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

From: Automatic digest processor <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 21 May 1994 00:02:26 -0400

There are 40 messages totalling 1736 lines in this issue.

Topics of the day:

  1. MONTY AND D-DAY
  2. Monty and D Day (2)
  3. Monty & Armour (2)
  4. INF: USAAF 20-22 MAY 44
  5. Armour
  6. NOST: Virginia D-Day Event
  7. INF: Regia Marina, Part 1
  8. SCI (Psyops WWII) (3)
  9. Mussolini
 10. TAC: River Platte (Graf Spee)
 11. Nazis - left or right?
 12. [TRIV] Police Dogs and Victory Cabbages
 13. [TAC] Russo-Japanese Border Clashes (4)
 14. Air Power in Southwest Pacific
 15. INFO ME 410 and B-24
 16. TRV: QUESTION REGARDING DEATH OF GENERAL STUMPFF
 17. Anglo-American ArmoUr deficient?
 18. TRIV:  Spam
 19. NPR looking for historian: Norman Inv.
 20. REF: Claim about Pacfic/Battle of the Bulge causulaties (2)
 21. INF: Regia Marina, Part 3
 22. P-61B (3)
 23. UK Bullion Goes to Canada after the fall of France (4)
 24. cOMPUTER GAMES
 25. First word on the Zero
 26. NOST: 50 years ago this week
 27. Library of Congress Online.

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

Date:    Fri, 20 May 1994 14:07:31 +0200
From:    John Ausland <[email-masked]>
Subject: MONTY AND D-DAY

  Oslo, May 20.
  I found Stephen Baldwin's contribution on Monty and D-Day extremely
interesting.  Two comments:
  1.  The initial breakout from the bridgehead was made by the VII Corps of
Bradley's First Army, with an assist from the air forces, in Operation Cobra, on
July 25, not by Patton's Third Army.  The breakthrough at Avranches came later,
and the army was not actually activated until August 1.  After that, Patton's
exploitation of the breakthroughs was brilliant.
  2.  The argument of the broadfront versus the narrow thrust, which the British
like so much, is not very useful.  We can never know what would have happened
had the Marshall/Eisenhower strategy not prevailed.  The reality is that Allied
forces captured the territory assigned to them by the politicians and destroyed
the German Army.  What little evidence there is regarding the thrust, Market-
Garden, was not encouraging.
  3.  If there are to be any regrets, they should be that the generals spent so
much time fighting with each other.  One must expect differences of opinion,
particularly among prima donnas, but they overdid it.  Had they been paying
closer attention, our forces might have been a bit more prepared for the German
winter offensive.  I have in mind such important details as the failure to see
that bridges were mined and that artillery were placed well back of the front,
as doctrine requires they be when on the defensive.  The Germans still would
have made a penetration but perhaps not as deep and with fewer casualties on our
side.
  Regards, John Ausland/Oslo Norway

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

Date:    Fri, 20 May 1994 08:56:54 BST
From:    Stephen Baldwin <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Monty and D Day

Dan.Ford and me write...
SMB>    > - he repeated what is widely known - that Monty was a loner, had
SMB>    >   a very strict upbringing, and was rather an abrasive chap.
SMB>    > - he is criticised in the US for being too cautious (compared with "Ol
SMB>    >   Blood and Guts"), and rather rude.
DAN>    David Eisenhower in *Eisenhower* frequently has occasion to point out
DAN>    that the obsession with casualties was general throughout the British
DAN>    high command, including Churchill, and not limited to Montgomery. In part
DAN>    because Britain had been at war longer, in part because she was still
DAN>    traumatized by the bloodletting of 1914-1918, and in part because of a
DAN>    cold calculation that if she was to play any part in the postwar world
DAN>    she had conserve resources.
DAN>

DAN>    Eisenhower by contrast had sent comparatively few men to their deaths.
Well, as far as I know, Eisenhower played no part in WWI
(at least he never fought in Europe during that time.) Looking
at the two wars on a casualty count, more died and were maimed in WWI
than in WWII - and WWII was half as long again as WWI.
 We are discussing this a bit
on WWI-L at present...I have wondered whether US tactics would have been
different had they experienced 2 or three years of the static trench
warfare on the Western Front 1914-18 that affected Britain and France...

SMB>    > The D Day expedition was Britain's last great military feat, and
SMB>    > _on the actual day of the landings_, contrary to what one might
SMB>    > expect with all the current celebrations and remembrances,
SMB>    > "other" forces outnumbered the US contingent. (He quoted 57,000 US
SMB>    > personnel v 75,000 British, Canadian etc if my memory serves me correctly).
DAN>    I don't know about D-Day especially, but residents of the UK were a
DAN>    minority of "British" forces in most theaters of WWII. There were five
DAN>    divisions in the first assault wave: one U.S., a composite U.S.
DAN>    division, one Canadian division, and two British divisions. So right away
DAN>    you have a minority of UK divisions. (Even in 1944 the Canadians would
DAN>    not wanted to have been included as British.) And I will bet there were
DAN>    significant numbers of "Empire" troops, especially Indian, in those two
DAN>    British divisions.
Which is why I _specifically_ omitted mention of soley UK forces :-)
(or at least mentioned the Brits along with the Canadians and the rest).
As for "significant numbers" of other troops, "it all depends on the
significance of significance" ((c) Sir Humphrey in 'Yes Minister')
I would think (without having any figures) that there would have been
very few indian & "eastern empire" troops, what with the japanese
comings and goings in the far east...
My main point was that _on the actual day of the landings_ US
forces were in the minority. Confusion may be present due to the fact
that all nationalities adopted the US White Star on vehicles etc.
to avoid confusion in identifying everyone...

steve baldwin
[email-masked]

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

Date:    Fri, 20 May 1994 10:19:35 BST
From:    Stephen Baldwin <[email-masked]>
Subject: Monty & Armour

Ladies and Gentlemen!

Thanks for the replies to my earlier posts....

One point I omitted to mention from Alistair Horne's lecture, is that
he mentioned that his new book sets out in one chapter, a statement that
part of Monty's caution was borne of his lack of faith in his armour.

It is true is it not, that having initially developed the Tank, the Brits
failed to come up with the goods in WWII. Even the most casual historian
of the period knows of Shermans, T34s, Tigers, Panthers etc. but nothing
produced in this country rose above the mediocre. Has anyone else read
of similar thoughts regarding Monty's views of his own armour capabilities?

steve baldwin
[email-masked]

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

Date:    Fri, 20 May 1994 07:58:00 EDT
From:    mc killop <[email-masked]>
Subject: INF: USAAF 20-22 MAY 44

COMBAT CHRONOLOGY OF THE US ARMY AIR FORCES
20-22 MAY 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
  UC-64, Noorduyn Norseman
  CG-4, Waco Haig (Hadrian)
  F-3, Douglas Havoc
  F-5, Lockheed Lightning
  L-1, Stinson Vigilant
  L-5, Stinson Sentinel
  P-38, Lockheed Lightning
  P-39, Bell Airacobra
  P-40, Curtiss
  P-47, Republic Thunderbolt
  P-51, North American Mustang
  Vengeance, Vultee

SATURDAY, 20 MAY 1944

CHINA-BURMA-INDIA (CBI) THEATER OF OPERATIONS

  BURMA-INDIA (Tenth Air Force): In Burma, 100+ A-36s, P-40s and P-51s pound
gun positions, attack bridges, bomb troops and hit numerous targets of
opportunity in areas around Myitkyina, Kamaing, Nanyaseik, and Nsopzup; 16
Royal Air Force (RAF) Vengeances and 2 P-38s hit targets in the Arakan area,
including a signal center SE of Buthidaung, gun positions SE of Maungdaw and
a jetty at Akyab; about 40 B-24s and P-51s hit oil installations at
Yenangyaung and Chauk, airfield at Pakokku, and town of Akyab. In India, HQ
1st Air Commando Group moves from Hailakandi to Asansol, India; the group
consists of the following sections:  bomber (B-25s), fighter (P-51s), light-
plane (L-1 & L-5), transport (C-47), glider (CG-4) and light-cargo (UC-64);
the bomber section is eliminated and after converting from P-51s to P-47s,
the group begins a training program; a detachment of 9th Photographic
Reconnaissance Squadron, 8th Photographic Reconnaissance Group, operating
from Dinjan since Sep 43 returns to base at Barrackpore with F-5s.

