Subject: WWII-L Digest - 11 Oct 1994 to 12 Oct 1994

From: Automatic digest processor <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 1994 00:01:39 -0400

There are 56 messages totalling 1703 lines in this issue.

Topics of the day:

  1. Gneisenau
  2. quick help (7)
  3. TRIV: USMA question (2)
  4. INF: USN Chronology 10-12-94
  5. INF: 50 Years Ago - 13-OCT-1944
  6. BIO:  Wingate (2)
  7. Churchill's bad decisions (from Economic Causes of the
  8. French ports (2)
  9. WEAP: Bazooka (6)
 10. B-29s over Japan
 11. Home: US: Illinois at war (3)
 12. GEN Re: Research
 13. FDR's Health
 14. Gas Rationing
 15. WEAP: BAZOOKA
 16. TACT: Could they have won?
 17. HYPO: The "Big" what-if?
 18. WEAP: What is the BV151 - guess
 19. "Oler Werks
 20. {WEAP} P-38 (2)
 21. Churchill's bad decisions (from Economic Causes of the War)
 22. HYPO:  The "Big" what-if? (2)
 23. INF: Regia Marina, Part 2 (4)
 24. DISC u-boats, a new topic (2)
 25. Bazooka
 26. Aircraft in Profile (2)
 27. WEAP: B-26 (4)
 28. The Big "What if..."
 29. [INF] USAAF 13 OCT 44
 30. FDR'S HEALTH

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

Date:    Tue, 11 Oct 1994 23:01:59 -0700
From:    Ed Kettler <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Gneisenau

Mike, according to J. C. Taylor's German Warships of WW2, Gneisenau was
damaged by the RAF, and sent to Gdynia to be repaired and refitted with
15" guns.  Shortages and labor problems caused work to cease in 1943.
The hulk was sunk as a blockship at Gdynia.  To Russia, broken up for
scrap 1947-51.

Ed Kettler                                       [email-masked]

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

Date:    Tue, 11 Oct 1994 23:04:49 -0700
From:    Ed Kettler <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: quick help

Robert,

I think you are talking about the Prinz Eugen instead of the Gneisenau.

Ed Kettler                                       [email-masked]

On Tue, 11 Oct 1994, Robert T. Moore wrote:

> Hello, Mike
>
>
> To the best of my knowledge, this ship was captured, turned over to
> the Allies and met its end in that atomic bomb tests of the 1950's. I
> believe the US was awarded this ship in the division of spoils at the
> end of the war.
>
> Hope this helps.
>
> Terry
>
>  >         I'm separated from source materials and need a
> reference:
> > Can anybody out there (especially you naval history specialists)
> > tell me the fate of the German battlecruiser Gneisenau?  Not the whole
> > operational history, just the ultimate end of the ship (i.e., was it sunk,
> > retired, still under repair--and from what--at the end of war, etc??).
> > Don't bother digging if you don't have sources handy either-- I can look it
> > up myself if it takes overnight to get a response.
> >
> > Thanks in advance
> >
> > Mike Yaklich
> >
>

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

Date:    Wed, 12 Oct 1994 09:23:47 BST
From:    Stephen Baldwin <[email-masked]>
Subject: TRIV: USMA question

With apologies:
Trivia completely unnconected to WWII but maybe relevant to the list...

Ladies and Gentlemen!
last night I watched an "arty" documentary on James? McNeil Whistler,
a 19th century american artist, famous for being misunderstood.

Whistler was a student at USMA West Point for a while (he failed his
Chemistry for consistently claiming that silicon was a gas....).

Anyway, during the description of Whistler's life at West Point,
the records of his reports were brought out and described by one
LTC Crane. I sat bolt upright in my chair at this point
and wondered whether I was gazing at the countenance of the
esteemed (ex WWII list?) LTC Conrad Crane, USMA West Point???
I wonder whether the program has been broadcast in the US....

Steve Baldwin
[email-masked]

Quote from Whistler:
Q: How did you come to be born in Massachussetts (sp?)
A: I wanted to be close to my mother.....

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

Date:    Wed, 12 Oct 1994 04:00:15 PDT
From:    "Keller, Theron P." <[email-masked]>
Subject: INF: USN Chronology 10-12-94

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

1944
10/12 Thu. Carrier-based aircraft from Third Fleet (Adm. W. F.
           Halsey) commence 5-day attack against enemy shipping,
           airfield facilities, and industrial plants on Formosa
           and northern Luzon, P. I. These strikes meet with
           intensive counterattacks by Japanese aircraft.
            United States naval vessel damaged:
             Destroyer PRICHETT (DD-561), accidentally by United
              States naval gunfire, Formosa area,
              21 d. 08'N., 123 d. 19'E.

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

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

Date:    Wed, 12 Oct 1994 04:31:46 -0700
From:    John Davis <[email-masked]>
Subject: INF: 50 Years Ago - 13-OCT-1944

On 13-OCT-1944, the following occurred -

World War II - The Battlefronts
-------------------------------
Western Front - The first German V1s and V2s fall on Antwerp. In the British
2nd Army sector, the 3rd Division opens an offensive from Overloon towards
Venray, but run into heavy German resistance. The US 1st Division continues
their final assault on Aachen.

Eastern Front - The 2nd and 3rd Baltic Fronts break through the German
defences around Riga, capital if Latvia. The German forces in northern Latvia
are threatened with encirclement.

Italian Front - The US 6th Armoured Division advances in the Grizzana sector.
After several unsuccessful attacks they succeed in capturing Monte Stanco and
Bombiana. In the eastern sector, units of the 46th Division enter Carpineta.

Greece - British Commandoes land near Piraeus and occupy the Kalamata
airfield. A British parachute battalion is dropped at Megara and captures the
airport there.

Formosa - TF 38 continues its attacks on targets on Formosa.

The Homefront
-------------
Mrs. Luce Assails Roosevelt - Rep. Clare Boothe Luce, R. Conn., in a campaign
speech in Chicago, syas President Roosevelt is "the only American President
who ever lied us into a war because he did not have the political courage to
lead us into it."

College Football - Boston College 33, CCNY 0; Georgia 13, Kentucky 12.

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

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.

Previous articles are archived at ftp.netcom.com in directory /pub/jbd and can
be accessed via the WWW by URL: ftp://ftp.netcom.com/pub/jbd/ww2.html. If you
have difficulty accessing the Netcom FTP server, please keep trying because it
stays very busy.

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

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

Date:    Wed, 12 Oct 1994 06:52:08 GMT-6
From:    "Robert T. Moore" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: BIO:  Wingate

Hello, Cassady!

Will post to you various accounts of his activities in Africa. More
later.

Terry

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

Date:    Wed, 12 Oct 1994 07:03:14 GMT-6
From:    "Robert T. Moore" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Churchill's bad decisions (from Economic Causes of the

Hello, Cassady!

Thanks for your post and I appreciate your opinion.

> Terry, you referred to 617 being pulled out of the line to bomb the damns,
> saying that the mission wasn't necessary to the war effort.  Well, was
> nighttime area bombing all that much more necessary or effective?

    Attacking those panacea targets was certainly a glamourous and
intriguing idea, and they were attention-getters, but that was about
all. To answer your question, relative to the war effort,
dislocations were certainly the result, but all this did was to force
the Germans to disperse their war industries. And, if I am not
mistaken, the production statistics for 1944 in Germany showed their
greatest increase in 1944 at the height of the bombing. Of course, the
effort had to be made to bomb at night or round-the-clock, but as far
as having a tremendous impact on the outcome, I don't think the
aerial bombing was that effective. Lt.-Col. Con Crane of West Point
has written a good account of the effects of aerial bombing of German
cities and industries and I would recommend you consult that.

