Subject: WWII-L Digest - 28 Sep 1994 to 29 Sep 1994

From: Automatic digest processor <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 30 Sep 1994 00:02:45 -0400

There are 55 messages totalling 1503 lines in this issue.

Topics of the day:

  1. Report: 50th MARKET-GARDEN (3)
  2. INF: USN Chronology 09-29-94
  3. WEAP: Eric Brown (3)
  4. German Military Vehicles (6)
  5. BOOKS: Liddle Hart, Fuller (2)
  6. Query
  7. INF: 50 Years Ago - 30-SEP-1944
  8. INF: 50 Years Ago FTP Archive
  9. WEAPON: Amphibious Landings and Tanks (3)
 10. Downfall
 11. POL:Hiroshima
 12. Italians (was TRIVIA: Czech Army) (5)
 13. Italians at war (was TRIVIA: Czech Army)
 14. Lufberry Circle (3)
 15. BOOKS: Liddle Hart, ... (4)
 16. SS Jeremiah O'Brien
 17. Tanks and amphibious landings (2)
 18. TAC: ?'Could still loose the war? (8)
 19. WWI sites neat Paris (was: Re: Report: 50th MARKET-GARDEN)
 20. ? WW2 Airplane Crash in CBI
 21. Italians (3)
 22. [INF] USAAF 30 SEP 44
 23. P-61s (2)

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

Date:    Wed, 28 Sep 1994 23:27:30 PDT
From:    Sidney Allinson <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Report: 50th MARKET-GARDEN

Thank you very much, Doug, for your series of accounts of the MARKET GARDEN
comemmorations.
I am particularly grateful for your posting of where to obtain a video of
THEIRS IS THE GLORY.
I commend the movie to anyone wishing to see an unvarnished, accurate
depiction of the British Airborne stand at Arnhem. I'll certainly be sending
off for my copy first-thing tomorrow.
Best Regards -- Sidney Allinson, Victoria, B.C. Canada.

--

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

Date:    Thu, 29 Sep 1994 01:17:07 PDT
From:    "Keller, Theron P." <[email-masked]>
Subject: INF: USN Chronology 09-29-94

UNITED STATES NAVY CHRONOLOGY
from:
//byrd.mu.wvnet.edu/pub/history/military/wwii/naval_chronology/chr4(4,5).txt

1944
09/29 Fri. Submarine NARWHAL (SS-167) evacuates 81 Allied
           prisoners war from Sindangan Bay, Mindanao, P. I.
           These men are survivors from the torpedoed Japanese
           ship SHINYO MARU.
            German submarine sunk:
             U-863, by naval land-based aircraft (VP-107), South
             Atlantic area,
             10 d. 45'S., 25 d. 30'W.

Theron P. Keller
Logicon, Inc.
Dahlgren, VA  22448 USA
[email-masked]

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

Date:    Thu, 29 Sep 1994 10:51:08 +0200
From:    "A.Bouis" <[email-masked]>
Subject: WEAP: Eric Brown

Checked my sources, here is Eric Brown's record, which I underestimated :
number of aircraft types flown : 487
Number of carrier landings : 2,400 (imagine: one a day for seven years !!)

Anyone wants to continue the thread on odd WWII air encounters ? (Swiss Me109s vs German ones, Hellcats vs Fw's, etc...)

Arnaud

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

Date:    Thu, 29 Sep 1994 10:24:07 BST
From:    Stephen Baldwin <[email-masked]>
Subject: German Military Vehicles

Ladies and Gentlemen!

I was wondering where one would have to go to see a good collection
of german military vehicles from WWII. Presumably germany. Would anyone
know of any AFV museums etc. in europe where such stuff would be on
display?

Steve Baldwin
[email-masked]

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

Date:    Thu, 29 Sep 1994 12:48:08 +0200
From:    "A.Bouis" <[email-masked]>
Subject: BOOKS: Liddle Hart, Fuller

Days agos someone mentioned a recent book on Liddle Hart, which criticizes his work as a Historian.
I am very interested in knowing what criticism was brought :  I have read many of his works and indeed his "History of the Second World War" has always been my favourite.
Can someone say more on this subject ?

Another author I would very much like to discuss about is Liddle Hart's friend, John Frederick Charles Fuller. Any of the gentlemen/ladies here read his works ?

Arnaud.

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

Date:    Thu, 29 Sep 1994 06:51:37 EDT
From:    "Steve L. New" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Query

     QUERY WWII-L

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

Date:    Thu, 29 Sep 1994 04:45:51 -0700
From:    John Davis <[email-masked]>
Subject: INF: 50 Years Ago - 30-SEP-1944

On 30-SEP-1944, the following occurred -

World War II - The Battlefronts
-------------------------------
Western Front - The Canadian 3rd Division captures Calais. The Polish 1st
Division captures Merxplas, northwest of Turnhout. The Germans forge a
powerful counter-attack against the US XII Corps (3rd Army), trying to
recapture the forest of Gremlecey. The counter-attack is contained with the
help of the US 6th Armoured Division.

Eastern Front - The 47th Army of the 3rd Ukraine Front crosses the Danube in
force upstream of Turnu Severin.

Peleliu - RADM Fort, newly appointed commander of the western Carolines
sector, officially announces the capture of Peleliu, Angaur, Ngesebus and
Kongauru. In fact, operations against pockets of Japanese resistance will
continue for a long time.

The Homefront
-------------
Navy's Hurricane Dead - The Navy has announced in Norfolk that it lost 344 men
died in the destruction of five ships in the Sept. 14 hurricane.

Top Films For September - "Arsenic and Old Lace" featuring Cary Grant and
Raymond Massey, "Double Indemnity" featuring Barbara Stanwyck, Fred MacMurray
and Edward G. Robinson and "The Seventh Cross" featuring Spencer Tracy.

Mickey Rooney Weds - Pvt. Mickey Rooney has married Betty Jane Rase in
Birmingham, Alabama. His first wife Ava Gardner divorced him in Sept. 1943.

=============================================================================

Sources: "2194 Days of War" by Cesare Salmaggi and Alfredo Pallavisimi, "The
World Almanac Book Of WW II" by Peter Young, "Facts On File Yearbook 1944,
Person's Index Of World Events" edited by R.L. Lapica.

----------
John Davis  [email-masked]
Cary, N.C.
----------

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

Date:    Thu, 29 Sep 1994 04:46:40 -0700
From:    John Davis <[email-masked]>
Subject: INF: 50 Years Ago FTP Archive

The September 1944 50 Years Ago articles are now available for downloading
via anonymous FTP.

Instructions for downloading 50 YA articles -

The articles are stored by month. To retrieve the articles by FTP, open host
"ftp.netcom.com", enter "anonymous" when prompted for login ID, enter your
Internet mail address when prompted for password. To change to the directory
where the articles are stored enter "cd /pub/jbd". The file name identifies
the month (example - sep1944.txt, contains the September 1944 articles).

----------
John Davis [email-masked]
Cary, N.C.
----------

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

Date:    Thu, 29 Sep 1994 07:37:40 GMT-6
From:    "Robert T. Moore" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Report: 50th MARKET-GARDEN

Hello, Jim!

