Subject: WWII-L Digest - 4 Oct 1994 to 5 Oct 1994

From: Automatic digest processor <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 6 Oct 1994 00:01:44 -0400

There are 72 messages totalling 2581 lines in this issue.

Topics of the day:

  1. SS and SA (2)
  2. WWII-L Digest - 2 Oct 1994 to 3 Oct 1994
  3. HYPO:  The "Big" what-if?
  4. German Military Vehicles
  5. TACT:Downfall (2)
  6. POL: Economic causes of the war (4)
  7. WEAP:  F-82
  8. INF: 50 Years Ago - 06-OCT-1944
  9. POL:  Swiss Neutrality
 10. ITALY IN WW2, MY $ (2)
 11. HIST -- US plants in wartime Germany
 12. Speculation (2)
 13. WEAP:  F-82 -Reply
 14. Carlson's Raiders
 15. POL:Night of the Long Knives (6)
 16. WEAP:  Other uses of the Zwilling design concept
 17. WEAP:  F82 Revisited
 18. SS in combat (2)
 19. INF: More on Aero engines
 20. WEAP: Ar234C with E381 (2)
 21. Raid in Poland (6)
 22. Ref: Reunion of the 91st Bomb Group
 23. WEAP: Arado Ar-234C with E-381 (3)
 24. Switzerland in WWII
 25. Kristalnacht
 26. POL:Hiroshima (4)
 27. TRIV: Largest Group of Prisoners
 28. HYPO: The "Big" what-if? (2)
 29. POL: Economic Causes of the war
 30. Christie chassis & Wehrmacht
 31. WEAP: What is the BV151 - guess
 32. WEAP:  F82 Revisited -Reply
 33. WEAP:  BV151
 34. Fat Man question (4)
 35. TACT:Could they have won ? (2)
 36. Gustav Geraet
 37. WEAPON: Amphibious Landings and Tanks
 38. Help
 39. [INF] USAAF 2 OCT 44
 40. Italy in WW2, my $0.02--part II
 41. WEAP:aircraft comparisons
 42. [INF] USAAF 6 OCT 44
 43. Peleliu write-up

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

Date:    Tue, 4 Oct 1994 21:02:32 PDT
From:    Sidney Allinson <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: SS and SA

Greg...
        You are right in saying "SS shot a barnload of British prisoners
in 1940".
        The 'barnload' was, more correctly, 99 soldiers of The Royal Norfolk
Regiment. They were part of the rearguard action fought by part of the
British army defending the Dunkirk perimiter. At the French village of
Paradis, units of the SS Deaths Head Division was held up on May 27, 1939,
until the Norfolks' ammunition ran out. The British soldiers showed white
towels on rifle muzzles and shouted they were surrendering. However, when some
of the Tommies walked out of the barn they had defended, the SS opened fire with
machine-guns. A second attempt at surrender seemed successful, and the British
troops filed out, unarmed. The Germans ordered the 99 British soldiers to
walk into an open field, and kneel down.  After being searched, and beaten with
rifle-buts, the Tommies were marched in front of the barn wall, and mowed down
by SS machine guns. The SS then bayonetted the murdered Norfolks for good
measure.
That day, the SS butchered 97 British POWs. Incredibly, two men survived. One
of them, Private Pooley, was so severley wounded he gave himself up to the
Germans a few days later. Clearly they did not know how he'd been hurt, and
the severity of his wounds enabled him to be repatriated to England two
years later. His is tesitmony, plus that of the other survivor, O'Callaghan,
helped the investigation into the atrocity, and led to trial of the SS
officer -- Captain Fritz Knochlein -- in Hamburg in 1945, where he was
condemned to death and hanged.

--

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

Date:    Wed, 5 Oct 1994 02:39:34 EDT
From:    Cassady Craft <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: WWII-L Digest - 2 Oct 1994 to 3 Oct 1994

Terry and others, maybe the professor was referring to the Soviet adaptation
of the Christie chasis for their tanks.  Perhaps with the Germans training
in Lipetsk, they acquired some of these.  Just a guess, hopefully enough
to get someone who knows more to weigh in.

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

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

Date:    Wed, 5 Oct 1994 03:27:52 EDT
From:    Cassady Craft <[email-masked]>
Subject: HYPO:  The "Big" what-if?

Very simple hypothetical question:  Could Germany have won the Second World
War?  I expect reasonable answers, well thought out, ably argued, and with
brilliant, witty, and inciteful prose!

(No, this is not a trick question)

Thought for the day:  The easy way is always mined.

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

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

Date:    Wed, 5 Oct 1994 09:01:05 BST
From:    Stephen Baldwin <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: German Military Vehicles

Greetings Bill& everyone!

The Royal Tank Museum in Bovington is not afiliated to the Imperial War
Museum. I think Bovington is an army base anyway so maybe the army keeps
the vehicles as backup! FYI, the Imperial War Museum comprises the main museum
site in London, HMS Belfast, the Cabinet War rooms, and the RAF museum at
Duxford, near Cambridge.

The idea of tank rides sounds good to me!

/steve baldwin
[email-masked]

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

Date:    Wed, 5 Oct 1994 10:14:48 +0200
From:    "A.Bouis" <[email-masked]>
Subject: TACT:Downfall

Mike writes :
"In 1941-42 the Germans had two Panzer divisions in Africa (they started Barbarossa with 19 in the first wave !). Likewise, there were only two fighter geschwaders active in France (JG2 and JG26)"

Thanks Mike for your response.
Your estimate, though right on paper, looks only at the surface of the iceberg.

The Germans left 50 divisions (42 ? I must check) to guard Europe against England, and 1,500 aircraft. He sent 2,000 to 2,500 to Russia (depending on sources) and in December, withdrew Kesselring's 2nd Air Fleet to the Meditterranean.
For the tanks you are right, the bulk was in Russia.

Also, you will have to count all the Kriegsmarine naval and air assets to be assigned against England. Admittedly they couldn't have played as decisive a role against Russia, though ships played an important role in the fighting for cities such as Leningrad and Sevastopol, and they could have been trained as infantry, as in 1945.
And in Barbarossa, the German Army suffered from a dire lack of infantry reserves.
U-boat production nevertheless diverted great resources from other productions, such as tanks.

Arnaud.

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

Date:    Wed, 5 Oct 1994 10:25:42 +0200
From:    "A.Bouis" <[email-masked]>
Subject: POL: Economic causes of the war

Here is the first installment in what I would like to be a general discussion of J.F.C. Fuller's writings. It is quite long (took hours to type.. I hope it will arouse interest), so skip it if not interested.
This is the first extract I type, "Economic Origins of the War".

I would like to have the thoughts of the scholarly people here, how much they agree/disagree with the author. I do not personally have a personal opinion of my own, and would like to have one. If you disagree, I would like you to refute the FACTS, not fall down to facility by saying "the Author is so and so and so and is wrong", thus paying tribute to your true scholarly qualities. Please fight a Historian with facts, not feelings.

Please also note that though I am typing this passage because of the way it strays from commonly taught history, Fuller by no means gives economics as the only causes of the war. The quote is only a small part of his long chapter, "The Rise of the Third Reich".

"A Military History of the Western World", Vol. III, p. 368-370
Start of the quoting.....

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
(Follows considerations on Hitler, as a semi-genial, semi-paranoid person, a "Dr Jeckyll & Mr Hyde").

Hitler held that, as long as the international monetary system was based on gold, a nation which cornered gold could impose its will on those who lacked it. This could be done by drying up their sources of exchange, and thereby compelling them to accept loans on interest in order to distribute their wealth - their production. He said : "The community of the nation does not live by the fictitious value to money, but by the real production which in its turn gives value to money. This production is the real cover of the currency, and not a bank or a safe full of gold."
(Mr Churchill, who, as Chancellor of the Exchequer, reintroduced the gold standard in Britain in 1925, in 1931 held identical views. He said "If the progress of the human race in this age of almost terrifying expansion to be arbitrarily barred and regulated by fortuitous discoveries of gold mines ?...Are we to be told that human civilization and society would have been impossible if gold had not happened to be an element in the composition of the globe ?...these are absurdities; but they are becoming dangers and deadly absurdities....I therefore point to this evil and to the search for the methods of remedying it as the first, second and the third of all the problems which should command and rivet our thoughts.")

He decided: (1) To refuse foreign interest-bearing loans, and base German currency on production instead of on gold. (2) To obtain imports by direct exchange of goods - barter - and subsidize exports when necessary. (3) To put a stop to what was called "freedom of the exchanges" - that is, license to gamble in currencies and shift private fortunes from one country to another acording to the political situation. And (4) to create money when men and material were available for work instead of running into debt by borrowing it.
Because the life of international finance depended upon the issue of interest-bearing loans to nations in economic distress, Hitler's economics spelt its ruination. If he were allowed to succeed, other nations would certainly follow his example, and should a time come when all non-gold-holding governments exchange goods for goods, not only would borrowing cease and gold lose its power, but the money-lenders would have to close shop.
This financial pistol was pointed more particularly at the United States, because they held the bulk of the world's supply of gold, and because their mass-production system necessitated the export of about 10 per cent. of their products in order to avoid unemployment. Further, because the brutalities meted out to German Jews by Hitler understandably had antagonized American Jewish financiers, six months after Hitler became Chancellor, Samuel Untermyer, a wealthy New York attorney, threw down the challenge. He proclaimed a "holy war" against National Socialism and called for an economic boycott of German goods, shipping, and services. Cordell Hull, American Secretary of State, under the terms of the Trade Agreement Act of 1934, insisted that American foreign trade should not be undercut by exchange contyrols, government monopolies, and the barter system.
Between 1933 and 1936, Hitler had reduced German unemployment from six millions to one, and prosperity had so far returned that, like Arthur Balfour in 1907, in 1936 Winston Churchill is reported to have said to General Robert E.Wood of America: "Germany is getting too strong and we must smash her." Then in September, 1937, a new American depression set in and developed with such startling rapidity that, on October 19, the stock market collapsed, and in the following month the census of unemployment showed about 11 million totally unemplyed and 5,500,000 partially so. Something had to be done to divert public attention from this desperate situation - especially as the presidential elections were impending - and on October 5, at Chicago, President Roosevelt delivered his notorious "Quarantine Speech". He spoke of "a haunting fear of calamity...the present reign of terror...the very foundations of civilization are seriously threatened...let no one imagine that America will esc!
ape, that the Western Hemisphere w
ill not be attacked", and that the easiest measure to enforce moral standards was an international quarantine againt agressors. Soon after this the main agressor was named. Mr. Bernard Baruch told General George C. Marshall that "We are going to lick that fellow Hitler. He isn't going to get away with it". With what ? Presumably his barter system, for in September, 1939, Baruch released a report of an interview with the President in which he said: "If we keep our prices down, there is no reason why we shouldn't get the customers from the belligerent nations that they have had to drop because of the war. In that event Germany's barter system will be destroyed".
In Great Britain a similar challenge to the barter system was in full blast, and on March 9, 1939, the Polish Ambassador in London reported to his Government that Mr. R. S. Hudson, the Parliamentary Secretary for Overseas Trade, had said to him: "The British Government were...determined not to abandon a single European market and not to renounce their economic advantages in favour of the German Reich...Today we are making negociations in the economic sphere and shattering the German barter system." So fiercely was the economic war waged that Robert E. Sherwood records in The White House Parers of Harry L. Hopkins that, in April, 1939, the acting military attache in the American embassy at Berlin reported: "The present situation when viewed in the light of an active war which Germany is now in the process of waging becomes clear. It is an economic war in which Germany is fighting for her very existence. Germany must have markets for her goods or die and Germany will not die".
When we consider these economic causes of the Second World War it must be borne in mind, like with those of the first, that the struggle between the two economic systems is not a question of right and wrong, but of survival values. It was no more a question of right and wrong for loan-capitalism to fight for its supremacy than it was for Hitler to fight for his barter system. Each was vital to the party concerned; both were the product of trade competition - the curse born of the Industrial Revolution.

Beside this cause of the war, between 1933 and 1939 other helped to inflame the international situation, and of these the most important was the violence with which Hitler set out to carry out his programme of German regeneration. ..... (follow many other pages on the pre-war events)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
(end of quoted material)

Arnaud.

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

Date:    Wed, 5 Oct 1994 07:32:04 EDT
From:    "Steve L. New" <[email-masked]>
Subject: WEAP:  F-82

     >Maybe I'm confused, but I cannot for the life of me figure out why
     >such a craft was designed outside of a barroom...

