Subject: WWII-L Digest - 19 Jan 1994 to 20 Jan 1994

From: Automatic digest processor <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 21 Jan 1994 00:00:31 -0500

There are 26 messages totalling 810 lines in this issue.

Topics of the day:

  1. ADMIN: Test
  2. Fighters with rear gunners (6)
  3. References on German Brandenberg Units
  4. fighter with rear gunner (2)
  5. media (2)
  6. USAAF 20 JAN 44
  7. USN 1944
  8. Brandenburg units
  9. ...men of low morals...(was Waffen SS) (2)
 10. Brandenburg unit(s) (3)
 11. MEDIA:  Realism, or the Lack Thereof
 12. REF: Brandenberger [sp?] units
 13. Addr: Patton
 14. Armed Japanese troops in French Indochina
 15. MEDIA/WEAP: U-1105, the Rubber U-Boat
 16. Re[2]: media

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

Date:    Thu, 20 Jan 1994 01:49:18 CST
From:    Steve Alvin <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: ADMIN: Test

Your message reached the list at 1:47 AM!  My guess the
weather is delaying your mail!

--
Steve Alvin
[email-masked]

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

Date:    Thu, 20 Jan 1994 09:40:21 GMT
From:    Johannes van Vuren <[email-masked]>
Subject: Fighters with rear gunners

I was watching a video called "Hunters in the Sky" which showed some scenes
from the Russian front. Particularly a scene of a Russian fighter called the
"Stormobic" or some such name. This plane apparently had a rear gunner and
was feared by the Luftwaffe.

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

Is it not surprising that the designers of the Spitfire and other famous
fighters never tried to fit a rear gun to their planes, in the light of
the fact that the best way to destroy a fighter was from behind. Thus a rear
gun would have been a good defensive weapon.

In general, what were the advantages and disadvantages for having a rear gun
or gunner in a WW2 fighter?

Johannes van Vuren,
Canterbury, England.

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

Date:    Thu, 20 Jan 1994 06:40:42 EST
From:    Lowe Barrett MAJ <[email-masked]>
Subject: References on German Brandenberg Units

WWII-Listers:

I made an error in my previous post to Gudmundur.

The book that has three chapters (Ch 5,6,7) on the Brandenbergers is:

KOMMANDO:  German Special Forces of WWII by James Lucas
(St. Martin's Press, NY 1985) (Sorry I don't have an ISBN)

The other Lucas book; War on the EAstern Front (ISBN 0-517-382857)
(Bonanza Books, NY  1979); has a number of good stories and vignettes
about the German soldier in Russia.  While it is not a campaign history,
it is a good compilation of what the regular soldier went through.

The book by Helmuth Spaeter is:
Panzerkorps Grossdeutschland (Bilddokumentation) (ISBN 3-7907-0214-4)
(Podzun-Pallas-Verlag GmbH, Freidburg, 1984)
The section in this book on the Brandenbergers is p.162-172.

Bear

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

Date:    Thu, 20 Jan 1994 12:38:28 MET
From:    Ireneusz Jakobik <[email-masked]>
Subject: fighter with rear gunner

Soviet aircraft with rear gunner was IL-2 "Stormovik" and it was
attacker. Its later variant was IL-10 which had better aerodynamics
and closed gunner cockpit. IL-2 could be compared with Junkers Ju-87 G.
There was also British fighter with a rear turret! It was Defiant.
-Irek.

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

Date:    Thu, 20 Jan 1994 12:45:59 MET
From:    Ireneusz Jakobik <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: media

I remember watching a British-Yugoslavian-French-etc. short TV series
based on Jack Higgins' book about British agent who wants to kill
Rommel, which is inspecting German troops based on one of Channel Islands
occupied by Germans. But Rommel is not really Rommel, but some German
Jew who joined Wehrmacht to avoid repressions and death. (who would
except that German soldier was a Jew?). Rommel was played by Michael York.
The story sounds stupid and the series is even more stupid. All 'German'
tanks which appear in series are T-34 wearing olive drab camouflage and
swastikas. 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)
Aircrafts: there's a small modern turbo-prop plane (probably Cessna)
with front landing gear and Antonov An-2, which is supposed to be
a German transport plane (Ju-52?).
I don't remember title of that series, but here's my advice: don't watch it.
-Irek.