> 4.  Paris:  we're doing the usual tourist stuff in paris for 4 days; any WWI
>     sites to visit there?

    I would recommend you visit Versailles, the Palace of Louis XIV,
located outside of Paris. The Hall of Mirrors, and the palace itself,
is a marvel to behold. As you know, the palace was the site of the
signing of the treaty ending WWI.

    Of course, there is always Napoleon's tomb located on the Rue des
Invalides.

    Hope this helps.

    Terry

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

Date:    Thu, 29 Sep 1994 08:08:52 -0500
From:    "Tim J. Watts" <[email-masked]>
Subject: WEAPON: Amphibious Landings and Tanks

Mike Yaklich's PS about the first landing of tanks in an opposed amphibious
operation reminded me of the German crossing of the Nieman in June 1941
(Operation Barbarossa).  I know it was later than the Narvik landings, but
the submersible Pzkw. Mk. III's definitely deserve to be remembered.  I
don't believe I would have had the nerve to drive a tank UNDER a river!
Tim J. Watts
Valparaiso University

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

Date:    Thu, 29 Sep 1994 09:06:11 EDT
From:    Ken Koester <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Downfall

On Wed, 28 Sep 1994 17:27:00 UTC Edward S. Miller said:
>historians as to whether an invasion would actually have been launched on
>November 1 (or any date, for that matter) absent the atom bomb and the
>Soviet attack in Manchuria.  We can never know, of course.  I belong to the
>school that believes Truman would never have launched it.

Clarify:  you believe that Truman would never have launched an invasion
in '45, '46, or any other reasonable date, or just not in '45?  If the
former, why do you think so & what do you think he would have done or
what would have happened instead?

ken koester
[email-masked]

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

Date:    Thu, 29 Sep 1994 09:09:26 EDT
From:    Ken Koester <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: POL:Hiroshima

On Wed, 28 Sep 1994 15:08:53 GMT-6 Robert T. Moore said:
>    Also, consider the experimental nature of the bomb. There was no
>consensus at the time that it would work. In the case of the Nagasaki
>bomb, they were more certain, but not with the first one.

?  Wasn't the U-235 bomb used first?  I don't think they could have had
many doubts on that one at all; it was about as simple a device as can
be imagined:  just a gun firing uranium bullets at a uranium target.
The plutonium device was far more complicated and delicate an affair.

ken koester
[email-masked]

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

Date:    Thu, 29 Sep 1994 09:32:31 EDT
From:    Patrick D Marsden <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: WEAPON: Amphibious Landings and Tanks

>
> Mike Yaklich's PS about the first landing of tanks in an opposed amphibious
> operation reminded me of the German crossing of the Nieman in June 1941
> (Operation Barbarossa).  I know it was later than the Narvik landings, but
> the submersible Pzkw. Mk. III's definitely deserve to be remembered.  I
> don't believe I would have had the nerve to drive a tank UNDER a river!
> Tim J. Watts
> Valparaiso University
>

I've always been under the impression that the German Army (WWII to present)
has always put a great emphasis on river crossing capabilities.  As I
recall, most present German AFV's and tanks possess fairly good amphibious
characteristics.  I've seen pictures of the Leopard II with it's commander's
"tunnel" fully extended which allowed the tank commander to ride above
the waves while the tank turret was about 3 meters underwater.  Once on
back on terra firma, the tunnel is retacted and the leopard looks like
a normal tank.  With the "tunnel" extended though, it looks like a tank with
three 55 gallon oil drums stacked on the turret.  I didn't realize that the
WWII tanks could also drive under rivers.  If anyone has more information
on this, I'd love to see it.

patrick
[email-masked]

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

Date:    Thu, 29 Sep 1994 08:31:25 -0500
From:    "Tim J. Watts" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Italians (was TRIVIA: Czech Army)

Terry-
I agree completely that the Italian people did not want war or see any
purpose in the war.  I think this is a great example of a leader who pushed
his people into a war they were not prepared for and paid the price.  It's
funny that people saw Mussolini as such a threat in the 30's.  Even his
Blackshirt battalions, which should have been comparable to SS units, were
no better than the normal army units.

I think there are many examples of Italian military professionals who acted
very bravely and honorably, but generally speaking they were hampered by
poor material or tactics.  In 1937, Italian military equipment was roughly
com
comparable to the rest of the world's.  It's just they didn't progress.

One of my favorite stories illustrates the point.  In the Spanish Civil War,
Spanish and Russian pilots flying I-15's against the Italian CR-32's had
lighter caliber weapons, but 4 machine guns to only 2 .50 calibers on the
CR-32's.  The Italian pilots liked to open fire at a longer range, because
they knew they had harder hitting weapons (the only time you'll ever hear
this about an Italian weapon).  Unfortuneately, they still had those same
two guns on all their fighters through most of WW II, when everyone else
had gone to 4-8 guns of comparable or heavier caliber.

Mussolini - He's sort of the comic relief in a very serious story.

Tim J. Watts
Valparaiso University

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

Date:    Thu, 29 Sep 1994 08:42:58 -0500
From:    "Tim J. Watts" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Italians at war (was TRIVIA: Czech Army)

Jim-
A great book on the Italians in Spain is Coverdale, ITALIAN INTERVENTION
IN THE SPANISH CIVIL WAR (1975), if you haven't seen it.  He has some
different information that Hugh Thomas gives in his classic on the
Spanish Civil War.  I agree with what you say about the Italians being
more helpful to Franco between 1936-1939.  I don't think the German
military saw Spain as much more than a proving ground for weapons and
equipment, while Mussolini just got more and more involved.  He saw a
Fascist victory in Spain as crucial to his prestige, especially since
Hitler was becoming more and more dominant in Europe.

The really terrible thing for the Italians was that they never seemed
to draw the right conclusions from what happened to them in the war.
The future of air fighting looked like biplanes, very manueverable.
Also, light tanks armed with machine guns were fine; who needs big
guns?

I really liked the idea of Italian submarines trying to sink Republican
ships off Spain and then denying any involvement.  For a while, Italy
and England were on the verge of an undeclared naval war.

Tim J. Watts
Valparaiso University

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

Date:    Thu, 29 Sep 1994 08:47:52 -0500
From:    Terrance Lewis <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: BOOKS: Liddle Hart, Fuller

If I remember correctly, most of the criticism of Liddle Hart comes from his
work before World War II, when he was one of the main advocates of the
theory "the bomber will always get through," with the implication that the
cities so attacked would sustain much heavier damage in a much shorter
time than actually occurred.

"T"

   -*-+****************************************************+-*-
   < [email-masked]   [email-masked] >
   <   Terrance L. Lewis, History Program, Social Sciences    >
   <            Southern University at New Orleans            >
   -*-+****************************************************+-*-

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

Date:    Thu, 29 Sep 1994 08:50:52 -0500
From:    John Lundstrom <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Lufberry Circle

Cassady,
        Thank you for your kind comments about my books.
        Actually the Thach Weave was conceived by Lt.Cdr. John S. ("Jimmy")
Thach, CO of VF-3, precisely to meet the type of high speed diving attack
used by Chennault and the Flying Tigers. That is the same types of attacks
practiced by the USN prior to WWII, except that the USN pilots could shoot
deflection shots. The Thach Weave is useful against any type of attack
from the tail. As I said, the key is in proper timing to execute the turn.
Do it too soon and the attacker can hit one of the weaving fighters just
after they scissor each other.