     >(I know I show my ignorance, there HAD to be a reason!)

     >Steven E. Pudlo  - [email-masked] |

     Why an F-82?

          It was an aircraft with excellent performance (Top speed of 465
     MPH at 21,000 FT) that could be made using available tooling , jigs,
     skills & parts (P51-F fuselage halves and P51-H wings).  Production
     could start up almost immediately with minimal impact on other A/C
     production.

          It had a combat range of 2,000+ miles, extendible by drop tank,
     ample to escort bombers from Saipan/Tinian to the Home Islands and
     return.

          It was armed with 6 .50 Cal machine guns in the center section,
     and could carry a pod containing an additional 8 .50 Cals in a
     centerline pod.  (Adequate to deal with even the most heavily armored
     Japanese interceptors.)

          Two pilots available to share the work of the 6 to 8 hour
     flights.

          Two engines, to allow an aircraft to return to base from over the
     thin reaches of the South Pacific if one should fail.

     All this even before someone thought to make a night fighter out of
     it.

     And besides, it was a da-- sight more attractive than the BV-151.

        Steve L. New                     .............................
        Weapon System Manager            .............................
        Battalion Countermine Set        ............ /\ .............
        U.S. Army TACOM AMSTA-IM-FR1D    ............/  \.............
        DSN: 786-5403  FAX: 786-7788     ............    .............
        EMAIL  [email-masked]   ............    .............

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

Date:    Wed, 5 Oct 1994 04:39:05 -0700
From:    John Davis <[email-masked]>
Subject: INF: 50 Years Ago - 06-OCT-1944

On 06-OCT-1944, the following occurred -

World War II - The Battlefronts
-------------------------------
Western Front - An offensive is begun to clear the Scheldt estuary; with the
goal of making it possible for the Allies to use the port of Antwerp. There is
one German division left manning the small port of Breskens, south of
Flushing. The Canadian II Corps opens the offensive with the "battle of the
polders", an attack against Breskens fought in mud and water. North of the
Leopold Canal they establish two small bridgeheads. German resistance is very
strong and the Canadians are forced to committ substantial reinforcements to
hold the two bridgeheads. The XIX Corps (US 1st Army) continues the battle
around Aachen and at Geilenkirchen on the Siegfried Line.

Peleliu - Operations on Peleliu come to a standstill.

Angaur - Artillery fire is resumed against the Japanese at the extreme
northwest end of the island.

The Homefront
-------------
Air Cargoe To China - The War Department has announced that more than
46,000,000 pounds of military cargo was flown across the Himalaya "hump" from
India to China during one recent month by the Army Air Force Transport
Command.

World Series - The St. Louis Browns win the third game of the World Series
6-2.

31 Guilty Of Polygamy - Twenty men and 11 women have been convicted by a Salt
Lake City district court jury of conspiring to preach and practice polygamy.

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

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 or
through the WWW at URL: ftp://ftp.netcom.com/pub/jbd/ww2.html.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
John Davis     [email-masked]      WWW: ftp://ftp.netcom.com/pub/jbd/ww2.html
Cary, N.C.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Date:    Wed, 5 Oct 1994 07:48:02 EDT
From:    "Steve L. New" <[email-masked]>
Subject: POL:  Swiss Neutrality

     >To my knowledge, international law was circumvented. This whole
     >issue brings to mind the question of just how neutral was Switzerland
     >really.

     >Your thoughts?

     >Terry

     Terry,

     Of course the return of the ME-110 crew was a violation of Swiss
     neutrality.  But it was such a small violation, and resulted in such a
     gain for the country (6 new fighters and the lifting of German
     pressure) that, I'm sure, the Swiss took the realpolitik view.  What
     impact could two fliers have had on the war effort?  At least they
     destroyed, rather than returned, the aircraft.

     When push comes to shove, a government is going to act in its national
     interest, regardless of the "Rules of War".

     In day to day terms, however, it was in the best interest of the Swiss
     to maintain neutrality.  (It's kind of like secretly dealing with
     terrorists to buy the release of hostages when official dogma is that
     you don't deal with terrorists.  If no one finds out, you can't get
     hurt.)

        Steve L. New                     .............................
        Weapon System Manager            .............................
        Battalion Countermine Set        ............ /\ .............
        U.S. Army TACOM AMSTA-IM-FR1D    ............/  \.............
        DSN: 786-5403  FAX: 786-7788     ............    .............
        EMAIL  [email-masked]   ............    .............

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

Date:    Wed, 5 Oct 1994 04:52:50 -0700
From:    John Davis <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: ITALY IN WW2, MY $

> I think that this may be the beginning of an interesting thread to discuss:
> just really how good were the so-called "elites" of a country or a country's
> armed services. In the case of the Marine Corps, we had Carlson's 2d Raider
> Battalion on the west coast, comprised of volunteers who went through an
> interview by Carlson or one of his officers. They were equipped with "unique"

Regarding Carlson's Raiders, I hate to admit it but most of what I know
about them comes from W.E.B. Griffin's "The Corps" fictional series.
Griffin talks about that the majority of the Marine officer cadre didn't
think much of Carlson or his Raiders because he had a very "democratic"
view of the relationship between officers and enlisted men. You almost got
from the book that they viewed him as almost "communistic" in nature. The
books also brings out that Carlson was a favorite of Roosevelt, so that is
why he was able to create the Raiders. I wonder how much of this is actual
truth or fiction?

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
John Davis     [email-masked]      WWW: ftp://ftp.netcom.com/pub/jbd/ww2.html
Cary, N.C.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Date:    Wed, 5 Oct 1994 07:58:32 -0400
From:    Warren Thompson <[email-masked]>
Subject: HIST -- US plants in wartime Germany

F Y I to Jim Curry et al.: On at least one occasion US planes with ITT
electronic equipment on board bombed ITT plants in Germany. A irony of war.

-- Warren Thompson

[email-masked]

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

Date:    Wed, 5 Oct 1994 08:11:43 EDT
From:    "Steve L. New" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Speculation

     > Very simple hypothetical question:  Could Germany have won the
     > Second World War?  I expect reasonable answers, well thought out,
     > ably argued, and with brilliant, witty, and inciteful prose!

     Cassady,

     Please define the limits of the term "won" i.e. accomplishing no less
     than ...?

        Steve L. New                     .............................
        Weapon System Manager            .............................
        Battalion Countermine Set        ............ /\ .............
        U.S. Army TACOM AMSTA-IM-FR1D    ............/  \.............
        DSN: 786-5403  FAX: 786-7788     ............    .............
        EMAIL  [email-masked]   ............    .............

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

Date:    Wed, 5 Oct 1994 08:36:59 -0400
From:    [email-masked]
Subject: WEAP:  F-82 -Reply

     Why an F-82?

          It was an aircraft with excellent performance (Top speed of 465
     MPH at 21,000 FT) that could be made using available tooling , jigs,
     skills & parts (P51-F fuselage halves and P51-H wings).  Production
     could start up almost immediately with minimal impact on other A/C
     production.

          It had a combat range of 2,000+ miles, extendible by drop tank,
     ample to escort bombers from Saipan/Tinian to the Home Islands and
     return.

          It was armed with 6 .50 Cal machine guns in the center section,
     and could carry a pod containing an additional 8 .50 Cals in a
     centerline pod.  (Adequate to deal with even the most heavily armored
     Japanese interceptors.)

          Two pilots available to share the work of the 6 to 8 hour
     flights.

          Two engines, to allow an aircraft to return to base from over the
     thin reaches of the South Pacific if one should fail.

     All this even before someone thought to make a night fighter out of
     it.

     And besides, it was a da-- sight more attractive than the BV-151.

        Steve L. New                     .............................
        Weapon System Manager            .............................
        Battalion Countermine Set        ............ /\ .............
        U.S. Army TACOM AMSTA-IM-FR1D    ............/  \.............
        DSN: 786-5403  FAX: 786-7788     ............    .............
        EMAIL  [email-masked]   ............    .............

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

But how maneuverable was the F-82?  If it were pitted against first class single
engine figthers (admittedly in short supply in Japan in 1945) would it have met
the fate of the Bf110 over Great Britain in 1940 where they ended up being
escorted by Bf109s?  Or would it have been like the P-38 over Germany a few
years later, an a/c that could not really stand up to the Germans?

p.s.  What is the BV151?

John Meierhoffer                [email-masked]
Albany New York         518 486 2390 (work)   283 4761 (home)

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

Date:    Wed, 5 Oct 1994 08:43:44 EDT
From:    STeven Vest <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: ITALY IN WW2, MY $

Ben:

    When you say the 1st Marine Raider Batallion was reorganized into the
4th Marines, are you saying they were reorganized into the 4th Marine Raider
Batallion?  I've been meaning to do some research on the 4th Marine Raiders
and I'd be grateful for any sources you (or anyone else) might reommend beyond
the obvious.

    Best,
      STeven Vest

------------------------------------------------------------------------
STEVEN VEST            *      "TWO BROKEN TIGERS, ON FIRE IN THE NIGHT,
PURDY/KRESGE LIBRARY   *       FLICKER THEIR SOULS TO THE WIND."
WAYNE STATE UNIVERSITY *              AL STEWART "ROAD TO MOSCOW"
[email-masked] *                    _PAST, PRESENT AND FUTURE_
________________________________________________________________________

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

Date:    Wed, 5 Oct 1994 09:16:00 EDT
From:    mc killop <[email-masked]>
Subject: Carlson's Raiders

 John Davis writes:

 >The books (W.E.B. Griffin's THE CORPS) also brings out that Carlson was
 >a favorite of Roosevelt, so that is why he was able to create the Raiders.
 >I wonder how much of this is actual truth or fiction?

 >John Davis     [email-masked]      WWW: ftp://ftp.netcom.com/pub/jbd/ww2.html

Wasn't one of Roosevelt's sons involved with the Raiders?

-------------------------------------------------------------------
|  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, 5 Oct 1994 08:47:45 EST
From:    [email-masked]
Subject: POL:Night of the Long Knives

        Does anyone on the list know when the phrases "Night of the Long
Knives" and "Krystallnacht" came into use?  Did the Nazis coin them or
was it the foreign press?
Thanks,
*****************************************************
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:    Wed, 5 Oct 1994 10:01:14 EDT
From:    "Dennis E. Sparks" <[email-masked]>
Subject: WEAP:  Other uses of the Zwilling design concept

There was at least one other "zwilling", or twin-fuselage aircraft
designed during WWII, the General Aircraft Twin Hotspur.  The
Hotspur was a combat glider, designed in response to the German
success at Fort Eban Emael.  It was the first combat glider to be
designed by the Allies, and its original form, thought was given
to towing the gliders to a high enough altitude over England that
they could then glide across the English Channel.  The Hotspur Mk.I
was accordingly given a 62 ft. wingspan, intended to produce a
24:1 glide slope, while carrying eight troops.  The first one flew
on 5 November 1940.

Deciding to use the Hotspur as either a paratroop carrier, or
releasing them at low altitude over the drop zone (with a much
steeper glide angle desired), the Mark II featured a wingspan of
only 46 feet.  18 Hotspur Mk.I and 907 of the Mk.II were built,
plus about 50 of a training version, the Mk. III.  None were used
in combat, all being relegated to the training role.

A single Twin Hotspur was built using two Hotspur fuselages, and
with a 58 ft. wingspan.  It was conceived as a means of lifting
greater loads.  However, given the Hotspur's rather trim fuselage
design, bulkier items such as motorcycles or light trucks still
could not be carried, and the idea was dropped.

This information was extracted from James Mrazek's "Fighting
Gliders of WWII".

Pre-WWII, the Savoia-Marchetti S.55 flying boat, as used by General
Balbo in his massed flights across the Atlantic in 1931 and 1933,
featured a twin fuselage also.

Curtiss also produced an unusual twin, the twin P-40.  This aircraft
was a conversion from a P-40C and featured twin engines.  Retaining
a single fuselage, the nose was truncated and two Merlin engines
(as used on the P-40F) were installed on rather large nacelles on
the top of the wings.  There is a photo of this aircraft in the
Squadron/Signal "P-40 in Action" book, but with no word on whether
it actually flew.