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

Date:    Thu, 20 Jan 1994 07:11:00 EST
From:    mc killop <[email-masked]>
Subject: USAAF 20 JAN 44

COMBAT CHRONOLOGY OF THE US ARMY AIR FORCES
THURSDAY, 20 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-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
  P-38, Lockheed Lightning
  P-39, Bell Airacobra
  P-40, Curtiss
  P-47, Republic Thunderbolt
  P-51, North American Mustang

CHINA-BURMA-INDIA (CBI) THEATER OF OPERATIONS

  BURMA-INDIA (Tenth Air Force): In N Burma, 40+ A-36's and P-51's hit
storage dumps along the railway in the Mogaung area and billets and warehouse
area at Mohnyin. In S Burma, 16 P-38's and 6 B-25's knock out a railroad
bridge, pipeline, and railroad tracks in the Nattalin area.

  CHINA (Fourteenth Air Force): 2 B-24's on sweep from Hong Kong to Swatow,
China, attack a freighter and a tanker, which are reported sinking.

EUROPEAN THEATER OF OPERATIONS (ETO)

  STRATEGIC OPERATIONS (Eighth Air Force): Mission 186: during the evening, 4
of 5 B-17's drop 960,000 leaflets on Lille, Brest, Caen and Chartres, France
without loss.

  TACTICAL OPERATIONS (Ninth Air Force): HQ 437th Troop Carrier Group and
83d, 84th, 85th Troop Carrier Squadrons arrive at Balderton, England from the
US with C-47's.

  US STRATEGIC AIR FORCES IN EUROPE (USSAFE): General Carl Spaatz, as
Commanding General USSAFE, formally assumes administrative responsibility for
all USAAF units in the UK. His HQ is located at Bushy Park, formerly Eighth
Air Force HQ.

MEDITERRANEAN THEATER OF OPERATIONS (MTO)

  STRATEGIC OPERATIONS (Fifteenth Air Force): In Italy, B-24's and B-17's
bomb airfields at Guidonia, Centocelle, and Ciampino;  P-38's provide escort
and P-47's carry out sweeps over the targets. Other P-47's escort transport
airplanes on a mission to Yugoslavia.
  HQ 451st Bombardment Group (Heavy) transfers from the US to Gioia del
Colle, Italy.

  TACTICAL OPERATIONS (Twelfth Air Force): In Italy, B-26's bomb the Viterbo
marshalling yard and attack a bridge at Pontecorvo; B-25's attack railroads
in the Carsoli area; A-20's give close support to the US 5th Infantry
Division in the Minturno area; British and US P-40's follow Royal Air Force
(RAF) light bombers in a raid on the Popoli station; A-36's pound a rail and
road crossing at Viterbo. and P-40's hit communications at Frosinone,
Palestrina, and Carsoli, where a traffic block is created; A-36's and P-40's
fly nearly 200 sorties in support of the US Fifth Army ground forces as the
36th Infantry Division begins an assault across the Rapido River in the
Theodice area; and P-40's hit targets along the British Eighth Army front.

PACIFIC OCEAN AREA (POA, Seventh Air Force): In the Marshall Islands, 13
B-24's, staging through Tarawa Atoll, Gilbert Islands, hit Wotje Atoll during
the night of 19/20 Jan; 8 B-25's from Abemama Island, Gilbert Islands, bomb
Rakaaru Island; other B-25's sent from Tarawa Atoll against shipping at
Ailinglapalap Atoll, abort because of bad weather; 9 P-40's from the Gilbert
Islands strafe a corvette and a schooner at Jaluit Atoll, mortally damaging
both vessels; 4 other P-40's bomb Mille Atoll.
  HQ 11th Bombardment Group (Heavy) and 98th Bombardment Squadron (Heavy)
transfer from Funafuti and Nukufetau Islands, Ellice Islands respectively to
Tarawa Atoll with B-24's.