        Regarding Japanese Zero pilots using firing passes rather than
dogfight, that is exactly what almost all of them did. If you look at the
fight on 7 August 1942 between Saburo Sakai and three other Zero pilots
versus Pug Southerland of VF-5, the only Japanese who even tried to dogfight
and get on Southerland's tail was Sakai. The other three pilots did what
they were taught and kept making firing passes. One VF-5 ace, Hayden Jensen,
wrote in his report for 27 Sept. 1942, that the Zeros "could not be shaken
by us if they would chop their guns and sit on our tails." Jensen was
profoundly grateful that they did not do so.

        I think the IJNAF fighter pilots did the firing passes because they
were trained to stay together and try to fight as a team. At least this was
the prewar and early war concept. It certainly seems that it was not the
best tactic for the Zero, precisely because it was not a good gunnery
platform at high speed (the heavy ailerons). IJNAF pilots later in the war
probably tried dogfighting, but by then it was too late, because the US
fighters were much better aircraft. The Japanese Army pilots, I believe, did
dogfight more, but the firepower of their OSCARS was so poor.

Regarding the Lufbery Circle (Lufbery is the proper spelling of Raoul
Lufbery's name), it can be defeated by pilots who know how to make
deflection shots, such as USN. They do not have to tail in behind one of the
circle to be able to shoot, but can make passes and dive out. The leading
USN ace, Lt.Cdr. Dave McCampbell and his wingman got most of their combined
total of 15 kills on one mission in October 1944 against a huge Japanese
formation that went into Lufbery Circles.

The next item of my agenda is a biography of Butch O'Hare, being co-authored
with Steve Ewing, who is curator of the USS Yorktown (CV-10) at Patriots
Point, SC. We have a great deal of new information on him, including his
death on one of the first carrier night fighting missions.
                   John Lundstrom

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

Date:    Thu, 29 Sep 1994 10:47:25 EDT
From:    John Sloan <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: BOOKS: Liddle Hart, ...

HI Arnaud,
-re Hart and Fuller and your questions. - a short answer while I am on line.
 I have read a number of books by each and consider Fuller a genuine military
historian of the first rank while Hart is (was) a self-promoter and
journalist of dubious veracity. ONe of the main criticisms comes from
detailed study of his book on "German Generals Speak" or something like that
done from interviews of the German generals after WWII. The point was made
that the Germans knew what Hart wanted them to say so they said it. In
particular they gave him much undeserved credit for having had influence on
the development of German military thinking between the wars. This was shown
in a book, whose title I can't recall at the moment, done by Prof Mearsheimer
(sp?) at U of Chicago. An edition of Hart's book on Scipio was recently
republished and I may have remarked already on one of these lists that I
considered it in its first edition to be mostly self promotion by Hart.  He
did everything short of saying that Scipio learned warfare from reading
Hart!!  Likewise his book on Strategy - the Indirect Approach - is
pretentious and mostly makes a big deal out of the obvious.
enough for now, but can go on at more length if folks are interested.

john sloan
[email-masked]

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

Date:    Thu, 29 Sep 1994 05:03:44 -1000
From:    Jim Adams <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: SS Jeremiah O'Brien

Some one asked if the Jeremiah O'Brien was going to return to her role as
a visitor/tourest ship, and that is the plan.

She is operated by the National Liberty Ship Memmorial, Fort Mason
Center, San Francisco (about a mile from Fisherman's Wharf).  Before her
voyage,and I would guess the same hours would be in effect again, she was
open daily from 9 to 3pm for self-guided tours.  you could call (415)
441-3101 for further info.

****************************************************************************
Jim Adams                       [email-masked]
USS Arizona Memorial, NPS        (808) 423-7300
1 Arizona Memorial Place
Honolulu, Hawaii 96818
****************************************************************************

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

Date:    Thu, 29 Sep 1994 10:16:55 -0500
From:    "Tim J. Watts" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Tanks and amphibious landings

Patrick-
What I said about the Mk. III's fording the Nieman river came mostly from
Paul Carell's HITLER MOVES EAST.  I don't have a copy handy, but what I
remember goes like this.

About a battalion of Mk. III's was modified for use in Operation Sealion.
The idea was that they would drive off landing craft and proceed underwater
onto the beach.  (I think the intended landing craft were ferrys that
could not get very close to shore.)  When the invasion of England was
cancelled, the tanks were without a mission.  When planning for the
invasion of the Soviet Union occurred, it was decided they could be used
to cross the Nieman river.  I get the impression that this was not a
critical part of the plan, but just that these tanks were available, so
why not find them something to do.

To make them submersible, a plug was put in the end of the gun (a cork?)
and the rest of the tank was made water-proof.  An inflatable rubber
seal (I guess like an inner tube) was fitted around the turret ring, to
keep water out of there.  A snorkel (and I don't remember how long it
was) was used to bring fresh air in for the crew and engine.  I believe
an automatic valve was fitted at the top to keep out water.  As I recall,
navigation consisted of following a set course on the compass; no
periscope or other means of visually guiding the tank was used.  When
the other side was reached, the cork was popped out of the gun, the
inner tube deflated, and the Mk. III was basically the same as all other
Mk. III's.

Hope this helps.  I just have always thought this was a great invention;
not too practical, maybe, but a great invention.

Tim J. Watts
Valparaiso University

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

Date:    Thu, 29 Sep 1994 16:14:17 BST
From:    Stephen Baldwin <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: BOOKS: Liddle Hart, ...

Revealing thread on BLH - is all his stuff "dubious" or is there a
particular period after which he becomes less reliable (I have his book
on WWI and thought it was quite well done).

Steve Baldwin
[email-masked]

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

Date:    Thu, 29 Sep 1994 12:08:42 -0500
From:    Mike Yaklich <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Lufberry Circle

Oops, my brain short-circuited again!  The Allied landings at Bjerkvik, Norway
were May 13, 1940 (not April)

Mike Yaklich

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

Date:    Thu, 29 Sep 1994 11:25:58 -0500
From:    "William L. Huber - SAA" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: German Military Vehicles

> I was wondering where one would have to go to see a good collection
> of german military vehicles from WWII. Presumably germany. Would anyone
> know of any AFV museums etc. in europe where such stuff would be on
> display?
>
> Steve Baldwin
> [email-masked]

Hi Steve and everybody,

The most comprehensive collection of German halftracks I have ever
seen is at the Victory Museum in Arlon, Lux.  In Germany the Auto &
Technique Museum in Sinsheim is excellent with a cutaway Tiger 1
which I am told is the one from Aberdeen Proving Grounds in Maryland.
Sinsheim has an amazing collection including heavy tanks where Arlon
just has halftracks.

Although I have not been there, I am told that the Panzer Museum in
Munster is very good too.  France has a large museum in private hands
that has a fine collection too.  If you find your way to Upper
Austria there is a good museum (also privately owned) in Ardagger
called "Die Wehrmachts Museum".

Since you are in Britain (Steve) what is your opinion of the Imperial
War Museum's panzer collection?  I have seen photos and it looks
pretty good.