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

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

Date:    Wed, 5 Oct 1994 10:14:41 +0059
From:    Ira H Krakow <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: POL:Night of the Long Knives

On Wed, 5 Oct 1994 [email-masked] wrote:

>         Does anyone on the list know when the phrases "Night of the Long
> Knives" and "Krystallnacht" came into use?  Did the Nazis coin them or
> was it the foreign press?
> Thanks,
> *****************************************************
> 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!
> ******************************************************
>

Brad,

  The Night of the Long Knives occurred in 1934 when Hitler was
consolidating power.  His biggest rivals were an internal Nazi
group called the SA, headed by Ernst Rohm.  The SA was essentially
a private army headed by Rohm, and posed a potential threat to Hitler.
Rohm was also a homosexual.  Hitler, and his ally Heinrich Himmler of
the SS, concocted a scheme to have Rohm discovered in flagrante delicto
and assassinated him.  While they were at it, they assassinated a lot
of the top SA brass, thus eliminating this group as a rival.  Apparently
knives were the weapon of choice.  The elimination of the SA, along
with the Reichstag fire, were the key events in Hitler's consolidation
of power.

   Kristallnacht occurred on November 9, 1938.  On that night ("the night
of crystal") the Nazis burned most of the synagogues in Germany and arrested
thousands of Jews.  This was the most public of overtly antisemitic acts
committed by the regime.  Previously, perhaps it would have taken some
research to grasp the Nazi's goal with regard to the Jews.  After
Kristallnacht, the goal was quite apparent, even though the setting up
of the extermination camps and the Final Solution had to wait until
the Wannsee Conference in 1942, when the was was in full swing.

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

Date:    Wed, 5 Oct 1994 10:31:06 EDT
From:    "Steve L. New" <[email-masked]>
Subject: WEAP:  F82 Revisited

     > But how maneuverable was the F-82?  If it were pitted against first
     > class single engine fighters (admittedly in short supply in Japan in
     > 1945) would it have met the fate of the Bf110 over Great Britain in
     > 1940 where they ended up being escorted by Bf109s?  Or would it have
     > been like the P-38 over Germany a few years later, an a/c that could
     > not really stand up to the Germans?

     > p.s.  What is the BV151?

     > John Meierhoffer                [email-masked] Albany New
     > York         518 486 2390 (work)   283 4761 (home)

     Lets not get caught in a WW-I dogfight frame of mind.  Both the
     Japanese and the Italians discovered, to their dismay, that fighter
     maneuverability wasn't as important as speed, rate of climb, and
     FIREPOWER.

     Neither the F4F Wildcat nor the P-38 Lightning could maneuver with the
     A6M2 Zero, but fighter tactics were developed for both aircraft that
     gave them high positive kill ratios against their more maneuverable
     opponents.

     And speaking of the P-38, I don't know of any source that claim that
     it was "...an a/c that could not really stand up to the Germans..."
     With the exception of the original P-300 Lend Lease aircraft sent to
     Britain (No superchargers and no contra-rotating propellers) the P-38
     had an exceptional record against the Germans.  It was the Luftwaffe
     that named it the Fork-Tailed Devil.

     P-38s got sent primarily to the Pacific not because of any problems
     dealing with German A/C, but because the twin engine design was
     preferred in an operating theater filled with lots of water between
     tiny islands.

     Lets face it, the ME-110 was just a dog, and using it's performance
     against Spitfires and Hurricanes to judge the F-82's against a Zero or
     a Tony is meaningless.

     I'll leave the BV-151 for someone else.

        Steve L. New                     .............................
        Weapon System Manager            .............................
        Battalion Countermine Set        ............ /\ .............
        U.S. Army TACOM AMSTA-IM-FR1D    ............/  \.............
        DSN: 786-5403  FAX: 786-7788     ............    .............
        EMAIL  [email-masked]   ............    .............

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

Date:    Wed, 5 Oct 1994 15:56:54 BST
From:    Stephen Baldwin <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: POL:Night of the Long Knives

Ira H Krakow writes...
>   Kristallnacht occurred on November 9, 1938.  On that night ("the night
>of crystal") the Nazis burned most of the synagogues in Germany and arrested
>thousands of Jews.  This was the most public of overtly antisemitic acts
>committed by the regime.  Previously, perhaps it would have taken some
>research to grasp the Nazi's goal with regard to the Jews.  After
>Kristallnacht, the goal was quite apparent, even though the setting up
>of the extermination camps and the Final Solution had to wait until
>the Wannsee Conference in 1942, when the was was in full swing.

I have heard that Churchill, during his "wilderness years"
 encouraged people to read Mein Kampf
in order for them to find out exactly what Hitler was up to. I have
not read it, so would be interested to know what it has to say
(if anything) about the Final Solution

Steve Baldwin
[email-masked]

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

Date:    Wed, 5 Oct 1994 11:04:36 -0400
From:    David Rising <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: SS in combat

On Tue, 4 Oct 1994, Sidney Allinson wrote:

> David Rising...
>         Well, you're close, when you say there were SS involved in the
> Polish border incident, which was a pretext for Germany's attack on Poland.
>         The facts, however, are that a squad of SS/Gestapo took a group
> of political prisoners from a Nazi concentration camp to a border
> point close to Gleiwitz. The prisoners were forced to put on Polish uniforms,
> then shot dead -- a bizarred faked "Polish attack" on the local radio
> station. The following morning, Sept 1, 1939, German troops invaded Poland,
> while Herr Hitler announced that it was in retaliation for "the attack by
> Polish troops on the [German] Gleiwitz transmitter..."
>         Regards -- Sidney Allinson.

Oh yes, I remember now :-). It was, however, the SS who shot them wasn't
it? That would still make them the first to fire in the war. Cheers,
David Risign

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

Date:    Wed, 5 Oct 1994 10:21:34 -0500
From:    "William L. Huber - SAA" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: INF: More on Aero engines

>
> I believe Hitler said 'the Americans can produce fast cars but they'll never be
> able to produce the number of airplanes and tanks they plan.' (definitely a
> paraphrase!!).  That was not just blindness on his part but an example of the
> cultural blindness that existed throughout Europe at the time.  BWK

Goering once told Rommel while discussing the Torch landing that the
only things the Americans could produce was razor blades.  Rommel
replied "We could do with some of those 'razor blades'".

Ciao, Bill Huber / [email-masked]

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

Date:    Wed, 5 Oct 1994 11:19:45 -0400
From:    Barone <[email-masked]>
Subject: WEAP: Ar234C with E381

        The October issue of the Squadron Mail Order catalog offers
a model by DML in 1/72 scale of an Arado Ar 234C with an E381 Julia
Parasite fighter (page 2).  These are two peculiar looking aircraft!
The Ar 234C seems to have four jet engines, two under each wing in two
nacelles blobbed together.  The E381 looks like a rocket plane and has
tiger-shark nose art more common to Allied aircraft.  (This impressions
are from the line art from the catalog so I could be way off.)  Can any
of the resident aircraft specialists offer any info on these planes?
Thanks.
--
Joe Barone
[email-masked]
Look, when we was in the bocage country, we was assaulted by them Tigers!
You know what I mean by assaulted, hunh?!  Well, I mean *assaulted*!!

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

Date:    Wed, 5 Oct 1994 10:25:18 CST
From:    "SCHERRER, TIM" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Raid in Poland

The raid on the radio station that kicked off the Polish campaign--wasn;
t that conducted not by SS but by Brandenburgers???  Does anyone else
remember this besides me???  TAS                                        as
                                                                        ders.

                                                                        ww2.html

************************************************************************
*  Tim A. Scherrer          "You'll be fighting WWII for the rest of   *
*  Facilities Supervisor     your life", Ron Scherrer, 1971            *
*  WP:816-785-5253                                                     *
*  HP:816-665-6704                                                     *
*  ID# [email-masked]                             *
************************************************************************

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

Date:    Wed, 5 Oct 1994 10:29:10 EST
From:    [email-masked]
Subject: Re: POL:Night of the Long Knives

Just to clarify, I do know what the references are to, I just need
to know when, where and how the specific terms came into use.  In
other words, did something occur along the lines of the German public
getting up on July 1, 1934 and reading _Last night was the Night of the
Long Knives_.
*****************************************************
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:    Wed, 5 Oct 1994 11:17:02 EDT
From:    William Lippert <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: POL:Night of the Long Knives

On Wed, 5 Oct 1994 10:14:41 +0059 Ira H Krakow said:
>Brad,
>
>  The Night of the Long Knives occurred in 1934 when Hitler was
>consolidating power.  His biggest rivals were an internal Nazi
>group called the SA, headed by Ernst Rohm.  The SA was essentially
>a private army headed by Rohm, and posed a potential threat to Hitler.
>Rohm was also a homosexual.  Hitler, and his ally Heinrich Himmler of
>the SS, concocted a scheme to have Rohm discovered in flagrante delicto
>and assassinated him.  While they were at it, they assassinated a lot
>of the top SA brass, thus eliminating this group as a rival.  Apparently
>knives were the weapon of choice.  The elimination of the SA, along
>with the Reichstag fire, were the key events in Hitler's consolidation
>of power.
>

   It was not Hitler and Himmler who plotted the neutralization of the SA
and the elimination of the top brass, but Himmler and Goering.  Hitler was
very close friends with Roehm, and it took some 24-48 hours for him to decide
that Roehm should be eliminated.  Himmler disliked, among other things, that
the SS was subordinate to the SA.  It was a struggle for power on his part.
Goering, also, desired more power.  As for Himmler, some have maintained that
his swing to support Hitler and fight Roehm was taken at the last minute -
it could have been the other way around.  Additionally, it is more or less
proven that the plot was concocted by such personalities as Rheinhard
Heydrich, for his own ends.  The fact that Roehm was homosexual, however,
had little bearing as to the motives of the purge, though it was used as
an explanation to the public.  Hitler had been aware of the top SA's homesexual
tendencies for quite since the very early days of the 1920's.

Sources: Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, Shirer,
         Himmler, Peter Padfield
         Reinhard Heydrich, Hitler's Most Evil Henchman.  Charles Wighton

William Lippert
The American University

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

Date:    Wed, 5 Oct 1994 11:55:22 EDT
From:    Cassady Craft <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Speculation

Definition of "won the war:"  Brought about a favorable conclusion, either
in the military or political sphere, of the hostilities before being
occupied.

Now define favorable:  Germany not giving up territory or assets considered
vital. (this allows compromise on areas not vital).

Now define vital:  (Good god, I can't even do this for the US anymore!)
_Lebensraum_ cannot be discounted.  Read _Mein Kampf_ for Hitler's definition
of vital interests.  Areas considered necessary for military and economic
security (by Hitler, of course).  This probably means (at the very least)
Ukraine, the Rumanian oil fields in friendly hands, France, Poland, the Baltic
States.

Hope this helps some.

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

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

Date:    Wed, 5 Oct 1994 11:09:55 CST
From:    "SCHERRER, TIM" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Ref: Reunion of the 91st Bomb Group

I had the pleasure of attending the 91st Bomb Group reunion in Oklahoma
City, OK the weekend before this past one.  I met many interesting vets ght
and learned a lot about the 91st Group.  I attended as part of the WWII rested
Airman's Preservation Society--we are recreating the 91st Group for our ts
displays.

The reunion started on a Wednesday, and I arrived late Friday night--the
vets got to tour several active duty aircraft--such as an AWACS at Tinke
r AFB as well as tour other sites around the city.

The WWIIAPS set up the memorabilia room which included our standard disp
lay of things plus many items donated on the spot by the vets.  We had
9 APS members there, and the room usually  had just as many vets and
spouces in it.

Interesting things I picked up--Lt Bill Winchell--a waist gunner of the
Memphis Belle recently died--within the past three months.  We spoke
with some of the group members--they never called her the Memphis Belle
but always as Morgan's plane or Morgan's crew.  One gentleman told me
that Wyler, who filmed the original documentary, had actually picked
another aircraft and crew to be the focus of his film--one piloted by
an O'Neal--however after shooting much footage of the crew they were
lost on their 24th mission.  Wyler had to pick another crew and chose
the 'Belle.  They weren;t the first crew to complete their 25 missions
although they were one of the first few to do so.  O'Neal went on to sur
 vive the war and had a daughter who was also in a few films--her name
was Jennifer O'Neal.  Another big name in the 91st was a pilot named
Sherwin Williams of the paint company--he was related to the family.

