Subject: WWII-L Digest - 9 Jan 1994 to 10 Jan 1994

From: Automatic digest processor <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 11 Jan 1994 00:00:16 -0500

There are 29 messages totalling 1108 lines in this issue.

Topics of the day:

  1. Gen. Vlasov (2)
  2. USAAF 10 JAN 44
  3. USAAF 4-9Jan44/ B-17 vs. B-24 question (6)
  4. B-17 vs B-24 (2)
  5. GEN: Charging Windmills (4)
  6. RUMOURED 1st Div. Conference 28-29 May 94 in Wheaton ... NOT!
  7. Coatney's academic launching. (?)  Please disseminate.
  8. David Irving
  9. Air: selected German targets (2)
 10. B-24 ditching trivia
 11. Code Breaking
 12. GEN: Doolittle Memorial Flight in April (3)
 13. Czechs and WWII
 14. Kate Ter Horst
 15. Carrying Bags
 16. [email-masked]

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

Date:    Mon, 10 Jan 1994 05:14:27 GMT
From:    Gudmundur Helgason <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Gen. Vlasov

Dear Mr. Bauer

        I just got your e-mail on Gen Vlassov and I do have some idea on
how to answer your 4. and last question. Vlassov has fascinated me in
the same way as the 4. Waffen SS unit 'Viking' has (they were volunteers
from Danmark, Norway, Belgium and Holland who joined the Waffen SS to
fight the Russian on the Eastern front). Vlassov was apparentlyy
captured near Prag by the U.S. forces and after short imprisonment he
was murdered (i.e. sent by air-mail to the Russian who of course
executed him for treason). This act of the US is disgusting (the did the
same thing to the few survivors of the Waffen SS unit 'Totankopf' who
were also killed by the Russians (best not to magine what happened to
them before their death). So, Vlassov was sent back to the Russians.

I hope this help, thank you and a greeting from Iceland!

Gudmundur Helgason

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

Date:    Mon, 10 Jan 1994 07:13:00 EST
From:    mc killop <[email-masked]>
Subject: USAAF 10 JAN 44

COMBAT CHRONOLOGY OF THE US ARMY AIR FORCES
MONDAY, 10 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-36, North American Apache
  B-17, Boeing Flying Fortress
  B-24, Consolidated Liberator
  B-25, North American Mitchell
  Beaufighter, Bristol
  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 Burma, 12 A-36's and P-51's hit a bivouac
area at Nanyaseik; and 15 P-40's attack a bridge at Namti, damaging railroad
tracks and the S approach to the bridge. During the night of 9/10 Jan, 7
B-24's lay mines in the Menam River estuary near Bangkok, Thailand and in the
Rangoon River estuary. B-24's during the day bomb marshalling yard and
airfield in the Bangkok area and hit the main jetty at Akyab, Burma. 9 B-25's
mine the Mokpalin, Burma ferry crossing over the Sittang River.
  315th Troop Carrier Squadron, Tenth Air Force, transfers from Dinjan to
Sylhet, India with C-47's.

  CHINA (Fourteenth Air Force): In China, 8 P-51's bomb the approach to the
Kienchang bridge and attack a troop train N of Teian damaging the train and
killing an estimated 100 soldiers; 3 B-25's and 8 P-40's sweep the area from
Anking to Chiuchiang, sinking a large motor launch, 2 100-ft (30.5 m) barges,
and a tug on the Yangtze River, and attacking a bridge at Teian and tracks S
of Chiuchiang; 2 B-25's and 4 P-40's attack shipping on the Yangtze River
near Wusueh, sinking a launch and leaving 3 tankers burning.
  491st Bombardment Squadron (Medium), 341st Bombardment Group (Medium),
transfers from Chakulia, India to Yangkai, China with B-25's.

EUROPEAN THEATER OF OPERATIONS (ETO)

  STRATEGIC OPERATIONS (Eighth Air Force): Mission 181: During the evening, 5
B-17's drop 4.8 million leaflets on Orleans, Chateauroux, Rouen, Le Mans and
Tours, France without loss.
  HQ 93d Combat Bombardment Wing (Heavy) transfers from Horsham St Faith to
Elveden Hall, England.

  TACTICAL OPERATIONS (Ninth Air Force): HQ 366th Fighter Group and 390th
Fighter Squadron arrives at Membury, England from the US with P-47's; first
mission is 14 Mar.
  71st, 72d, 73d and 74th Troop Carrier Squadrons, 434th Troop Carrier Group,
transfer from Welford Park to Fulbeck, England with C-47's.

MEDITERRANEAN THEATER OF OPERATIONS (MTO)

  STRATEGIC OPERATIONS (Fifteenth Air Force): B-17's bomb Sofia, Bulgaria
causing considerable damage in the marshalling yards. B-24's hit the
marshalling yard at Skoplje, Yugoslavia. P-38's and P-47's provide escort.
Around 60 Luftwaffe fighters attack the Sofia force and a fierce air battle
ensues; 2 B-17's are lost; they claim 28 aircraft shot down.