 The ops
> that 617 did later in the war, as an "elite" squadron (dropping extremely
> large bombs with pinpoint accuracy) seem to make this effort worthwhile in
> the long run.  Just 2 cents, anyway.

    Maybe against military targets, but not civilian, if the purpose
here was to cause significant disruptions in war production. Just my
opinion anyway. I think the aerial bombing of Germany in WWII as well
as England have one thing in common. Rather than demoralize the
population and cause significant dislocations and disruptions in war-
related production, it tended to have the opposite effect. The
bombing of both countries tended to unite the population and force a
strong commitment to sacrifice, no matter the cost.

    My thoughts any way, and thank you again for you offering yours.
If you have any additional comments please let me know.

All the best, Cassady.

Terry

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

Date:    Wed, 12 Oct 1994 07:05:01 GMT-6
From:    "Robert T. Moore" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: quick help

Hello, Brad!

You are right. Thanks for the correction.

Terry

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

Date:    Wed, 12 Oct 1994 07:07:50 GMT-6
From:    "Robert T. Moore" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: quick help

Hello, Ed!

Thanks for your post to me. You are correct and Alzheimer's is a
terrible disease. :-)

    Terry

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

Date:    Wed, 12 Oct 1994 07:11:19 GMT-6
From:    "Robert T. Moore" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: French ports

Hello, Scott!

The only source that comes to mind is "Defeat in the West" by (I
can't think of the author) but it came out in paperback (Ballantine
Books) in the 1960's.

Hope this helps.

Terry

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

Date:    Wed, 12 Oct 1994 07:12:08 GMT-6
From:    "Robert T. Moore" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: quick help

Hello, Peter!

Thanks for the correction, and it was the Prinz Eugen I was thinking
of.

Thanks again.

Terry

 >
> I believe you're thinking of the Prinz Eugen, which now lies at the bottom
> of the Kwajalein lagoon.
> --
> Peter Smith -- Data General Corp., Westboro MA, USA
> [email-masked]
>

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

Date:    Wed, 12 Oct 1994 07:16:45 GMT-6
From:    "Robert T. Moore" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: TRIV: USMA question

Hello, Steve!

I am certain that it was Con Crane who was interviewed on this
program. I talked with Barry Lowe this past weekend, and Colonel
Crane's name came up. According to Barry Lowe, Col. Crane is still at
the Academy but is involved in workshops or something to this effect
and hasn't been able to stay on the list. In a note to me last year,
Con had said that he was going to have to sign off for awhile to
catch up on some work, and that is the last I have heard. I still
have his e-mail address and will attempt to contact him to find out
what is going on.

  Con is or was a great asset to this list, and I hope he will stay
with it.

    Terry

 > > Steve Baldwin
> [email-masked]
>
> Quote from Whistler:
> Q: How did you come to be born in Massachussetts (sp?)
> A: I wanted to be close to my mother.....
>

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

Date:    Wed, 12 Oct 1994 07:44:43 -0500
From:    Cooper Addison <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: WEAP: Bazooka

I can offer a somewhat educated guess on #2 based on personal experience
with other shaped carge weapons (90MM, 3.5 RL, LAW,&RPG).  Personnel-
practically none if you discount the minimal effects of noise and blast.
In the case of a direct hit though it's super.  As to buildings and such
you get a hole about the size of a quarter and some blast effect that
does not necessarily incapacatate people inside the structure.  It seems
to depend on the interior volume of the structure and the proximity of
the people to the jet and of course any collateral shrapnel.  Actually,
the shaped charge is not even usually the first choice for anti-armor
because while it will penetrate and scare the crew it often doesn't kill
the vehicle.  Hope this helps.

On Tue, 11 Oct 1994, Richard Larkin wrote:

>         Although I am mainly interested in the bazooka's usefulness as
> an anti-armor weapon, there are other questions about it that I wouldn't
> mind having answered as well:

>         2. How effective was the bazooka as an anti-personnel and building
> demolition weapon?
>
> Richard Larkin
> [email-masked]
>

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

Date:    Wed, 12 Oct 1994 08:56:01 -0400
From:    Dan Ford <[email-masked]>
Subject: B-29s over Japan

Since there's an association for almost everything else, there must be a
B-29 Association. Does anyone have an address or a pointer to one?

I'm interested in talking to aircrews who flew over Japan toward the end
of the war.

Thanks -

            - Dan      <[email-masked]>

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

Date:    Wed, 12 Oct 1994 09:16:15 EDT
From:    William Lippert <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Home: US: Illinois at war

On Tue, 11 Oct 1994 20:28:41 PDT Jim Brady said:
>I have heard that gasoline was not in short supply, but tires were. The
>rationing of gas was meant to slow the consumption of rubber. Does anyone
>know if this is a contortion of facts or possibly the actual truth of the
>matter?
>
>-- Jim Brady
>
>
   I think this might be a point of view or subject to the interpretation
of facts.  Most of our natural rubber had come from the Far East and so
when we were at war with Japan, that supply dried up over night.  Thus,
tires were in short supply and rubber was scrounged up from dumps, woods,
etc.  Gasoline was rationed because it was an essential war material, too.
Thus, gasoline was not solely rationed to conserve rubber but also to
serve its general function of fueling the war machine.  The fact that it
also contributed to the conservation of rubber was both an added bonus
and an additional factor.  In the words of one Pacific War historian,
(I don't have the name or book handy) "The shortage of rubber did as much
to keep cars off the road as did gasoline rationing" (approximate quote).

William Lippert
The American University

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

Date:    Wed, 12 Oct 1994 09:22:05 EDT
From:    Ken Koester <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: WEAP: Bazooka

On Wed, 12 Oct 1994 07:44:43 -0500 Cooper Addison said:
>does not necessarily incapacatate people inside the structure.  It seems
>to depend on the interior volume of the structure and the proximity of
>the people to the jet and of course any collateral shrapnel.  Actually,
>the shaped charge is not even usually the first choice for anti-armor
>because while it will penetrate and scare the crew it often doesn't kill
>the vehicle.  Hope this helps.

Now this is interesting, because I've always read that the plasma jet--at
27,000 degrees F--pretty well scorches the crew, depending on the hit and
the layout, ie, it might not scorch everyone.  It should also fritz a lot
of the interior equipment & should have a good shot at igniting hydraulics
or cooking off ammo.  It is degraded, however, by rifling, as centrifugal
force disperses the jet, so that its penetrative ability is roughly the
same as solid shot--roughly, because there are several varieties of each
kind, some more effective than others.  So it is also a question of range.
I remember the old SPI Firefight simulation, which made the point that at
3 klicks the penetrating power of shaped charge had dwindled little,
whereas solid shot was almost useless.  By 1500 meters, however, the solid
shot had a definite edge.

ken koester
[email-masked]

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

Date:    Wed, 12 Oct 1994 06:52:20 -0800
From:    John Riegsecker <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Home: US: Illinois at war

>I have heard that gasoline was not in short supply, but tires were. The
>rationing of gas was meant to slow the consumption of rubber. Does anyone
>know if this is a contortion of facts or possibly the actual truth of the
>matter?
>
>-- Jim Brady

I've read the same thing, that gasoline rationing was put in place because
of a shortage of tires, not a shortage of gasoline.  I've also read that
things like scrap drives and so on were probably more to get the American
people to feel involved in the war, than they were to make up shortages.