The neat thing about Arlon is that their vehicles are in life-like
settings in 1:1 scale with dummies in uniforms and lots of equipment
that adds realism that more clinical museums like Aberdeen PG lack.

Cheers, Bill Huber / [email-masked]

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

Date:    Thu, 29 Sep 1994 12:26:15 -0500
From:    Mike Yaklich <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: German Military Vehicles

If you're not going to Europe try the Aberdeen Proving Ground in Aberdeen,
Maryland.  It has virtually every German tank and SP of the period, including
some experimental types.  Also a nice little small arms collection and an
artillery selection that includes the current home of "Anzio Annie" (280mm
K5 type railroad gun).  Its been a decade since I was there but I remember it
was well worth the visit.

Mike Yaklich

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

Date:    Thu, 29 Sep 1994 12:36:43 -0500
From:    Mike Yaklich <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Italians (was TRIVIA: Czech Army)

I thought the CR 32 mounted two (later four) 7.7-mm mgs?  Wasn't the 12.7-mm
introduced for the CR 42 "Falco"? (not used in Spain--entered squadron
service May '38).  This is what the books I've seen say... I might also
mention that the 12.7-mm guns had a very low practical rate of fire due to
synchronization problems (probably caused by poor or infrequent maintenance--
the Regia Aeronautica was chronically short of trained mechanics).  Some of
the original Gladiator pilots on Malta (the Faith, Hope, Charity bunch) later
credited their survival to this fact.

Sorry to challenge one of the undisputed experts on air affairs on this list
(no sarcasm intended), but could you double-check that one for me (and let me
know what you've been reading if you turn out to be right so I can get better
facts)

Thanks

Mike Yaklich

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

Date:    Thu, 29 Sep 1994 12:50:22 -0500
From:    Mike Yaklich <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: WEAPON: Amphibious Landings and Tanks

I am aware of those PzKw III's  (and have even seen a photo, from "Signal")
used for crossing the Nieman in June '41.  They were actually designed and tested for the cancelled Sea Lion operation.  An inflatable rubber tube around the
turret made it watertight, and an early version of the schnorkel concept
allowed the engine to breathe.  The caps over the gun barrel were popped off
by compressed air to allow the tank to be combat-ready as soon as it reached
the other side (without any of the crew having to exit the vehicle).  These
tanks were not standard field equipment and to the best of my knowledge were
not used again.  There is a good account of this operation in Paul Carell's
"Hitler Moves East."

Mike Yaklich

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

Date:    Thu, 29 Sep 1994 13:00:59 -0500
From:    Mike Yaklich <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Lufberry Circle

Sorry to be cluttering up the bandwidth so much today, maybe I'm just
ornery, but in reference to John Lundstrom's post on Thach weave and
Lufbery circle (thanks for the right spelling) he refers to Dave McCampbell
shooting down nine planes (and his wingman six) from Japanese planes in a
Lufbery circle.  While I know the Japanese sometimes used these tactics,
I could swear I read an account by McCampbell where he said the Japanese
planes just kept flying in formation.  Is my memory playing tricks again??

Mike Yaklich

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

Date:    Thu, 29 Sep 1994 13:05:11 EDT
From:    Ken Koester <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Report: 50th MARKET-GARDEN

On Thu, 29 Sep 1994 07:37:40 GMT-6 Robert T. Moore said:
>> 4.  Paris:  we're doing the usual tourist stuff in paris for 4 days; any WWI
>>     sites to visit there?
>
>    I would recommend you visit Versailles, the Palace of Louis XIV,
>located outside of Paris. The Hall of Mirrors, and the palace itself,
>is a marvel to behold. As you know, the palace was the site of the
>signing of the treaty ending WWI.
>
>    Of course, there is always Napoleon's tomb located on the Rue des
>Invalides.

In the same building as Invalides (Nap's tombeau), but on the river side, is
the Army Museum, with captured Panthers outside the door (at least, in 1973)
& relics from the ages, including a big set of 18th century scale models of
various forts & towns.  Well worth a few hours, and not very crowded.

As you walk through Paris, particularly around the Luxembourg Gardens, look
at the sides of buildings & walls for small plaques, some with flowers,
saying "So-and-so, killed by the Germans <tuee' par les Allemands>, August
24, 1944)", or other date from that week.

Incidentally, Versailles is also the site of the document signing in 1871
that established the Second Reich.

ken koester
[email-masked]

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

Date:    Thu, 29 Sep 1994 18:11:46 BST
From:    Stephen Baldwin <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: German Military Vehicles

>
>Since you are in Britain (Steve) what is your opinion of the Imperial
>War Museum's panzer collection?  I have seen photos and it looks
>pretty good.

Hi Bill!
um, I've got nothing really to compare it with, but thought it
would be worth doing a week-end trip to europe...I think the Imperial
War Museum has an adequate selection - at the main site in London,
it is fairly limited - a WWI tank, a Churchill, Sherman, JagdPanther
and a few other bits and pieces. The IWM also has a collection at their
Duxford site (Battle of Britain airfield, "home" of Sir Douglas Bader
etc). That collection is better, and has the vehicles in mock settings-
ruins, desert etc with dummy soldiers. It is a lot better than the
IWM London display. I was on the phone to the Tank Museum in
Bovington, Hamphire UK today - think I'll drop down there and take a
look. They have ~100 vehicles on display but own in total ~300
AFVs. I've always been impressed with german engineering - Terry
Moore's info on the Schwerer Gustav gun was astounding - I posted it to
my colleagues here - one of them replied "s'pose you've got one in
your back yard...". Pity that gun doesn't exist any more...and a friend
suggested going over the water to look at some german AFVs - hence my
enquiries.

thanks for your info...

Steve

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

Date:    Thu, 29 Sep 1994 13:38:36 EDT
From:    Brian Nicklas <[email-masked]>
Subject: German Military Vehicles

There is an excellent magazine -Wheels & Tracks- published quarterly in
Great Britain which covers museums and exhibitions, plus vehicle
gatherings for private owner/operators.
The magazine is by the same group who do the wonderful -After The Battle-
magazine and -The XXX Then and Now- series of books (Battle of Britain,
Battle of the Bulge, etc).
Bill Dean Books in Whitestone, NY is the US outlet (I pick it up at the
Washington DC Squadron Shop).
I don't have a full run of the magazine, but if someone else has
access, the "Collections" column might have some fruit worth picking.
Issue at hand shows the Museum of Army Flying at Middle Wallop,
Hampshire with some vehicles, and in France, Ouvrage du Hackenberg,
a fortress on the Maginot Line - now a museum.  The latter looks as if it
may be all French vehicles.
The last page of the magazine lists the books and back issues, incl.
a book - Historic Military Vehicles Directory - at $48.00.
Also retail address - Sky Books, East 50th St, NY, NY.
I have heard that several of the German AFVs at Aberdeen have been
sent to Germany on long-term loans for restoration, possibly
sent to Munster.
If I find any more back issues with Museum details for German AFVs,
I'll post back.

(Not anything to do with WWII, but I am so happy that Disney has
abandoned the Haymarket site for "Disney's America"!)(Sorry Joe,
humor me. :-)  )

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

Date:    Thu, 29 Sep 1994 12:48:52 GMT-6
From:    "Robert T. Moore" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: BOOKS: Liddle Hart, ...