  TACTICAL OPERATIONS (Twelfth Air Force): In Italy, B-25's hit San Benedetto
de Marsi; P-40's, with Royal Air Force (RAF), South African Air Force (SAAF),
and Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF) airplanes, hit communications, gun
positions, trucks, and tanks at numerous points in and NW of the battle area;
other P-40's give close support to ground forces in the Chieti area; and
A-36's hit trucks, tanks, trains, and other targets of opportunity N of Rome.
  Transfers:
  HQ 47th Bombardment Group (Light) from Vincenzo Airfield to Vesuvius
Airfield, Italy.
  Air echelon of the 417th Night Fighter Squadron, Twelfth Air Force
(attached to RAF 337 Wing) from Tafaraoui to La Senia, Algeria with
Beaufighters; ground echelon is at Ghisonaccia, Corsica.

PACIFIC OCEAN AREA (POA, Seventh Air Force): In the Marshall Islands, 4
P-39's from Makin Island, Gilbert Islands strafe Mille Atoll; 1 of the
P-39's drops 2 500-lb (227 kg) bombs on the fuel storage area; during the
night of 10/11 Jan, 16 B-24's, staging through Tarawa Atoll, Gilbert Islands
from the Ellice Islands, bomb Maloelap Atoll; 4 others, staging through Baker
Island from Canton Island, Phoenix Islands, hit Mille Atoll.
  392d Bombardment Squadron (Heavy), 30th Bombardment Group (Heavy),
transfers from Canton Island to Abemama Island, Gilbert Islands with B-24's.

SOUTH PACIFIC AREA (SOPAC, Thirteenth Air Force): Major General Hubert R
Harmon, Commanding General, begins a heavy bomber campaign of night strikes.
5th Bombardment Group (Heavy) opens the night raids sending 20 B-24's on a
strike against Lakunai Airfield, New Britain Island after a morning raid by
10 B-24's against nearby Vunakanau airfield. 5 B-24's hit the Kahili supply
area, Bougainville Island while 4 hit the Chinatown area of Buka Island. AAF
and US Navy (USN) fighters cover a USN dive bomber strike against Cape Saint
George, New Ireland Island.

SOUTHWEST PACIFIC AREA (SWPA, Fifth Air Force): In New Guinea, 100+ heavy,
medium, and light bombers, and fighters attack the Madang, Alexishafen, and
Bogadjim areas and the coastline from Madang to Sio. P-39's strafe scattered
villages and barges on New Britain Island. B-25's bomb Koepang, Timor Island.
  Transfers to Nadzab New Guinea:
  33d Bombardment Squadron (Medium), 22d Bombardment Group (Medium), from
Dobodura with B-25's; squadron will be redesignated 33d Bombardment Squadron
(Heavy) on 3 Feb and transition to B-24's.
  69th Troop Carrier Squadron, 433d Troop Carrier Group, from Port Moresby
with C-47'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 them.  |
|  [email-masked]  |                       FDR              |
-------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Date:    Mon, 10 Jan 1994 07:38:46 EST
From:    "William B. Thacker" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: USAAF 4-9Jan44/ B-17 vs. B-24 question

LTC Crane writes:

>     The B-24 vs. B-17 debate has always been a hot one among airmen.

One author I read put it this way; the B-24 was a better "offensive"
bomber, since it carried more bombs and had a greater range; but the B-17
was a better "defensive" plane, with more armor and ability to absorb
punishment.  For instance, it was three times more likely to survive an
attempt to ditch than a B-24.

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

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

Date:    Mon, 10 Jan 1994 08:08:00 EST
From:    mc killop <[email-masked]>
Subject: B-17 vs B-24

>     I notice in the raid on Kiel that although B-17s outnumbered
>B-24s more than 3:1, losses were less than 2:1.
>
>     While I realize that some squadrons would be hit hard while
>others completely missed,
>
>     Would it be a fair generalization to say that the B-24 was
>more efficient in payload/range/etc., while the B-17 was more
>flyable/survivable?  (Those thin, tapering wings on the -24
>always raised my suspicions.)
>
>Lou Coatney, WIU
>
>     Input from everyone is welcome.  Bob Granvin, are you (still)

On the particular mission you mention, I believe that the B-24's
happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.

As far as the overall question of B-17 vs B-24, most people agree
that the B-24 could not take a hit in the wings and survive.  The
Davis wing gave the aircraft the range and ability to carry a great
load but could not sustain much damage.

-------------------------------------------------------------------
|  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, 10 Jan 1994 08:35:00 EST
From:    "W. C. (RUSTY) DIVENS" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: USAAF 4-9Jan44/ B-17 vs. B-24 question

Ernie Gann noted in "Fate is the Hunter" that the C-87 (B-24 transport
derivitave) "couldn't carry enough ice to chill a highball" owing to
the supercritical Davis wing.  Which brings the question of weather-
related losses.  I have yet to see any information on the totals of
aircraft lost to weather (either directly or indirectly) as opposed
to direct enemy fire.  Any thoughts?

Bill
[email-masked]

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

Date:    Mon, 10 Jan 1994 09:01:34 EST
From:    Charles Reace <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: USAAF 4-9Jan44/ B-17 vs. B-24 question

This converstation on the B24 vs. B17 survivability raises another
question in my mind.  It seems that with few -- if any -- exceptions all
the US fighters of WWII (both Army and Navy) were built to withstand
more damage than their opposition (and the other Allies, for that
matter [with the possible exception of the Soviets?]).