I heard a terriffic story from a gentleman about the 91st Group's last
mission--the particular squadron (can;t remember which one--they had
the 322, 323, 324, and 401st squadrons) was lead for the formation and
the squadron CO was leading the formation--they were in heavy flack over
the target, and something went wrong and the lead plane didn't drop his
bombs, but the 2nd lead had the back-up bombardier who pickled on the
target, so the rest of the squadron and group pickled as well.  The
squadron CO in the lead aircraft didn;t know the rest of the planes
had pickled, so he ordered a 360 degree run to make another pass at the
target--despite the fact that all the other planes except the lead and o
ne other had no bombs.  Well--the aircrews of the rest of the planes
decided to follow the rest of the group back to Bassingbourne and not
venture another run through a heavy flak target.  They kept radio silenc
e and went with the group.

The squadron CO was then executing his 360 degree turn for another run
at the  target when he looked back and saw only one other B-17 with
him.  They pickled their bombs and made a mad dash to catch up with the
rest of the group.  When they got on the ground--the squadron CO threw
a fit with the aircrews, and ordered them to complete 5 more missions
than required for rotation.  The crews were pretty upset about this
however the joke ended up being on the squadron CO because that was the
last mission of the war.

The 91st was featured in an article in National Geographic and had a quo
te from a diary of a gunner.  I met this man and he autographed the
National Geographic edition I had.  I also picked up an autographed
copy of "COMBAT he wrote"  which is the story of a 91st Bombardier who
ended up being the senior Bombardier in the 8th AF--his name was Charlie
 although his last name escapes me.

There is an excellent book out now about USAAF uniforms now called "Silv
er Wings, Pinks and Greens" which is probably destined to be the bible
on USAAF uniforms in the future--it just hit the racks recently--it is
expensive but I highly recommend it.

Our memorabilia room was a big hit, with us receiving many donations fro
m the vets.  We also received as a donation from the 91st BG Memorial
Association their large mural prints of photos from Bassingbourne and
of COL Wray giing the now famous "rigid digit" symbol he created.

One especially interesting thing we saw were some color 91st BG mission
photos taken by a radio operator in the group--they are stunning.  The
photographer will not sell them for profit but he has given the WWIIAPS
permission to print them as postcards and sell them as a fund raiser.

Other interesting notes--the 91st had an aircraft built from two shot
up planes--what was unusual was the front half was silver, and back
half green.  They also had a plane, "Nine-O-Nine" that flew 140 missions
without a turnback or a crew injury.

The vets would look through their photo albumns and they knew every sing
le mission they flew plain as day--like it happened yesterday.  They wou
d look at pictures and could tell you exactly what happened to each
aircraft.  One gentleman had even drafted a section of the airfield
showing which aircraft were parked where, and what the different sheds
on the parking ramp were used for.  I am supposed to be getting a copy o
f a radar map showing flak positions over Europe from a gentleman who
will use a copy  camera.  I am excited about this--for it is a major
boon for building my reproduction S-2 shop.

I spoke with a gentleman about the staff planning time for missions
and he said they got the mission alerts early in the evening, and
the fragorders at about 11pm-1am, and briefed them at 6am usually.
That isn;t much time!

If I remember more signifcant things I'll post them later.  The
highlight of the weekend was us presenting the colors at the closing
banquet.  After the dinner there was dancing, and we received dozens
of handshakes and pats on the back from the vets and spouces.  The
spouces were really interesting because they would see us walk by and
a little smile would appear on their faces--I'm not sure what went
through their minds, but it had to be good.  TAS

************************************************************************
*  Tim A. Scherrer          "You'll be fighting WWII for the rest of   *
*  Facilities Supervisor     your life", Ron Scherrer, 1971            *
*  WP:816-785-5253                                                     *
*  HP:816-665-6704                                                     *
*  ID# [email-masked]                             *
************************************************************************

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

Date:    Wed, 5 Oct 1994 12:10:27 EDT
From:    William Lippert <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Raid in Poland

    No, the original raid was not executed by the Brandenburgers.  In fact, it
was not precisely executed by the SS; that is to say that is not being specific
enough.  Operation Canned Goods was directed by Alfred Naujocks, personal
favorite of Reinhard Heydrich.  Thus it fell under the domain of the Sicher
dienst (or something like that), the SS intelligence branch (SD).  Additionally
, Heinrich Muller, head of the Gestapo, also provided assistance.  But the
Brandenburgers did not, particularly since they were under Wermacht command.
   The Brandenbergers were an operations section of Wilhelm Canaris' Abwher,
intelligence branch of the Wermacht.  All the Abwher did in Canned Goods was
provide the Polish uniforms used on the raid.

Sources: Himmler: Reichsfuhrer SS
         Wilhelm Canris; by Honze

William Lippert,
The American University

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

Date:    Wed, 5 Oct 1994 12:26:37 CCS
From:    Jorge Merino <[email-masked]>
Subject: WEAP: Arado Ar-234C with E-381

I haven't heard about the E-381, but I can say something about the Ar-234C.

The Arado Ar-234 Blitz (Lightning) was the first german (and I think world's)
jet bomber. If memory serves, the first version Ar-234A had expendable landing
gear (if not, please correct me!!). The first operational version was Ar-234B,
both versions were twin-engined. The Ar-234C version was four-engined, and did
have also a modified canopy. The Ar-234C-3 was intended to carry a V-1 bomb
(Fi-103) on the back, the Ar-234C-4 had a camera arrangement on the belly for
reconnaisance missions.

I have the DML 1/72 scale Ar-234C-3/C-4 with V-1. Very good kit, with highly
detailed photoetched parts. DML has also another interesting kit: The Mistel 5
(a combination of an Arado E-337 and a Heinkel He-162). The Mistel series were
flying bombs, where the "bomb" was a modified bomber full of explosives, with
a manned fighter attached to the back. The fighter had to fly near the target
and "release" the "bomb". Many combinations were tested. The first were
between Ju-88/Bf-109 and Ju-88/Fw-190. I have to recall my sources for more
information. About the E-337, it was a "bomb" version of the Ar-234. Same
wings (twin-engined), different fuselage and tail surfaces.

Jorge Merino

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

Date:    Wed, 5 Oct 1994 12:27:35 EDT
From:    Ken Koester <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Switzerland in WWII

On Tue, 4 Oct 1994 15:28:20 GMT-6 Robert T. Moore said:
Thanx, Terry.

>> Weren't
>> Allied fliers interned?
>
>    Yes. And some were also recruited by Allen Dulles to process
>intelligence info.

Which brings up the question:  exactly what was internment like for a
downed flier?  Actual imprisonment?  House arrest?  Detained in the
appropriate embassy?  Mixture of all 3 & others I haven't thought of? (-:

> If so, weren't the Swiss obliged to intern the
>> Germans as well?
>
>    Yes, but in this instance, the pressure from Goering and the
>German air ministry was so intense, out of fear that the Me-110 would
>fall into Allied hands, particularly the radar equipment on board,
>that it all resulted in a compromise situation for the Swiss. My
>source is Janusz Piekalkiewicz' book "Luftkrieg: 1939-1945" in German
>which goes into much detail on this episode.

Think I would have raised cain, had I been an Allied government at the time (-:
Although, perhaps the Allies were evading neutrality on Swiss soil & figured
they were overall gainers & didn't want to rock the boat.

ken koester
[email-masked]

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

Date:    Wed, 5 Oct 1994 12:46:08 EDT
From:    "Steve L. New" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Kristalnacht

     > Just to clarify, I do know what the references are to, I just need
     > to know when, where and how the specific terms came into use.  In
     > other words, did something occur along the lines of the German
     > public getting up on July 1, 1934 and reading _Last night was the
     > Night of the Long Knives_.

     *****************************************************
     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!
     ******************************************************

     Brad,

     Kristalnacht is a name contemporaneous with the event.  Every shop
     etc. that had been identified as being owned by a Jew was destroyed,
     with shattered glass littering the streets in great volume.  The
     street lights illuminating the shards of glass it made it appear that
     the streets were covered in chrystal, hence Kristalnacht.  It was not
     a planned or operational name, but came about as the description of
     the carnage.

     I have no idea about the night of the long knives, sorry.

        Steve L. New                     .............................
        Weapon System Manager            .............................
        Battalion Countermine Set        ............ /\ .............
        U.S. Army TACOM AMSTA-IM-FR1D    ............/  \.............
        DSN: 786-5403  FAX: 786-7788     ............    .............
        EMAIL  [email-masked]   ............    .............

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

Date:    Wed, 5 Oct 1994 13:10:27 -0400
From:    "John E. Kollar" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: POL:Hiroshima

I hate to be a stickler, but the first bomb used on Hiroshima was an
implosion type warhead, the fissionable material is arranged in a sphere,
and a perfect hollow sphere of explosives is detonated, causing a critical
mass to form, and then the explosion takes place, using U235, this
was done becuase of the properties of U235 and U238, it is very hard to get
them to form a critical mass for an explosion to take place.  With the
second bomb on Nagasaki, which was a plutonium bomb, it used the
gun-type mechanism becuase Plutionium is much easier to start a reaction
with, which is why there is much more concern in the international community
today about plutonium being on the black market rather than uranium being
on the balck market.

John E. Kollar

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

Date:    Wed, 5 Oct 1994 10:13:02 PDT
From:    Henry Herz <[email-masked]>
Subject: TRIV: Largest Group of Prisoners

Here's a fun trivia question:
What was the largest number of prisoners taken in a single battle?
We'll probably need to precisely define "battle" in terms of time & space.
Answer for the following nationalities:
   American (Battle of the Bulge?)
   British (Dunkirk?)
   French
   Soviet
   German
   Italian
   Japanese (Okinawa?)

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

Date:    Wed, 5 Oct 1994 12:26:24 -0500
From:    Michael D Wallick <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: POL:Night of the Long Knives

On Wed, 5 Oct 1994, Ira H Krakow wrote:

> On Wed, 5 Oct 1994 [email-masked] wrote:
>
> >         Does anyone on the list know when the phrases "Night of the Long
> > Knives" and "Krystallnacht" came into use?  Did the Nazis coin them or
> > was it the foreign press?
> > Thanks,
> > *****************************************************
> > 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!
> > ******************************************************
> >
>
> Brad,
>
>   The Night of the Long Knives occurred in 1934 when Hitler was
> consolidating power.  His biggest rivals were an internal Nazi
> group called the SA, headed by Ernst Rohm.  The SA was essentially
> a private army headed by Rohm, and posed a potential threat to Hitler.
> Rohm was also a homosexual.  Hitler, and his ally Heinrich Himmler of
> the SS, concocted a scheme to have Rohm discovered in flagrante delicto
> and assassinated him.  While they were at it, they assassinated a lot
> of the top SA brass, thus eliminating this group as a rival.  Apparently
> knives were the weapon of choice.  The elimination of the SA, along
> with the Reichstag fire, were the key events in Hitler's consolidation
> of power.
>
>    Kristallnacht occurred on November 9, 1938.  On that night ("the night
> of crystal") the Nazis burned most of the synagogues in Germany and arrested
> thousands of Jews.  This was the most public of overtly antisemitic acts
> committed by the regime.  Previously, perhaps it would have taken some
> research to grasp the Nazi's goal with regard to the Jews.  After
> Kristallnacht, the goal was quite apparent, even though the setting up
> of the extermination camps and the Final Solution had to wait until
> the Wannsee Conference in 1942, when the was was in full swing.
>
Didn't the Nazis also break the windows and ransack Jewish owned
businesses?  Therefore, it became known as "the night of crystal"
because of the amount of broken glass in the streets.

Michael Wallick

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

Date:    Wed, 5 Oct 1994 12:41:28 -0400
From:    Christopher Morton <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Raid in Poland

>
> The raid on the radio station that kicked off the Polish campaign--wasn;
> t that conducted not by SS but by Brandenburgers???  Does anyone else
> remember this besides me???  TAS                                        as

I don't believe there WERE any Brandenburgers at the time.

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

Date:    Wed, 5 Oct 1994 10:52:34 -0800
From:    Yarbrough James L <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: HYPO: The "Big" what-if?

Taking into consideration the definitions of winning that have been given, I
would have to say yes.  The Germans could have come out in a position of
dominance in Europe.  The occupation of a large portion of eastern and central
Europe followed by a period of relative peace.  I do not think that they would
still be in that position today, but that is not the question.

Now for the good part, why I think that way.

Had Germany continuted to attack the British airfields during the Battle of
Britain they could have gained air superiority over Britain and successfully,
either invaded or forced Britain into a peace treaty.  This by the way is the
really weak link in my arguement.  The ideal situation would be for a peace
treaty with Britain, thus freeing up an occupation force.