John Riegsecker                                 (206) 756-3566
Dept of Math and Computer Science               [email-masked]
University of Puget Sound

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

Date:    Wed, 12 Oct 1994 09:20:35 -0500
From:    "Sidney W. Kitchel" <[email-masked]>
Subject: GEN Re: Research

Terry (Robert T. Moore) writes to the list:
>> a REAL Historian (with a capital "H") and not a hobby-historian.  I would
>> think it would take a real command of the language, not just a working
>> vocabulary.  Comments, suggestions, rotten fruit?
>
>    I enjoy reading German and have several works in my own
>collection in that language, for instance, General der Panzertruppen
>Walther K. Nehring's history of the German tank arm, a role he played
>in that directly. This work has not been translated into English, yet
>it contains some info that only General Nehring himself would have
>known. In order to read that work and others requires a large passive
>vocabulary; I wouldn't say a large active vocabulary. It would
>require you to have extensive experience in reading German, not
>necessarily a speaking knowledge of it.

        I'd say not reading other languages is not a big problem as
long as you are just interested in the big picture. However, I do find
that you miss a lot of rich detail. My WWII book collection is mostly
English but I've got some interesting local or national focus books in
French and Dutch. Terry's comments show that reading German could be a
big plus. As some have pointed out, the historigraphy of WWII is
significantly different in the Soviet and Japanese literature. Knowing
these languages, you could explore how differently writers in Russian
and Japanese have characterized the fabric of WWII history. So knowing
other languages is a fun plus for amateurs and absolutely necessary
for most real historians.

                                                        --Sid
--
Sidney W. Kitchel           [email-masked], [email-masked]
Data Parallel Systems, Inc.  ============||  DPSI  ||===============
4617 E. Morningside Drive                             (812) 334-8100
Bloomington, Indiana,  47408  USA               FAX:  (812) 334-8121

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

Date:    Wed, 12 Oct 1994 09:23:52 -0500
From:    Cooper Addison <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: WEAP: Bazooka

On Wed, 12 Oct 1994, Ken Koester wrote:

> On Wed, 12 Oct 1994 07:44:43 -0500 Cooper Addison said:
> >does not necessarily incapacatate people inside the structure.  It seems
> >to depend on the interior volume of the structure and the proximity of
> >the people to the jet and of course any collateral shrapnel.  Actually,
> >the shaped charge is not even usually the first choice for anti-armor
> >because while it will penetrate and scare the crew it often doesn't kill
> >the vehicle.  Hope this helps.
>
> Now this is interesting, because I've always read that the plasma jet--at
> 27,000 degrees F--pretty well scorches the crew, depending on the hit and
> the layout, ie, it might not scorch everyone.  It should also fritz a lot
> of the interior equipment & should have a good shot at igniting hydraulics
> or cooking off ammo.  It is degraded, however, by rifling, as centrifugal
> force disperses the jet, so that its penetrative ability is roughly the
> same as solid shot--roughly, because there are several varieties of each
> kind, some more effective than others.  So it is also a question of range.
> I remember the old SPI Firefight simulation, which made the point that at
> 3 klicks the penetrating power of shaped charge had dwindled little,
> whereas solid shot was almost useless.  By 1500 meters, however, the solid
> shot had a definite edge.
>
> ken koester
> [email-masked]
>
I'm not an authority on shaped charge weapons but I have had some formal
training on them albeit a long time ago.  I think a shaped charge will
deliver it's full effect regardless of range and velocity because the
effect is solely from the jet which is detonated by the Piazzo
base-detonated fuse so whether it's shot at high velocity or just stuck
there by hand, the effect should be the same. I've been in a couple of
armored vehicles which were hit by shaped charges and their effect seems
to depend on what the jet encounters.  On several occasions I've seen the
jet go into and out of a '113 without doing much more than shaking the
crew up--I've also seen it do the opposite.

Cooper

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

Date:    Wed, 12 Oct 1994 09:47:00 EST
From:    "Eliot K. Friedman" <[email-masked]>
Subject: FDR's Health

File item: WW.C 10/12/94 9:18AM

1083
John Davis Wrote:
>The Homefront
>-------------
>Roosevelt In Good Health - Vice Adm. Ross McIntire, the President's personal
>physician, says that Mr. Roosevelt is in perfect health.

I had been under the impression that Roosevelt's polio was a well-kept
secret from the American public, but watching the FDR bio on PBS last
night, my in-laws, both of the WWII generation, claimed that FDR's
disability was no secret to them.  Comparing pictures of FDR, particularly
those taken at the Yalta conference, with those taken only a year earlier,
it's obvious that he was a sick and dying man.  I assume Dr. McIntire lied
about FDR's condition, both for domestic political considerations (election
coming up in a month... would you vote for a dying man?) and to keep the
war effort on track.

The fact that the bosses at the Democratic convention had demanded that
Henry Wallace be replaced by a reliable party man like Truman implies
that they knew FDR would never serve out his 4th term.

Anyone care to comment on the coverup of FDR's true medical condition?

El

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

Date:    Wed, 12 Oct 1994 09:59:00 EST
From:    "Eliot K. Friedman" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Gas Rationing

    Jim Brady asked about whether gas rationing for US civilians was
    actually intended to slow rubber (tire) consumption.  I've heard the
    same story, in Organic Chemistry class, where we learned how synthetic
    rubber was developed during the war.

    Back in pre-OPEC days, the US led the world in oil production AND
    EXPORT.  Even with supporting the war effort, there was plenty of oil
    left for civilian use.  The same cannot be said for natural rubber,
    most of which had come from Southeast Asia/Dutch East Indies, now under
    Japanese occupation.

    Human nature being what it is, if gasoline had been made too available,
    a lot of civilians would have gotten hurt driving on bald tires.  It
    was easier to sell the public on gas as the limiting factor for
    civilian driving than rubber.  After all, when you go for a drive, you
    check your gas gauge, not your tire treads.

    El

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

Date:    Wed, 12 Oct 1994 12:22:06 -0400
From:    Ben Frank <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: WEAP: BAZOOKA

For a bit of trivia, in case anybody on the list does not know this fact, the
bazooka was named after an "instrument" played by a radio comedian from
Arkansas by the name of Bob Burns, I believe it was. The WWII bazook mightily
resembled the comedian's instrument. Ben Frank

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

Date:    Wed, 12 Oct 1994 09:47:36 -0600
From:    Dave Neil <[email-masked]>
Subject: TACT: Could they have won?

Terry said, in part:
>I do believe that Germany could have won WWII, if the US had stayed
>out of it and Hitler had not encouraged, if not demanded that his
>forces adopt the harsh attitude of an occupier rather than that of
>the liberator.

I agree with Terry.  Germany could have won the war if they could
have won "the hearts and minds" of their subjegated peoples.  More
important, however, is keeping the U.S. out of it.  I think the attack
on Pearl Harbor is a given in this kind of discussion, so the
big question is "What if Germany didn't declare war on the US?"
Would the US declared war on it's own?  If not, at what point
would the US have declared war on Germany?

In view of the fact that Roosevelt pushed through Lend/Lease,
I personally feel that a declaration would have been made sooner
rather than later.  Already allies with Britain against Japan,
the US would've had a hard time dictating/enforcing that all aid to
Britain was to be used in the Pacific.  Eventually, German U-boats
would have attacked US merchants ships delivering supplies to mainland
Britain.  Even if US shipping wasn't attacked, I don't think the US
would've stood by while their ally in the Pacific, Britain, was
being invaded by Germany.  A separate peace with Britain?  I think that
if it was possible, it would've been done and the French would be speaking
German right now.

Looks like I talked myself into a circle, doesn't it?  I agree that
Germany could've won the war if the US had stayed out, but I don't think
the US *would've* stayed out.  Looks like the National Debate Team won't
be calling *me* anytime soon!

Thanks for allowing me to comment...

                                Dave Neil

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

Date:    Wed, 12 Oct 1994 12:05:56 -0400
From:    "John E. Kollar" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: HYPO: The "Big" what-if?