  CHINA (Fourteenth Air Force): In China, 19 B-24s attack a convoy S of Hong
Kong claiming 2 motor launches sunk and damaging several larger vessels; 3
B-24s are lost at sea; 37 P-40s hit trucks, armored vehicles, river traffic
and troops in or near Shasi, Ichang, Tangyang, Chingmen, Loyang and Loning;
on the Salween front 43 fighters and 8 B-25s support ground forces and damage
a bridge N of Tengchung over the Shweli River.

EUROPEAN THEATER OF OPERATIONS (ETO)

  STRATEGIC OPERATIONS (Eighth Air Force): Mission 359: 638 bombers and 657
fighters are dispatched to hit targets in France and Belgium; 2 bombers and 4
fighters are lost; AAF claims 2-0-1 Luftwaffe aircraft in the air and 1-0-1
on the ground:
  1. 190 B-17s are dispatched to bomb Orly Airfield (90 bomb) and
Villacoublay Air Depot (73 bomb) in France; 4 B-17s are damaged beyond repair
and 48 damaged; 20 airmen are KIA and 6 WIA.
  2. 125 of 177 B-24s bomb Reims Airfield and marshalling yard in France; 5
B-24s are damaged.
  3. 271 B-17s and B-24s are dispatched to marshalling yards at Liege and
Brussels, Belgium but the mission is abandoned due to heavy cloud cover; 2
bombers are lost, 4 damaged beyond repair and 41 damaged; 17 airmen are KIA,
16 WIA and 17 MIA.
  Escort is provided by 146 P-38s, 177 P-47s and 334 P-51s; P-38s claim 2-0-1
Luftwaffe aircraft in the air and 1-0-1 on the ground; 1 P-38, 1 P-47 and 2
P-51s are lost; 5 P-38s are damaged; 4 pilots are MIA.

  TACTICAL OPERATIONS (Ninth Air Force): Around 450 B-26s attack airfields,
coastal defenses, and V-weapon site in France; about 250 aborts are caused
mainly by bad cloud conditions and failure to rendezvous with fighters. P-47s
dive-bomb targets in NW Europe.
  423d Night Fighter Squadron, 10th Photographic Group (Reconnaissance),
moves from Chormy Down to Chalgrove, England with F-3s and A-20s; the 423d
will be redesignated 155th Photographic Reconnaissance Squadron on 22 Jun.

MEDITERRANEAN THEATER OF OPERATIONS (MTO)

  STRATEGIC OPERATIONS (Fifteenth Air Force):

  TACTICAL OPERATIONS (Twelfth Air Force): In Italy, weather prevents
operations by medium and light bombers; fighter-bombers continue to hit
communications and gun positions in the battle area; areas in and around
Vallecorsa and Terracina are hit especially hard; fighters maintain patrols
and reconnaissance, destroying or damaging numerous vehicles between Pisa and
Pistoia.

PACIFIC OCEAN AREA (POA, Seventh Air Force): B-25s from Engebi Island bomb
Ponape Island.

SOUTH PACIFIC AREA (SOPAC, Thirteenth Air Force): On Bougainville Island, 22
B-25s, 44 P-39s, P-40s, and P-38s and 30+ US Navy (USN) and US Marine Corps
(USMC) aircraft pound AA positions, bivouacs and supply areas from the
Muguai-Ebery's Lease area to the Maika area; 24 other P-39s hit barges in
Matchin Bay, AA guns on Sohano Island, and bridges at Kieta. On New Britain
Island, 3 B-24s bomb the Tobera runway.

SOUTHWEST PACIFIC AREA (SWPA, Fifth Air Force): In New Guinea, B-24s, A-20s
and B-25s hit airstrips, revetments, supply area, AA positions and shipping
at Manokwari, Noemfoor and Biak Islands, and Mawi Bay; A-20s, B-25s and
fighter-bombers continue to pound airfields, coastal villages, bridges,
supply dumps, trucks and various other targets at Wewak and from Wewak to the
shore of Hansa Bay.

SUNDAY, 21 MAY 1944

CHINA-BURMA-INDIA (CBI) THEATER OF OPERATIONS

  BURMA-INDIA (Tenth Air Force): In Burma,  120+ P-40s, P-51s, A-36s and
B-25s hit Mogaung, Myitkyina, the Talawgyi-Hokat area, and Kamaing; gun
positions  around Myitkyina and Mogaung are also hit; a single B-24 bombs NW
part of Mandalay; 20th Tactical Reconnaissance Squadron, 8th Photographic
Reconnaissance Group, based at Kisselbari, India with P-40s, sends a
detachment to Tingkawk Sakan.

  CHINA (Fourteenth Air Force): 27th Troop Carrier Squadron, 443d Troop
Carrier Group, moves from Sylhet, India to Yunnani, China; during the next
nine months, detachments will operate from Chanyi, Chengtu and Kunming at
various times.

EUROPEAN THEATER OF OPERATIONS (ETO)

  STRATEGIC OPERATIONS (Eighth Air Force): Mission 360: 150 bombers and 48
fighters hit V-weapon sites in France without loss; 25 of 40 B-17s hit
Marquise/Mimoyecques and 13 B-17s are damaged; 99 of 110 B-24s hit Siracourt
and 1 B-24 is damaged. Escort is provided by 48 P-47s without loss.
  617 fighters are dispatched on strafing missions to attack rail stock in
Germany; 27 fighters are lost; 91 of 225 locomotives attacked are destroyed;
P-47s also dive bomb rail bridges in W Germany; and 1 P-51 pilot claims 25
cows killed; participating are:
  1. 145 P-38s claim 2-0-0 Luftwaffe aircraft in the air and 6-0-3 on the
ground; 8 P-38s are lost, 2 damaged beyond repair and 12 damaged; 1 airman is
KIA and 8 MIA.
  2. 139 P-47s claim 1-0-0 Luftwaffe aircraft in the air; 4 P-47s are lost
and 21 damaged; 3 pilots are MIA.
  3. 333 P-51s claim 17-0-2 Luftwaffe aircraft in the air and 77-0-64 on the
ground; 15 P-51s are lost, 1 damaged beyond repair and 20 damaged; 15 pilots
are MIA.

  TACTICAL OPERATIONS (Ninth Air Force): In France 50 B-26s bomb airfields at
Abbeville/Drucat; and 600+ P-47s and P-51s attack railroad rolling stock.
  404th Fighter Squadron, 371st Fighter Group, based at Bisterne, England,
begins operating from Ibsley with P-47s.

MEDITERRANEAN THEATER OF OPERATIONS (MTO)

  TACTICAL OPERATIONS (Twelfth Air Force): In NC Italy, medium bombers are
restricted by bad weather but bomb a few bridges and roads, while light
bombers hit a bivouac area; fighter-bombers continue support of ground
forces, hitting troops, vehicles, roads and railroads in or near the battle
areas, particularly around Sezze, Ceccano, San Giovanni Valdarno and
Pontecorvo.

PACIFIC OCEAN AREA (POA, Seventh Air Force): 53 B-24s from Kwajalein Atoll
bomb various targets in Wotje Atoll; 41 B-25s, based on Makin Island, follow
up with bombing, cannonading and strafing attack on the atoll. 8 B-24s stage
through Eniwetok Atoll, strike Rota Island, Marianas Islands, and rearm at
Los Negros Island.