Anyway, after the securing of the west, the Germans would then be able to
solidify the Balkan states by equiping and training the militaries and
supporting the governments.  With a solid base in the Balkan countries and a
German economy geared for war. (Something that didn't happen in WWII until 1941
or '42)  Germany could then turn to the east and the USSR.  I don't think that
the Soviet Union would have been any more prepared for war than they were
because Stalin was trying to motivate the people with communist propaganda.  It
wasn't until after the early defeats that he turned to the Mother Russia theme.

I also think that the period of gearing up for war against the USSR would have
taken until 1942.  A time spent in r&d of new weapons and production of new
equipment.

To take into consideration the other countries of the world.

After the fall of Britain the US would not be in position to take action
against Germany.  Assuming the Japanese launch the attack at Pearl, I believe
that the US would not declare war against Germany.  They appeared not to be
going to until Germany declared on Dec 10.  If Britain is not around then the
US sends it entire might against the Japanese, which keeps them busy until 1944
or so.

Like I said, the USSR continues to prepare for war, but the people are not
motivated and the army is regularly purged of it's quality officers.  I think
the USSR might have been in a worse position to fight the war if Germany had
waited than they really were.

In conclusion,  Germany would occupy most of Europe and be in a position deal
with the US after the US defeats Japan.  Unless the US is willing to prop up
the Soviet Union and engage Germany on the plains of Russia.  The US would have
no ability to invade from the west and would have to take its army across the
USSR to engage the Germans.  Picture this, German U-boats patrolling the
Pacific supply lines.  Refueling from ports in India and Indochina.

That's the way I would have done it if I had been the little fella in charge.
Of course, I would probably would have been just as 'impassioned' and then I
would have done the same thing he did and we know the results of that.

Jim

[email-masked]

New rules adopted by the agency require me to state that all my opinions are
mine, not that anybody else would want them, and not to hold the State of
Oregon or anybody else responsible.
_______________________________________________________________________________
Very simple hypothetical question:  Could Germany have won the Second World
War?  I expect reasonable answers, well thought out, ably argued, and with
brilliant, witty, and inciteful prose!

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

Date:    Wed, 5 Oct 1994 12:58:46 -0500
From:    "Tim J. Watts" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: POL: Economic Causes of the war

Arnaud-
An interesting post about economics and causes of the war.  One challenge
to the theory.  He mentions the Sept. 1937 depression in the U.S. and
the need to divert public attention from this situation "especially as
the presidential elections were impending".  Presidential elections
were next held in 1940 - 3 years after the event and hardly impending.
This makes me doubt his effort to tie the "Quarantine speech" purely
to the economic conditions.

I am interested in the idea of economics and its role in history.  I
don't know enough to discount its effects, so I look forward to what
others have to say.
Tim J. Watts
Valparaiso University

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

Date:    Wed, 5 Oct 1994 13:36:52 -0400
From:    Bob Stewart <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: POL: Economic causes of the war

>Here is the first installment in what I would like to be a general
discussion of
> J.F.C. Fuller's writings.
>
>Arnaud.
>

Arnaud,

        Coincidentally, I have just been reading John Kenneth Galbraith's
_A_Journey_through_Economic_Time_ where he discusses the the interwar
economic period. I think there are three important facts left out by Fuller.

        First, one of the primary reasons for Germany's improved position in
foreign exchange was the ceasing of reparation payment's by Hitler. The
mechanism of international trade wasn't the problem. The problem was that
Germany was forced to transfer wealth and receive nothing in return.

        Second, Fuller dosen't mention the far greater negative impact on
international trade of the various tariff laws, such as the US's
Smoot-Hawley. These laws, intended to protect vulnerable domestic
industries, had a much greater effect on trade than Germany's moves to curb
its loses in foreign exchange.

        Third, it makes no mention of Hitler's use of public expenditure to
reduce unemployment. Much like Roosevelt, Hitler borrwed money domestically
to produce jobs programs and expenditures on infrastructure like the
autobahns. This was financed through loans from German banks. Wouldn't this
qualify as "loan-capitalism"? This certainly contributed to the improvements
in Germany's economy during this period, especially the reduction in
unemplyment.

        Overall, I think Fuller places to much emphasis on the philosophic
explanations of Hitler's trade reforms. His main motivation was purely
practica, to end a great drain on German wealth.

        Galbraith also gives a good accounting of the effects of Churchill's
return to the gold standard. It was, much like his invasion of the
Dardanelles, a disaster. It seems truely amazing that a public figure whose
two most famous, or infamous, decisions had had such terrible results would
be chosen as PM in Britain's time of calamity. Luckily, his service as PM
was not marked by the same sort of decisions. Or maybe I should say, luckily
no one listened to his plans for a balkan invasion into "the soft underbelly
of Europe." That move would have left him 0 for 3 in strategic moves!

     Bob Stewart    [email-masked]   (202) 232-3433
     1835 Lamont St., NW
     Washington, DC

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

Date:    Wed, 5 Oct 1994 13:39:43 EST
From:    [email-masked]
Subject: Re: POL:Hiroshima

Sorry John, but I am occasionally a stickler as well.  The Hiroshima
bomb was indeed the U235 bomb, but it was the gun type, hence
the more elongate shape and the nick name Little Boy.  The Nagasaki
bomb was the plutonium bomb but it was the famous Fat Man and it
was the implosion device as well as being the prototype for at least
the first generation of US nuclear weapons.  Sources are numerous
but include _Nuclear weapons of the United States_.
*****************************************************
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:    Wed, 5 Oct 1994 11:54:45 -0700
From:    John Riegsecker <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: POL:Hiroshima

>From:         "John E. Kollar" <[email-masked]>
>Subject:      Re: POL:Hiroshima
>
>I hate to be a stickler, but the first bomb used on Hiroshima was an
>implosion type warhead, the fissionable material is arranged in a sphere,
>and a perfect hollow sphere of explosives is detonated, causing a critical
>mass to form, and then the explosion takes place, using U235, this
>was done becuase of the properties of U235 and U238, it is very hard to get
>them to form a critical mass for an explosion to take place.  With the
>second bomb on Nagasaki, which was a plutonium bomb, it used the
>gun-type mechanism becuase Plutionium is much easier to start a reaction
>with, which is why there is much more concern in the international community
>today about plutonium being on the black market rather than uranium being
>on the balck market.
>
>John E. Kollar

No, you have it backwards.  Little Boy, the bomb dropped on Hiroshima
was a gun type bomb.  Fat Man, dropped on Nagasaki was an implosion type
bomb.  I'm looking at a reference book as I type this so I'm sure of
that fact, which is as I have always remembered it.

John Riegsecker
Department of Mathematics and Computer Science
University of Puget Sound

[email-masked]

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

Date:    Wed, 5 Oct 1994 14:54:41 -0400
From:    "Robert F. Kieran" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Raid in Poland

        From: "SCHERRER, TIM" <[email-masked]>
        Subject: Re: Raid in Poland
        Date: Wed, 5 Oct 1994 10:25:18 CST

        The raid on the radio station that kicked off the Polish campaign--wasn;
        t that conducted not by SS but by Brandenburgers???  Does anyone else
        remember this besides me???  TAS                                        as
                                                                                ders.
        ************************************************************************
        *  Tim A. Scherrer          "You'll be fighting WWII for the rest of   *
        *  Facilities Supervisor     your life", Ron Scherrer, 1971            *
        *  WP:816-785-5253                                                     *
        *  HP:816-665-6704                                                     *
        *  ID# [email-masked]                             *
        ************************************************************************

Tim,

     I remember that Admiral Canaris, as head of German military
intelligence, was responsible for providing Polish army uniforms
to the SS unit which "attacked" the Gleiwitz radio station.
(BTW, I believe the code name for this operation was "Canned Goods".)
Since the Brandenburgers reported to military intelligence at that time,
could this be what you're remembering?

                                                Regards,
                                                Bob Kieran
                                                [email-masked]

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

Date:    Wed, 5 Oct 1994 14:26:18 EST
From:    [email-masked]
Subject: Re: HYPO: The "Big" what-if?

I would add one more requirement to Jim Yarbrough's post, namely, the
Wehrmacht is free to go on into Dunkirk and captures the 338,000 who got
away.  Operation Seelo"we may not be cakewalk with this proviso, but it
sure gets easier.
*****************************************************
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:    Wed, 5 Oct 1994 14:31:55 -0500
From:    Greg Kelley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Christie chassis & Wehrmacht

If memory serves, the only German tracked vehicles at their armour
training facility near Kazan were examples of the LEICHTTRAKTOR and
GROSSSTRAKTOR, neither of which had suspensions even remotely
Christie-ish.  German tank suspensions seem to have originated with an
example of a British Carden-Loyd tankette obtained elsewhere & developed
into the Panzerkampfwagen I.  Some years later, during the war, the first
designs for the PANTHER showed a suspension looking very much like that
of the Soviet T-34 (which Was based on the Christie).

The Polish Army DID order a single copy of the Christie Model 1931 but
defaulted on payment; this vehicle ended up bought by the US Army, but
that's as close as I know of that the Germans got to Christies (until
they ran across them in Spain in '37 and the western Ukraine in'41)

Unfortunately, the Rumanian Army never got to use anything Christie-ish.
Too bad-- General Radu might've enjoyed racing them down the streets of
Bucharest.....

                                          Glad To Be Of Service!

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

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

Date:    Wed, 5 Oct 1994 15:45:00 CCS
From:    Jorge Merino <[email-masked]>
Subject: WEAP: What is the BV151 - guess

> p.s.  What is the BV151?

I guess Steve was talking about the Blohm und Voss Bv-141, an asymetric
reconnaissance aircraft. It consisted in two modules: a fuselage/engine
module located on port side, and a cockpit module, located on starboard
side. The horizontal stabilizer was also asymetric (only port side).
The crew was composed by 3 men. A few (about 10 or more) were produced.
The cockpit was quite similar to the Fw-189 Uhu's cockpit. This plane
was discussed some months ago, and I have my sources at home, but I could
try to recall more information if you are interested.

Jorge Merino

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

Date:    Wed, 5 Oct 1994 15:57:05 EST
From:    Aldo <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: POL: Economic causes of the war

        Galbraith also gives a good accounting of the effects of Churchill's
return to the gold standard. It was, much like his invasion of the
Dardanelles, a disaster.

     Bob,
One small point of contention, not directly related to your main
point:
I don't think the Dardanelles operation was as ill-concieved as it
was ill-executed; the idea of Churchill's being fairly sound, but,
like the whole of the Vietnam conflict, was only 1/2 heartedly
carried-out.

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

Sic Friatur Crustum Dulce

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

Date:    Wed, 5 Oct 1994 15:13:10 -0400
From:    Christopher Morton <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Raid in Poland

>
>     No, the original raid was not executed by the Brandenburgers.  In fact, it
> was not precisely executed by the SS; that is to say that is not being specific
> enough.  Operation Canned Goods was directed by Alfred Naujocks, personal
> favorite of Reinhard Heydrich.  Thus it fell under the domain of the Sicher
> dienst (or something like that), the SS intelligence branch (SD).  Additionally

Sicherheits Dienst - Security Service

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

Date:    Wed, 5 Oct 1994 15:17:30 -0400
From:    Christopher Morton <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: WEAP: Arado Ar-234C with E-381

>
> I haven't heard about the E-381, but I can say something about the Ar-234C.
>
> The Arado Ar-234 Blitz (Lightning) was the first german (and I think world's)
> jet bomber. If memory serves, the first version Ar-234A had expendable landing
> gear (if not, please correct me!!). The first operational version was Ar-234B,

That's correct.

It was not a viable concept, as it left the aircraft essentially helpless on
the ground until a wheeled trolly could be fitted, and the trolly had the
disturbing tendencies to 1) Bounce off the ground and strike the aircraft on
release, 2) fail to deploy its parachute upon release, leading to it's
destruction.

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

Date:    Wed, 5 Oct 1994 16:21:00 -0400
From:    Barone <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: POL: Economic causes of the war

Bob Stewart <[email-masked]> writes:
>         Galbraith also gives a good accounting of the effects of Churchill's
> return to the gold standard. It was, much like his invasion of the
> Dardanelles, a disaster. It seems truely amazing that a public figure whose
> two most famous, or infamous, decisions had had such terrible results would
> be chosen as PM in Britain's time of calamity. Luckily, his service as PM
> was not marked by the same sort of decisions. Or maybe I should say, luckily
> no one listened to his plans for a balkan invasion into "the soft underbelly
> of Europe." That move would have left him 0 for 3 in strategic moves!