My question is:  was this the result of design requirements of the US
services, a general design philosophy of the manufacturers, or just a
result of the fact that the US had more raw materials and manufacturing
resources to spend on the *luxury* (sarcasm/irony) of protecting the
air crews.

Parenthetically yours,

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

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

Date:    Mon, 10 Jan 1994 09:27:29 EST
From:    Crane Conrad LTC <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: USAAF 4-9Jan44/ B-17 vs. B-24 question

>Ernie Gann noted in "Fate is the Hunter" that the C-87 (B-24 transport
>derivitave) "couldn't carry enough ice to chill a highball" owing to
>the supercritical Davis wing.  Which brings the question of weather-
>related losses.  I have yet to see any information on the totals of
>aircraft lost to weather (either directly or indirectly) as opposed
>to direct enemy fire.  Any thoughts?
>
>Bill
>[email-masked]
>

Bill,
     In Adolf Galland's superb THE FIRST AND THE LAST, he notes that German
fighters did not have instruments for blind flying or cockpit de-icers,
and pilots were not trained for bad weather conditions.  When they had to go up
and engage Allied bombers attacking through overcast in the winter, Luftwaffe
losses were "appalling."  He gives no numbers, though.
                                                  LTC Con Crane
                                                  USMA

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

Date:    Mon, 10 Jan 1994 08:39:41 -0600
From:    WILLIAM HUBER - SCDR <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: GEN: Charging Windmills

In your message of  7 Jan 1994 at 1158 CST, you write:
> Re Arnhem etc, nothing to do with the tactical debate but it just reminded
> me that 2nd half of 1993, the lady known as The Angel of Arnhem, can't remember
> her name, but she tended many wounded/dying soldiers,
> and is depicted in "A Bridge Too Far",  was tragically killed
> in a road accident as she walked near her home.
>
> smb
>

Kate ter Horst???  Really, what a drag.  She coached the actress
(Liv Ullman) that portrayed her in the movie (as did many of the
principal characters).  I had not heard of her death.

Bill Huber

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

Date:    Mon, 10 Jan 1994 15:43:52 +0100
From:    Emmanuel Gustin <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: B-17 vs B-24

> >     While I realize that some squadrons would be hit hard while
> >others completely missed,
> >
> >     Would it be a fair generalization to say that the B-24 was
> >more efficient in payload/range/etc., while the B-17 was more
> >flyable/survivable?  (Those thin, tapering wings on the -24
> >always raised my suspicions.)

It seems that while the B-24 was a little easier to fly at low and medium
altitudes, it was less stable and more difficult to fly at the higher
altitudes (above 20.000ft) at which most European bombardment missions
were flown.  The bombers depended on flying in close formations, "combat
boxes" for protective gunfire; the B-24 was less suitable for this. Thus
they were more vulnerable to fighter attack.  The service ceiling of the
B-24 was also lower.  (The B-17G had a higher service ceiling than any
other WWII four-engined bomber, with exception of the B-29.) This meant
that it would fly in the lower, more vulnerable parts of the formation.

The larger stability of the B-17 also meant that it was easier to bring
home with damaged control surfaces.  The B-17 may have been more rugged
than the B-24, but it tended to catch fire unpleasantly easy.  The B-24
had a higher cruise speed than the B-17; that made it very undesirable to
fly both aircraft on one attack, so the 8th AAF had to select one of both.

The B-24 was a later design and aerodynamically more efficient, but it
performance was only slightly better.  It had a twice as large bomb bay,
that allowed it to carry more bombs (but not that much to British
standards) and extra fuel tanks.  The B-24 was far more suitable for the
maritime patrol mission.  The longer range was also beneficial in the
Pacific; most missions there were flown at medium altitudes, were the B-24
was easier to handle. From some point in 1943, all B-17s were deliverd to
European units.

Emmanuel Gustin

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

Date:    Mon, 10 Jan 1994 09:30:33 -0600
From:    WILLIAM HUBER - SCDR <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Gen. Vlasov

In Richard's message of  9 Jan 1994 at 0414 CST, he writes:

> To Jon Stevens:  I found your posting very interesting and not long
> at all.  I would like to read more after your Break is over, either
> on the List, or direct.

> Regards.  Richard.
> --==oo00oo==--
> [email-masked]
> RFE/RL Inc
> Munich,Germany

Ditto that!  Good work.  All I had that mentioned Vlasov (correct
spelling - don't know where I got that 2nd "s") was David Irvings
book(s), _Hitler's War_.  In there all it says is that Vlasov was
captured and volunteered to lead an Army against Stalin.

Hitler didn't think much of Vlasov according to Irving.  He quotes
Hitler as having said something to effect: "What a swine that Vlasov
must be.  Stalin made him a General.  Everything he is he owes to
Stalin and now he bites the hand that fed him."

Irving goes on to say that Vlasov was seen as a more valuable
political tool than as a general because of the defection.

I was also wrong about the "Don Cossacks Badge".  It was established
for members of the 5th Don Cossacks, a unit that defected to the
Germans under the unit's commanding officer (a colonel).  There were
others that did the same thing.

Thanks Jon, cheers,    Bill Huber / [email-masked]

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

Date:    Mon, 10 Jan 1994 09:51:33 -0600
From:    WILLIAM HUBER - SCDR <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: GEN: Charging Windmills

In Peter's message of  7 Jan 1994 at 1526 CST, he wrote:

> Sorry to disagree with Mr. Huber, especially when I do not have all my
> sources to hand but....