SOUTH PACIFIC AREA (SOPAC, Thirteenth Air Force): On New Britain Island, 3
B-24s, 30+ P-39s and P-40s, and 40+ USN dive bombers hit Vunakanau Airfield
and nearby plantation; 8 P-38s, followed shortly by USN aircraft, bomb
Lakunai Airfield. 40+ P-39s, P-38s, and P-40s fly sweeps over Bougainville
Island; bridges at Rigu Mission and Shishigatero are reported demolished.

SOUTHWEST PACIFIC AREA (SWPA, Fifth Air Force): In New Guinea, B-24s, A-20s
and P-38s attack airfields, town areas, barges, personnel and supply areas,
and fuel dumps at Manokwari, Urarom, along the Moemi River and on Noemfoor
and Biak Islands; fighter-bombers. A-20s and B-25s continue almost constant
pounding of supply dumps, camps, AA positions and a variety of targets along
the coast from Wewak to Hansa Bay; and 13th Bombardment Squadron (Light), 3d
Bombardment Group (Light), moves from Nadzab to Hollandia with A-20s.
Thirteenth Air Task Force B-24s bomb Truk Atoll.

MONDAY, 22 MAY 1944

AMERICAN THEATER OF OPERATIONS

  ALASKA (Eleventh Air Force): 2 Attu Island, Aleutian Island-based B-25s on
a shipping strike near Paramushiru bomb and strafe a picket boat, which is
left sinking.

CHINA-BURMA-INDIA (CBI) THEATER OF OPERATIONS

  CHINA (Fourteenth Air Force): In China, 2 B-25s attack a large
concentration of sampans in Honghai Bay; 2 others heavily damage a 150-ft
(45.7 m) cargo vessel near Hong Kong; 22 P-51s pound the town of Anking and
military area NE of Nanchang; 24 P-40s hit the Sienning area, bombing a
factory W of town, damaging a bridge near town, and strafing numerous trucks
in the vicinity; 23 P-40s hit road and river traffic in areas around Loyang,
Loning, and Itu; and 5 P-40s bomb Yangsin.

EUROPEAN THEATER OF OPERATIONS (ETO)

  STRATEGIC OPERATIONS (Eighth Air Force): Occupancy of all planned Eighth
Air Force stations in Britain is completed with the transfer of the airfield
at N Pickenham from the RAF to the Eighth; total stations number 77,
including 66 airfields, occupied by 82 operational or HQ units.
  Mission 361: 438 bombers and 568 fighters are dispatched on PFF attacks to
targets in Germany and France; 5 bombers and 7 fighters are lost:
  1. 342 are dispatched to the port area at Kiel, Germany; 289 hit the primary
and 5 bomb targets of opportunity; 5 B-17s are lost, 1 damaged beyond repair
and 209 damaged; 4 airmen are KIA, 3 WIA and 78 MIA.
  2. 94 of 96 B-24s hit V-weapon sites at Siracourt, France; 1 B-24 is
damaged.
  Escort is provided by 145 P-38s, 95 P-47s and 328 P-51s; P-38s claim 8-1-5
Luftwaffe aircraft, P-47s claim 12-1-2 and P-51s claim 2-2-1; 3 P-38s, 3
P-47s and a P-51 are lost; 1 P-38 and 2 P-47s are damaged beyond repair; 1
P-38, 2 P-47s and a P-51 are damaged; 6 pilots are MIA.
  130 P-47s are dispatched on a fighter-bomber attack railroad bridges at
Hasselt and Liege, Belgium; 1 P-47 is lost and 1 damaged.
  Mission 363: 4 of 4 B-17s drop 320,000 leaflets on The Hague, Haarlem,
Rotterdam and Utrecht, The Netherlands without loss.
  12 B-24s are dispatched on CARPETBAGGER missions without loss.

  TACTICAL OPERATIONS (Ninth Air Force): Around 330 B-26s and A-20s bomb
airfields and other targets in the Cherbourg, Calais, and Paris areas of
France while a like number of P-47s and P-51s dive-bomb marshalling yards,
airfields and other targets in the same general areas.

MEDITERRANEAN THEATER OF OPERATIONS (MTO)

  STRATEGIC OPERATIONS (Fifteenth Air Force): As weather again clears, 550+
bombers attack communications and military targets in C and NW Italy; B-17s
bomb the marshalling yard at Avezzano; B-24s hit port areas at Fano, Porto
Civitanova and La Spezia; fighters fly 200+ sorties in escort to bombers;
there is no fighter opposition.

  TACTICAL OPERATIONS (Twelfth Air Force): 332d Fighter Group with P-47s is
transferred to the Fifteenth Air Force; this move, following a series of
reassignments of fighter groups to the Fifteenth Air Force and to India,
leaves the XII Fighter Command with only 1 fighter group.
  In Italy, medium bombers are inactive or abortive except for a raid on
Cave; fighter-bombers maintain close support of the ground advance, hitting
at motor transport, roads, and bridges in the battle areas and nearby points
in C Italy, including Terracina, Ceccano, Sezze, Bastia, points between Rome
and Bracciano Lake and near Balsorano.

PACIFIC OCEAN AREA (POA, Seventh Air Force): 8 B-25s based on Engebi Island
bomb Ponape Island. Weather cancels other strikes.

SOUTH PACIFIC AREA (SOPAC, Thirteenth Air Force): 40+ P-39s, P-38s and P-40s
hit targets of opportunity in the coastal area near Talili Bay on New Britain
Island. 24 B-25s pound Mioko I, Bismarck Archipelago. On Bougainville Island,
40+ P-39s bomb the Bonis supply area and blast 4 small bridges near Kieta.

SOUTHWEST PACIFIC AREA (SWPA, Fifth Air Force): In New Guinea, B-24s and
B-25s bomb Manokwari, shipping E of Cape Manggoear and storage areas and
Sorido village on Biak Island; P-40s hit supply and fuel dumps, trucks and
other targets of opportunity in the area of Wakde Island; B-24s, B-25s and
fighter-bombers continue to bomb and strafe various targets in the Wewak-
Hansa Bay area; and HQ 348th Fighter Group and 341st and 342d Fighter
Squadrons move from Saidor to Wakde Island with P-47s.

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

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

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

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

Date:    Fri, 20 May 1994 08:19:48 EST
From:    Aldo <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Armour

Hello All,

I was just wondering if anyone knew of an article or short book that
elaborates on the strenthes & weeknesses of Russain, American &
German Armour.  As mentioned below, everyone has has herd of T34s,
Tigers etc..., but I know little about specifialy what made one
superior, another inferior & how various tanks faired againt each
other.  (of course, if someone wants to post any details, do feel
free).

Thanks in advance

Aldo

>>Shermans, T34s, Tigers, Panthers etc. but nothing
>>produced in this country rose above the mediocre. Has anyone else
>>read of similar thoughts regarding Monty's views of his own armour
>>capabilities?

Aldo M. Hubert
                                           [email-masked]
University of North Carolina at Greensboro
800 Oakland Ave.
Greensboro NC 27412

Sic Friatur Crustum Dulce

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

Date:    Fri, 20 May 1994 08:33:35 CDT
From:    Tim not Timothy Scherrer <[email-masked]>
Subject: NOST: Virginia D-Day Event

The 50th anniversary D-Day reenactment will be held at Camp Pendleton
State Military Reservation, Virginia.  The event is sponcered by the War
Memorial Museum of Virginia.

Schedule of evets: Wednesday 1 June: Arrival of reenactors Thursday 2
June: Tactical reenactors battle, Ft. Story Friday 3 June: Invasion
rehersal, commenorative dance and displays Saturday 4 June: Parade,
displays, Invasion, Stage Door Canteen, BBQ and entertainment/displays
Sunday 5 June: Ceremony, Cape Henry, Ft. Story

The ladning, being held on Saturday is expected to be one of the largest
WWII reenactment events ever held---it will inckude over 25 surface
craft to include landing craft, escort vessels and American and French
ships firing banks.  Vintage aircraft will provide air cover for the
landing.  It is expected that 1,000 allied and 600 german reenactors are
to participate.