SOUTH PACIFIC AREA (SOPAC, Thirteenth Air Force): Several targets on
Bougainville Island are bombed by 2 squadrons of B-24's. 18 B-25's, with
about 70 escorting fighters, pound the airfield, fuel dump and gun positions,
at Vunakanau and Rabaul, New Britain Island.
  HQ 42d Bombardment Group (Medium) and 75th Bombardment Squadron (Medium)
transfer from the Russell Islands to Sterling Island, Treasury Islands with
B-25's.

SOUTHWEST PACIFIC AREA (SWPA, Fifth Air Force): In New Guinea, 37 B-25's and
a B-24 bomb and strafe the Hansa Bay area; 60+ B-25's hit positions on Shaggy
Ridge; and  P-39's strafe troops at Weber Point. 25 A-20's hit positions
between Borgen Bay and Rein Bay, New Britain Island, and hit barge hideouts
and enemy held areas on Gasmata Island.
  Transfers in New Guinea: HQ 71st Reconnaissance Group from Port Moresby to
Nadzab; "A" flight of the 110th Reconnaissance Squadron (Fighter), 71st
Reconnaissance Group, based at Port Moresby, begins operating from Gusap with
P-39Q'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:    Thu, 20 Jan 1994 07:22:00 EST
From:    mc killop <[email-masked]>
Subject: USN 1944

THE FOLLOWING IS FROM THE U.S. NAVY NEWS SERVICE

                               -USN-
NNS046.  This Week in the Navy:
Jan. 31-Feb. 8, 1944 -- With the Marshall Islands campaign, the
Marine 4th Division and the Army's 7th Infantry Division moved into
Japanese territory for the first time in World War II.  Kwajalein,
Majuro and Eniwetok atolls were the targets of the campaign.  In
the seizure of these targets, naval gunnery improved markedly in
strength and accuracy when compared with the battle of Tarawa three
months earlier.  That, and the fact that amphibious tactics and
equipment had also improved, resulted in a significant reduction in
casualties.

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

Date:    Thu, 20 Jan 1994 08:27:18 -0500
From:    Warren Thompson <[email-masked]>
Subject: Brandenburg units

I seem to recall that some the earliest Brandenburg units were sent by
Abwehr head Canaris into Poland BEFORE 1 Sept 39. They were armed but
wore civilian clothes.

-- Warren Thompson

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

Date:    Wed, 19 Jan 1994 09:37:14 EST
From:    Richard Kaplan <[email-masked]>
Subject: ...men of low morals...(was Waffen SS)

Charles Reace begins to bring up an important point; that authoritarian
systems, regardless of social ideology tend to attract and reward mostly
mediocre, and the intellectually dogmatic.  Loosely interpreted thats the
believers in the onetrue faith, and their hangers-on.  It seems to me that the
USSR under Lenin and Stalin, and Nazi Germany are the obvious cases; but what
about autocratic states that aren't politically extreme?

                                        Richard Kaplan
                                        Carnegie Library of Pittsburgh

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

Date:    Thu, 20 Jan 1994 08:50:06 EST
From:    Ron Babuka <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Fighters with rear gunners

There were several fighters with rear gunners, ones that come to mind
would include:

Bolton Paul Defiant - Basically it looked like a Hurricane with a powered
4 gun (.303 Browning) turret behind the pilot.  In its first action a
group of Defiants were jumped by some Me-109's that thought they WERE
Huricanes.  The massed firepower of the turrets brought down a large number
of the Me-109's.  The Germans were quick to learn from this and soon
learned that the heavy turret created a fighter that was both slow and
as manueverable as my Aunt Nellie after a couple of toddies.  Also the
Defiant had no forward firing guns!