God help us if I am taken as the last word on any given subject!  The
only reference I have with me is a German/English dictionary and my
memory is not what you would call infallible.  That alzheimers is a
bummer :-/

Thanks for the updates, Peter and Jon.

Cheers, Bill Huber / [email-masked]

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

Date:    Mon, 10 Jan 1994 16:51:44 +0100
From:    Emmanuel Gustin <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: USAAF 4-9Jan44/ B-17 vs. B-24 question

On Mon, 10 Jan 1994, Charles Reace wrote:
>
> My question is:  was this the result of design requirements of the US
> services, a general design philosophy of the manufacturers, or just a
> result of the fact that the US had more raw materials and manufacturing
> resources to spend on the *luxury* (sarcasm/irony) of protecting the
> air crews.

It had several reasons. The most important one is that many US aircraft
were designed with European combat experience in mind; the US could afford
to put new types in production because it was not yet at war -- for
Germany or Britain the delays involved in bringing major redesigns or new
types to the production lines were often unacceptable. Armour plating,
self-sealing fuel tanks, and other inventions could be incorporated in US
designs. The tactical experience was important too; Japanese fighter
designs were optimized for maneuvrability, but in Europe it was quickly
learnt that many things are more important than dogfighting ability.

Another important factor is the US use of large radial engines. These were
more powerful than liquid-cooled contemporaries and far better resisitant
to combat damage, but consumed more fuel and were bulkier. Thus it was
natural too build a big fighter (F6F, P-47) around them, with room for
ample fuel, armour and armament. Pre-war fighter fighter designs often
were the smallest, lightest airframe that could be built around a certain
engine; for the P&W R-2800, that is a quite sizeable airframe.

Emmanuel Gustin

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

Date:    Mon, 10 Jan 1994 09:52:32 -0600
From:    "Robert J. Granvin" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: USAAF 4-9Jan44/ B-17 vs. B-24 question

In message World War II Discussion List writes:
> This converstation on the B24 vs. B17 survivability raises another
> question in my mind.  It seems that with few -- if any -- exceptions all
> the US fighters of WWII (both Army and Navy) were built to withstand
> more damage than their opposition (and the other Allies, for that
> matter [with the possible exception of the Soviets?]).
>
> My question is:  was this the result of design requirements of the US
> services, a general design philosophy of the manufacturers, or just a
> result of the fact that the US had more raw materials and manufacturing
> resources to spend on the *luxury* (sarcasm/irony) of protecting the
> air crews.

Oof.  Without trying to sound melodramatic or starting to stereotype, the
U.S. (Allied in general) philosophy was very often centered around the
economics of protecting your investment.  Airplanes can be replaced very
quickly (in reality they could -- it may have never worked that way in the
field, of course... :-).  Pilots take a long time to train and be ready and
you don't want to be left with nothing but inexperienced pilots.

The flipside of the coin is weight.  The Japanese didn't employ much armor or
even self-sealing tanks.  This made the aircraft lighter, faster and more
nimble.  The arguments here are just as valid... if you give the pilot an
EDGE, they have a better chance of surviving.

So much of the philosophy boils down to:

1) Do you try and protect the pilot by increasing protection at the cost of
   speed, payload and/or range or
2) Do you try and protect the pilot by increasing his odds of surviving an
   engagement through better performance?

In the end, it more or less boils down to your mission and resources...  You
may not even know which theory is the better one until the war is over.

For example, in Europe, if many sacrifices in aircraft design and/or pilot and
crew protection were made, could fighters have escorted the bombers earlier,
or would the bombers have been more effective with a larger payload?  But if
so, what would the cost be?  Would you actually lose more aircrew through the
increased ability to fly but decreased ability to absorb damage?

Again it boils down to perspective.  I have no doubts the B-17 crews would have
given almost anything to have fighter escort a year earlier, but I'm sure the
fighter pilots were happy to wait for aircraft that gave them a better chance
to stay in the air, fight and then make it home...

--
Robert J. Granvin                                             [email-masked]
University of Minnesota, School of Statistics

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

Date:    Mon, 10 Jan 1994 16:04:00 GMT
From:    Stephen Baldwin <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: GEN: Charging Windmills

>       In your message of  7 Jan 1994 at 1158 CST, you write:
>       > Re Arnhem etc, nothing to do with the tactical debate but it just reminded
>       > me that 2nd half of 1993, the lady known as The Angel of Arnhem, can't remembe
>       r
>       > her name, but she tended many wounded/dying soldiers,
>       > and is depicted in "A Bridge Too Far",  was tragically killed
>       > in a road accident as she walked near her home.
>       >
>       > smb
>       >
>
>       Kate ter Horst???  Really, what a drag.  She coached the actress
>       (Liv Ullman) that portrayed her in the movie (as did many of the
>       principal characters).  I had not heard of her death.
>
>       Bill Huber
Bill,
I've only been "spectating" on this debate and have deleted previous
entries so apologies if you've said all this before, but what is
your interest in this subject? Are you a veteran?

steve

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

"I call on Fred Jarvis to ask his members to stand ready to sit down.
That would be a giant step forward" / caller on phone-in radio program

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

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

Date:    Sat, 8 Jan 1994 21:23:35 -0600
From:    [email-masked]
Subject: RUMOURED 1st Div. Conference 28-29 May 94 in Wheaton ... NOT!