The commemorative dance will be held Friday night at NAS Oceana Friday
night, with music provided by the Dorsey Orchestra.  WWII celebrities as
well as DOD officials and foreign diplomats will be present.  Dress is
black tie or WWII attire.

The parade will be held Saturday morningin Virginia Beach, and is
expected to be 100 units.

Following the landing a USO show open to the public will be held on
base.

If anyone wants more specific information, please contact me--I have the
points of contacts listed with the flier.  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:    Fri, 20 May 1994 09:43:51 GMT-6
From:    Terry Moore <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: INF: Regia Marina, Part 1

Hello, Joe!

Thanks for those posts on the naval battle of Taranto. I am glad you
saved those postings for "new readers" such as me.

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:    Fri, 20 May 1994 09:42:31 GMT-6
From:    Terry Moore <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: SCI (Psyops WWII)

Hello, Archie!

Would you be interested in the varying approaches to propaganda
campaigns during the war? I have info on this, if you require that.

Please advise.

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:    Fri, 20 May 1994 09:56:18 GMT-6
From:    Terry Moore <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Mussolini

Hello, Joe and others!

>
>         This type of response is indicative of the short shrift that Italy's
> role always receives.

    How true. The study of Mussolini's career, personal life and
tragic end is fascinating. His one real mistake was his being taken
in by Hitler.

     Personally, I wouldn't mind hearing some discussion on
> Mussolini's political achievements as well as his (obvious) failures.

    For one thing, Mussolini was awarded the Collar of D'Annuncio for
his successful prosecution of the campaign in Ethiopia. This
decoration was seldom awarded and only to those who brought great
recognition and prestige to the country. BTW, this decoration was
also coveted by Goering who also wanted it, but couldn't pull the
necessary political strings to obtain it.

    The one thing, I have heard, and I know others on this list have
as well, is that the one big achievement of Mussolini's Fascist Italy
was his being able to make the trains run on time. Those of you
having either visited there or lived there know that this is not an
easy thing to do.

    Certainly another big achievement of Mussolini's reign was his
bringing prosperity back to Italy at a time when other European
nations were backsliding. On the surface, at least, there seemed to
be a great sense of optimism in the country in the 1920's, and there
seemed to be a renewed sense of pride in the country and in its
political leadership.

   From
> my limited reading, Italy was a mess after World War I.

    How true!

  For being one of the
> victors, this comes as a bit of a surprise.  Italy was slighted at the peace
> conference, acquiring a token parcel of territory from Austria-Hungary.
> Further, one of the reasons for creating the Kingdom of Croats, Serbs, and
> Slovenes (Yugoslavia) was to counter Italian domination of the Adriatic.  This
> is not the best way to make an ally happy.  The foci of his political career
> seems to always fall on the invasion of Ethiopia, his role at Munich, and,
> of course, World War II.  Remember, Mussolini came to power in 1922 and
> people didn't seem to be too upset with his reign.

    Yes. See above.

  He created public works
> projects (Rome still has the "SPQR" man-hole covers from one of his projects).
> Sure, the fellow was a demagogue and ultimately ruined his country, but that
> shouldn't mean that discussions should be treated lightly.  As I said, though,
> my reading and knowledge are limited so I would appreciate any elaborations
> from others rather than simply dismissing Mussolini and Italy out-of-hand.

    Please see above, and I wholeheartedly agree with your last
statement.

    Thanks for allowing my two cents' worth on this.

    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:    Fri, 20 May 1994 10:10:13 GMT-6
From:    Terry Moore <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: TAC: River Platte (Graf Spee)

Hello, Bengt!

Sorry to have taken so long to get back to you, and thanks for your
very interesting post below.

> When discussing the nazification of the Wehrmacht the events of July
> 1944 certainly are an interesting example. The conspiracy against
> Hitler involved a large number of people from the very highest rank
> all the way down. If there had been a succesful nazification, how
> could these men have remained in the Wehrmacht?

    Of course, a nazification of the Wehrmacht was undertaken, even
after Hitler came to power, but it wasn't really gotten into full
gear until after the turning point at Stalingrad, the loss of the
Battle of Kursk and, of course after Goebbels' "Total War" speech.

    For one thing, these men were able to remain in the Wehrmacht,
because of 1) their oath of loyalty to Adolf Hitler; 2) these
soldiers were still soldiers and saw a duty to fulfill as soldiers,
regardless of politics; 3) the deterioriating military situation
required their service. As long as they were no real direct threat to
national security, they could be watched and could possibly lead the
Gestapo or SD to others involved in any anti-Hitler conspiracy. Of
course, all that changed after 20 July 1944, as you know.

> Look at what happened in the Soviet Union during the 1930's when Stalin
> executed most of his top military men and also many on the lower levels
> and compare that with Germany.

    That is right on the mark.

 I would think that Hitler couldn't
> possibly have attempted to do the same because he needed a well
> functioning miltary machine for his purposes and also because the
> Wehrmacht would not have accepted it. They just weren't nazified
> enough to swallow something like that.

    No, they weren't, but, then again, the traditions of the two
armies were different. The German Army, at least up until Hitler, had
kept itself free of political influence, and prided itself on that.
Any attempt to politicize or nazify the Wehrmacht would, of course,
encounter stiff resistance.

    The Russians on the other hand, as you know, were forced to
reflect the status quo of Russian society where political influence
was the order of the day. To Stalin's mind, an independent-minded
military was unthinkable. Since the earliest days of the Czars, the
Army was throughout politicized. It had to be for the Romanovs and
the Bolsheviks to remain in power.

    Your thoughts or any others?

    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:    Fri, 20 May 1994 10:25:32 GMT-6
From:    Terry Moore <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Nazis - left or right?

Hello, All!

This argument dealing with the similarities or differences in Nazis
or Communists can also be viewed as to the ultimate goals of both and
what they were trying to accomplish.

Aside from considering Nazism or Communism as other terms for
agression, the differences lie in the methods of attaining basically
a similar goal, which is, namely, to enhance the lives of the people
living within those systems, since a measure of government is the
services it provides to its constituents.

I am not talking here of the military but of the economic
philosophies here.

Nazism seeks to enhance the lives of its constituents through
government control of the means of the production while allowing
private ownership of property, providing meaningful work for everyone
and setting up or enhancing a system of socialized programs already
in existence with the goal of making life easier for the common man.

 Communism seeks to enhance the lives
of its constituents through government control of the means of
production, no ownership of private property and removal of all the
problems associated with day-to-day life in the country, i.e., low
rents, work for everyone, regardless of its importance, etc., no
medical bills, a place to live, government provision for public and
university education, etc. The goal of both was to make life easier
for their respective constituents.

    Hope this helps.

    Thanks.

    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:    Fri, 20 May 1994 10:29:16 GMT-6
From:    Terry Moore <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [TRIV] Police Dogs and Victory Cabbages

Hello, Bob!

Will add my two cents' worth to this.

  Sauerkraut became Victory Cabbage, German
> > Shepherds became Police Dogs.  At one time I'd heard the name that was
> > adopted for the Dachshund but I've since forgotten that name.  Does
> > anybody remember that name?  Also what other things were renamed during
> > the war years?  Did the German Measles become the European Spots etc.?

    The hamburger became the "Liberty-burger". These terms were
coined during WWI.

> I believe that renaming of 'Thing German' was done more during WW 1 than during
> WW 2. I know that in Baltimore Hamburg street becam Light Street.

    Interesting.

    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:    Fri, 20 May 1994 10:36:20 GMT-6
From:    Terry Moore <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [TAC] Russo-Japanese Border Clashes

Hello, Christopher!

> No, you're thinking of the Battle of Tsushima, which was fought between
> the IMPERIAL RUSSIAN Navy and the Imperial Japanese Navy during the
> Russo-Japanese War.  1905 or '06 I believe.