Me-110 Destroyer - the basic twin engined German fighter that was supposed
to use speed and heavy firepower to knock down both opposition bombers
and fighters.  The Luftwaffe quickly found out that the speed and the fire-
power (that was not that awesome to start off with by 1941 standards) did
not compensate for the lack of manueverability)

I may be wrong on this one but also didn't the series of Failey fighters
used by the Fleet Air Arm use 2 seater fighters with Radioman/Observer/
gunners in the back seat.  I am thinking of the FireFly as a specific.
If I recall this fighter was pretty much a dog too, being underpowered
and not very manueverable.

The problem with a rear gunner is that it adds weight.  If we start
adding it up, the gunner himself is heavy, then their is the weight of
the gun and the ammunition, then there is extra armor, plus the plane has
to be physically bigger(heavier)  to hold this extra equipment, which means
you need a larger and heavier engine to get the performance, then of course
this means you need more fuel to power this bigger engine.  This cycle
continues until of course until you have one hell of a dinosaur on your
hand.  Often the problem you ended up with is a two-seated fighter that
was bigger and heavier than its contemporaries with roughly the same
sized powerplant as its contemparies.

As todays aircraft are often designed arround electronics, yesterdays
aircraft were designed arround an engine.  An aircraft designer had
to compromise on designs in regards of size, weight, and engine to get
the maximum performance.  Basically a general rule can be applied that
a good design with a poor engine will never get off the ground but a
poor design with a great engine might just make it (until the design
get tweaked to make it a good design).  The designs that included an
extra gunner often just started to overtax the power that was available
in the engines of those days.

National Warplane Museum                              Ron Babuka
Geneseo, New York                                     Cornell University

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

Date:    Thu, 20 Jan 1994 10:01:30 -0600
From:    [email-masked]
Subject: Re: ...men of low morals...(was Waffen SS)

Richard and Charles raise an interesting point which may be
  depthier than they expected.

Look at our degenerated society:  the law has become an obstruc-
  tion to justice, and the media/intelligentsia an obstruction to
  truth -- too critically often.

Maybe those "mediocre, amoral" types censured by Charles and
  Richard are the men of action who -- articulating/galvanizing the
  frustration and disgust of their society -- try to do what is
  necessary to clean up the intolerable mess/mockery their society
  has become.  The concern -- besides society's chronic inability
  to govern/maintain/control itself -- is the extremes to which
  they are tempted/led to purge their society and then immortalize
  themselves.

The disillusionment with authoritarianism democracy has enjoyed
  will disappear, if liberal/democratic societies cannot effectively
  deal with the fundamental problems inflicting humanity with ever
  increasing immediacy/terminality.

Where is the car-jacking statistic now?

MILHIST-L folks,  this discussion was started on WWII-L, and I'm
  posting it on MILHIST-L FYI, in case anyone wants to come on over
  and join it.

Lou Coatney, Western Illinois University

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

Date:    Thu, 20 Jan 1994 08:40:18 PST
From:    Sidney Allinson <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Brandenburg unit(s)