I think I forwarded (from seeing it on the new UK mil hist net) the
  announcement about this.

Unfortunately, the folks at the 1st Div Museum at Cantigny Woods in
  Wheaton (Illinois) know nothing about this (!!), except that a
  similar conference was held last year.

Hmmmmmm.  The rust buckets across the Atlantic must be slow indeed!

So, please disregard that annoucement (while I investigate).

Lou Coatney, WIU

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

Date:    Sat, 8 Jan 1994 21:15:39 -0600
From:    [email-masked]
Subject: Coatney's academic launching. (?)  Please disseminate.

At the risk of appearing immodest -- or at least incorrigible -- I
  am attaching my resume.  I'd like to try teaching history -- maybe
  in a community/junior college at the outset -- preferably at an
  institution providing Bitnet/Internet access.

I do realize how scarce such opportunities are, but please stop
  guffawing long enough to consider how deadly quiet/bland my
  favorite nets may become, were they to have NO COATNEY.  (Or DO I
  want you considering that?  (-:  )

ANY assistance (including advice on improving the resume) will be
  appreciated.  Here goes:

                               RESUME
Louis R. COATNEY                                   626 Western Ave.
[email-masked]                        Macomb IL 61455
                                                   309/836-1447

OBJECTIVE:  To teach history and historical thinking.

EDUCATION:
  MA in History, Dec93, WIU:  3.8 (out of possible 4.0) GPA
      Fields:  Modern Europe and U.S. (Military/Diplomatic)
    Thesis topic:  Significance to the West of the Katyn Massacre
    Initiated (for general scholarship) into Phi Kappa Phi, Apr92,
        and Phi Alpha Theta, Dec91
  MS in Library Science, Aug73, Univ. of Illinois/Champaign/Urbana
  BA in Philosophy, May72, Augustana College (Rock Island, Illinois)
    (Also: Knox Coll., Sep65-Mar66, and U.S. Mil. Acad., Jul64-Jan65)
  Rock Island Senior High School, Class of 1964

PUBLICATION:
  "A New Library Patron:  The Systemwide User."  ILLINOIS LIBRARIES
      75 (May93:  Library Cooperation):  240-42.
  A PLACE FOR GAMES AND SIMULATIONS IN ACADEMIC LIBRARIES:  ARE THEY
      DIGESTIBLE?  ERIC Document ED 330 339.  1990.
  "Best Laid Plans . . . ASPIN and the Quest for Total Depository
      Collection of Alaska State Publications."  ILLINOIS LIBRARIES
      71 (Nov89:  Accessing Government Documents):  457-62.
  GERMAN EAGLE VS. RUSSIAN BEAR:  A WORLD WAR II RUSSIAN FRONT BOARD-
      GAME KIT.  ED 287 786.  1987.  (2d ed. to be republished 1994)
  Various library education handouts, etc.

EXPERIENCE:
  Teaching:
    Library research skills instruction classes, Jan89-present
    "Campaigns of World War II," Juneau-Douglas (Alaska) Comm. Coll.
        1976(?)
  Librarianship:
    Western Illinois University Library, Jan89-present
      Reference librarian, Jan89-present
      Part-time:  Quad Cities Library Services Coordinator, Sum92-
          Oct92;  WIU Map Librarian, Sum91-Sum92;  Government
          Publications, Jan89-Sum91
    Alaska State Library, Juneau, Sep73-Jan89
  U.S. Army, volunteer/draftee, Jan67-Jan69:  West Texas and Germany

ACTIVITIES, SERVICE, ORGANIZATIONS:
  WIU (Student-Faculty) Council on Student Welfare (CSW), 1991-pres.
  WIU Chess Club Faculty Advisor, 1990-present
  World War II Studies Association (formerly, American Committee on
      the History of the Second World War), 1986-present
  North Central Association High School Accreditation Team (evalu-
      ating Rock Island Senior High School library), Nov92
  Various Internet forums: MILHST-L, WWII-L, CONSIM-L, H-DIPLO, IACRL
  Contributor, MAGAZINES FOR LIBRARIES (1994)
  Various library committees, organizations

LANGUAGES:  Some German, a little French, less Russian

INTERESTS:
  Military and naval history and gaming, classical music, chess,
      Alaska, general reading, sailing, jogging.

REFERENCES:
  Prof. Nicholas Pano, Associate Dean of Arts and Sciences and
      (Soviet and Eastern Europe) History professor, WIU,
      309/298-1828
  Dr. Sterling Kernek, (Diplomatic) History professor, WIU,
      309/298-1350
  Dr. Daniel Wise, Chair, Geography Department, WIU, 309/298-1648

                          * * * * * * *

I might add that I enjoy people and helping them learn.  Also, I have
  a personal, living memory of the important events of post-1950
  history, while maintaining/nurturing a somewhat independent and
  original mind about them.

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

Date:    Mon, 10 Jan 1994 16:26:09 GMT
From:    Stephen Baldwin <[email-masked]>
Subject: David Irving

Bill Huber writes...