        Not quite true, regarding Churchill not making bad strategic
moves -- Anzio was his baby.
--
Joe Barone
[email-masked]
It was a wasted trip, baby.  Nobody said
nothing about locking horns with no Tigers.

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

Date:    Wed, 5 Oct 1994 16:08:48 -0400
From:    [email-masked]
Subject: WEAP:  F82 Revisited -Reply

> Lets not get caught in a WW-I dogfight frame of mind.  Both the
> Japanese and the Italians discovered, to their dismay, that fighter
> maneuverability wasn't as important as speed, rate of climb, and
> FIREPOWER.
>
> Neither the F4F Wildcat nor the P-38 Lightning could maneuver with> the
> A6M2 Zero, but fighter tactics were developed for both aircraft> that gave
> them high positive kill ratios against their more> maneuverable opponents.

You are quite right in downplaying maneuverability as a prime factor for a
figher aircraft.  On the other hand, I would still propose that aspects of
maneuverability like rates of climb, roll, and turn; ability to dive and
accelerate quickly are important to an effective air superiority aircraft.  It is
information on these elements that I was looking re the F-82.  In any case, the
importance of fitting your tactics to your aircraft's performance strong points
and training are also critical.

> And speaking of the P-38, I don't know of any source that claim that it was
> "...an a/c that could not really stand up to the Germans..." With the
> exception of the original P-300 Lend Lease aircraft sent to Britain (No
> superchargers and no contra-rotating propellers) the P-38 had an >
exceptional record against the Germans.  It was the Luftwaffe that named
> it the Fork-Tailed Devil.

A some citations that support the proposition that the P-38 was outclassed as
an air superiority fighter over Germany:

Alfred Price, _World War II Fighter Conflict_,

pg 110.  Price summarizes the results of trails between a FW 190 A and a
P-38F:  FW190 was faster that the P-38 up to 23,000 feet.  FW190 had better
climb below 20,000 feet.  FW 190 dives better and can out turn the P-38 at
higher speeds.  Fw 190 accelerates faster in all cases.

Stephen L. McFarland / Wesley Newton, _To Command the Sky: The Battle for
Air Superiority over German, 1942-1944

p 56  "The German veteran tended to dismiss the P-38 as inferior because it
lacked all-round vision, was less maneuverable, and was more vulnerable to
cannon fire".

p 56  "Based on the relative strengths and weaknesses of enemy aircraft,
Luftwaffe rule of engagement were fairly simple: Never deliberately dogfight
with a P-51 but dive away and live to fight another day; never dive from a P-47
but engage and dogfight below 20,000; attack a P-38 anywhere, anytime."

p 247  "After the war..., two senior Luftwaffe commanders gave an assessment
of the three type.  Besides chronic engine problems, the P-38 had the twin
booms easily recognizable from a long distance, making in vulnerable to a
surprise attack".

(BTW the size factor is one that would have affected the F-82, especially in
days before radar was not used in your typical day fighter.  I have read that
the size discrepancy between the F-4 Phantom and the MIG 21 partially
compensates for the superior performance of the former, especially when
rifled-weapon is being used.  The guy who sees the other aircraft first has a
distinct tactical advantage)

Walter J. Boyne _Clash of Wings: World War II in the Air_

p 322  "The Lockheed Lightening, which became available later in the year,
could ultimately reach out to a distnce of 600 miles when equipped with two
165-gallon drop tanks. but the Lightening was never highly regarded as an
air-superiority fighter in European skies".

Jeffrey L. Ethell / Alfred Price _Target Berlin: Mission 250: 6 March 1944_

p 12  "The next most numerous fighter type in the 8th Air Force's inventory
[after the P-47] was the Lockheed P-38 Lightning.... During his time in Euriopr
Hub Zemke ommanded units operating each of the three fighter types used by
the 8th Air Force.... He felt the Lightning was the least effective of the escorts.
'The turbo-superchargers were controlled by an oil regulator and at altitude
the oil had a tendency to congeal, which caused serious problems'.  A further
problem with the P-38 was that its airframe was not strong and it had a
relativley low maximum diving speed.  If German fighters broke off combat by
diving steeply the Lightning pilots could not follow.  But Zemke did remember
the P-38 as hivng on outstanding feature. 'As a gun platform it was as steady
as a shooting stand'.

I would not claim that the P-38 was as poor as the Bf110, but it seems that the
people of the time saw it as a distinct third place finisher behind the P-47 and
P-51.  I don't know what would have happened to the air superiority
campaigne if the P-51 had not been introduced and USAAF had to rely on the
P-38 for long-range escort.  Fortunately that proved unnecessary.

Does anyone have an citations of kill loss ratios for P-38 units against the
Germans in an escort / air superiority role?

> P-38s got sent primarily to the Pacific not because of any problems  dealing
> with German A/C, but because the twin engine design was preferred in an >
operating theater filled with lots of water between  tiny islands.

I would not deny that this is one of the reasons for directing the P-38 to the
Pacific.  I would wonder whether its RELATIVE ineffectiveness against the
Luftwaffe may have been another factor (for that position I don't have any
documentation)

> Lets face it, the ME-110 was just a dog, and using it's performance
> against Spitfires and Hurricanes to judge the F-82's against a Zero
> or a Tony is meaningless.

You are setting up a straw man here.  My original post was not comparing the
F-82 effectiveness against the Zero or the Tony, but rather against "first class
single engine fighters", for example the FW 190, Ta 152 or some of the newer,
more heavily armed Japanese fighters, or the P-51 itself for that matter.  As
was the case, the Japanese did not have such a fighter and in the air
environment over Japan in 1945-6, the F-82 might well have been very
successful.

> Steve L. New

John Meierhoffer                                [email-masked]
New York State Education Dept           518 486 2390
Rm 5B44  Cultural Ed Center
Albany NY 12230

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

Date:    Wed, 5 Oct 1994 16:19:02 -0400
From:    [email-masked]
Subject: WEAP:  BV151

     I'll leave the BV-151 for someone else.

        Steve L. New                     .............................
        Weapon System Manager            .............................
        Battalion Countermine Set        ............ /\ .............
        U.S. Army TACOM AMSTA-IM-FR1D    ............/  \.............
        DSN: 786-5403  FAX: 786-7788     ............    .............
        EMAIL  [email-masked]   ............    .............

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

Assuming the BV stands for Blohn und Voss, are you referring to the BV 141,
the assymetical short range recon aircraft??

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

Date:    Wed, 5 Oct 1994 15:47:05 -0500
From:    "William L. Huber - SAA" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: SS and SA

> There was mention in an earlier post of the SA never seeing combat
> except possibly in defense of cities.
>
> The 60th Infantry division was made up of the S.A. Brigade Eberhardt-a
> combat force smuggled into Danzig the Westerplatte, and surrounding areas
> of Poland in 1939.  Fought in Poland,rance, and Russia.  Surrounded
> and destroyed at Stalingrad.  Rebuilt around the 272d Regiment (Feldherrnhalle)
> made up primarily of SA soldiers.  Destroyed at Budepest, remnants of
> Felhernhalli still fighting on Eastern front when war ended.
>
> Rob Rush

Good points.  There was also a formation of Feldherrnhalle under the
Luftwaffe as well.  Also a Waffen SS regiment was comprised of SA
folks (Rgt Horst Wessel).

The cadre of the SA also filled out the ranks of regular Wehrmacht
formations (that is *all* branches - army, navy, air forces) as
individual replacements in combat units not necessarily as SA
sponsored formations.  Same for NSDAP leaders too.  There was one
Gauleiter who served as a Gefreiter in a Gebirgsjaeger Regt.  Baldur
von Schirach (Reichjugendfuehrer) served as a Leutnant in the army for
a time.  As I recall Viktor Lutze (SA Chef after Rhoem) also served as
a lower ranking officer in the Army.

In my research, I have run across quite a number of SA men who were
killed in action (as opposed to dying from bombing etc.).  Most SA
men in the early days were veterans of the Kaiser's army and various
Frei Korps units so fighting was nothing new to them.

Cheers, Bill Huber / [email-masked]

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

Date:    Wed, 5 Oct 1994 15:58:48 -0500
From:    "William L. Huber - SAA" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: SS in combat

>         The facts, however, are that a squad of SS/Gestapo took a group
> of political prisoners from a Nazi concentration camp to a border
> point close to Gleiwitz. The prisoners were forced to put on Polish uniforms,
> then shot dead -- a bizarred faked "Polish attack" on the local radio
> station. The following morning, Sept 1, 1939, German troops invaded Poland,
> while Herr Hitler announced that it was in retaliation for "the attack by
> Polish troops on the [German] Gleiwitz transmitter..."
>         Regards -- Sidney Allinson.

To *really* pick nits, let me add that Aryan looking prisoners were
brought along to be laid out in German uniforms (boarder guards etc)
along with others dressed in Polish uniforms to really make it look
good.  That Walter Schellenburg, what a guy.  He thought of
everything.... :-)

Cheers, Bill Huber / [email-masked]

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

Date:    Wed, 5 Oct 1994 17:22:05 EDT
From:    "Dennis E. Sparks" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Fat Man question

Here's a quote from the book "The Fall of Japan", by William
Craig, Dial Press, 1967, regarding an unusual incident prior
to the Nagasaki mission.  Can anyone on the list comment on
whether or not this is accurate, or even possible?

Begin quote:

While Sweeney talked to his men about the mission, scientists
completed the assembly of the Fat Man.  Just before they inserted
the plutonium itself, General Tom Farrell, Grove's deputy on
Tinian, held in his hands the dark-grayish metal.  It felt warm
to his touch and he found it almost impossible to believe that
this amount of matter, cupped in his palms, could actually
destroy a city.

End quote.

Can you safely hold plutonium in your hands, or was this plain
ignorance on their part?  Was the lump Farrell held the entire
plutonium charge for the bomb, or only some fraction of it?  As
I understand it, the Little Boy uranium bomb had a large piece
of uranium (the "target") installed in the bomb while it was still
on the ground, and that the second, smaller piece, (the "bullet")
was installed in the bomb after takeoff.  At detonation, the
bullet" was fired with an explosive charge, forcing it along a
six-foot long barrel, with the "target" attached to the end of
the barrel.

I note that the 2nd bomb used charges all around the plutonium to
squeeze it (an implosion), but was the plutonium separated into two
pieces like the uranium?  If two pieces, were both installed while
the bomb was on the ground?  Craig's book mentions that it was
considered to be a possibility that a crash on takeoff of the
second mission could possibly ignite the TNT charge in the bomb,
and hence start the nuclear explosion.

I vaguely recall a different account that described some type of
A-bomb as having two hemispheres of the radioactive material, each
having a highly polished flat face.  The two were forced together
by the TNT charge.  Does this description apply to either of these
first two bombs?

Inquiring minds want to know....

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

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

Date:    Wed, 5 Oct 1994 16:23:14 -0500
From:    "William L. Huber - SAA" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: TACT:Downfall

>
> Also, you will have to count all the Kriegsmarine naval and air assets to be ass
> igned against England. Admittedly they couldn't have played as decisive a role a
> gainst Russia, though ships played an important role in the fighting for cities
> such as Leningrad and Sevastopol, and they could have been trained as infantry,
> as in 1945.
>
> Arnaud.
>

Kriegsmarine troops were used as ground forces on different occasions.
One that comes to mind was mentioned in a report from Generaloberst
Erhard Raus to Hitler when he related in early 1945 that on the
sector of the front in Pommerania  his two remaining panzer divsions
were facing 19 soviet divisions but that the naval auxiliaries were
holding out bravely against the soviet tanks using mines and
panzerfausts but taking appauling casualties.

That was when Hitler told Raus he was facing *17* soviet tank
divisions and relieved him of command as not being aggressive enough.

Cheers, Bill Huber / [email-masked]

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

Date:    Wed, 5 Oct 1994 13:09:26 GMT-6
From:    "Robert T. Moore" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: TACT:Could they have won ?

Hello, William!

Thanks for the note and I appreciate hearing from you.

>    The Ardennes Offensive probably did hasten their defeat.  But, without
> the benefit of hindsight, what would you do if you were Hitler, faced with
> a superior enemy on both sides?