The Regiment Bradenburg had interesting origins. It started as a unit
of the German Abwehr, Military Intelligence.  It came about because
of the experiences on a Hauptmann von Hippel, who had been in combat
in the former g German African colonies in the First World War. Von
Hippel saw first-hand the effectiveness of non-standard military
operations, and was assigned by the German high command to make a
study of the Allied use of irregular forces.
Von Hippel particularly admired the tactics of Col T.E. Lawrence
(Lawrence of Arabia) and how he exploited the potential of guerrila
warfare. Von Hippel made a report at length on the advantages of
the new German forces raising a special unit based on irregular
warfare; highly-trained small elite units with specialist abilities,
with the particular roles of infiltration, sabotage, and subversions.
His concepts were quickly embraced by Admiral [then Kapitan sur See] Wilhelm
Canaris, in 1936, shortly after his appointment as Chief of Counter-
Intelligence.
He set up a special section, Abwehr II, to command the Brandenburg
Special Duties SEction. As the ability to speak foreign languages
well was a high priority for such a role, many of the first men
recruited were returned Germans from adventurous lives in Africa and
South America. Liguists, outdoorsmen, inured to hardship, they wwere
ideal for Canaris' new unit.
They were intensively trained to fight as "irregulars", for types of
operations behind enemy lines for which conventional troops were not
suited.
The first Brandenburgers were named, for security reasons, No 1
Constructuion Training Company, under a Lt Grabert, and went into
action in September, 1939, in th attack on Poland.

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

Date:    Thu, 20 Jan 1994 09:04:26 PST
From:    Sidney Allinson <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: MEDIA:  Realism, or the Lack Thereof

To this day, I somtimes get irritated at spotting inaccuracies in
war movies -- everything from soldier actors with their belt-s
on upsidedown to the "wrong" tank, or showing Sten guns in 1940
settings. But I've learned to not bother as much about this as
previously.
After all...
There's the story of Ingrid Bergman during the shooting of a scene
in an Alfred Hitchcock mo film. Ingrid just couln't get into it.
She kept wailing, "But vodt is my *motivation*?"
Hitch said quietly, "Ingrid, it's only a *movie*!"
We have to keep that in mind, I guess.

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

Date:    Thu, 20 Jan 1994 12:32:20 -0500
From:    Akira Takiguchi <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Brandenburg unit(s)

Lowe Barrett MAJ <[email-masked]> wrote:
>a good place to start is the
>History of the Grossdeutschland by Helmuth Spaeter (he was a Knight's Cross
>winner in the GD on the Eastern front). The history and the pictorial
>(bildband in German).

     The book is available in English from Schiffer Publishing (1469
Morstein Road, West Chester, Pennsylvania 19380) as _Panzerkorps Gross-
deutschland - a pictorial history_.  Spaeter's another book of Gross-
deutschland division is available [only 1 of 3 volume set as of today]
in English from J.J.Fedorowicz Publishing (267 Whitegates Crescent
Winnipeg, Manitoba Canada R3K 1L2)

     Sonderverband Brandenburg (15 Oct 1939) saw many commando actions
starting from Operation "Weseruebung".  Fought in Belgium, Netherland,
Luxemburg, Balkan, North Africa, Russia.
     Division Brandenburg (1 Apr 1943) fought in eastern front and Balkan.
It was later armored to become Panzergrenadierdivision Brandenburg (15 Sep
1944), which continued fighting in eastern front.  The remnants went into
Russian captivity.
--
      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:    Thu, 20 Jan 1994 13:19:10 EST
From:    Robert E George <[email-masked]>
Subject: REF: Brandenberger [sp?] units

     A book I got for Christmas:

     Secret Armies. Written by James Adams. Published by Bantam. 1987.

has short, heavily-illustrated articles on elite forces. There are at
least two dealing with the Brandenbergers [sp?]. One deals with North
Africa, the other with Russia.

Regards,
Rob

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

Date:    Thu, 20 Jan 1994 15:11:01 EDT
From:    RICHARD KING <[email-masked]>
Subject: Addr: Patton

In case anyone is interested, our library has a very nice (but small)
display of two of Patton's uniforms along with photos and some
magazines of the period. The uniforms are on models so they look
like they are being worn, and there are photos of Patton wearing
the two uniforms being displayed. It is rather haunting.
I think I'll go take a look at the display now.
     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?
******************************************************************
Richard L. King, Reference Librarian, Vincennes (IN) Univ.
[email-masked]

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

Date:    Thu, 20 Jan 1994 16:22:31 EST
From:    "William B. Thacker" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Fighters with rear gunners

Johannes van Vuren writes (of the Sturmovik)

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

Several postings have covered this in detail.