    Absolutely correct. Admiral Togo sank the bulk of the Russian
fleet under Admiral Rozdeventsky within an hour after making contact
with it at Tsushima. That fleet had sailed around the world only to
be sunk by superior Japanese tactics, a Russian naval force of low
morale, and mutiny-minded. In fact, Rozdeventsky's lack of
total control of this fleet played right into the hands of Admiral
Togo which allowed Togo to cross the "T" on the Russians. A
fascinating story,
albeit a tragic one. Admiral Rozdeventsky survived the battle and
died shortly before the Bolsheviks came to power in 1917.

    Thanks for allowing me to insert my two-cents' worth on this.

    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:    Fri, 20 May 1994 17:39:43 MET-1
From:    Bognar Attila <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Monty & Armour

Steve writes:

 Monty's caution was borne of his lack of faith in his armour.
>
> It is true is it not, that having initially developed the Tank, the Brits
> failed to come up with the goods in WWII. Even the most casual historian
> of the period knows of Shermans, T34s, Tigers, Panthers etc. but nothing
> produced in this country rose above the mediocre. Has anyone else read
> of similar thoughts regarding Monty's views of his own armour capabilities?

1., I'm non of an expert of armour warfare still IMHO trust in armour
involve trust in the quality of the machines (hardware) and also in
the commanders (software). As for the latter he at least had Gen
Horrocks in Africa, then in France, too.

2., As for the machines, I dimly recall having seen remarks and also
drawings of British armour in Hasting's Overlord.
I'll check that again.

All the best,

Attila  [email-masked]

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

Date:    Fri, 20 May 1994 10:59:08 GMT-6
From:    Terry Moore <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Air Power in Southwest Pacific

Hello, David!

I would like to add my two-cents' worth to this, if someone else
hasn't already provided an answer to this.

>           Question:  Was this imbalance a factor in air superiority?

    Perhaps. In the early stages of the war, the Japanese Zero was a
superior aircraft in comparison to what we could put up against it.
However, even a P-40, in the hands of a skilfull pilot, could compete
against it.

 Were
>           the Japanese airplanes and doctrine better?

    Perhaps in the beginning, but we learned quickly. Pilots were
told not to turn with the Zero which would mean certain death,
because the Zero was much more agile. After the recovery of a downed
Zero in the Aleutians in 1942, the airplane was evaluated, and the F-
6F was designed to take advantage of the Zero's weaknesses. After
1942, with the increasing American output, a corresponding
deterioration of the quality of their combat pilots in an attempt to
make good the losses they had suffered at Coral Sea and Midway, and
their reluctance to recognize the need for change in its excessive
reliance on the Zero to meet new challenges, the Japanese tactics,
aircraft and training methods became very outmoded and outdated.

 Obviously something

>           went right for the Allies, but I would like to know if it was
>           much of a factor.

     A superior pilot training program, American flexibility to meet
a changing military situation, a pragmatic approach to solving
problems that could not be matched from the Japanese with their
myopic approach to solving problems were the factors that enhanced
their downfall. The Japanese simply refused to face reality when it
came to considerations in reevaluating their front-line aircraft, as
they tended to view their creation as perfection that could not be
matched by the other side. Thus, their viewpoint was that with a
superior aircraft and superior pilots, and training, they would
eventually win. Only later, after it was much too late to do anything
about it, did they reluctantly change their attitude.

    Thanks again for allowing my two cents' worth on this.

    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:    Fri, 20 May 1994 11:14:43 GMT-6
From:    Terry Moore <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: INFO ME 410 and B-24

Hello, Derek!

> 1.  anyone who has the issue could tell me the unit that the plane belonged to?

    The US had at least one, maybe others, squadrons of B-24's
outfitted for night bombing. The 43rd Bomb Group stationed in the
Philippines in the later stages of the war, performed night bombing
missions against Japan and Formosa.

> 2. Any kind list member could give me any info or pointers to info about
> British PFF ops in the Pacific in WWII.

    You might consult David Irving's book "The Bombing of Dresden".
He discusses something of this. Also Martin Caidin's book "The Night
Hamburg Died" contains some discussion on this topic.

> Secondly, I have a picture book on german a/c in WWII and its ays that
> the Me410 was used as a Night fighter!. I never knew this, is it true and
> if so what radar systems did it have?.
>

    I would have to check this out for you, but it will be some time
for me to do that. I do have some info on this, and if it is handy, I
will get it to you. Will have to get back to you on this.

    More later.

    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:    Fri, 20 May 1994 11:24:38 GMT-6
From:    Terry Moore <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: TRV: QUESTION REGARDING DEATH OF GENERAL STUMPFF

Hello, John!

I can certainly answer this question.

>   Oslo, May 18, 1994
>   When Keitel signed the surrender documents at Berlin, General Hans Juergen
> Stumpff was sitting to his right.  He was at that time Commander of the Air
> Force.  Could anyone give me the date and circumstances of his death?

    I believe General Stumpff died of natural causes in  the 1950's.
He did survive the war and I can give you a specific date of this
death later. I do not have access to my records, but I do have the
exact date of his death at the house, and other details on his demise.

        More later.

        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:    Fri, 20 May 1994 12:31:08 -0400
From:    Emery Ford <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: SCI (Psyops WWII)

Hi Terry,

I would definitely be interested!

>
>
>Hello, Archie!
>
>Would you be interested in the varying approaches to propaganda
>campaigns during the war? I have info on this, if you require that.
>
>Please advise.
>
>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:    Fri, 20 May 1994 11:27:50 -0500
From:    "Louis R. Coatney" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Anglo-American ArmoUr deficient?

I'll disagree with the conventional belief that A-A tanks were
  inferior to German and Russian ones.

A tank wasn't designed *just* for tank vs. tank use.  The Sherman
  was an excellent, reliable, mobile -- indeed, FAST -- tank with
  adequate armament.

True, at various times the Germans would pull ahead, but we caught
  up soon enough, and in mass.  The American Grant tank was superior
  to the Mark III Special at Gazala (Jun42).  The American Sherman
  was superior to the Mark IVF/Special at El Alamein.

The British Matilda was superior to the German tanks, until El
  Alamein (when I believe it was withdrawn).

The Sherman was regularly up-gunned:  75mm, 76mm, 90mm, and in
  Israel, even 105mm (I believe)!  The latewar M26 Pershing
  (with its generous armor and 90mm gun) was the equal of the
  Tiger or Panther, and considerably more mobile/reliable.
  The latewar M24 Chaffee was an excellent light/medium weapon.

Comparing the Russian to the AA tanks would be like comparing
  Zeros to Wildcats (again).  The Russian tanks had superior
  design factors and were supremely crude and mass-producable.
  However, AA communications, training, and tactics would have
  prevailed, and our tactical airpower would have swept the
  field.  Our tanks weren't *that* inferior, even to the JSIII,
  in any case.

Self-criticism is worthwhile, and an ever-better tank is always
  desirable.  However, with the exception of the British medium
  tanks, AA tanks (or at least tank destroyers) ultimately kept
  pace and -- in the exploitative/cavalry sense -- outpaced
  the Germans' menagerie.

Lou Coatney, Western Illinois University Library, Macomb

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

Date:    Fri, 20 May 1994 11:42:24 GMT-6
From:    Terry Moore <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: TRIV:  Spam

Hello, Ken!

> Today is the 103rd anniversary of the birth of SPAM!

    I want you to know that you have made my day with that
announcement.

    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:    Fri, 20 May 1994 13:08:32 -0400
From:    Kevin Kamphaus <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: NPR looking for historian: Norman Inv.

I know this off the general subject, but..... if you are interested in reading
a *good* article on the Norman Conquest of 1066, go to the library or used book store and pick up a National Geographic from Oct. 1966(I think). The year is
right since it was the 900th anniversary but the month may be off by 1 or so. I
read this a couple of years ago, it is very good with pictures(no not from 1066) of the battle sites and a complete photo reproduction of the Bayeaux Tapestry.

Kevin Kamphaus
[email-masked]

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

Date:    Fri, 20 May 1994 12:12:17 GMT-6
From:    Terry Moore <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: REF: Claim about Pacfic/Battle of the Bulge causulaties

Hello, Emery!

Thanks for the note.