To throw a wrench in the arguement, BTW, if, after Pearl Harbour, the Germans
declared war on Japan, becuase how could they get at each other???  Pulled out
the U-boats, as long as Britain had sued for peace, you might have seen the
US and Nazis allied against Japan, of course no joint operations, but Japan
would have gone down much sooner with the entire might of the US pointed at
her, and the Germans could have then crushed the Soviet Union, an example
of the possibilities open to the Nazis was that when they invaded the Ukraine,
the Ukranians welcomed them as saviors from the Commies, until the SS
machine-gunned them.

Note:I screwed up, Hiroshima was a gun-U235 warhead, and Nagasaki was a
implosion P239 and U235 warhead.  I can only be on the list on Wednesdays,
and don't have my resources with me, I apologize for the error.

John E. Kollar

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

Date:    Wed, 12 Oct 1994 12:10:34 -0400
From:    "John E. Kollar" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: WEAP: What is the BV151 - guess

The BV141 is really weird, it flew well, but the pilots didn't like
it so they never built many of them, if people want more info, it is
in the book
        'The Worlds Worst Aircraft'
I don't have the author with me, but next week (I am only here on Wed.)
I will bring the book with me to the lab.  The plane was not listed as one
of the worst, only as one of the weirdest.

John E. Kollar

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

Date:    Wed, 12 Oct 1994 12:47:11 -0400
From:    Vic Annas <[email-masked]>
Subject: "Oler Werks

        Hello,
        I am not a subscriber to this list, however a friend recommended
that I post a note here regarding the German "Oler Werks.  As I understand
it this was a type of recycling of aircraft and armament that could be
placed back into functional condition with upgraded components.  If anyone
knows of any books that refer to this, please E-Mail the titles to me
directly.  My address is: [email-masked]
 Thanks in advance for any help.
 Vic Annas

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

Date:    Wed, 12 Oct 1994 12:47:27 -0400
From:    "John E. Kollar" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: {WEAP} P-38

To defend the P-38, just about my favorite plane, if memory serves only
the early models were used in Europe, not the later version like the
P-38L or J, the P-51 in the first versions was also a bad fighter, but
one thing the P-38 could do that no German single-engined fighter
could do was to vary the throttles on the two engines and literally
pull the plane into a turn (not too good for your airframe though) and the
P-38 did prove itself very valuable against Japanese fighters, both
the new and the old ones.  But I would agree that the later models of
the P-51 and Fw-190 were better fighters, but I don't think that the P-38
sucked either though, it just wasn't as good.

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

Date:    Wed, 12 Oct 1994 12:50:32 -0400
From:    "John E. Kollar" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Churchill's bad decisions (from Economic Causes of the War)

I might not qualify, but it is funny, during D-Day, Churchill wanted
to ride in a DD and watch, Ike didn't want to, but couldn't tell him
no, so when word got to the British King, His Majesty said, well if
Churchill can go, then I will go, which almost gave Churchill a
coronary, so he backed down and didn't visit the beachhead till later.

John E. Kollar

source:My Three Years as Eisenhowers Aid

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

Date:    Wed, 12 Oct 1994 13:08:29 -0400
From:    "John E. Kollar" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: HYPO:  The "Big" what-if?

IMHO if the Nazis had 300+ U-boats, then there would be no King of
England today, but a Fuhrer there.  The damage that the Germans did with
their entirely too few submarines was impressive.  Even if they started
unconditional submarine warfare at the beginning of the war, and the
US enteredd the war because of it, the subs would have taken such a
large chunk out of the merchant marine, and also escorts if the
submarines were sent to sink them first (especially if they didn't have
any ASW weapons or sensors) many problems would have been cause for the
Allies.  The battle of britain should never have been waged, just wait
for the British to run out of gasoline, then blast an area of the south
coast, use gliders to land troops, and the few ships that they did hae
only to move equipment, and becuase you had air superiority you could
sink the British navy if they came out, or they might not even have
the fuel to do so.  ASW abilities were so anemic in the beginning of WWII,
that a concentrated attack with U-boats would have cut the lifeline.
Taking France before poland, and crushing dunkirk would have allowed the
Germans to base subs on the Bay of Biscay earlier, and what could Poland
do if you didn't take it till later anyway?

John E. Kollar

I like what-ifs so keep the discussion going, but am only in on Wed.

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

Date:    Wed, 12 Oct 1994 13:05:16 EDT
From:    Ken Koester <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: WEAP: Bazooka

On Wed, 12 Oct 1994 09:23:52 -0500 Cooper Addison said:
>I've been in a couple of
>armored vehicles which were hit by shaped charges and their effect seems
>to depend on what the jet encounters.  On several occasions I've seen the
>jet go into and out of a '113 without doing much more than shaking the
>crew up--I've also seen it do the opposite.

(One hopes that you were in them *after* the hit & not *while* being hit!)
Fair enough.  I wouldn't want to be bunkmates with a plasma jet, but if
it didn't splash around & I wasn't real close, I can guess that I'd
have a good chance at being ok afterwards.

Which brings me to the question I posed a number of months ago about
Hollywood & shells & shellbursts, to wit:  what is one likely to see when
solid shot hits its target?  Hollywood *ALWAYS* has everything going up
in a *huge* ball of flames & smoke.  If you set off the hydraulics, fuel,
or ammo, sure.  But given the percentage of tanks recovered from the
battlefield in WWII and repaired, that just doesn't seem to be the common
case.  (It might be now, I dunno.)  Can anyone opine from personal
experience?

ken koester
[email-masked]

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

Date:    Wed, 12 Oct 1994 13:17:36 -0400
From:    Joe Barone <[email-masked]>
Subject: INF: Regia Marina, Part 2

        On the night of November 11, 1940, the British carried out a
daring and well-planned attack on the Italian fleet anchorage at Taranto.
Taranto is located in Southeast Italy, on the western side of the "heel"
of the Italian boot, on the Gulf of Taranto on the Ionian Sea.  All six
of the Italian battleships of the 5th and 9th Divisions were in port on
the night of the attack.  The new British armored carrier, "Illustrious",
approached undetected to within 170 miles of the base and launched two
strikes of torpedo-carrying Swordfish aircraft, some of which were from
the complement of "Eagle".

        At 11:14 PM, the 12.6-inch gun battleship, "Conte di Cavour"
was hit by one torpedo in her port bow between her number 1 and 2 turrets.
A minute later, the battleship, "Caio Duilio" was hit by a torpedo in her
starboard bow just behind her number 1 turret.  At the same time, the
15-inch gun battleship, "Littorio", was hit by three torpedoes: two in
her starboard bow and one in her port stern.  The British used flares to
illuminate the harbor and only two of the twenty-one aircraft were shot
down, both to anti-aircraft fire.

        "Littorio" and "Duilio" were moored in shallow water and were
run aground, down by the bows, to prevent their sinking.  "Cavour",
however, was moored in deeper water and the decision to run her aground
was made too late.  She listed to starboard and sank with only her
superstructure and main turrets above water.

        The next day, the undamaged ships, "Guilio Cesare", "Vittorio
Veneto", and "Andrea Doria" (which was still not fully operational),
were transferred to Naples while Taranto's defenses were upgraded.

        Salvage operations began immediately on the damaged ships.
"Littorio" and "Duilio" had held up relatively well and refloating
them was not particularly difficult and was accomplished within a
month.  "Littorio" would be fully repaired in a little over 4 months
and "Duilio" in 6 months.  "Cavour", however, suffered far more damage
and required a significant amount of lightening before she could be
raised.  In fact, "Cavour" would never see action again and was still
undergoing repairs in Trieste at the time of the armistice.

        Despite the losses at Taranto, the Italian Navy still had the
material wherewithal and desire to bring the British forces to combat.
This was demonstrated on November 27, 1940, when the Italians encountered
the British off Cape Teulada (known by the British as the Battle of
Spartivento).

