
> tank's own gun would disipate most of its noise inside the tank.

The great bulk of the noise is vented outside, through the barrel.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Bill Thacker             AT&T Network Systems       attmail!att!cbemf!wbt
(614) 860-5294           Columbus, Ohio              [email-masked]
                      Humpty Dumpty was pushed!

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

Date:    Mon, 24 Jan 1994 13:29:48 CST
From:    "Robert J. Granvin" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Movie realism

> BTW, someone mentioned a B&W WWII movie with Bob Newhart; it was HELL IS
> FOR HEROES, starring Steve McQueen.

Newhart spoke about this film on the Tonight Show recently.  He basically
said the whole thing was weird.  They kept rewriting the script and went
way, way over budget.  Eventually, Paramount just said "no more money.
After such-and-such a date, everything stops."  When that date came, they
stopped, but the story never got finished.  The movie was released anyways.

He said the movie ends when someone is crawling towards a machine gun
bunker in the midst of a battle and then ... roll credits.

Totally weird.

Probably placed it in the running for an Academy Award.  :-)

--
Robert J. Granvin                                    Southern Minnesota Wing
[email-masked]                                       Confederate Air Force

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

Date:    Tue, 25 Jan 1994 02:45:53 +0700
From:    "Peter E. Beal" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: UK Opens Files on WWII Massacre

On Mon, 24 Jan 1994, George PISZCZUK wrote:

> One article suggests that 22 files, marked not to be made public until 2021,
> were in fact released early.  These files were described as containing
> interviews with British and German soldiers describing the massacre of between
> 80 and 90 British soldiers in a barn at Wormhoudt, Belgium, during the 1940
> retreat to Dunkirk.
>
> I question the need to continue holding back historical records only to draw
> on theif it can serve some political end.  T

Why were the files not to be made public until 2021.  I thought the
British government had a 30 year rule for sensitive material.  And why
was it considered sensitive in the first place?  And how did it get out
early?

I am not asking because I think you *should* know; just in the hope that
you do or somebody else on this list does.

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

Date:    Mon, 24 Jan 1994 14:18:23 -0600
From:    WILLIAM HUBER - SCDR <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Movie realism

In Mr. Norton's message of 22 Jan 1994 at 1303 CST, he writes:

>         I haven't seen the movie "Cross of Iron" in a few years, but as I
> recall it was very good.  The only part that I question is that the main
> character, a German NCO (I believe), carried a Soviet made PPSh submachine
> gun as his primary weapon.  I have never heard of a German soldier giving up
> a MP 40 (which a NCO would carry) for another weapon such as this.  I've
> also never seen evidence in any photographs or autobiographies (such as
> "The Forgotten Soldier") from the Eastern Front.
>
> [email-masked]

Funny, that's what I thought gave the movie that added touch of
realism.  There is a book called _Die Waffen SS_ by Walther (I think)
which is a photo history of the Waffen SS and there are a couple of
shots with SS men using PPSh-41s in combat.  The MP-40 had a stick
magazine that carried 32 rounds of 9mm ammo while the drum magazine
of the PPSh-41 could hold 72 rounds of 7.65.  The old Russian 41s
had a selector lever to allow single shot of full automatic fire too.
The 41 was a tough weapon and could take a lot of abuse and still
function.  It disassembled very quickly and was simple to repair and
maintain.  The Schmeisser required better care and feeding.  More
Germans would probably have used them had there been a ready access
to ammo and if it didn't make one's own troops nervous hearing the
sound of enemy weapons close by, especially in close combat (where
this weapon was ideal).

Another of the men in Steiner's platoon transitioned from his 98k
rifle to a captured Moisen-Nagant 91 sniper rifle.

While on the subject of accuracy of movies, nobody yet has mentioned
the horror film called "The Keep".  It is set in Bulgaria in 1943 or
44 where a group of Germans is assigned to defend a mountain pass
that has an old medieval keep.  Turns out there is a vampire in the
Keep or some such but the makers of this movie searched Europe for
authentic vehicles and found some.  It is the best use of real German
vehicles I have seen.  There was also an 8 ton prime mover used as a
getaway car in the movie "The Dirty Dozen" which was a real one too.