>      But weren't there far more U. S. troops fighting in Europe?

    Yes, but not that many more. The Marines weren't involved in the
ETO, but did help to make up the numbers employed in the PTO. Even
so, from the time of the Allied invasion 6 Jun 1944 to the end of the
war on 8 May 1945 was about 11 months.

    With the American commitment to the PTO, the length of time for
physical contact with the Japanese went from 7 August 1942 to April
21 1945 (basically from Guadalcanal to Okinawa). Thus almost 3 years.
Casualties were bound to be greater even if more troops were fighting
in Europe over a shorter time period.

    Hope this helps, and please feel free to disagree.

    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:    Fri, 20 May 1994 13:24:02 -0400
From:    Barone <[email-masked]>
Subject: INF: Regia Marina, Part 3

        During the winter of 1940-41, activities of Italian battleships were
reduced.  Both "Littorio" and "Duilio" were undergoing repairs from damage
incurred the previous November at Taranto; the former still at Taranto, the
latter in Genoa.  Salvage work on "Cavour" continued at Taranto as well, but
it was estimated that she would not be refloated until the summer.  "Doria"
had completed training and was operational along with "Veneto".  "Cesare" had
been damaged in January, during an air raid on Naples, and was transferred to
Genoa for repairs that would last three months.

        At dawn, on February 9, 1941, Force H from Gibraltar, under Admiral
Sommerville, consisting of the battleship "Malaya", battlecruiser "Renown",
carrier "Ark Royal", a cruiser and ten destroyers, bombarded Genoa for half
an hour.  The targets included shipyards, factories, and "Duilio", still
under repair.

        Italian assessments indicated that such an attack was possible
and a force had previously been sent to sea, including "Veneto", "Doria",
"Cesare", three heavy cruisers and ten destroyers, to counter the British.
However, due to poor weather and communications, the Italian units were too
far south and, despite the favorable situation, were unable to intercept
the British.

        The British shelling sank some cargo ships but no other major damage
was sustained.  However, the audacity of the action was in keeping with the
best traditions of the British Navy.  Moreover, Italian morale suffered and
the incident again highlighted the navy's ineffective communications and
poor naval-air force cooperation.

        Little more than a month later, while controversy still swirled
around the shelling of Genoa, the Italian Navy suffered a significant
setback, perhaps its worse defeat at sea during the war.  In a brief night
action, at close range, the 1st Cruiser Division, consisting of three
heavy cruisers of the "Zara" class, along with two destroyers, was sunk.

        Under German pressure, a cruiser sweep of the Eastern Mediterranean
was planned, with the goal of interdicting convoy traffic between Egypt and
Greece. The Germans argued (incorrectly) that British battleships would not
be available to oppose the sweep.  Italy, dependent on Germany for oil, had
already used up half of its strategic reserve, and therefore bowed to the
pressure of its Axis partner.  The Germans committed themselves to cooperate
in providing air cover for the operation.

        The Italian force was made up of "Veneto", providing heavy cover,
eight cruisers and thirteen destroyers.  On the morning of March 28, 1941,
they neared the small island of Gavdo, near the Cape of Matapan, and came
into contact with four British light cruisers and eight destroyers.  These
were the British light forces, acting as scouts for the Mediterranean fleet,
which was made up of the battleships "Warspite", "Valiant", and "Barham", the
armored cruiser "Formidable", and nine destroyers under Admiral Cunningham.
Cunningham was aware that the Italian units were at sea and he was spoiling
for a fight, with the "Veneto" as his main target.

        The four British cruisers were sighted by three Italian cruisers
and turned southward, staying out of range, hoping to draw the Italians
into the British heavy forces.  After an hour, the Italians reversed course
with the same objective and the British took the bait.  "Veneto" then
appeared from the northwest and opened fire, taking the British by surprise.
Once they realized they were under battleship fire, the British again turned
southwards, hoping to draw the Italians into the oncoming heavy fleet.  Air
strikes were launched from "Formidable" and from land bases and Admiral
Iachino realized he had lost the element of surprise and decided to return
home.

        The British could not catch the Italians at their maximum speed
and so launched further air strikes, hoping to damage and slow them.
Late in the afternoon, "Veneto" was hit portside near the screws by an
air-launched torpedo.  The outboard shaft broke and the port propeller
sheared off.  Flooding was extensive and power was initially lost, but
the ship was able to get under way again a few minutes later, working up
to 19 knots and proceeding home.  Despite the German promises, calls for
fighter protection were in vain throughout the day.  Calls for assistance
from the Regia Aeronautica also were fruitless.  At dusk, during another
British air strike, the heavy cruiser "Pola" took a torpedo hit and
stopped dead in the water.  Admiral Iachino was unaware that the British
battle fleet was in close proximity, again being badly served by
reconnaissance and intelligence.  He ordered the heavy cruisers "Zara"
and "Fiume" and four destroyers to stand by and assist "Pola".

        Admiral Cunningham, on the other hand, had a good appreciation of
the general situation thanks to effective air reconnaissance.  He believed,
though, that "Veneto", not a cruiser, had been stopped and continued his
pursuit despite darkness.  The British ships, radar equipped, unlike their
foe, came upon the Italian forces aiding "Pola".  Unaware of the enemy's
presence and intent on assisting their compatriot, the Italian ships were
not closed up at battle stations.  At point blank range, British 15-inch
shells ripped into "Fiume" and "Zara" sinking both while two of the Italian
destroyers were sunk in the ensuing melee.  "Pola", immobilized, scuttled
herself (being assisted by a number of British torpedos) after her crew was
taken off by the remaining destroyers.  (British propaganda reported that
"Pola"'s crew were drunk and had panicked.  These reports were totally
baseless and their source and purpose should be noted.)

        Italian lack of radar and the British use of naval aircraft as well
as information via "Ultra" provided the British with a great advantage.
However, none of this mitigates the Italian mistakes, including poor night
tactics, reconnaissance and intelligence, as well as the absence of air
cover.  These factors combined to cause an Italian debacle.  Though the
defeat was painful, it did not materially affect the balance of forces
in the Mediterranean.  The Italian battleship force was still essentially
intact and four heavy cruisers remained in service while the British had
only one, "York", in the theater.  ("York" would be severely damaged in
May in Suda Bay, Crete, by a brilliant attack by Italian-piloted explosive
motor boats.  The ship would be unsalvageable.)

        "Littorio", now fully repaired, reentered service as the fleet
flagship, replacing "Veneto", which would be under repairs for the next
three months.  "Doria", "Duilio", and "Cesare" were also operational.

        It should also be noted that the British would soon suffer heavy
naval losses at the hands of Axis air units during the evacuations of
Greece and Crete, when the British lacked a friendly air umbrella.  This
was a situation frequently faced by the Italian Navy, and the British fared
just as badly.
--
Joe Barone
[email-masked]
Look, we're not worried about the German Army, we've got enough troubles
of our own.  To the right, General Patton; to the left, the British Army;
to the rear, our own goddamn artillery; and besides all that, it's raining!
And the only good thing to say about the weather: it keeps our Air Corp
from blowing us all to hell because it's too lousy to fly!

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

Date:    Fri, 20 May 1994 13:44:02 -0400
From:    Robert Hanks <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Monty and D Day

This is avery good discussion. More people should report on the
conferences which they have attended. A footnote on the possible use of
Indians at D-Day. Weren't all of the Indian troops in service in Egypt,
Crete, Ethiopea and Burma? I don't think that they crossed over to Sicily
and Italy, and I'm fairly certain that none were involved in the Normandy
campaign. Not only would this have been a waste of shipping, and not only
would the sensitivities of Indian nationalism have inhibited use of
Indians in Europe proper, but one of the British "lessons" of the First
World War was that Indian soldiers were not well suited to the French
climate or to European-style industrialized warfare.

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

Date:    Fri, 20 May 1994 13:04:06 GMT-6
From:    Terry Moore <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: P-61B

Hello, Aldo, Emmanuel, Peter and others!