> Thus a rear
> gun would have been a good defensive weapon.

Not really; especially, not in a fighter.

For starts, the single, flexible-mount rear gun like that carried in the
Sturmovik or the Stuka, was not particularly valuable against WWII-era
fighters.  They moved too fast and the aiming mechanism (the gunner's arms)
weren't precise and accurate enough to keep the rounds on target.  And
since a man could only handle, at best, a .50-caliber (12.7mm) gun in such
a mount, you needed to put a lot of rounds on target to shoot it down.
This became an even greater problem as the war progressed and fighters got
better armor.

The problem becomes even greater if the flex gun is mounted on a fighter,
which itself is moving fast and flying an erratic course (unlike a bomber).

The American exeperience with heavy bombers led to the conclusion that
flexible mount guns (like the waist guns on B-17's) were nearly useless,
and that .50 caliber guns were too light.  Hence the B-29 and B-36, which
showed trends first toward using powered turrets exclusively, then toward
adoption of 20mm as the minimum armament.

This carried into lighter planes as well.  The American Devastator torpedo
bomber had a flexible mount rear MG; its replacement, the Avenger, had a
powered twin turret.

The Germans toyed with remote-controlled barbette-mounted guns on some of
their twin-engine night fighters, like the He 219. These had very limited
rearward arcs.

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

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

Date:    Fri, 21 Jan 1994 09:08:27 +1000
From:    John Foster <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Armed Japanese troops in French Indochina

There was an incident in Indonesia maybe Timor which was hushed up as its
disclosure might have finished Mountbattens career with a bang.Indonesian
independence fighters were a growing problem for the British and I think
Indian troops in this theatre and as posted Japanese soldiers were used for
lots of duties.These were not bedraggled troops but well fed highly combat
ready troops who had been left marooned when Japan lost control of the sea.
On at least one occasion Japanese artillery was brought into the fray to
silence the "rebels" and it caused a tremble in the command chain that went
right to the top.I think "officially" no one was aware of the incident.
                                                          Regards
                                                          John

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

Date:    Fri, 21 Jan 1994 09:33:00 +1100
From:    Mick Fauchon <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: media

        Ireneusz,

                Haven't seen the film, and probably won't, after your
"recommendation", but it sounds like it was taken from the book "Night
of the Fox" (Jack Higgins).
        In which case I can highly recommend the book over the film.

                                                                Cheers,

                                                                Mick.

--                                                                          --
Mick Fauchon                          | Internet: [email-masked]
Reference Section, Auchmuty Library   | Ph  (intl+61+49) 215861
University of Newcastle, AUSTRALIA    | Fax (intl+61+49) 215833

On Thu, 20 Jan 1994, Ireneusz Jakobik wrote:

> I remember watching a British-Yugoslavian-French-etc. short TV series
> based on Jack Higgins' book about British agent who wants to kill
> Rommel, which is inspecting German troops based on one of Channel Islands
> occupied by Germans. But Rommel is not really Rommel, but some German
> Jew who joined Wehrmacht to avoid repressions and death. (who would
> except that German soldier was a Jew?). Rommel was played by Michael York.
> The story sounds stupid and the series is even more stupid. All 'German'
> tanks which appear in series are T-34 wearing olive drab camouflage and
> swastikas. 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)
> Aircrafts: there's a small modern turbo-prop plane (probably Cessna)
> with front landing gear and Antonov An-2, which is supposed to be
> a German transport plane (Ju-52?).
> I don't remember title of that series, but here's my advice: don't watch it.
> -Irek.
>

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

Date:    Thu, 20 Jan 1994 15:00:12 PST
From:    Sidney Allinson <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Fighters with rear gunners