        Concluding that the Italian losses at Taranto precluded
intervention, the British planned to run a convoy across the
Mediterranean.  On November 17, British reconnaissance sighted
Italian units at sea, alerting the Royal Navy that battleships
were still operational.  It was decided that the planned convoy
required a heavy escort, and Force H, including the battlecruiser,
"Renown, and the carrier, "Ark Royal", was to cover the convoy to
a point southwest of Sardinia.  Units of the Mediterranean Fleet,
including the battleship, "Ramilles", would then join the escort
and upon reaching Cape Bon, Force H would retire.

        On November 26, the Italian Fleet sailed, after being alerted
of British activity.  It was made up of "Veneto", "Cesare", six heavy
cruisers and 14 destroyers.  British forces, except for the presence of
the carrier, were nearly equal to this.  The Italian force was ordered
to the southwest of Sardinia on the morning of November 27.

        Admiral Campioni's freedom of movement was greatly limited by
orders from Supermarina (Regia Marina HQ) that he was not to engage the
enemy and risk his battleships, except under favorable conditions.  This
caution, after the events of Taranto, is understandable; however, Admiral
Campioni acted with excessive prudence.

        Due to poor reconnaissance information, the admiral concluded
that he was outnumbered and sought to avoid contact with the British,
though they were in close proximity.  However, Italian and British
cruisers sighted each other at great range.  The Italians fired with
great accuracy and the cruiser, "Berwick", was hit almost immediately.
In return the Italian destroyer, "Lanciere", was damaged by the British.
Admiral Campioni was still convinced of the need to withdraw while the
British cruisers tried to press home the attack.  Aircraft were launched
from "Ark Royal" but all of their attacks were unsuccessful.  The British
cruisers came on, but when they closed to within range of the 15-inch
guns of "Veneto", they quickly broke off the encounter.  Once again, an
inconsequential action had been fought.  The British could claim victory,
though, since the convoy had not been interdicted.

        The action again emphasized poor Italian naval-air force
cooperation.  Despite being close to Sardinia, no fighter cover was
provided to the Italian force and requested aircraft were late, just
as they had been in the Battle of Point Stilo.  The laborious Italian
chain of command required the commander at sea to request aircraft.
This request was sent to Supermarina which assessed it and then passed
it on to Superaero (Regia Aeronautica HQ) which also assessed the
situation and took what it considered to be the appropriate action.
This prevented prompt responses and robbed the commander at sea of
the support actually required.
--
Joe Barone
[email-masked]
   Cowboy: Peugh! You guys smell like a dungheap!
Crap Game: Makes you kinda miss home, don't it?
  Willard: Kinda does, at that, don't it, ol' buddy.

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

Date:    Wed, 12 Oct 1994 12:59:45 GMT-6
From:    "Robert T. Moore" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Home: US: Illinois at war

Hello, John!

> I've read the same thing, that gasoline rationing was put in place because
> of a shortage of tires, not a shortage of gasoline.

    That is true. There were even wooden tires designed to be used as
rubber was in such short supply.

I've also read that
> things like scrap drives and so on were probably more to get the American
> people to feel involved in the war, than they were to make up shortages.

    That is also true. The same held true in England.

    Thanks for allowing my comment, John.

    Terry

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

Date:    Wed, 12 Oct 1994 14:17:47 -0400
From:    "John E. Kollar" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: DISC u-boats, a new topic

It might be obscure, but Joe Barone, what does your quote mean?

It's a Mark 6!  And we got her by the ass!

John E. Kollar

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

Date:    Wed, 12 Oct 1994 14:25:00 EDT
From:    Doug McCabe <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: WEAP: Bazooka

                   Ohio University Electronic Communication

   Date:  12-Oct-1994 01:38pm EST

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

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

Subject:  Re: WEAP: Bazooka

    We happen to have a great deal of information on John "Jack" R. Towle
    after we made contact with the family last summer in preparation for
    our trip to the Netherlands for the 50th anniversary of operation
    MARKET-GARDEN.  (Adrie Nab, our vice-president of University relations)
    and his brother, Kees Nab, (both young boys living between Nijmegen and
    Arnhem during the war) paid for all in-Europe expenses of Tom Ryan,
    nephew of Towle.
         Towle was a member of the 504th Parachute Infantry Regiment, the
    unit involved in the Waal River assult I went into in Untold Stories
    f/ABTF, Pt. 3.  He was, I believe in the third wave and his group was
    sent to the left flank (away from the bridges), southeast of
    Oosterhout, to cover the flank from German counter attacks which could
    take the landing site and roll up the exposed and understrength
    regiment.  Towle was the bazooka man and on the day after the river
    assult was in position to confront a serious German attack of two
    tanks, a half-track, and 100 infantrymen.  From the Congressional Medal
    of Honor citation: "With full knowledge of the disasterous consequences
    resulting not only to his own company but to the entire bridgehead by
    an enemy breakthrough, Private Towle immediately and without orders
    left his foxhole and moved 200 yards in the face of intense small arms
    fire to a position on an exposed dyke [sic] roadbed.  By his heroic
    tenacity, at the price of his life, Private Towle saved the lives of
    many of his comrades and was directly instrumental in breaking up the
    enemy counter-attack."
         What Towle actually did was to use his bazooka to shoot, damage,
    and force the withdrawal of the two tanks, fire into a house being used
    by nine Germans - killing all of them with one shot - and, while lining
    up on the half-track, was killed by a morter shell which landed next to
    him as he was fully exposed at the top of the dike.  Just as the action
    began he said to Joe Print, "It looks like I'm going to get the
    Congressional today."  His one-man action completely disrupted the
    German counter attack and bought time so that British armor could race
    up and finish off the two tanks, thus ending the action.  (The two
    tanks were killed, by the way, next to and near Adrie and Kees'
    grandfather's house.  The house and the one German tank <with a British
    Sherman passing it> are in a photo used in Ryan's ABTF.)
         Towle's remains were returned to his native Cleveland Ohio in 1949
    from Holland and in 1991 the headstone was replaced by a special stone
    for CMOH graves.  Earlier a football stadium and a street were named
    for him at Ft. Bragg.  Ten years ago a monument was erected by the
    people of Lent, the Netherlands commemorating the river assult and the
    names of those who were KIA or DOW were cut into stone.  Gen. Gavin
    dedicated the monument that day.  On September 18, 1994 there was a
    ceremony at the monument which included the unveiling of a change to
    to the stone: "CMOH" beside the name of Towle, the only 82nd AB Div.
    soldier to earn the medal in WWII.  This addition to the marker was
    suggested by myself and Adrie Nab and graciously accepted by Herman
    Jonsson on behalf of the people of Lent.  Tom Ryan and Adrie also laid
    a wreath on the marker representing the Ohio University and the Towle
    family.
         OU's archives has collected copies of some of the Towle material
    from the family and hopes of either collect all the original material
    or a complete set of copies for addition as a supplement to the Ryan
    Collection.

    More than you wanted on the use of bazookas but thought you'd like to
    know about Towle as well.

    Doug

Received:  12-Oct-1994 02:24pm

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

Date:    Wed, 12 Oct 1994 13:27:30 GMT-6
From:    "Robert T. Moore" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: BIO:  Wingate

Hello, Cassady!

I will post to you several details of his activities of both a
personal and professional nature. Here goes with the first
installment. This will be sent to you in increments.

Orde Wingate became famous for his Chindit operations behind
Japanese lines in Burma. In Ethiopia, he had performed brilliantly
behind enemy lines. Now he was back in Cairo, ignored, overwrought,
ill and suffering from phantasies induced by the over-large doses of
drugs he was mistakenly taking. A devastating despair led him to
attempt suicide.