Here goes with some more info on the P-61B. Sorry for the lapse.

The P-61B differed primarily from the P-61A in teh length of the nose
section. The P-61B had an eight-inch plug inserted in the fuselage
just behind the radome. Additionally, the main landing gear doors
were split, allowing the rear portion of the door to be closed after
the main landing gear was down and locked. The door's actuators were
changed from hydraulic to mechanical and a safety latch was added to
the main landing gear retraction handle in the cockpit to eliminate
the possibility of accidental gear retractin while the aircraft was
on the ground.

The P-61B was also outfitted with another innovation known as "night
binoculars" in the pilot's cockpit. These binoculars consisted of a
pair of 5.8 power night glasses combined with the optical gunsight.
A system of dots superimposed on the gunsight image allowed the pilot
to determine the range of a target with greater accuracy. These
"night binoculars" wre also retrofitted to many P-61As  already in
service.

Other changes to the P-61B included a better crew heating system,
automatic cowling cooling flaps, an additional taxi light installed
on the nosewheel strut, the aileron trim tabs were deleted, and fire
extinguishers were built into the engine nacelles. The four-gun
dorsal turret was not installed, although all wiring and fittings
were installed. The first P-61B rolled out during July, 1944.

There were various changes and improvements made to the P-61B during
its production run. These changes included a low altitude altimeter,
two additional underwing pylons  installed inboard of the engine
nacelles (capable of carrying either drop tanks or bombs) and and APS-
13 Tail Warning Radar (beginning with the P-61B-10). At Block-15, the
General Electric Type A-4 dorsal turret  was reintroduced. Later a
new turret, the A-7, was introduced on Block-20 aircraft. There were
seven Block-25 aircraft built, which were strictly testbeds for the
new Western Electric APG-1 Gun Laying Radar/GE remote controlled
dorsal turret.

During the Summer of 1944, P-61s began flying night intruder
missions. With the Allies having total air superiority during
daylight, the Germans were forced to move rail and truck traffic
under the cover of darkness. 9th Air Force P-61 crews were ordered to
conduct night ground attack missions using their radar to detect
targets such as trains and truck convoys. Sometimes napalm was used
to stop a train or a truck convoy, whtn the P-61 crew would use the
light of the fire to attack the convoy repeatedly with their cannons.
Several aircraft of the 425th NFS were modified to carry five inch
Bazooka rocket tubes under the wings to increase their air-to-ground
firepower. P-61s, operating in teh night intruder role, were very
effective during the Battle of the Bulge, scoring seven night
aircraft kills in addition to destroying large amounts of rolling
stock and a number of locomotives. Typical armament for intruder
missions was a pair of 500 pound bombs or napalm tanks and rockets.

In the Pacific Theater, P-61s were also used in the night intruder
role and several aircraft of the 427th NFS were modified with
underwing Bazooka rocket tubes, while others were modified with five
inch zero length rocket stubs under the outboard wing panels. In
addition to their P-61Bs, the 418th NFS used several B-25H bombers
for the intruder missions. Initially, the aircraft retained the 76mm
cannon armament, but it was later removed when it was found that the
muzzle blast almost blinded the crew. The 418th's B-25Hs were painted
Flat Black and carried the same markings as the 418th's P-61s.

That is it for today.

More later.

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:    Fri, 20 May 1994 14:35:19 -0400
From:    Emery Ford <[email-masked]>
Subject: UK Bullion Goes to Canada after the fall of France

Hello all!
I thought you might be interested in this.

        I just read an interesting tidbit in _World_At_Arms_ regarding
Great Britain's reaction to the fall of France.  To wit:

        "As early as May 21 [1940] [the UK govt.] decided to act against
the contingency of German occupation of the British Isles.  In late June
and early July Britain's gold, foreign exchange reserves and negotiable
foreign securities were shipped to Canada; within a few weeks over five
billion dollars worth of bullion, bonds, and other securities crossed
the Atlantic in a battleship, two cruisers and three passenger ships for
deposit in vaults in Toronto and Montreal.  The British war effort could
now be financed from North America if necessary."

        Anybody have any other info on this?  Comments?

        --Emery

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

Date:    Fri, 20 May 1994 14:40:32 EDT
From:    Burt Knight <[email-masked]>
Subject: cOMPUTER GAMES

Looking for the 'BEST' shareware game about DDay.  Any suggestions??

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

Date:    Fri, 20 May 1994 12:44:12 -0700
From:    Henry Frummer <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: REF: Claim about Pacfic/Battle of the Bulge causulaties

FLAME TIME!

I guess this is one of my pet peeves.  Causulity figures are a matter of
record (even though sources vary considerably.)

According to Costello _The Pacific War_, the PTO accounded for only 27.6%
of the US world Causulaties.

Terry, sorry to sound pedantic but logic doesn't replace facts in any
field of indeavor.

If I am taking this all too seriously please anyone let me know, I am new
to this list and don't want to be too out of line.

On Fri, 20 May 1994, Terry Moore wrote:

> Hello, Emery!
>
> Thanks for the note.
>
> >      But weren't there far more U. S. troops fighting in Europe?
>
>     Yes, but not that many more. The Marines weren't involved in the
> ETO, but did help to make up the numbers employed in the PTO. Even
> so, from the time of the Allied invasion 6 Jun 1944 to the end of the
> war on 8 May 1945 was about 11 months.
>
>     With the American commitment to the PTO, the length of time for
> physical contact with the Japanese went from 7 August 1942 to April
> 21 1945 (basically from Guadalcanal to Okinawa). Thus almost 3 years.
> Casualties were bound to be greater even if more troops were fighting
> in Europe over a shorter time period.
>
>
>     Hope this helps, and please feel free to disagree.
>
>     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:    Fri, 20 May 1994 16:59:35 -0400
From:    Dan Ford <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: P-61B

I think it was Richard Bueschel in his little book *Nakajima Ki.43
Hayabusa etc* who told the story of the last plane to go down in WWII. A
P-61 was prowling off the Home Islands on the night of August 14/15 and
spotted a Hayabusa and tipped it into the sea without firing a shot.

(I realize that some planes went down after the official cease-fire;
perhaps Bueschel was adhering to his own definition of the end of the war.)

I never saw any other mention of this. Has anyone?

Cheers - Dan     <[email-masked]>

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

Date:    Fri, 20 May 1994 17:40:54 -0400
From:    Dan Ford <[email-masked]>
Subject: First word on the Zero

The first Zero to be captured was shot down by ack-ack over
Chengdu, north of the Nationalist capital of Chongqing on 20 May
1941. The Chinese went over it thoroughly and interrogated
Japanese airmen. From this they drew up a spec sheet and a three-
view which had one notable flaw: since the "Chengdu Zero" lost
its tail in the crash, the artist endowed it with the tail of a
Nakajima Ki-27 "Nate" army fighter. So it look very much like the
Nakajima Ki-43 Hayabusa which was then undergoing its trials.

USMC Major James McHugh was the military attache in Chongqing,
and he sent the spec sheets and three-view back thru channels to
the Navy Dept. When Claire Chennault returned to Chongqing in
August 1941, McHugh gave him a copy as well, and Chennault (who
had earlier briefed George Marshall on the Zero as he had seen it
from the ground) sent back a copy to the Adjutant General in
Washington. Thus both the navy and the army had a very good
notion of the Zero's capabilities in the fall of 1941. According
to William Leary at the Univ Georgia, this information actually
went down thru channels and was posted in the requisite briefing
books.

For the record, here's what the Chinese had to say about the
"Japanese Sea Fighter 0-1 Model 1":

Engine: 840 hp two row 14 cylinders (925 hp "superpressure")
Max horizontal speed: 505 km/H   314 mph  (@ "superpressure")
Range with drop tank: 1,940 km   1,207 miles
Practical ceiling:    10,930 m   35,860 ft
Time to 4,000 m (13,120 ft): 4.3 min
Climb rate seal level: 921 m/min  3,022 ft/min
Armament: 2 7.7 mm mgs with 600 rounds each
          2 20 mm "machine guns" with 60 rounds each

So the information was there--it just wasn't believed!