The name was "Stormovik".  Incidentally, the model of aircraft to have
been most produced of any type in WW2.
Strictly speaking, though, the Stormovik was a fighter-bomber, not s
a "fighter", or interceptor, as such.
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
the company got the idea of an aircraft design embodying their turret.
The Defiant, was a two seater fighter, with the particular intention
of being a bomer-killer. That's bomber-killer. Also expected to be a
useful plane against enemy fighters. There was one fixed forward-
firing gun in one wing, but its main armament were four .303 Browning
guns in a rear-mounted hydraulic powered turret mounted right behind the
pilot's compartment.
For a few days, the Defiant enjoyed good success against the Luftwaaffe,
whose pilots at firsdt mistook the type for a Hurricane, which it
resembled, and attacked from the rear, with fatal results. Once the
German pilots figured things out, they simply attacked from the front,
and Defiants went down in scores. The f Defiant spent the rest of the
war as a target-towing aircraft, with a short period as a night-fighter.
Not a success.

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

Date:    Thu, 20 Jan 1994 15:10:21 -0800
From:    Jim Benn <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: MEDIA/WEAP: U-1105, the Rubber U-Boat

The article about the U-1105 described the rubber sheathing as "an early
form of stealth technology".  German aircraft designers in WWII were also
advanced in the application of stealth technology.  Compare the late war
design of the jet aircraft GO 229 (designation may be a bit off; sources
at home, computer at work) with the current US Stealth Bomber.  I read
recently that  the Smithsonian Air & Space Museum has a GO 229 in one of
their many warehouses- wouldn't it make a fascinating exhibit?

 *=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-*> 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:    Thu, 20 Jan 1994 15:19:16 -0800
From:    Jim Benn <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Brandenburg unit(s)

It is my recollection that the Brandenburg Division was controlled
by/attached to the Abwehr, the German (and very anti-Nazi) secret service.
They were special service troops, not Waffen-SS.  The book "History of
the German Resistance" by Peter Hoffmann (I will check the source at
home-this might not be exactly correct) details an number of times when
the Brandenburgers were part of Hitler assasination plots which failed or
never got off the ground.

 *=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-*> 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:    Fri, 21 Jan 1994 00:54:14 +0100
From:    Emmanuel Gustin <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Fighters with rear gunners

> There were several fighters with rear gunners, ones that come to mind
> would include:
> Bolton Paul Defiant - Basically it looked like a Hurricane with a powered
> 4 gun (.303 Browning) turret behind the pilot.

The theory behind the Defiant was that the gun turret would serve as main
armament, so forward firing guns were omitted just to make sure that the
pilot would not be tempted to use them :-/ The coordination of the guns
with the movement of the aircraft was a big problem.  The idea goes back
to the WWII two-seat fighters, of which the most succesful was the Bristol
F.2 'Brisfit'; but these were flown as if they were single-seaters, i.e.
with the forward-firing gun as main armament. The RAF continued the
conmcept of the two-seat fighter into WWII, but somehow lost the original
benefits.  The Royal Navy ordered the 'Roc', a turreted fighter version of
the (already underpowered) Skua fighter-and-dive-bomber; it was worthless.

> I may be wrong on this one but also didn't the series of Failey fighters
> used by the Fleet Air Arm use 2 seater fighters with Radioman/Observer/
> gunners in the back seat.  I am thinking of the FireFly as a specific.
> If I recall this fighter was pretty much a dog too, being underpowered
> and not very manueverable.

The Fulmar and the Firefly. These were no 'dogs', but due to their concept
they were both less nimble and slower than the opposition.  Especially the
Firefly had a long career. In early Fulmars the second crewmember had a
single 7.7mm gun of largely symbolical value, but in the Firefly he had no
armament at all. These fighters were intended as long-range reconaissance
fighters for the fleet; it seems that the RN doubted that fighter pilots
on their own would ever find the carrier back...

The German Me 210/ Me410 series of twin-engined fighters had remotely
controlled rearward firing guns. And I believe that some Ju 88
nightfighters had a single, fixed tail gun.