At three o'clock in the afternoon of 4 Jul, he took his temperature
and read that it was standing at 104 degrees. He had no more atabrine
left. He got out of bed, made his way downstairs and out onto the
street and tried to walk to the doctor's office. He could not find it
although he had been there more than once. He became terrified. He
now believed that his loss of memory was the beginning of madness. In
his weakness, he had to hold on to the walls as he made his way back
to the hotel. In his confusion and despair, he had now made up his
mind.

More tomorrow, Cassady.

You will be receiving quite a bit of info on General Wingate in time.

Thanks.

Terry

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

Date:    Wed, 12 Oct 1994 14:35:06 -0400
From:    Ron Babuka <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: {WEAP} P-38

>To defend the P-38, just about my favorite plane, if memory serves only
>the early models were used in Europe, not the later version like the
>P-38L or J, the P-51 in the first versions was also a bad fighter,

Do you mean the A-36 Apache?  This of course depends on what you mean by a
bad fighter since the A-36 Apaches were a good fighter with good
performance at low-levels. Many earlier pilots perferred that handling and
performance of the Allison powered A-36 to the performance of the P-51 at
the lower levels. The A-36 was used very succesfully on ground support and
attack missions in the Chinese and Burma fronts.

>one thing the P-38 could do that no German single-engined fighter
>could do was to vary the throttles on the two engines and literally
>pull the plane into a turn (not too good for your airframe though)

Or ANY single engined aircraft if ya think about it.

>P-38 did prove itself very valuable against Japanese fighters, both
>the new and the old ones.  But I would agree that the later models of
>the P-51 and Fw-190 were better fighters, but I don't think that the P-38
>sucked either though, it just wasn't as good.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ron Babuka
Cornell University
CIT - Information Resources
Ithaca, New York 14850
(607) 254-6492

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

Date:    Wed, 12 Oct 1994 13:54:51 CDT
From:    Robert Hohlt <[email-masked]>
Subject: INF: Regia Marina, Part 2

Joe Barone on Wed, 12 Oct 1994:

>At 11:14 PM, the 12.6-inch gun battleship, "Conte di Cavour"
>was hit by one torpedo in her port bow between her number 1 and 2 turrets.
>A minute later, the battleship, "Caio Duilio" was hit by a torpedo in her
>starboard bow just behind her number 1 turret.  At the same time, the
>15-inch gun battleship, "Littorio", was hit by three torpedoes: two in
>her starboard bow and one in her port stern.  The British used flares to
>illuminate the harbor and only two of the twenty-one aircraft were shot
>down, both to anti-aircraft fire.

>"Littorio" and "Duilio" were moored in shallow water and were
>run aground, down by the bows, to prevent their sinking.  "Cavour",
>however, was moored in deeper water and the decision to run her aground
>was made too late.  She listed to starboard and sank with only her
>superstructure and main turrets above water.

Joe or anyone,

So the Italians lost(at least temporarily) 3 battleships to the 5 torpedos.
All 3 were in a sinking condition or were sunk at the conclusion of
the raid.

Were the Italian ships manned by skeleton crews, and or did
they have damage control parties which could/should have done
something? Close watertight doors, etc...

I am astonished.

This is the raid the Japanese studied for Pearl Harbor correct?

Robert Hohlt, Jr.

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

Date:    Wed, 12 Oct 1994 13:53:31 -0500
From:    Oliver Bonham-Carter <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: quick help

Does anyone know what size this battlecruiser Gneisenau was?

[email-masked]
 "This is it... so read it!"

On Tue, 11 Oct 1994, Mike Yaklich wrote:

>         I'm separated from source materials and need a reference:
> Can anybody out there (especially you naval history specialists)
> tell me the fate of the German battlecruiser Gneisenau?  Not the whole
> operational history, just the ultimate end of the ship (i.e., was it sunk,
> retired, still under repair--and from what--at the end of war, etc??).
> Don't bother digging if you don't have sources handy either-- I can look it
> up myself if it takes overnight to get a response.
>
> Thanks in advance
>
> Mike Yaklich
>

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

Date:    Wed, 12 Oct 1994 14:54:25 -0400
From:    Barone <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: HYPO:  The "Big" what-if?

John E. Kollar <[email-masked]> writes:
> IMHO if the Nazis had 300+ U-boats, then there would be no King of
> England today, but a Fuhrer there.  The damage that the Germans did with
> their entirely too few submarines was impressive.  Even if they started
> unconditional submarine warfare at the beginning of the war, and the
> US entered the war because of it, the subs would have taken such a
> large chunk out of the merchant marine, ...

        As I recall (but the reference escapes me), the German torpedos
made the US ones look effective!  I recall reading that German torpedos
would actually bounce off the hull of a ship without detonating and U-boats
had to rely on their deck guns for the first portion of the war.  I don't
think the problem was adequately corrected until 1942.

        Another thing to consider is that the Germans had an industrial
bottleneck when it came to shipbuilding.  Because German ships were
welded rather than riveted, more skilled labor was required.  Germany's
shipbuilding program had been dormant during the Weimar years so much
of the skilled labor had either retired or made career changes.  This
caused an acute shortage of skilled welders and fitters.
--
Joe Barone
[email-masked]
 Big Joe: What are you doing?
Odd Ball: I'm drinking some wine and eating some cheese
          and catching some rays, you know...
 Big Joe: Why the hell aren't you up there helping them fix the tank?
Odd Ball: Oh, man, I only ride them, I don't know what makes them work.

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

Date:    Wed, 12 Oct 1994 13:52:55 CDT
From:    Michael P LaForge <[email-masked]>
Subject: Bazooka

How effective was the bazooka as an anti-personnel and building demolition
 weapon?
Richard Larkin
[email-masked]

Richard -  From OS 9-69, February 1944. (OS refers to an Ordnance School test,
 said school being located at Aberdeen Proving Ground (APG) at the time)

Rocket, H.E., AT, 2.36", M6A series.
21.62" in length
3.5 lbs (1.59 k)
Muzzle velocity: 265 fps
Max range 700 yds, relatively inaccurate beyond 300 yds.
Weapon effects:
penetrate 3" homogeneous armor at all ranges and at
angles of impact as low as 30 degrees.
penetrate up to 9" of pine timber; ground impacts will not
normally cause detonation at high angles of impact. At low
angles of impact to ground, effects are similar to that of an 75mm HE shell.
 Water impacts will not cause a detonation.
Propellant: 5 each sticks of ballistite weighing approximately
61.5 grams.
Detonator: M18, .98 grains lead azide and 1.26 grains tetryl.
Booster: 1.86 grains tetryl.
Main Charge:
M6A3 - .47 lb. 50-50 pentolite, .013 lb. 10-90 pentolite.
M6A4 - .47 lb. 50-50 pentolite, .013 lb. cast TNT.
M6A5 - .47 lb. 50-50 pentolite, .026 .lb cast TNT.

******************************************************************************
* Mike LaForge, QASAS                                                        *
* U.S. Army Technical Center for Explosive Safety (USATCES)                  *
* Explosive Safety Logistics Division (ESL)                                  *
* Defense Environmental Restoration Program - Formerly Used Defense Sites    *
* (DERP FUDS)                                                                *
* DSN: 585-8762  FAX: 585-8769  COMM: 815-273-8762                           *
******************************************************************************

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

Date:    Wed, 12 Oct 1994 14:36:50 -0500
From:    "Tim J. Watts" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Aircraft in Profile

Is anyone on the list familiar with the series of books "Aircraft in
Profile"?  I know it was being published during the 1960's and 70's, but
don't know if (and when) it ceased.  If it has ceased, what was the last
volume published?

Also, how about the similar "Warships in Profile"?  How many volumes?