As far as uniforms, there was a movie that came out quite recently
called "Swing Kids" which is set in pre-war Nazi Germany.  The
uniforms in that movie looked like they came out of my collection!!!!
They were fantastic - Police, SA, SS uniforms all perfect.  I have
not yet seen "Schindler's List" but from the clips the uniforms look
pretty good there too.

Another *good* one for technical details was "Das Boot".  Again,
perfect uniforms and man, that U-boat looked great to me.  There is
something really special about war movies that use German actors to
portray German soldiers.  American actors have to be really good to
pull off the effect that a German actor never gives a second thought
which are both reasons why "Cross of Iron" remains my favorite.  Sam
Peckinpah's directorship is icing on the cake.

The sequel, "Breakthrough" was only a weak attempt to recapture the
feel of "CoI".  It was set on the West Front against US forces but
the music and directorship killed it.  The fact that James Coburn
chose not to play Sgt. Steiner again was a real minus but to put
Richard Burton in there was a *big* mistake.  He would have been a
natural to play a British character but a German, no way.  The music
in this movie really made you wonder what these guys were smoking
when they put this one together.

Cheers,  Bill Huber / [email-masked]

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

Date:    Mon, 24 Jan 1994 15:05:54 -0500
From:    Joe Barone <[email-masked]>
Subject: TECH: Wet stowage (was MEDIA: Realism...)

From: "William B. Thacker" <[email-masked]>:
>> Also, most tanks of that period had relatively unsophisticated ammo stowage,
>> with the notable exception of late-war Shermans which had a "wet stowage"
>> system of questionable effectiveness.
> My reading suggests that the wet stowage system was quite successful and
> made the Sherman much more survivable.  (Hmmm, the proof ought to be in the
> pudding... did the later Chaffees and Pershings use wet stowage?)

        From "M-24 in Action", p.5:

"...The T-24 [prototype model] carried forty-eight rounds of 75mm in
water filled ammunition containers, 440 rounds of .50 caliber ammunition,
and 3,750 .30 caliber rounds..."
--
Joe Barone
[email-masked]
German Tanker: You?  You're the American Army!
     Odd Ball: No, baby, we're not.
        Kelly: Think of us as a private business venture.

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

Date:    Mon, 24 Jan 1994 15:12:01 -0600
From:    WILLIAM HUBER - SCDR <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Causing the death of tank crews

In Johannes' message of 24 Jan 1994 at 1119 CST, he writes:

> Is it true that a shell did not have to penetrate the tank in order to kill
> the crew or at least knock them unconscious. This theory says that the noise
> made by an impacting shell on the tank can be enough to disable the crew if
> not actually kill them. So, how load is the bang that the crew hear inside the
> tank when the shell strikes and what effect does this this "acoustical" bomb
> have? Were there any reports by survivors who experienced this sort of thing?

Here in San Antonio there was a barber who had been a tank driver in
the Waffen SS (in the Nordland Rgt. I think) but he drove Pz IVs and
later they were trained on Kingtigers.  According to Mr. Billmann
(who died in the 1980s) as soon as they took their first hit the crew
bailed out of the thing.  He said that once you were hit you knew
that you were in the other guys sights and there would be no second
chance.

Another German vet, now a professor of mathematics at Sul Ross State
College in Alpine, Texas, was an artillery officer in the German Army
on the Russian Front.  A friend of mine (a student of his at the
time) asked about the practice of painting victory rings around the
barrels of their 88s.  He said that some did it but his guns did not.
There was no time or desire to do so and gun barrels had to be
replaced fairly frequently due to heavy use anyway.  I thought you
all might get a kick out of that.  I've seen lots of photos of guns
with the rings and wondered how prevalent it was.