> hand.  Often the problem you ended up with is a two-seated fighter that
> was bigger and heavier than its contemporaries with roughly the same
> sized powerplant as its contemparies.

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.

Emmanuel Gustin

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

Date:    Thu, 20 Jan 1994 19:50:46 CST
From:    "[email-masked]. --Scherrer,
         Tim A." <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re[2]: media

Not to sound like a broken record, because I've talked about this movie
before, but "Cross of Iron" is one movie I am in awe of for WWII
accuracy.  It has a reputation among the WWII German reenactors for
being correct on about every way, from dog tags, to the T-34 tanks that
attack them.  Sam Pekinpaugh did his research well for the movie.  A
warning, though---don't watch it with your kids--it is bloody, and there
is a scene that makes the Bobbit case look like child's play.  Tim

************************************************************************
*  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:    Thu, 20 Jan 1994 21:48:38 -0500
From:    Bob Smart <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: fighter with rear gunner

> Soviet aircraft with rear gunner was IL-2 "Stormovik" and it was
> attacker. Its later variant was IL-10 which had better aerodynamics
> and closed gunner cockpit. IL-2 could be compared with Junkers Ju-87 G.
> There was also British fighter with a rear turret! It was Defiant.
> -Irek.
 There wre several two seat fighters. The british also had the ROC a turret
fighter similar to the Defiant but based on the Skua naval divebomber. It was
designed for carrier use I believe. It was less of a success than either the
Defiant or the Skua.  There was also the Fulmar, A British Naval fighter. The
Brits beleived that an overwater aircraft needed a navigator. So they saddled a
fighter with two seats. (Gee I wonder how the US and Japanese were  getting
along without navigators in their naval fighters :-))

Actually the IL-2 was an attack aircraft not a fighter. So if you wanted to
include similar planes you would have to include JU-87s and SBDs.

Bob Smart ([email-masked])

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

Date:    Thu, 20 Jan 1994 22:25:33 -0500
From:    Bob Smart <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Fighters with rear gunners

> I was watching a video called "Hunters in the Sky" which showed some scenes
> from the Russian front. Particularly a scene of a Russian fighter called the
> "Stormobic" or some such name. This plane apparently had a rear gunner and
> was feared by the Luftwaffe.
 as mentioned in an earlier message ( These things seem to get randomized in
the net :-() The Shturmovick ( which means attacker) was an attack aircraft.
In looking in my referance books I see that there was a single seat version of
it also.  It was designed for close air support similar to the Ju-87 or the
modern A-10.

>
> I was wondering if this was the only fighter in WW2 with a rear gun/gunner.
>
> Is it not surprising that the designers of the Spitfire and other famous
> fighters never tried to fit a rear gun to their planes, in the light of
> the fact that the best way to destroy a fighter was from behind. Thus a rear
> gun would have been a good defensive weapon.
>
> In general, what were the advantages and disadvantages for having a rear gun
> or gunner in a WW2 fighter?
 The weight penalty was the biggest problem. again look at the Fulmar or the
Henly ( A Hawker competitor to the Fulmar that was based on the Hurricane)
Performance was much below single seaters. there was a short period in the late
20's or early 30's when some two seat fighters appeared and seemd to be popular
Grumman built the FF, The Hawker Demon  and Ospery, come to mind. The most
successful multiplace fighters were the ones that became night fighters
The Defiant served moderatly well in this role as did the Firefly (also a
'strike fighter') and the larger P-61, He-219, ME-110, etc. In tehese cses the
volume needed for the radar equipment as well as the desirability of having a
fulltime scope watcher justified the poorer performance of the heavier
airframe.

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.

Bob Smart ([email-masked])
> Johannes van Vuren,
> Canterbury, England.

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

End of WWII-L Digest - 19 Jan 1994 to 20 Jan 1994
*************************************************