TIA
Tim J. Watts
Valparaiso University

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

Date:    Wed, 12 Oct 1994 14:39:27 -0500
From:    "Tim J. Watts" <[email-masked]>
Subject: WEAP: B-26

Sort of on the fringes of the list.
Is the B-26 which was used at the beginning of Vietnam and at the Bay of
Pigs actually the WW-II Maurader or is it really the A-26 Invader(?)?  If
the designation was changed, when was it changed?
TIA
Tim J. Watts
Valparaiso University

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

Date:    Wed, 12 Oct 1994 15:53:22 -0400
From:    "Steven Pudlo, Dept. Computer Svcs." <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: INF: Regia Marina, Part 2

Mr. Robert Holt, Jr asks:

>Joe or anyone,

>So the Italians lost(at least temporarily) 3 battleships to the 5 torpedos.
>All 3 were in a sinking condition or were sunk at the conclusion of
>the raid.

>Were the Italian ships manned by skeleton crews, and or did
>they have damage control parties which could/should have done
>something? Close watertight doors, etc...

>I am astonished.

>This is the raid the Japanese studied for Pearl Harbor correct?

It is my impression that the Japanese studies US naval exercises in the
Pacific, and Central America in the 20's/30's(?) to convince themselves
that the tactics of arial assault using carrier based aircraft against a
fleet in harbor was viable.

Someone please correct me if I'm wrong? (dan?)
                                                                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:    Wed, 12 Oct 1994 16:05:18 -0400
From:    Peter Smith <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: quick help

Oliver Bonham-Carter <[email-masked]> asked:
> Does anyone know what size this battlecruiser Gneisenau was?

(From Bayer):

Displacement (nominal): 26,700 tons
   Displacement (full): 33,000 tons
                Length: 755 ft
                  Beam: 98 ft
                 Draft: 30 ft
                 Speed: 32 kts
          Main Battery: 9x11"/55 in three triple turrets

Pedeants may argue as to whether the Gneisenau and her sister Scharnhorst
were battlecruisers, very heavy cruisers, small battleships, or whatever.
Their original armament, the same guns and turrets as the pocket battleships,
was an economy measure and as I understand, it was always planned to
someday replace the triple 11" mounts with dual 15"/47 as carried by the
Bismark and Turpitz, which would have certainly made them battlecruisers
in the traditional sense of a ship with a battleship's armament which has
sacrificed some armor for speed and/or range.
--
Peter Smith -- Data General Corp., Westboro MA, USA
[email-masked]

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

Date:    Wed, 12 Oct 1994 16:21:28 EDT
From:    Henry Sirotin <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: French ports

There is a popular history in French about the battle for these ports.
I'll try and have the reference for you in a day or two. It was written
by a French naval historian.

Henry Sirotin

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

Date:    Wed, 12 Oct 1994 15:28:16 -0500
From:    "Tim J. Watts" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: INF: Regia Marina, Part 2

Joe's description of the attack on Taranto and the way the English used
flares to light the Italian battleships calls to mind English tactics
used by Swordfish from Malta attacking  Italian convoys.

The English always prefered to attack at night. (As far as I know, a
HUGE difference from American tactics).  One or more planes would always
be tasked to drop flares; they usually carried no torpedoes.  Later in
the war, these planes would be equiped with air-sea search radar.

The planes dropping the flares would draw attention away from the
torpedo carriers, who would usually approach from the other side.

One is forced to ask whether the English pilots were better trained (or
skilled) than Americans, since they would attack at night.  Or were
they just using the only tactic possible, since they had such inferior
equipment?  (As I recall, the Swordfish and even the Albacore had top
speeds with torpedoes of about 100 mph.  They were pretty easy meat for
fighters in daylight and there were stories of planes trying to land on
their carriers having a hard time catching up.)  What do you think?

Source: Poolman, NIGHT STRIKE FROM MALTA: 830 SQUADRON R.N. & ROMMEL'S
CONVOYS (1980)

Tim J. Watts
Valparaiso University

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

Date:    Wed, 12 Oct 1994 16:28:39 EDT
From:    Henry Sirotin <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: DISC u-boats, a new topic

John, welcome back to the list, and let me know if your doing that thesis on
the pre-world war I Navy.

As for Joe's quotes, think Eastwood....

Henry Sirotin

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

Date:    Wed, 12 Oct 1994 16:51:45 CCS
From:    Jorge Merino <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: WEAP: B-26

Tim J. Watts wrote:

> Is the B-26 which was used at the beginning of Vietnam and at the Bay of
> Pigs actually the WW-II Maurader or is it really the A-26 Invader(?)?  If
> the designation was changed, when was it changed?

The B-26 used in Korea and Vietman was actually the Douglas A-26 Invader.
The reason of the designation change was because USAF decided to eliminate
the "A" for attack by 1948, and all the "A" planes were to be redesignated
as "B" for bombers. By 1962 (or maybe before), USAF decided to re-use the "A"
letter for attack aircraft, so, the B-26 Invader was redesignated A-26 again.
It was a wise decision to re-use the "A" letter, and you can find a number
of these "A" planes that were in USAF service since Vietnam War. (i.e. A-1,
A-7, A-10, A-37). The CIA's Lockheed A-12 has nothing to do with this kind
of designation.

I guess that the Martin B-26 Marauder was retired almost immediately after
the end of WW-II.

Jorge Merino

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

Date:    Wed, 12 Oct 1994 18:05:45 -0400
From:    Dan Ford <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: WEAP: B-26

The Vietnam-era B-26 was the Douglas A-26 in new clothing.

I think the Martin Marauder B-26 of WWII fame served in foreign air
forces (including French) after 1945, but not in U.S. service.

Lotsa writers get this wrong, including Neal Sheehan in *A Bright Shining
Lie* which shows a picture of a "Martin" B-26 bombing in Vietnam.

            - Dan      <[email-masked]>

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

Date:    Wed, 12 Oct 1994 18:55:03 -0400
From:    Mike Yaklich <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: quick help

        The Gneisenau (and its sister ship Scharnhorst) displaced roughly
32,000 tons, with main batteries of nine 280-mm (11-inch) guns.  They were very
heavily armored for their day, up to 15 inches in the main belt.  You can get
more detail than this, my quick reference source was the charts in the World
Almanac Book Of World War 2 (Peter Young, editor).

Regards

Mike Yaklich

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

Date:    Wed, 12 Oct 1994 19:58:20 EDT
From:    "Steve L. New" <[email-masked]>
Subject: The Big "What if..."

    John E. Kollar conjectures that a Germany that starts the war with 300
    U-boats would win the war.

    Considering the resources required to produce 300 U-boats (metal, plant
    & equipment, crew training, docks, fuel, armaments, etc.) a Germany
    that started WW-II with 300 U-boats probably couldn't field the
    Wermacht and Luftwaffe that took Poland, let alone the forces that took
    France.

    In addition, the years of effort involved in producing such a fleet
    couldn't have been hidden from the British and French.  Even if the
    French didn't react, the British would have been forced to.  The memory
    of the effect that the U-boats had on the British economy and war
    effort during WW-I was still fresh.  A Kriegsmarine with a huge U-boat
    fleet couldn't be tolerated.

    I suspect that this type of threat would have forced the British to
    take preemptive action, based on the German violation of the terms of
    the Treaty of Versaille.

    Something like Bill Clinton sending tens of thousands of troops to SWA
    in reaction to Saddam Hussein's latest violation of the U.N.
    resolutions, even though there have been dozens of less threatening
    violations in the past that the U.S. has chosen not to react to.