Cheers, Bill Huber / [email-masked]

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

Date:    Mon, 24 Jan 1994 16:09:41 EST
From:    Crane Conrad LTC <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Schweinfurt raid and FW-190

>>
>
>Hi,
>The FW-190 had upward firing cannons (I think the designation was G8)
>that were totally automatic and activated by light sensors when the
>fighter flew beneath the belly of a bomber. It has been estimated the
>over half of the USAAF bombers shot down in the Sweinfurt raid had been
>shot down with this equipment.
>The FW-190 also had DOWNWARD firing cannons at one time (tank killers).
>
>Bye for now,
>
>
>
>Gudmundur J. Helgason
>
>E-mail to:    [email-masked]
>

Gudmundur,
     I've read a lot of books on the Luftwaffe, but the only mention of upward
firing guns I've seen were the "schrage Musik" that night fighters used. That
light sensor system sounds awfully impractical, especially with the shades of
light caused by clouds and other aircraft.  Do you have a reference where I can
read more about this?  I also have never seen any mention of upward firing FW
190's in Schweinfurt records.  Which raid are you discussing, the first or
second?

                                             LTC Con Crane
                                             USMA

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

Date:    Mon, 24 Jan 1994 18:47:16 EST
From:    Crane Conrad LTC <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Wilhelmshaven 1943

>I am told that the first American raid into Germany took place on January 27,
>1943.  Can anybody tell me if this is true, and something about the raid.
>
>Thank you.
>
>
>  =========================================================================
>  | DR.  GEORGE R. BAUER

George,
     That is true.  91 heavy bombers of the 1st (B-17) and 2nd (B-24)
Bombardment Wings set out to bomb sub pens in Wilhelmshaven in uncertain
weather.  Only 53 bombed it, but the weather also confused German defenses so
only three aircraft were lost.  German fighter losses were probably as high as
seven.
                                             LTC Con Crane
                                             USMA

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

Date:    Mon, 24 Jan 1994 19:02:16 EST
From:    Crane Conrad LTC <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: 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]
>

Sue,
     Look at the Army Greenbook official histories,  The 164th Infantry was one
of the regiments in that division.  You'll find entries for both in the index
of the appropriate volumes.  TRIUMPH IN THE PHILIPPINES seems to have the most
on that unit, since the volume on Leyte doesn't even mention it. It seems to
have done a lot of mopping-up operations.

                                             LTC Con Crane
                                             USMA

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

Date:    Mon, 24 Jan 1994 21:37:38 CST
From:    "[email-masked]. --Scherrer,
         Tim A." <[email-masked]>
Subject: Ref: Robert Clary Speech

I just returned from the Robert Clary speech given here at Northeast
Missouri State University tonight.  I will not go into the details of
his story of deportation, labor camps and liberation for it is really
outside the charter of this list---I did want to discuss one item he did
touch upon regarding "Hogan's Heros", which is a show I grew up
watching.

He was asked how ironic it was for him, after serving in a labor camp
for 31 months to find himself in a role that made him famous as a French
prisoner in a German POW camp.  He said that he had no problems playing
the role because this was not his memory or his condition.  He did not
have the Geneva Convention protection, Red Cross packages or letters
from home.  The only thing that reminded him of his experience were the
cold German winters that he would click his heels together to stay warm.
Also, that the role was well suited for him, because he is a spunky
frenchman, although he still can't cook.

If any other schools are interested in having him as a speaker, he does
this as part of the Outreach program with the Simon Wiesanthall (sp?)
in New York.  I can provide more details to anyone if they are
interested off line.

************************************************************************
*  Tim A. Scherrer          "You'll be fighting WWII for the rest of   *
*  Facilities Supervisor     your life", Ron Scherrer, 1971            *
*  WP:816-785-5253                                                     *
*  HP:816-665-6704                                                     *
*  ID# [email-masked]                             *
************************************************************************

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

Date:    Mon, 24 Jan 1994 22:08:45 CST
From:    Steve Alvin <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: World War I

Having hunted grouse, or more accurately, tried to hunt grouse,
I can vouch for the truth in HRH's statement. :-)

--
Steve Alvin
[email-masked]

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

End of WWII-L Digest - 23 Jan 1994 to 24 Jan 1994
*************************************************