Cheers - Dan     <[email-masked]>

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

Date:    Fri, 20 May 1994 18:15:17 -0400
From:    Christopher Morton <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [TAC] Russo-Japanese Border Clashes

>
> Hello, Christopher!
>
>
> > No, you're thinking of the Battle of Tsushima, which was fought between
> > the IMPERIAL RUSSIAN Navy and the Imperial Japanese Navy during the
> > Russo-Japanese War.  1905 or '06 I believe.
>
>     Absolutely correct. Admiral Togo sank the bulk of the Russian
> fleet under Admiral Rozdeventsky within an hour after making contact
> with it at Tsushima. That fleet had sailed around the world only to
> be sunk by superior Japanese tactics, a Russian naval force of low
> morale, and mutiny-minded. In fact, Rozdeventsky's lack of

And the Russian fleet almost got into a shooting war with the British Royal
Navy in the bargain.  They mistook some fishing boats for Japanese torpedo
boats off of the Dogger Bank and sank them with gunfire.  For a time, it
appeared as though the British navy would engage, but the crisis was
eventually defused.

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

Date:    Fri, 20 May 1994 20:14:21 -0400
From:    "Steven Pudlo, Dept. Computer Svcs." <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [TAC] Russo-Japanese Border Clashes

On the subject to near-misses between allied navies, Can anybody relate
any stories about the alleged situation in north africa when the british
attempted to persuade the french navy to join them?

I remember a rumor that there were british casualties. Any info?

                                                                Steve
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Steven E. Pudlo  - [email-masked] |"Life may be a drag BUT
STC Programmer/Analyst - (203) 885-2343  |  it sure beats the only
Three Rivers Community-Technical College |           known alternative"
574 New London Turnpike                  |                     (S.E.P.)
Norwich, CT. U.S.A. 06360                |No one gets out of it alive..
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Date:    Fri, 20 May 1994 18:18:11 PDT
From:    Sidney Allinson <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: UK Bullion Goes to Canada after the fall of France

The transfer of Britain's bullion to bank vaults in Toronto and Montreal
has had several good write-ups. Possibly the best account was (would you
believe) in Readers Digest.

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

Date:    Fri, 20 May 1994 20:29:39 GMT-6
From:    Terry Moore <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [TAC] Russo-Japanese Border Clashes

Hello, Christopher!

> >     Absolutely correct. Admiral Togo sank the bulk of the Russian
> > fleet under Admiral Rozdeventsky within an hour after making contact
> > with it at Tsushima. That fleet had sailed around the world only to
> > be sunk by superior Japanese tactics, a Russian naval force of low
> > morale, and mutiny-minded. In fact, Rozdeventsky's lack of
>
> And the Russian fleet almost got into a shooting war with the British Royal
> Navy in the bargain.  They mistook some fishing boats for Japanese torpedo
> boats off of the Dogger Bank and sank them with gunfire.  For a time, it
> appeared as though the British navy would engage, but the crisis was
> eventually defused.

    That is exactly right. It was a comedy of errors the whole way
and the Russian officers had to contend with mutinous sailors as well.
That story is a study in what not to do to conduct a naval battle.

    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:    Fri, 20 May 1994 20:31:01 GMT-6
From:    Terry Moore <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: P-61B

Hello, Dan!
>
> (I realize that some planes went down after the official cease-fire;
> perhaps Bueschel was adhering to his own definition of the end of the war.)
>
> I never saw any other mention of this. Has anyone?

    I have and will post this along with all other info I have on the
P-61.

    More later.

   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:    Fri, 20 May 1994 20:32:43 GMT-6
From:    Terry Moore <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: UK Bullion Goes to Canada after the fall of France

Hello, Emery!
>
>         "As early as May 21 [1940] [the UK govt.] decided to act against
> the contingency of German occupation of the British Isles.  In late June
> and early July Britain's gold, foreign exchange reserves and negotiable
> foreign securities were shipped to Canada; within a few weeks over five
> billion dollars worth of bullion, bonds, and other securities crossed
> the Atlantic in a battleship, two cruisers and three passenger ships for
> deposit in vaults in Toronto and Montreal.  The British war effort could
> now be financed from North America if necessary."
>
>         Anybody have any other info on this?  Comments?
>
        Yes, I do, but it will be much later before I can post it.
Please be patient. I heard about and read about that story nearly 30
years ago.

    Will be glad to post it when I can.

    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:    Fri, 20 May 1994 20:33:50 GMT-6
From:    Terry Moore <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: SCI (Psyops WWII)

Hello, Archie!
>
> I would definitely be interested!

    Will do my best to get it to you when I can. Please be patient.

    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:    Fri, 20 May 1994 21:55:11 EDT
From:    "Jonah Triebwasser, Adjunct Instructor,
         Marist Coll" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: UK Bullion Goes to Canada after the fall of France

>billion dollars worth of bullion, bonds, and other securities crossed
>the Atlantic in a battleship, two cruisers and three passenger ships for
>deposit in vaults in Toronto and Montreal.  The British war effort could
>now be financed from North America if necessary."
>
>        Anybody have any other info on this?  Comments?
>
>        --Emery
I know Britain shipped to Canada an even more precious cargo...her
children. The King and Queen declined to send their children away
and, in fact, made a point of staying in London.

Jonah Triebwasser
Adjunct Instructor
Marist College
Dyson Building (Adult Education)
Poughkeepsie, New York12601
Tel: (914) 575-3331, ext. 7037
E-Mail: [email-masked]

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

Date:    Fri, 20 May 1994 22:11:31 EDT
From:    "Jonah Triebwasser, Adjunct Instructor,
         Marist Coll" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: NOST: 50 years ago this week

I have obtained two calendars, one from the International Churchill
Society and one from the US Department of Defense which highlight
some of the events of WWII. As time permits, I will post some of
these events:

Fifty Years ago this week:
Sources: (c) = Churchill society; (d) = Defense Dept.

23 May - Allies launch offensive at Anzio (c). US Army breaks out at
Anzio beachhead (d).
25 May - Tito and Randolph Churchill (Winston's son) narrowly escape
capture (c).
26 May - Winston Churchill feels that he is "too old and too heavy"
to parachute to Tito (c).
28 May - Troops sealed in ships and camps for D-Day (c).

Jonah Triebwasser
Adjunct Instructor
Marist College
Dyson Building (Adult Education)
Poughkeepsie, New York12601
Tel: (914) 575-3331, ext. 7037
E-Mail: [email-masked]

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

Date:    Fri, 20 May 1994 21:36:28 EST
From:    Larry & Kim Jewell <[email-masked]>
Subject: Library of Congress Online.

>Date:    Thu, 19 May 1994 13:41:36 -0500
>From:    Bill Smith <[email-masked]>
>Subject: ARC byrd, and other research sites
>
>In response to a post a few days ago to Larry Jewell, I'd like a little
>more info on byrd.'s resources.  I'm new to using the net as a research
>tool, and think there's got to be more than making my secondary source
>searches faster than thumbing the card catalog.
>
>Here's a couple of other questions:
>        Are any of the finding aids for any of the major collections
>        (ie, NAMRB, LC) available on-line?
>
>        Are archivists at these sites on the net?  Seems quicker to send
>        e-mail requests and responses?
>
>As a point of reference, I'm searching for period diplomatic and aviation
>records.

Library of Congress 'telnet 140.160.240.11'

USAF                'ftp 131.13.25.2'

You can also check sunsite.unc.edu and wiretap.spies.com (sic) for random
goodies.

Larry J

[email-masked]; Co-Moderator: BYRD.MU.WVNET.EDU (Historical docs)
"Sunday's horoscope is note worthy because of its strange, sudden and wholly
unpredictable and inexplicable occurrences, affecting all phases of life."
Your Horoscope" L.A. Evening Herald Express, Sat, 12/06/41

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

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