>       Ditto that!  Good work.  All I had that mentioned Vlasov (correct
>       spelling - don't know where I got that 2nd "s") was David Irvings
>       book(s), _Hitler's War_.  In there all it says is that Vlasov was
>       captured and volunteered to lead an Army against Stalin.
>
>       Hitler didn't think much of Vlasov according to Irving.  He quotes
>       Hitler as having said something to effect: "What a swine that Vlasov
>       must be.  Stalin made him a General.  Everything he is he owes to
>       Stalin and now he bites the hand that fed him."
I'm interested to see David Irving quoted. He is presumably the
same chap who denies the Holocaust but has admitted recently
that it *may* have happened? I don't think his views on the
Holocaust are held in much esteem by most professional historians
as far as I can ascertain.
What about his views on other subjects?

steve baldwin
[email-masked]

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

"...and Janet Reger talks about the ups and downs of the ladies
underwear business..." / Trailer for "Woman's Hour" radio programme

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

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

Date:    Mon, 10 Jan 1994 10:31:34 -0600
From:    WILLIAM HUBER - SCDR <[email-masked]>
Subject: Air: selected German targets

In Lou's message of  7 Jan 1994 at 1611 CST, he wrote:

(regarding B-17s and B-24s)

>      While I realize that some squadrons would be hit hard while
> others completely missed,

This jogged a couple of synapses and dislodged a story that was told
to me while attending the reunion of the 450th Bombardment Squadron
(Heavy) which flew B-24s out of Manduria, Italy.  The story points
out what Lou was saying perfectly about unit losses.

The 450th flew missions all over Italy, Yugoslavia, Austria, Germany,
Rumania and others.  On one of these missions a B-24 developed engine
problems while en route to a target and two of its engines had conked
out.  Returning to Manduria the lone plane was jumped by German
fighters.  Realizing that they were going to get shot down they
signalled their intent to surrender by putting down their landing
gear at which the Germans stopped shooting and formed up with three
fighters around the plane, one front and one on either wing.

The copilot managed to clear the problem with the engines and with
all four going they decided that they would make a break for home.
The pilot notified the crew of the plan and at the specified moment
the gunners all opened up on the German escort two of whom went down.
One got away and reported the incident.  The B-24 made it home.

Over the radio the "Berlin Bitch" (as they called her) began
broadcasting messages to the 450th about how the Luftwaffe was gonna
be looking for them.  The 450th had distinctive tail markings that
consisted of the stabilizers having a diagonal sinister with the
lower half painted white.  This bought them the name "Cotton Tails"
and gave the Germans easily identifiable targets when they formed
with other squadrons to fly missions.

This is just what happened.  According to members of the 450th, they
were singled out from long bomber formations for fighter attack.
The Germans never forgot that incident and attacked the 450th at
every opportunity to the end of the war.

Cheers,  Bill Huber / [email-masked]

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

Date:    Mon, 10 Jan 1994 11:25:09 -0400
From:    "Dennis E. Sparks" <[email-masked]>
Subject: B-24 ditching trivia

As Bill Thacker mentioned, ditching at sea was a much more risky
proposition in a B-24 than in a B-17.  One of the reasons was that
the B-24 had larger and comparatively more flimsy bomb bay doors,
which usually collapsed upon contact with the sea.  A few months
ago, I had the opportunity to tour the USAF Museum's B-24D
"Strawberry Bitch".  Laying in the bomb bays were curved pieces of
wood, apparently cut from 2x10s.  They were stenciled to indicate
that they were to be used to brace the bomb bay doors for ditching.

Also, the B-17 had broad, low-mounted wings, while the B-24's wings
were mounted high on the fuselage.  When a B-17 ditched, the wings
could take the brunt of the impact, while a B-24 landed on its belly.

Dennis E. Sparks
[email-masked]
Lexington, Kentucky

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

Date:    Mon, 10 Jan 1994 12:29:00 EST
From:    mc killop <[email-masked]>
Subject: Code Breaking

For those of you in the US and Canada, the Public Broadcasting Station
in New York City broadcast previews of upcoming 1994 shows over the
weekend.  One of the programs (I think it will be NOVA) will cover code
breaking during World War II.  There were no dates or dates given; it
will probably vary by PBS station anyway.  However, if you happen to
see it listed locally, you may want to broadcast it so we could all
check our local listings for the show.

-------------------------------------------------------------------
|  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, 10 Jan 1994 12:00:25 CST
From:    "Robert J. Granvin" <[email-masked]>
Subject: GEN: Doolittle Memorial Flight in April

Just as a bit of info, there is a plan to put together a special flight
of B-25s at this year's Doolittle Raider's Reunion in Pebble Beach,
California.  The flight is intended to pay respects to General Doolittle,
who passed away last year.

The goal is definitely sky high!  There are about 34 flyable B-25s in
existence.  Of those, about 28 (or fewer) are in some sort of flying
condition.  Some of those are not in the United States.

The desire/dream/goal is to put together a flight of 16 B-25s one last
time and provide an escort of 8 P-51s.

If this happens, it will be a spectacular site on April 16th in California.

To give an idea of how difficult this will be, we very much wish to attend
this reunion, even if nothing else happens.  We flew the memorial salute
to Doolittle during his funeral at Arlington National Cemetery and would
like to complete the mission with a trip to the other coast to pay respect
to the rest of the crews.