    I don't think I would have chanced an attack that had no ultimate
chance of success, as Hitler did not do. He was told from the very
beginning by von Rundstedt and Model that it would have no chance of
success. A reduced version, as suggested by Model, or a small
"Ardennenschlacht" would have stood a better chance of succeeding. In
any case, Hitler's attack reflected his utter lack of appreciation of
the military situation. He refused to let go of the fact that the
days of attack with accompanying success were over. Probably what
Hitler had in mind at the time was that by attacking, he was showing
the world that there was still fight left in what everyone viewed as
a corpse, if you will. This is my opinion anyway.

    But to answer your question, I would have used those resources,
accumulated at great sacrifice, for reserves on the Eastern Front, as
best as possible.

 I'm sorry to those people who don't like
> if questions, but they are essential for a full understanding of why certain
> decisions were made and events came to pass.

    I agree with that.

 Rommel, when faced with the
> British in North Africa driving him almost out of Italy, counterattacked.

    Yes, that is true, but the type of warfare in the Western Desert
was different than that on the European Continent, and.
> This is what made him the Desert Fox - striking when least expected.

>       All together, I found Hitler's offensive very admirable.

    I appreciate your opinion on this, and I understand your point of
view, but I think Hitler would have been better served to have used
his strategic reserves as such on the Eastern Front where they were
most needed. Hitler tried to do too much with too little resources
and he could ill afford to waste them on a scheme that had no
ultimate chance of success. It only brought Germany closer and more
quickly to defeat.

To begin
> with, he clearly caught the Allies by surprise.

    True, but it didn't take long for the Allies to recover.

  Second, that although it
> was ultimately to fail, it did restore morale to the German troops for
> a while.

    True, but this didn't last long either and most Germans at that
time, the soldiers included, had long given up the hope of a complete
German victory.

        And third, I might question
whether or not it speeded up the
> end of the Reich.

    There is no doubt of this. That offensive squandered Germany's
last strategic reserves of men and materiel that would have been
better used in resupplying the Eastern Front and/or Western Front as
the case may be. A correct distribution of these resources would have
made the going much harder for both Russians and Western Allies
during their drive into Germany, not that it would have affected the
outcome, because, by that time, there was no doubt how it would end.

 The troops and equipment would probably have been
> encircled, destroyed by the air, or just chewed up on the Eastern Front.

    Probably, but I think their opponents would have had a harder
time of it, as the Germans had proven themselves to be very
resourceful in improvisation, and additional men and resources would
have seriously slowed but not stopped the inevitable.

 It really might have only made the difference of a month or two.

    Perhaps, but one can only guess at that. The outcome would have
been the same, no doubt, and Allied casualties would have been higher
as I see it.

    Do you have any additional thoughts. I do appreciate yours and
thank you for them. I apologize, if I may have seemed to ramble.

   Terry

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

Date:    Wed, 5 Oct 1994 12:33:39 GMT-6
From:    "Robert T. Moore" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Gustav Geraet

Hello, Tim!

I think I can answer your question on this.

> I enjoyed your postings about the railroad gun and its performance against
> Sevastapol.  Although this may be on the fringes of the list, do you have
> any idea how it compared to the WW I Paris gun?

    The Paris gun fired more rounds into Paris than the Gustav did
into Sevastopol. The range of the Paris gun was 76 miles with the
projectile making it into the stratosphere, hence the range. Each
shell that was fired from the Paris gun resulted in forcing the crew
to carefully calculate the amount of powder to be used in each
succeeding shot.

    I am taking all this from memory, but I understand that the Paris
Gun blew up during a firing because the crew had miscalculated the
charge that was used and, along with the angle of firing, the
pressures built up inside the breech became intolerable for the
weapon and it exploded.

    The Paris Gun was more a propaganda/terror weapon rather than one
used for a valid military purpose. The Gustav Geraet was designed for
a specific purpose, i.e. to destroy either the fortifications of the
Maginot Line or other related purposes such as the reduction of the
fortifications of Sevastopol, etc.

    The weight of the projectile for the Paris Gun was not as heavy
as that of the Gustav Geraet. If memory serves me properly, the
weight of the projectile was in the neighborhood of less than one
ton. I will have to check on this, whereas the shell of the Gustav
weighed several.

     Was it manufactured by the
> same people or draw in any way on the earlier gun?

    Yes. Krupp manufactured both weapons as well as all other siege
artillery in WWI.

   Hope this has been of help. I will try to get back to you on the
Paris Gun

    Terry

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

Date:    Wed, 5 Oct 1994 07:35:24 GMT-6
From:    "Robert T. Moore" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: WEAPON: Amphibious Landings and Tanks

Hello, Patrick!

You might consult the following:

    Tank by Kenneth Macksey that is a history of the development and
combat employment of the tank.

    Hitler Moves East by Paul Carrell goes into some detail as to the
use of watertight tanks against the fortress of Brest-Litovsk in the
opening phase of Operation Barbarossa.

    Hope this helps.

    Terry

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

Date:    Wed, 5 Oct 1994 17:38:19 -0400
From:    Patrick Draper <[email-masked]>
Subject: Help

listserv help

--
 /\/\ |Patrick Draper                        Mr. Order, he runs at a|
/ /_.\|Cambridge Technology Partners, Inc.      good pace, but old  |
\  /./|e-mail: [email-masked]                      Mother chaos is   |
 \/\/ |Lansing, Michigan                          winning the race. |

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

Date:    Wed, 5 Oct 1994 15:37:52 GMT-6
From:    "Robert T. Moore" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [INF] USAAF 2 OCT 44

Hello, Tim and Jack!

One thing to consider is that a significant part of the oil-
production facility at Ploesti, Rumania had been owned by Standard
Oil prior to the establishment of the dictatorship in Rumania headed
by Ian Antonescu. After they became nationalized the Rumanians gladly
exported oil to Germany.

Terry

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

Date:    Wed, 5 Oct 1994 15:52:54 GMT-6
From:    "Robert T. Moore" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Italy in WW2, my $0.02--part II

Hello, William!

Great post.

>    The Waffen SS became a fighting army after Hitler lost faith in the regular
> army.  They did not perform particularly brilliantly, but fought well and to
> the death, following Hitler's orders.  The regular army units would usually
> retreat when hard pressed.

    I might add one thing to the above statement that "they did not
perform particularly brilliantly, etc". That is very true but that
was largely due to poor leadership in the field. As you very aptly
point out, the Waffen-SS was the elite of the Party and selected
along racial lines and given the best equipment, but they certainly
weren't given the best leadership. For example, Sepp Dietrich's Chief
of Staff as CO of the 6th Panzer Army at the Bulge was an army
officer, namely Generalleutnant Heinz Cramer. In fact, with
exceptions, of course, in the form of Hausser and Gille, both former
Reichswehr officers with proven administrative and field experience,
a large part of the "field officers" lacked ability. One can say that
given the fact that this was a "revolutionary" unit within an
established command structure, there necessarily would be a lack of
real competence expected on the battlefield. Thus to make up for
this, the Waffen-SS relied upon discipline and this "fight to the
death" mentality to make up for this deficiency in battlefield
leadership competence.

    Just my opinion, of course, but your post is right on.

    Terry

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

Date:    Wed, 5 Oct 1994 17:14:06 -0500
From:    Greg Kelley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Raid in Poland

I'll have to double check my sources when I get home tonight, but the
first troops which would later be called "Brandenburgers" were assembled
in the fall of 1938, under the command of an Army colonel whose name
escapes me just now.  They were to assigned the responsibility of
storming the Reichstag and arresting Hitler if the Munich Crisis hadn't
resolved peacefully.  I'll check my copy of Harold Deutsch's HITLER AND
HIS GENERALS: THE UNSEEN CRISIS, 1938 for details.

                                          Glad To Be Of Service!

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

On Wed, 5 Oct 1994, Christopher Morton wrote:

> >
> > The raid on the radio station that kicked off the Polish campaign--wasn;
> > t that conducted not by SS but by Brandenburgers???  Does anyone else
> > remember this besides me???  TAS                                        as
>
> I don't believe there WERE any Brandenburgers at the time.
>

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

Date:    Wed, 5 Oct 1994 18:33:17 EDT
From:    Cassady Craft <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Fat Man question

Dennis, as long as the plutonium is sub-critical, you can hold it.  It won't
be good for you, though.  So, yes it was ignorance, too.

Incidentally, two different accidents occured in Los Alamos (with the exact
same piece of plutonium!) after the war.  Both were situations where the
239 was sub-critical, somebody goofed (a screwdriver slipped and someone
knocked a piece of graphite over), flash, and you are microwaved.  The
"old salts" here tell me that the people involved died the most excruciating
deaths you can ever imagine.

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

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

Date:    Wed, 5 Oct 1994 18:37:06 EDT
From:    Brian Nicklas <[email-masked]>
Subject: WEAP: Ar234C with E381

The Arado Ar 234C was four engine, with BMW 003 jets.
The "standard" was the Ar 234B with two Junkers Jumo 004 jets.
The Arado E.381 had a span of (roughly) 16ft, length 16ft,
empty weight 1,963 lb.  Pilot lay prone, amidst T-Stoff and
C-Stoff fuel tanks.  Powered by Walter 109-509A-2 rocket.
All of the above is from:
German Aircraft of the Second World War by J R Smith & A L Kay.
IMHO I find this book better than "Warplanes of the Third Reich"
since it covers helicopters, missiles, projects (like the E.381)
and several light aircraft.
Sharkmouth designs (among Germans) on aircraft go back to German
A/C during WWI.  The LFG Roland C.II "Walfisch" one example that was
"mouthy" quite often.  A Junkers Ju 87B-1 used early in France
by a St.Gruppe commander had a very nice sharkmouth painted on it.
On another thread someone mentioned "Bf 109 at War", which had
a photo of a Swiss Bf 109E-3 with sharkmouth.

I like the DML subjects, but I wish they'd leave the high-grade
tooling for "real" airrcaft and leave the "projects" to the resin
and basement producers.  At least MPM has done a Junkers W 34!

Joe - Am I mistaken, or you a rabid fan of "Kelly's Heroes"??
:-)

-Brian Nicklas

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

Date:    Wed, 5 Oct 1994 18:38:01 EDT
From:    Cassady Craft <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Fat Man question

Incidentally, is Richard Rhodes, _The Making of the Atomic Bomb_ considered
THE classic.  One of my favorites, regardless.

By the way, you can make a bomb with a piece of uranium and a hammer--and one
_really_ dedicated individual.  I think the guy who "did" the Marine's
barracks in Beruit would have qualified.

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

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

Date:    Wed, 5 Oct 1994 18:44:30 PDT
From:    Jim Brady <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: TACT:Could they have won ?

>    There is no doubt of this. That offensive squandered Germany's
>last strategic reserves of men and materiel that would have been
>better used in resupplying the Eastern Front and/or Western Front as
>the case may be. A correct distribution of these resources would have
>made the going much harder for both Russians and Western Allies
>during their drive into Germany, not that it would have affected the
>outcome, because, by that time, there was no doubt how it would end.
>
> The troops and equipment would probably have been

 An examination of the events in WWII may suggest a fairly precise answer,
but I wonder: at what point =during= the war did the Allies believe they
were over the hump, that victory was beyond question?

 Anyone?

 - Jim Brady

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

Date:    Thu, 6 Oct 1994 01:44:49 +0100
From:    Emmanuel Gustin <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: WEAP: Arado Ar-234C with E-381

On Wed, 5 Oct 1994, Jorge Merino wrote:

> I haven't heard about the E-381, but I can say something about the Ar-234C.

The E 381 never left the drawing board.  The writer Andre Ver Elst claims
that it was developed from the Me 163. Knowing the limitations of Ver
Elsts works --- He didn't have access to all sources we now have -- this
probably only means that it also had rocket engines. The US later followed
the idea up with the F-85 Goblin parasite jet fighter design.

The 'Julia' name is used for a number of strongly different designs. It
seems that it was a name for an entire class of aircraft, rather than a
single design.

> The Arado Ar-234 Blitz (Lightning) was the first german (and I think world's)
> jet bomber. If memory serves, the first version Ar-234A had expendable landing
> gear (if not, please correct me!!).

The landing gear was not, strictly spoken, expendable. The Ar 234A took
off with a jettisonable trolley, and landed on retractable skis. It was
intended to reuse the trolley. This avoided the problem of fitting landing
gear to a high-wing aircraft with a slender fuselage, but was very
impractical in the field: an Ar 243A could not taxi from the landing strip
and to the parking area, and trolleys were scattered all over the place.

> The first operational version was Ar-234B,
> both versions were twin-engined. The Ar-234C version was four-engined, and did
> have also a modified canopy. The Ar-234C-3 was intended to carry a V-1 bomb
> (Fi-103) on the back, the Ar-234C-4 had a camera arrangement on the belly for
> reconnaisance missions.