Hello, Steve!

BLH has recently fallen into disrepute mainly because his theories
regarding tank warfare are not really his nor original.

    I don't know if all his stuff is dubious but his theories that
were commonly accepted before WWII have now been shown to be not
really his.

    Terry
> Revealing thread on BLH - is all his stuff "dubious" or is there a
> particular period after which he becomes less reliable (I have his book
> on WWI and thought it was quite well done).
>
> Steve Baldwin
> [email-masked]
>

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

Date:    Thu, 29 Sep 1994 12:58:58 -0500
From:    "Tim J. Watts" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Italians (was TRIVIA: Czech Army)

Mike-
You're probably right.  The story came from Howson, AIRCRAFT OF THE
SPANISH CIVIL WAR 1936-1939.  It's full of interesting facts and trivia,
but I don't have it here, so my memory is probably playing tricks on
me.
Tim J. Watts
Valparaiso University

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

Date:    Thu, 29 Sep 1994 14:01:48 EDT
From:    Alan Wild <[email-masked]>
Subject: TAC: ?'Could still loose the war?

With the Allied troops approaching from all sides, what made the Allied
General staff think that they could possibly "still loose this war"?

(Quoting the movie Patton at the meeting where Bedel and Bradley ask
the corps commanders for assitance up at Verdun and/or Bastogne.)

Was it the development of atomic energy? Was it other "specialized"
weapons, or the combination? Was it a real concern, or a movie line?

'Just wondering,...

-Al

Calm down; it's only ones and zeros.

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

Date:    Thu, 29 Sep 1994 14:15:26 EDT
From:    Cassady Craft <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Tanks and amphibious landings

Has anyone out there read a book by Holsti entitled, _Hitler's Panzers
East_?  Any opinions?

Cassady Craft
Department of Political Science
University of Georgia
e-mail [email-masked]
or
[email-masked]

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

Date:    Thu, 29 Sep 1994 14:58:14 EDT
From:    Patrick D Marsden <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: TAC: ?'Could still loose the war?

>
> With the Allied troops approaching from all sides, what made the Allied
> General staff think that they could possibly "still loose this war"?
>
> (Quoting the movie Patton at the meeting where Bedel and Bradley ask
> the corps commanders for assitance up at Verdun and/or Bastogne.)
>
> Was it the development of atomic energy? Was it other "specialized"
> weapons, or the combination? Was it a real concern, or a movie line?
>
> 'Just wondering,...
>
> -Al

        I just saw PATTON a few weeks ago and recognize the scene you're
refering to (planning the relief of Bastogne, Dec. '44).  IMHO the line
was an attempt to add drama to the Bastogne situation and a good climax
to the movie.  BUT, I also think that if the German Ardennes offensive
had succeeded and driven to the coast, Amsterdam probably, it would have
been a huge blow to the Allied armies in western europe.  These armies
were mainly supplied via England and the loss of any ports would not
have helped the situation on the continent.  I don't know if the loss
the supply routes could have permanently halted the western allies advance
on Germany or if the Germans could have forced the allies from continential
europe again.
        It does make for some interesting thought experiments: (1) With allies
forced from the continent again, could the Germans have stopped and turned
the Soviets?  (2) Would the western allies ever attempt another invasion of
France?  (3) Could the V-weapons have caused the British to sue for peace
if used to their fullest?  And just imagine the post-war politics!
        Again, just my opinion, but I think that if the western powers had
lost the Battle of the Bulge, they would not have lost the war but it would
have made winning it a LOT more difficult.

patrick
[email-masked]

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

Date:    Thu, 29 Sep 1994 14:00:50 -0700
From:    John Holtz <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: German Military Vehicles

In England, check out Bovington, the Royal Armoured Corps training
grounds.  It's about an hour west of London by train, I believe the stop
is Wool.  There is a bus from the station (5-10 min. ride) or a nice 40
min. walk (note the "Tank Crossing" signs along the road).  They had
almost every Mark of German tank plus a number of SPs, APCs and Armored
Cars.

The Land Warfare Museum at Duxford Airfield, near Cambridge, also has a
nice selection of German equipment.

jwh

--
John W. Holtz, Asst. Professor       INTERNET: [email-masked]
Sangamon State University Library       PHONE: (217) 786-6633
Springfield, IL  62794-9243               FAX: (217) 786-6208

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

Date:    Thu, 29 Sep 1994 15:04:22 -0400
From:    David Rising <[email-masked]>
Subject: WWI sites neat Paris (was: Re: Report: 50th MARKET-GARDEN)

If you have access to a car, try driving out to Vimy Ridge. I understand
that it's quite a good "display". I, of course, couldn't go because I was
trainbound. Cheers,
David Rising

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

Date:    Thu, 29 Sep 1994 15:18:22 EDT
From:    Ken Koester <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: BOOKS: Liddle Hart, ...

On Thu, 29 Sep 1994 12:48:52 GMT-6 Robert T. Moore said:
>BLH has recently fallen into disrepute mainly because his theories
>regarding tank warfare are not really his nor original.
>
>    I don't know if all his stuff is dubious but his theories that
>were commonly accepted before WWII have now been shown to be not
>really his.

Terry, can you furnish some cites for this?  I might actually get to a
useful library at some point, and I would be interested.

ken koester
[email-masked]

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

Date:    Thu, 29 Sep 1994 15:37:07 -0500
From:    Mike Yaklich <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Italians (was TRIVIA: Czech Army)

Of course, theItalians did use the Fiat G50 "Freccia" fighter experimentally in Spain in 1939.  It mounted two 12.7-mm mgs, so the incident could have occurred
even if it wasn't in a CR32.

MIke Yaklich

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

Date:    Thu, 29 Sep 1994 14:41:14 EST
From:    [email-masked]
Subject: Re: TAC: ?'Could still loose the war?

As I recall, at the time of the Bulge, our forces were already ashore
in the south of France.  I agree that a major defeat in the Ardennes
would have been devastating, but I see no reason to believe that the
allies would have lost the war.  Even IF the US and the UK had just
quit, I have no doubt the Russians would have gone right on tearing
the guts out of the German armies.
*****************************************************
Brad Coon                     Windows: the operating
[email-masked]          system for people who
[email-masked]    think even a Macintosh
                              is too fast.

Remember, only YOU can prevent political correctness!
******************************************************

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

Date:    Thu, 29 Sep 1994 16:23:30 -0500
From:    Drew Halevy <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: WEAP: Eric Brown

Drew Halevy
Department of History
University of Arkansas
[email-masked]

On Thu, 29 Sep 1994, A.Bouis wrote:

>
> Anyone wants to continue the thread on odd WWII air encounters ? (Swiss Me109s v
> s German ones, Hellcats vs Fw's, etc...)
>
> Arnaud
>
The Swiss Me-109's sounds interesting? Anymore details? What about
Sweden, Spain or Portugal?-Drew

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

Date:    Thu, 29 Sep 1994 17:33:15 -0400
From:    Barone <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Italians (was TRIVIA: Czech Army)

        You didn't *really* think that I would be silent while there was a
discussion about Italy, did you?  :-)

        "The first real test of Italian aircraft and airmen came in Spain
in 1936 onwards.  Mussolini was quick to provide support for the Nationalist
Insurgents; an air legion of substantial strength forming part of this aid
from first to last.  Many Italian airmen received their baptism of fire over
Spain, where they fought with some considerable success.  Against French and
Russian-built fighters, the Fiat CR.32 was more than able to hold its own,
while the fast new Savoia SM.79 and Fiat BR.20 bombers proved almost
impossible for the Republican fighters to intercept.  Older Meridionali
Ro.37 army cooperation biplanes and Savoia SM.81 bomber-transports also
operated satisfactorily and with only minimal losses.