Even though we are in the midwest, the cost for fuel and oil alone will
require approximately $8,500.  Minimum.  That will give you an idea of the
potential costs involved in bringing a B-25 from the East Coast, like
Panchito.  This includes minimal flying, no unexpected expenses, no lodging,
food, etc.

If you're in or near Pebble Beach in April, you might want to check this
out and see what has come together.  The sight of even three B-25s today
is stunning.  The thought of 16 is breath-taking...

On the other hand, if you know a sponsor who would like to help send a
couple of B-25s to this, we'd certainly like to hear about them!  (What
would the cost per person be on the mailing list to support a B-25 flight
to California...?  :-) :-)

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

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

Date:    Mon, 10 Jan 1994 13:36:31 GMT-6
From:    Terry Moore <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: GEN: Charging Windmills

Date sent:      Mon, 10 Jan 1994 08:39:41 -0600
Send reply to:  World War II Discussion List <[email-masked]>
From:           WILLIAM HUBER - SCDR <[email-masked]>
Subject:        Re: GEN: Charging Windmills
Originally to:  [email-masked]
To:             Multiple recipients of list WWII-L <[email-masked]>

Bill and others,

The name Kate ter Horst does strike chord! What a waste, and, as Bill
states, she did coach Liv Ullmann in that movie. In fact, there was
much physical resemblance. How terrible! Such an ignominious way to
go, after all she had been through.

Thanks for the post.

Terry

----------------------------------------------------------------------
In your message of  7 Jan 1994 at 1158 CST, you write:
> Re Arnhem etc, nothing to do with the tactical debate but it just reminded
> me that 2nd half of 1993, the lady known as The Angel of Arnhem, can't remembe
r
> her name, but she tended many wounded/dying soldiers,
> and is depicted in "A Bridge Too Far",  was tragically killed
> in a road accident as she walked near her home.
>
> smb
>

Kate ter Horst???  Really, what a drag.  She coached the actress
(Liv Ullman) that portrayed her in the movie (as did many of the
principal characters).  I had not heard of her death.

Bill Huber

Terry Moore, Professor of German and French, Amarillo College
P.O. Box 447, Amarillo, Texas 79178, voice 806-371-5077
fax 806-371-5370

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

Date:    Mon, 10 Jan 1994 14:49:13 EST
From:    Ken Koester <[email-masked]>
Subject: GEN: Doolittle Memorial Flight in April

>On the other hand, if you know a sponsor who would like to help send a
>couple of B-25s to this, we'd certainly like to hear about them!  (What
>would the cost per person be on the mailing list to support a B-25 flight
>to California...?  :-) :-)
>
>Robert J. Granvin                                    Southern Minnesota Wing
>[email-masked]                                       Confederate Air Force

Well, are you tax-deductible? (-:

ken koester
maint2@bitnet

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

Date:    Mon, 10 Jan 1994 14:44:51 GMT-6
From:    Terry Moore <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Czechs and WWII

George,

Here is the info you requested.

Mr. O. Kusera
Renneska 42
BRNO 63900

Sorry to have taken so long to get this to you but I have had trouble
with your e-mail address, and will post it to the list in the hope
that you will receive it.

It may take several attempts, but someone there will answer you. To
my knowledge, he is still living.

Please let me know, if there is anything else I can do to help you.

Thanks, and hope this helps.

Terry

Terry Moore, Professor of German and French, Amarillo College
P.O. Box 447, Amarillo, Texas 79178, voice 806-371-5077
fax 806-371-5370

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

Date:    Mon, 10 Jan 1994 16:39:20 EST
From:    Doug McCabe <[email-masked]>
Subject: Kate Ter Horst

                   Ohio University Electronic Communication

   Date:  10-Jan-1994 04:35pm EST

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

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

Subject:  Kate Ter Horst

    It is sadly true that Kate and her husband, Jan, were both killed by an
    automobile just outside of their home while taking a walk.  I do not
    have the date at hand but I'll try to get it from a vp here at OU.
    He's Dutch, lived through the battle, and introduced Kate and Liv
    Ullman on the set for the filming of "A Bridge Too Far."

    Doug McCabe
    [email-masked]

Received:  10-Jan-1994 04:39pm

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

Date:    Mon, 10 Jan 1994 16:59:55 EST
From:    Doug McCabe <[email-masked]>
Subject: Carrying Bags

                   Ohio University Electronic Communication

   Date:  10-Jan-1994 04:41pm EST

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

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

Subject:  Carrying Bags

    While it would be great fun having someone carry my bags to Holland, I
    am under strict orders to leave the women at home. ;-)

    I am also ordered to only take one suitcase - travelin' light or we
    don't trust baggage - and I'm wondering if I should be sure it can
    double as a floatation device.  (Like anyone could survive longer than
    90 seconds in either the Atlantic or the North Sea this time of year.)

    Doug

Received:  10-Jan-1994 04:59pm

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

Date:    Mon, 10 Jan 1994 16:42:48 CST
From:    "Robert J. Granvin" <[email-masked]>
Subject: GEN: Doolittle Memorial Flight in April

> >On the other hand, if you know a sponsor who would like to help send a
> >couple of B-25s to this, we'd certainly like to hear about them!  (What
> >would the cost per person be on the mailing list to support a B-25 flight
> >to California...?  :-) :-)
> >
> >Robert J. Granvin                                    Southern Minnesota Wing
> >[email-masked]                                       Confederate Air Force
>
> Well, are you tax-deductible? (-:

But of course we are.  501(c)(3) and all that stuff.