The Ar 234C never really entered production, it remained one of the
numerous Ar 234 prototypes. There also was an Ar 234P version, this was a
nighfighter with a conventional 'solid' nose. Just wait for some
manufacturer to produce a model of this one...  (One of the more
remarkable 'flights of bold imagination' of a model manufacturer that I
have seen was a nightfighter version of the Messerschmitt P.1011
swing-wing prototype, armed with equally imaginative air-to-air missiles.)

Emmanuel Gustin

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

Date:    Thu, 6 Oct 1994 01:52:59 +0100
From:    Emmanuel Gustin <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: WEAP:aircraft comparisons

On Tue, 4 Oct 1994, Greg Kelley wrote:

> > Re odd fighter groupings, Bf109s and Hawker Hurricanes fighting side
> > by side for the Rumanians in 1941, if I recall correctly.
> >
> Yes, they did-- alongside Polish PZL P.24s and French Morane MS.406s.  In

The Belgian Air Force of May 1940 used both Gloster Gladiators and Fiat
CR.42 biplane fighters, 15 and 23 of them, respectively.  The modern part
of it were eleven Hawker Hurricanes (some bought, some interned).

Emmanuel Gustin

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

Date:    Wed, 5 Oct 1994 21:22:00 EDT
From:    mc killop <[email-masked]>
Subject: [INF] USAAF 6 OCT 44

COMBAT CHRONOLOGY OF THE US ARMY AIR FORCES
FRIDAY, 6 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
  C-47, Douglas Skytrain
  F-5, Lockheed Lightning
  L-4, Piper Cub/Grasshopper
  L-5, Stinson Sentinel
  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.

CHINA-BURMA-INDIA (CBI) THEATER OF OPERATIONS

  BURMA-INDIA (Tenth Air Force): In Burma, 20+ P-47s bomb troop
concentrations in Mawlu and Bilumyo and damage an approach to bridge at
Seywa; 8 B-25s attack bridges at Hsenwi, damaging the main bridge but causing
little harm to bypass bridges. Transport operations continue on large scale
in the CBI. In India, HQ 7th Bombardment Group (Heavy) moves from Kurmitola
to Pandaveswar while it's 436th and 492d Bombardment Squadrons (Heavy) move
from Tezzgaon to Madhaigani with B-24s.

  CHINA (Fourteenth Air Force): In China, 12 B-25s bomb Wucbou and attack
boats and other targets of opportunity in the Canton area; 50+ P-40s and
P-51s on armed reconnaissance over areas of China S of the Yangtze River
attack rivercraft, bridges, town areas, troop concentrations and targets of
opportunity along the N French Indochina coast; the flight of the 35th
Photographic Reconnaissance Squadron, Fourteenth AF, at Nanning, returns to
base at Chanyi with F-5s.

  STRATEGIC OPERATIONS (Twentieth Air Force):  The first P-61 night fighters
arrive in Chengtu, China on the eve of the third air raid; in 10 attacks from
6 Sep to 19 Dec, only 43 aircraft participate.

EUROPEAN THEATER OF OPERATIONS (ETO)

  AIRBORNE OPERATIONS (IX Troop Carrier Command): The 305th Troop Carrier
Squadron, 442d Troop Carrier Group, moves from Weston Zoyland, England to
Peray, France with C-47s.

  STRATEGIC OPERATIONS (Eighth Air Force): 2 missions are flown.
  Mission 667: 1,271 bombers and 784 fighter are dispatched to hit
industrial targets in N Germany; with one exception, all attacks are visual;
19 bombers and 4 fighters are lost:
  1. 447 B-17s are dispatched to hit Stargard Airfield (199), aircraft
factories at Neubrandenburg (73) and Stettin (12); targets of opportunity are
Stralsund (110), Kappeln (36), Freienwalde (1) and other (1); 1 B-17 is lost
and 34 damaged; 9 airmen are MIA. Escort is provided by 180 of 202 P-51s;
they claim 3-1-3 aircraft in the air and 30-0-14 on the ground; 3 P-51s are
lost (pilots MIA), 2 damaged beyond repair and 4 damaged.
  2. 418 B-17s are dispatched to Berlin to hit a munitions dump at Berlin/
Spandau (144), aircraft factories at Berlin/Spandau (138) and tank factory at
Berlin/Tegel (100); 10 hit a target of opportunity. 17 B-17s are lost, 1
damaged beyond repair and 234 damaged; 3 airmen are KIA, 4 WIA and 154 MIA.
Escort is provided by 363 of 414 P-51s; they claim 15-0-5 aircraft; 1 P-51 is
lost and 3 damaged.
  3. 406 B-24s are dispatched to hit Harburg/Rhenania oil refinery (121) with
PFF methods, munitions dumb at Hamburg/Glinde (89) and aircraft factories at
Hamburg/Klockner (79) and Wenzendorf (46); targets of opportunity are Stade
Airfield (29), the Hamburg area (8), Nordhoz Airfield (2), Bremervorde (1)
and Ottersberg (1); 1 B-24 is lost and 127 damaged; 1 airman is KIA, 2 WIA
and 10 MIA. Escort is provided by 156 of 168 P-47s; they claim 1-0-0 aircraft
in the air; 6 P-47s are damaged.
  Mission 668: 6 B-24s and 4 B-17s drop leaflets in Germany, the Netherlands
and France during the night without loss.

  TACTICAL OPERATIONS (Ninth Air Force): 300+ B-26s and A-20s hit marshalling
yards, barracks, and ammunition dump at Hengelo, the Netherlands and Duren,
Germany and bridges at Arnhem, the Netherlands and Aldenhoven, Germany; in
Germany, fighters fly armed reconnaissance in the Dusseldorf, Aachen, Trier,
Dieuze, and Koblenz areas, sweeps and patrols in forward areas, attack
railroads in the Dorsel area, and support the First, Third, and Seventh
Armies' forces in E France and W Germany. In France, HQ 397th Bombardment
Group (Medium) moves from Dreux to Peronne.

MEDITERRANEAN THEATER OF OPERATIONS (MTO)

  AAF, MTO: The 121st Liaison Squadron, AAF MTO, moves from Pomigliano to
Florence, Italy with L-4s and L-5s ("A" Flight is at Vittel, France).

  STRATEGIC OPERATIONS (Fifteenth Air Force): Weather cancels bombing
operations; in Greece, 35 P-38s strafe airfields at Sedhes, Megalo Mikra,
Megara, Eleusis, and Tatoi, and 55 P-51s strafe Kalamaki airfield.

  TACTICAL OPERATIONS (Twelfth Air Force): In Italy, weather cancels all
operations of the medium bomber wing and the XII Fighter Command. In France,
the 34th Photographic Reconnaissance Squadron, XII Tactical Air Command
(attached to Provisional Reconnaissance Group), moves from Dijon to Azelot
with F-5s.

PACIFIC OCEAN AREA (POA)

  AAFPOA (Seventh Air Force): B-24s from Saipan Island hit Iwo Jima Island in
harassment attacks during the night of 6/7 Oct. In the Marshall Islands, a
B-24 from Kwajalein Atoll bombs a heavy gun battery on Emidj Island, Jaluit
Atoll. During the night of 6/7 Oct, 3 B-24s bomb Wake Island.

SOUTHWEST PACIFIC AREA [SWPA, Far East Air Force (FEAF)]: On Halmahera
Island, P-38s hit Kaoe Airfield and shipping near Djailolo. In the Ceram
Island-Amboina, Ambon Island-Boeroe, Sunda Island area B-25s and P-38s attack
Namlea on Buru Island, Waai on Celebes Island, Amahai on Ceram Island, and
several small craft. In New Guinea, P-47s bomb Kaimana; and the 547th Night
Fighter Squadron moves from Oro Bay to Owi, Schouten Islands with P-38s and
P-61s.

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

06/0124Z OCT

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

Date:    Thu, 6 Oct 1994 02:28:06 +0100
From:    Emmanuel Gustin <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Fat Man question

On Wed, 5 Oct 1994, Dennis E. Sparks wrote:

> Can you safely hold plutonium in your hands, or was this plain
> ignorance on their part?  Was the lump Farrell held the entire
> plutonium charge for the bomb, or only some fraction of it?

Plutonium is radioactive --- half-life of some 24000 years --- but is,
like Uranium, an alpha emitter. In a subcritical mass, the reactions that
produce neutrons die out rapidly. Alpha particles are relatively heavy
(they are Helium cores) and will interact readily with other matter;
therefore they will travel only a few centimeters through air. The pieces
for 'Fat Man' were gold-plated to combat corrosion, and this would
probably stop most of the alphas. You shouldn't hold it in your hands if
you don't have to, but there should be no great danger. The real danger
with Pu is ingestion or inhalation; if it settles down in your body, it
will do real damage.

One has to be careful with pieces of Pu that are near to critical mass.
Hydrogen, an very element common in the human body, will slow down
neutrons and reflect them back. This can make an appropiately sized stack
of Pu go critical (it very nearly happened to one of the scientists at Los
Alamos) and create a very dangerous burst of neutrons. For the same
reason, solutions of Pu are more dangerous to handle than solid Pu.

The core of 'Fat Man' consisted two hollow half-shells of Pu; in the
center an initiator was placed. Design of initiators is still secret, but
its role is to create on initial burst of neutrons to make sure that the
chain reaction starts at the right time. Nuclear reactions in Pu will
multiply neutrons, but Pu will produce none or few neutrons by itself ---
I don't have a reference at hand;  maybe there is a little bit of beta
decay (producing electrons and neutrons) or else you would have to hope
for some passing cosmic ray to initiate the bomb. Not a good bet.

There was an opening in the explosive mantle of 'Fat Man'; the armourers
first inserted the core pieces with the initiator, and then two pieces of
explosives. This was probably done on the ground; it is high precision
work.

Emmanuel Gustin

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

Date:    Wed, 5 Oct 1994 18:43:09 -0700
From:    John Davis <[email-masked]>
Subject: Peleliu write-up

A couple of months ago, someone posted to the list a very detailed
write-up on Peleliu. It gave a day by day summary of what was going on.
I kept a copy of the article but the authors name and address got cut by
my save script. I'd like to ask the author a question. If you are that
person, could you send me a private email message. The article was posted
back sometime in the summer. Thanks

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
John Davis     [email-masked]      WWW: ftp://ftp.netcom.com/pub/jbd/ww2.html
Cary, N.C.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Date:    Thu, 6 Oct 1994 02:57:11 +0100
From:    Emmanuel Gustin <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: POL:Hiroshima

On Wed, 5 Oct 1994, John E. Kollar wrote:

> was done becuase of the properties of U235 and U238, it is very hard to get
> them to form a critical mass for an explosion to take place.  With the
> second bomb on Nagasaki, which was a plutonium bomb, it used the
> gun-type mechanism becuase Plutionium is much easier to start a reaction
> with, which is why there is much more concern in the international community
> today about plutonium being on the black market rather than uranium being
> on the balck market.

No, that is not correct. The Uranium bomb used a 'gun' design, the
Plutonium bomb was an implosion type. As I explained earlier, an Uranium
bomb is easier to contruct.  Plutonium is 'easier' because you can produce
bomb-quality Pu with a nuclear reactor (one moderated by graphite is
preferable) and a chemical processing plant.

U235 is only a small fraction in natural uranium: officially 0.711%, in
practice it is varying somewhat (0.1%) with the source of the ore (and
decreasing with time, because U235 has a shorter half-life than U238).
There is by definition no chemical difference between the various Uranium
isotopes; they have to be separated by physical means that exploit their
0.6% weight difference. There are a number of them: electromagnetic
separation (the so-called 'Calutron'), gaseous barrier diffusion, liquid
thermal diffusion, centrifuges, gas jet separation... Some of these do not
produce bomb-quality uranium; all are very expensive. If you can build a
reactor, then you better use it to make Plutonium. You need to enrich U
only partially to make a normal reactor run -- to a few percent U235.

So most of the bomb material on the market is Plutonium. Bomb-quality
uranium would be far more dangerous, if the dangers of terrorism are
concerned; but there is simply less of it. There was a report recently
about pure U235 from the USSR, BTW. (Not that the average journo would
care about the differences between U235 and Pu239).

Emmanuel Gustin

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

End of WWII-L Digest - 4 Oct 1994 to 5 Oct 1994
***********************************************