    Steve New

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

Date:    Wed, 12 Oct 1994 20:57:29 -0400
From:    David Rising <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: WEAP: Bazooka

Thanks Doug-- I knew the Towle story was a great one, but I couldn't
remember the details. Cheers,
David Rising

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

Date:    Wed, 12 Oct 1994 21:50:00 EDT
From:    mc killop <[email-masked]>
Subject: [INF] USAAF 13 OCT 44

COMBAT CHRONOLOGY OF THE US ARMY AIR FORCES
FRIDAY, 13 OCTOBER 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
  F-5, Lockheed Lightning
  P-38, Lockheed Lightning
  P-40, Curtiss
  P-47, Republic Thunderbolt
  P-51, North American Mustang
  P-61, Northrop Black Widow

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

AMERICAN THEATER OF OPERATIONS

  ALASKA (Eleventh Air Force): On Paramushiru Island, 4 B-25s bomb Kurabu
Airfield and bomb and strafe buildings on Tomari Cape, scoring hits on
canneries, warehouses, and barracks; later, 4 B-24s photograph and bomb
targets at Kashiwabara.

CHINA-BURMA-INDIA (CBI) THEATER OF OPERATIONS

  BURMA-INDIA (Tenth Air Force): In Burma, 38 P-47s strike Okkyin,
Yebyangale, and Theinlon, and hit troops in the Myothit area; 8 P-47s support
ground forces in the Mohnyin area, 12 attack and considerably damage Wanling
bridge and 4 hit targets of opportunity in the area.  Transports fly 280+
sorties hauling troops and supplies to CBI terminals.

  CHINA (Fourteenth Air Force): In China, 138 P-40s and P-51s on numerous
armed reconnaissance missions throughout S China and into W Burma attack
troop areas, rivercraft, town areas, bridges, trucks, and other targets of
opportunity; 71 of the fighter-bombers hit targets in the Kweiping area while
the others attack targets around Chuanhsien, Litou, Shepchung, Tengyun,
Lungfukwan, Kingshan, Mangshih, and Chefang.

EUROPEAN THEATER OF OPERATIONS (ETO)

  TACTICAL OPERATIONS (Ninth Air Force): 9th Bombardment Division bombers
hit bridges at Saarlouis, France, Roermond and Venlo, the Netherlands, and
Euskirchen and Mayen, Germany, plus several targets of opportunity. Escorting
fighters also fly armed reconnaissance over the areas of Metz, France and
extensively over W Germany, attacking railroads and other targets, and
support the US First, Third, and Seventh Armies. In France, HQ 323d
Bombardment Group (Medium) and the 453d, 454th, 455th and 456th Bombardment
Squadrons (Medium) move from Chartres to Laon/Athies with B-26s; the 425th
Night Fighter Squadron, XIX Tactical Air Command, moves from Coulommiers to
Prosnes with P-61s.

MEDITERRANEAN THEATER OF OPERATIONS (MTO)

  STRATEGIC OPERATIONS (Fifteenth Air Force): 650+ fighter escorted B-17s
and B-24s bomb oil refineries at Blechhammer, Germany and Vienna/Floridsdorf,
Austria; motor works, locomotive shops, and marshalling yard at Vienna and
Graz, Austria; Banhida, Szekesfehervar and Papa, Hungary; and Hranice and
Mezirici, Czechoslovakia; some of the escorting fighters strafe railroads,
roads, and an airfield in the areas of Balaton Lake, Hungary; Neusiedler
Lake and Vienna, Austria; and Prostejov, Czechoslovakia; other fighters
strafe roads, railroads, and Danube River traffic in the Vienna-Gyor, Hungary-
Budapest, Hungary areas.

  TACTICAL OPERATIONS (Twelfth Air Force): In Italy, weather cancels all
medium bomber operations except for attacks on 4 targets (bridges and supply
dumps) in the battle area S of Bologna; fighter-bombers support US Fifth Army
operations more successfully in the area, hitting gun emplacements, troop
concentrations, supply dumps, bridges, and vehicles; the 23d Photographic
Reconnaissance Squadron, 5th Photographic Reconnaissance Group [attached to
3d Photographic Group (Reconnaissance)] moves from Valence, France to
Malignano with F-5s.

PACIFIC OCEAN AREA (POA)

  AAFPOA (Seventh Air Force): B-24s from Saipan Island bomb Yap Island,
Caroline Islands. From the Marshall Islands B-24s pound Truk Atoll. Gilbert
Islands-based B-25s bomb Nauru Island. In Hawaii, HQ 21st Fighter Group moves
from Wheeler Field to Mokuleia Field.

SOUTHWEST PACIFIC AREA [SWPA, Far East Air Force (FEAF)]: B-25s bomb Menado
on Celebes Island and the surrounding area. P-38s hit AA positions, enemy
concentrations, and other targets in NE Celebes and Halmahera Islands. A-20s
and fighter-bombers attack Boela on Ceram Island, oil installations and
airfields at Amahai on Ceram Island, Kairatoe on Celebes Island, and Namlea
on Buru Island. In New Guinea, the 17th Photographic Reconnaissance
Squadron, 4th Photographic Group (Reconnaissance), enroute from Guadalcanal
Island to Morotai Island, sends a detachment to operate from Sansapor with
F-5s (other detachments are at Bougainville and Noemfoor Islands).

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

13/0153Z OCT

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

Date:    Wed, 12 Oct 1994 22:08:00 EDT
From:    mc killop <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: WEAP: B-26

 >Sort of on the fringes of the list.
 >Is the B-26 which was used at the beginning of Vietnam and at the Bay of
 >Pigs actually the WW-II Maurader or is it really the A-26 Invader(?)?  If
 >the designation was changed, when was it changed?
 >TIA

Tim,

You, like others, are a victim of the military changing the
designations of aircraft.   During WWII, the USAAF had the Douglas
A-26 Invader and the Martin B-26 Marauder.  After WWII, the Martin
B-26 was rapidly phased out and in 1948, the USAF eliminated the
"A" for attack prefix and the Douglas A-26 Invader became the B-26
Invader.  In 1962, the USAF and USN finally got around to
developing a unified system of aircraft designations and the "A"
for attack was back in.  Initially, the 40+ B-26s converted by
On-Mark to YB-26K and B-26K-OMs were designated B-26s but when they
were sent to Thailand, they were redesignated A-26A-OMs because it
was OK to have attack aircraft in Thailand but not bombers.

-------------------------------------------------------------------
|  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:    Wed, 12 Oct 1994 22:12:00 EDT
From:    mc killop <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Aircraft in Profile

 >Is anyone on the list familiar with the series of books "Aircraft in
 >Profile"?  I know it was being published during the 1960's and 70's, but
 >don't know if (and when) it ceased.  If it has ceased, what was the last
 >volume published?
 >
 >Also, how about the similar "Warships in Profile"?  How many volumes?
 >
 >Tim J. Watts

Tim,

They are long gone.  I have selected issues, the highest number
being 249.  According to a promo at the end, when No. 249 was
issued there were a total of 258 Profiles.

-------------------------------------------------------------------
|  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:    Wed, 12 Oct 1994 23:07:06 -0400
From:    Ben Frank <[email-masked]>
Subject: FDR'S HEALTH

FDR's polio was not a well-kept secret. As a matter of fact, each year on his
birthday, an organization whose name escapes me right now, but was dedicated to
supporting research on infantile paralysis, would celebrate his birthday. His
sojourns at Warm Springs for the therapy he obtained in the pool there was also
well known and well-photographed. He was a strong supporter of research in the
cause of polio, and so on. His polio was not kept from the public, but out of
respect for him, photographers would never photograph the heavy metal leg
braces he wore. Undoubtedly his upper body was made strong by having to use
crutches and wheeling his wheel chair around. That plus his engaging smile and
uplifted face and cigarette holder were marks of the man who many respected if
not worshipped. I don't think that there has been a finer president in our
time, certainly not in my time. He gave hope and a bright outlook to many in
the depths of the depression, and as a leader of the free work, he was
unparalleled. Please forgive this outburst, but the man deserves it. Ben Frank

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

End of WWII-L Digest - 11 Oct 1994 to 12 Oct 1994
*************************************************