(And no, I can't stop you from dating a check 1993, even though I have to
tell you the IRS takes a dim view of that... :-)

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

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

Date:    Mon, 10 Jan 1994 18:50:00 EST
From:    Carl Wernke <[email-masked]>
Subject: [email-masked]

 Subject: EDU:RE: CARL-MOTIVES? THE PEARL HARBOR PAPERS--BUSHIDO SPIRIT 1 OF 3
 X-TO: [email-masked]
 TO: MULTIPLE RECIPIENTS OF LIST WWII-L ([email-masked])

 Lou, Dan, Bill, et al.,

 Part one and part two of three, for some reason, did not make it through to
 the net. On 9 Jan, part one was acknowledged and duplicated. Consequently,
 I am once again reposting the  first two parts of "Carl-Motives?" "The
 Bushido Spirit," endeavoring to answer Lou and et al's questions. "Don't
 Give Up the Ship," etc.

 In 1921, when Mitsuo Fuchida entered the Japanese naval academy at Etajima, he
 stated the navy was already indoctrinating its future officers with the idea
 that "The potential enemy is America." Both Minoru Genda and Fuchida were
 indoctrinated on this precept, and both became leaders for the promotion and
 advancement of the Imperial Japanese Navy Air Arm, suported by the influence
 of ADM Isoroku Yamamoto.

 If there was going to be a war, as a loyal Japanese naval officer, ADM
 Yamamoto considered the problem of war against the United States. Just as the
 U.S.Navy had its Plan Orange, which envisioned a war against Japan, so the
 Japanese had their Kantai Kessen Plan, or decisive battle plan. They expected
 the U.S.Pacific Fleet to steam out from San Diego, heading west, preparing
 to attack Japan in Asian waters. First of all, Japanese submarines would find
 and harass the American fleet by constant attacks, destroying as many capital
 ships as possible. Then someplace favorable to Japan, where the navy could
 employ its major fleet elements, the sea battle would be joined. The Americans
 would be defeated, and Japan would  control the Asian seas.

 But as 1940 came to an end, it became obvious that the problem was not so
 simple.

 Yamamoto was then evolving his own war plan, which he based on the
 practicalities as he knew them. He told the Imperial Palace that the size of
 the Combined Fleet ought to be doubled, the number of carriers increased, and
 the number of planes more than doubled.

 When the United States split its fleet in 1940 and created the Pacific Fleet
 at the forward base of Pearl Harbor, ADM Yamamoto saw both danger and
 opportunity. The new base gave the Americans a major advantage, but it also
 concentrated the American Pacific Fleet in one small basin, where under
 certain conditions it would be very vulnerable.

 The lesson of Taranto came back to Yamamoto that fall (November 1940). He
 began talking to RADM Fukudome, then his chief of staff, and more and more
 often mentioned Pearl Harbor. By the end of the year, an idea had gotten into
 his head. Yamamoto was convinced that aerial torpedoes would play a big part
 in any new war. This was all new doctrine, and in retrospect it seems almost
 incredible that ADM Yamamoto could have persuaded his naval peers, most of
 them battleship men by training, to accept all these innovations in so short a
 time as the fall of 1939 until the winter of 1941.

 Yamamoto was an excellent leader, but many younger officers were of the same
 mind. To understand why  this was important, one must realize that in the
 Japanese naval system, staff officers -- bright young "Brains" as they were
 called by commanders -- were given an enormous amount of authority. The
 commanders always had the responsibility, but his willingness to delegate
 authority to his staff was quite unlike anything of the sort in any other
 navy. Thus you had commanders and lieutenant commanders of the navy exerting
 major policy influence at the fleet level. One such commander was Minoru
 Genda, who did much of the detailed planning work for the attack on Pearl
 Harbor. He also was the architect of a  plan to reorganize the navy so that
 the carrier attack force became all powerful. The doctrine here was to mass
 the carriers and mass the attack. It would work very well at Pearl Harbor and
 at Trincomalee, as well as down in the south pacific in the early days of the
 war, but it would fail at Midway and cost the Japanese very dearly. This was
 not because the danger was forgotten at the Combined Fleet level --at Midway
 the striking force would be warned to spread out -- but the striking force
 would not listen to orders -- once again, this independence was
 characteristic of the Japanese navy, an indication, perhaps,  of a reason that
 doctrinal changes did not seem so difficult as with other navies.

 End of part one -- continued on part two.

  CARL WERNKE
  [email-masked]

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

Date:    Tue, 11 Jan 1994 00:20:20 GMT
From:    Gudmundur Helgason <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Air: selected German targets

Regarding the story of the 450th bomber squadron:

        The Germans were quite right in sigle them out for that
incident. You dont signal surrender and then attack you captors and
expect no retaliations from them. If this were done by many then the act
of surrender would mean nothing and surrendering parties would simply be
shot down.

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

End of WWII-L Digest - 9 Jan 1994 to 10 Jan 1994
************************************************