        "While experience in Spain led the Italians to believe that
maneuverability in fighter aircraft was of supreme importance, resulting
in the ordering new biplane fighters as late as 1939, their first examples
of modern monoplane fighters and attack aircraft with retractable
undercarriages and enclosed cockpits were tested operationally in the
latter stages of the [civil] war.  By this time however, the opposition
was so slight that no noteworthy lessons for combat could be learned.
Only in China, where Japanese Army Air Force had introduced numbers of
Fiar BR.20 medium bombers into service, were Italian aircraft tested
under less than favorable conditions.  Here the unescorted bombers were
met by determined fighter interceptions over Central Chinese towns,
suffering very severe losses to the same types of opposing aircraft
as had operated in Spain during the months of the conflict (Polikarpov
I-15bis and I-16 fighters).  The lessons so gained did not apparently
filter back to Italy.

        "By 1939, most Regia Aeronautica equipment was due for replacement,
but production of new aircraft in sufficient numbers had not been achieved
when war broke out in Europe in September of that year.  The Italian
aircraft industry faced two major problems at this time.  Airframe design
capabilities were excellent, and fully up to world standards, but no really
suitable power plant had been developed, nor was a really suitable aircraft
gun available.

        "The only engines in full production were radials of substantially
lower power than the new inline liquid-cooled engines available in Germany,
Great Britain, and to a lesser extent, in France and the United States.
Worse, no promising prototype was yet in view.  Most combat aircraft were
fitted with the Breda SAFAT machine gun of 12.7mm calibre as main armament.
While the calibre was the same as the highly-successful Browning .50in
weapon, there the similarity ended.  Muzzle velocity and rate of fire were
poor, and available ammunition relatively ineffective.  Most shells were
constructed for impact explosion, to rip the fabric off an aircraft.
However most modern aircraft of other nations were now increasingly metal-
clad, and thereby not nearly so badly affected by such armament.  The
bulky Breda gun also had to be mounted in the nose of the fighter aircraft
at this stage, being too big and heavy for wing mounting in the light
Italian machines.  This imposed the need for synchronization with the
propeller through the spinning disc of which the gun had to fire.  This
synchronization further reduced rate of fire, and was also to pose many
technical problems in action."

---
_Regia Aeronautica, Vol. 1_, Christopher Shores, pp. 5-6, Squadron
Signal Publication, Carrollton, TX, ISBN 0-89747-060-5
--
Joe Barone
[email-masked]
He may be nuts, but he's not crazy enough to put Shermans up against Tigers!

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

Date:    Thu, 29 Sep 1994 17:06:14 -0500
From:    Greg Kelley <[email-masked]>
Subject: ? WW2 Airplane Crash in CBI

Patron is trying to recall an event he experienced at the end of the
Second World War.  Back in August, September, or October of 1945 (he
remembers it was during the monsoon season) he was aboard a C-87
transport plane of the 1847th Bengal Wing of the USAAF, flying out of
Chabua Air Base in India over the "Hump"of the Himalayas. After losing
two engines (#'s 3 & 4) it made a successful crashlanding which the crew
survived.  Circumstances surrounding the crash were remarkable enough to
be written up in an issue of STARS & STRIPES.

Does anyone out there have either access to an index to STARS & STRIPES
or some other source that might describe this crash?  We've exhausted our
sources here.

For those of us not well versed in aeronautics, the C-87 was the cargo
version of the B-24 Liberator bomber.

TIA for any assistance/leads/guesses.

                                          Glad To Be Of Service!

                                          Greg Kelley
                                          St. Paul Public Library
                                          [email-masked]

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

Date:    Thu, 29 Sep 1994 16:23:34 -0600
From:    Dave Neil <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Italians

Joe Barone and others:

If I may summarize:

Pre-war Italian aircraft suffered from a lack of a suitable power plant and
armaments which plagued the Italian Air Force throughout the war.

My question to the list is "Why didn't they build engines under contract from
Daimler-Benz?"  Same goes for the armaments - why not use the successful German
weapons? Surely Germany had an interest in a strong Italian Air Force in the
Med?  Would've made Rommel's job a little easier... Or did Speer insist on
keeping all production in Germany, thus benefiting Germans?  Or did Mussolini
insist on Italian manufactured goods for the same reason?

                                Dave Neil
                                Systems Analyst
                                Fort Lewis College
                                Durango, CO  81301

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

Date:    Thu, 29 Sep 1994 19:43:18 EDT
From:    Henry Sirotin <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: TAC: ?'Could still loose the war?

I think in that same part of the movie, Patton supposedly said the
Germans hadn't launched a winter campaign since Frederick the Great.
Verdun, anyone? (Feb 1916); and would Patton not have known this?
It's a movie.

HS

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

Date:    Thu, 29 Sep 1994 19:31:50 EDT
From:    Alan Wild <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: TAC: ?'Could still loose the war?

Patrick D Marsden <[email-masked]> continued:
   (I'd stated earlier:
>> With the Allied troops approaching from all sides, what made the Allied
>> General staff think that they could possibly "still loose this war"?
>>
>> (Quoting the movie Patton at the meeting where Bedel and Bradley ask
>> the corps commanders for assitance up at Verdun and/or Bastogne.)
>>
>> Was it the development of atomic energy? Was it other "specialized"
>> weapons, or the combination? Was it a real concern, or a movie line?
>>
>> 'Just wondering,...
>>
>> -Al
>
>        I just saw PATTON a few weeks ago and recognize the scene you're
>refering to (planning the relief of Bastogne, Dec. '44).  IMHO the line
>was an attempt to add drama to the Bastogne situation and a good climax
>to the movie.  BUT, I also think that if the German Ardennes offensive
>had succeeded and driven to the coast, Amsterdam probably, it would have
>been a huge blow to the Allied armies in western europe.  These armies
>were mainly supplied via England and the loss of any ports would not
>have helped the situation on the continent.  I don't know if the loss
>the supply routes could have permanently halted the western allies advance
>on Germany or if the Germans could have forced the allies from continential
>europe again.
>        It does make for some interesting thought experiments: (1) With allies
>forced from the continent again, could the Germans have stopped and turned
>the Soviets?  (2) Would the western allies ever attempt another invasion of
>France?  (3) Could the V-weapons have caused the British to sue for peace
>if used to their fullest?  And just imagine the post-war politics!
>        Again, just my opinion, but I think that if the western powers had
>lost the Battle of the Bulge, they would not have lost the war but it would
>have made winning it a LOT more difficult.

On point 1) I don't think so. The soviets had taken full advantage of the
two fronts, and that was a perfect problem for Germany; a perfect advantage
for the Allies IMHO. 2) would/could they ever get kicked off again? Their
air power was overwhelming, and nothing short of the a-bomb would turn
things around, even in the least. 3) V-Weapons equiped the the big N might
have changed the flavor of things (understatement!), but I think that the
combined Allied forces could have been put on a higher alert status. Air
forces could have been placed over the channel, and ground forces could
have raised Caine with any potencial missile site; they were becoming
limited. (IMHO - speculation)...

-Al

.signature not found! Reformat hard drive? [Yn]

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

Date:    Thu, 29 Sep 1994 19:54:43 EDT
From:    Alan Wild <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: TAC: ?'Could still loose the war?

Brad said:

>As I recall, at the time of the Bulge, our forces were already ashore
>in the south of France.  I agree that a major defeat in the Ardennes
>would have been devastating, <stuff deleted>

Devastating, yes,... to many thousands of lives, and I don't care to
minimize losses at all, but I can't see how strategically, and again,
aside from The Bomb, it would have changed the outcome. If the offensive
that was the bulge had any significant strength, it would've taken much
longer than it did to root them out. Don't you think? The Germans were
nearly out of fuel, replacement parts, ammo, etc,... weren't they? Their
only hope was that they could perfect the bomb (something they were a year
from, at least) or that Indiana Jones would fail to recover the Ark. ;-)

-Al

.signature not found! Reformat hard drive? [Yn]

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

Date:    Thu, 29 Sep 1994 20:05:33 EDT
From:    Alan Wild <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Italians

Dave Neil said:
>
>Joe Barone and others:
>If I may summarize:
>Pre-war Italian aircraft suffered from a lack of a suitable power plant and
>armaments which plagued the Italian Air Force throughout the war.
>
>My question to the list is "Why didn't they build engines under contract from
>Daimler-Benz?"  <stuff deleted>                                               n
Is that true about underpowered engines? I can't believe the culture, which
turned out many other HP products, would've skimped on a war product.

-Al

.signature not found! Reformat hard drive? [Yn]

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

Date:    Fri, 30 Sep 1994 01:29:18 +0100
From:    Emmanuel Gustin <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Italians

On Thu, 29 Sep 1994, Dave Neil wrote:

> Pre-war Italian aircraft suffered from a lack of a suitable power plant and
> armaments which plagued the Italian Air Force throughout the war.

Actually, the pre-war record of Italian aircraft was not so bad, if you
stop looking after the Spanish Civil War. They just missed the boat of
modern monoplane combat aircraft, and these appeared a few years before
WWII.

> My question to the list is "Why didn't they build engines under contract from
> Daimler-Benz?"  Same goes for the armaments - why not use the successful German
> weapons? Surely Germany had an interest in a strong Italian Air Force in the

They did! The Daimler-Benz engines were license-built by Alfa Romeo. The
DB601 was known as the Alfa Romeo RA1000. They just appeared much too
late: The Macchi MC.202 appeared in 1941 and the Reggiane Re 2001 in 1942.
(They even built a CR.42 biplane with a DB 601 engine, probably the
fastest biplane fighter ever flown!) The DB605 was also used, in the Fiat
G.55, Macchi MC.205 and Reggiane Re.2005, that all entered service in
1943. These three fighters all had 20mm cannon, I presume a copy of a
German weapon.  But the low capacity of the Italian industry prevented
these aircraft from entering service in large numbers; hundreds were
built, when the other major combattants of WWII produced thousands of
aircraft. In 1943 the war was virtually over for Italy.

The problem was probably not one of technology. In the inter-war years,
the Italian high-powered seaplane racers competed with the British ones
for the Schneider Trophy; they demonstrated that Italians could build fast
aircraft and powerful engines as good as anyone else's. But the Italians
failed to turn these into production equipment. They felt no need to do
so, because the results of the Spanish Civil War had given them too much
confidence and they interpreted them incorrectly. The USSR made the same
mistake (in that case compounded by Stalinist purges to ruin one of the
world's most advanced aircraft industries).

Emmanuel Gustin

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

Date:    Thu, 29 Sep 1994 20:37:30 EDT
From:    Alan Wild <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: TAC: ?'Could still loose the war?

Henry Sirotin said:
>
>I think in that same part of the movie, Patton supposedly said the
>Germans hadn't launched a winter campaign since Frederick the Great.
>Verdun, anyone? (Feb 1916); and would Patton not have known this?
>It's a movie.

You're right. Patton was The military historian. A point against the
histrionics!

-Al

.signature not found! Reformat hard drive? [Yn]

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

Date:    Thu, 29 Sep 1994 20:54:00 EDT
From:    mc killop <[email-masked]>
Subject: [INF] USAAF 30 SEP 44

COMBAT CHRONOLOGY OF THE US ARMY AIR FORCES
SATURDAY, 30 SEPTEMBER 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
  B-17, Boeing Flying Fortress
  B-24, Consolidated Liberator
  B-25, North American Mitchell
  B-26, Martin Marauder
  C-47, Douglas Skytrain
  L-5, Stinson Sentinel
  P-38, Lockheed Lightning
  P-40, Curtiss
  P-47, Republic Thunderbolt
  P-51, North American Mustang

NOTE: A number in parenthesis after a target name indicates the number of
bombers attacking.

CHINA-BURMA-INDIA (CBI) THEATER OF OPERATIONS

  BURMA-INDIA (Tenth Air Force): In Burma, 50+ P-47s hit various targets in
the Myothit and Bhamo areas, attack targets of opportunity at Khalayang,
sweep the Anisakan and Nawnghkio Airfield areas, bomb Nansiaung railroad
bridge, and hit targets of opportunity on or near the Burma Road between
Mangshih and Lashio; 11 B-25s knock out a span of the main bridge and damage
2 bypass bridges at Hsenwi. 18 B-24s haul fuel to Liuchow, Yungning, and
Kunming, China.

  CHINA (Fourteenth Air Force): In China, 29 B-24s and 12 B-25s bomb Wuchou
and Tien Ho and White Cloud Airfields at Canton; 6 B-25s hit targets of
opportunity S of Lungfukwan; nearly 100 P-40s and P-51s on armed
reconnaissance over wide areas of China S of the Yangtze River again hit
numerous targets of opportunity, concentrating on river shipping.

EUROPEAN THEATER OF OPERATIONS (ETO)

  AIRBORNE OPERATIONS (IX Troop Carrier Command): In France, HQ 440th Troop
Carrier Group and the 98th Troop Carrier Squadron move from Reims to Le Mans
with C-47s; the 93d Troop Carrier Squadron, 439th Troop Carrier Group, moves
from Juvincourt to Lonray with C-47s.

  STRATEGIC OPERATIONS (Eighth Air Force): Mission 655: 834 bombers and 629
fighters are dispatched to make PFF attacks on marshalling yards and
airfields in W Germany; 8 bombers are lost:
  1. 257 of 266 B-17s hit Bielefeld marshalling yard; 4 B-17s are lost, 1
damaged beyond repair and 24 damaged; 3 airmen are WIA and 28 MIA. Escort is
provided by 240 P-47s and P-51s without loss.
  2. 255 B-24s are dispatched to hit the marshalling yard at Hamm (206);
targets of opportunity are Munster (12) and other (1); 1 B-24 is lost and 32
damaged; 10 airmen are MIA. Escort is provided by 170 P-38s, P-47s and P-51s
without loss.
  3. 313 B-17s are dispatched to hit the marshalling yard at Munster (35) and
Munster/Handorf Airfield (14); targets of opportunity are Munster (239) and
other (1); 3 B-17s are lost and 85 damaged; 1 airman is KIA, 2 WIA and 36
MIA. Escort is provided by 177 P-47s and P-51s; 1 P-51 is damaged beyond
repair.
  86 of 97 P-51s fly a sweep over NW Germany; 1 P-51 is damaged beyond
repair.
  116 B-24s fly a TRUCKIN' mission carrying fuel to France.

  TACTICAL OPERATIONS (Ninth Air Force): 14 B-26s bomb the Arnhem, the
Netherlands road bridge with poor results; fighters fly sweeps over Belgium,
E France, and W Germany and attack rail targets. In Belgium, HQ 48th Fighter
Group and the 492d and 494th Fighter Squadrons move from Cambrai/Niergnies,
France to St Trond with P-47s. In France, HQ 344th Bombardment Group (Medium)
and the 494th, 495th, 496th and 497th Bombardment Squadrons (Medium) move
from Stansted, England to Cormeilles-en-Vexin with B-26s.

MEDITERRANEAN THEATER OF OPERATIONS (MTO)

  AAF, MTO: The 72d Liaison Squadron, AAF, MTO (attached to Seventh Army),
moves from Vesoul to Epinal, France with L-5s.

  TACTICAL OPERATIONS (Twelfth Air Force): In Italy, B-25s bomb road and
railroad bridges in the Po Valley at Piacenza, Voghera, Sesto Calende, Lonate
Pozzolo, Galliate, Cittadella, Borgoforte, and Tortona; B-26s hit fuel dumps
at Cremona, and bridges at Padua, Turbigo, and San Nazzaro; XII Fighter
Command fighters hit motor transport, rail lines, roads, bridges, and rolling
stock in the Po Valley; HQ 62d Troop Carrier Group moves from Galera Airfield
to Malignano Airfield.

PACIFIC OCEAN AREA (POA)

  AAFPOA (Seventh Air Force): Saipan Island-based P-47s blast the airfield
area on Pagan Island; later in the day a B-24 hits the same target. During
the night of 30 Sep/1 Oct a Kwajalein Atoll-based B-24 bombs Wake Island. HQ
494th Bombardment Group (Heavy) and the 864th, 865th, 866th and 867th
Bombardment Squadrons (Heavy) move from Barking Sands, Hawaii to Angaur
Island, Palau Islands with B-24s (first mission is 22 Nov).

SOUTHWEST PACIFIC AREA [SWPA, Far East Air Force (FEAF)]: B-24s strike oil
installations at Balikpapan, Borneo. On Celebes Island, Ambesia Airfield is
pounded by B-24s while B-25s hit Mapanget, Langoan, and Sidate, and P-38s hit
shipping in Wasile Bay. Other B-25s attack shipping in the Halmahera Island
waters. P-38s hit Amahai on Ceram Island, Kairatoe and Halong seaplane base
on Celebes Island, and Haroekoe Airfield on Haroekoe Island. In New Guinea,
A-20s and fighter-bombers hit Babo, Urarom, and Fak Fak; A-20s and B-25s bomb
Faan; the 23d Bombardment Squadron (Heavy), 5th Bombardment Group (Heavy),
moves from Wakde Island to Noemfoor Island with B-24s.

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              |
-------------------------------------------------------------------

30/0057Z SEP

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

Date:    Thu, 29 Sep 1994 21:06:55 EDT
From:    Cassady Craft <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: WEAP: Eric Brown

I just finished reading Len Deighton's _Bomber_ last night.  Wow!  What a
powerful story!  Anyone know if Tom Clancy read it?  Seems like a forerunner
to the techno-thriller.  Deighton's considerable coverage of German night
fighter operations made me start wondering about allied night fighter
operations.  Does  anyone know of a good book on allied intruder, night
fighter ops in ETO or PTO?  Did the P-61 see action in ETO?  Why was a
dedicated night fighter developed by the US?  Was the P-61 the only US a/c
completely developed during the war--or have I confirmed before that this is
not true?  Emmanuel, Mike, and others, help me out!

Cassady Craft
Department of Political Science
University of Georgia
e-mail [email-masked]
or
[email-masked]

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

Date:    Thu, 29 Sep 1994 21:15:28 EDT
From:    Cassady Craft <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: TAC: ?'Could still loose the war?

Uh, Al, the Germans were alot further than a year from the bomb.  Some would
argue that they could never have built a bomb for two reasons:  1) they did
not have the resources ($, materials, etc.) and could never keep those they
had safe from bombing; and 2) they were going about it in the wrong way.
Again, the book _Heisenberg's War_ makes the claim that their lead physicist
in the bomb program was tanking the project.

About an earlier response from Ken K., it seems that the standard critique of
Heisenberg in this situation is to point to the actual program, and say, "look,
he didn't know how to build the bomb, he was going to drop a 'pile' on them."
The "bomb" program the Germans had got no further than to create a really
inefficient reactor pile, that probably never had or could have worked (there
is some rumor of an accident, though).  This thing would require "tons" of
material, as did the first US pile built in the gym at the Univ. of Chicago.
The pro-Heisenberg stance is to say he didn't want to build it,
but could have at least done better (he probably didn't have the resources,
anyway).  They point to the imprisonment and spying on the German scientists
after the war, and the statements and actions I have mentioned before as
proof.  I am interested to see what the article said, and to see if it was
a review or reaction to _Heisenberg's War_.

Cassady Craft
Department of Political Science
University of Georgia
e-mail [email-masked]
or
[email-masked]

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

Date:    Thu, 29 Sep 1994 21:31:00 EDT
From:    mc killop <[email-masked]>
Subject: P-61s

The Ninth Air Force had two squadrons with P-61s.

1. The 422d Night Fighter Squadron arrived in England on 7 Mar 44 and began
flying combat missions on 3 Jul 44.  The squadron moved to France on 25 Jul
44, Belgium on 16 Sep 44 and Germany on 6 Apr 45.  They flew their last
combat mission on 4 May 45.

2. The 425th Night Fighter Squadron arrived in England on 26 May 44 and
started flying combat in Jul 44.  They moved to France on 18 Aug 44 and
Germany on 12 Apr 45.  They flew their last combat mission on 8 May 45.

That's all I have after a cursory glance.  Do you need any additional
info?

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

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

Date:    Thu, 29 Sep 1994 22:24:08 EDT
From:    Cassady Craft <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: P-61s

How successful were they and what were they successful at?  How were they
controlled?  How good was their radar?  Did they do the intruder thing, or
just night fighters?  Were the Germans bombing alot at night?
Sources?  Thanks a million--any embellishment is welcome, as long as its on
the subject, not the stats/facts!

Cassady Craft
Department of Political Science
University of Georgia
e-mail [email-masked]
or
[email-masked]

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

End of WWII-L Digest - 28 Sep 1994 to 29 Sep 1994
*************************************************