Subject: WWII-L Digest - 8 Jan 1995 to 9 Jan 1995

From: Automatic digest processor <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 10 Jan 1995 00:02:11 -0500

There are 46 messages totalling 1763 lines in this issue.

Topics of the day:

  1. Soviet Aircraft
  2. INF: USN Chronology 01-09-95 (2)
  3. INF: 50 Years Ago - 10-JAN-1945
  4. Smithsonian Contact Needed
  5. Inf: 3rd Army Chronology - 8Jan45
  6. WEAP: US Heavy Bomber Comparison (2)
  7. Medals
  8. Inf: 3rd Army Chronology - 9Jan45
  9. WEAP:  US Heavy Bomber Comparison (5)
 10. Inf: 3rd Army Chronology - 10Jan45
 11. WW II Mysteries
 12. BATTLE OF THE BULG (2)
 13. PVT Shafer
 14. Stalingrad etc. (was Re: Movie "Das Boot")
 15. German Ocean Liners??
 16. <No subject given>
 17. TRIVIA: Schindler's List (2)
 18. HIST: Trivia (2)
 19. France's Forgotten Past / Dracy (2)
 20. Re[2]: PVT Shafer, 63rd Division (2)
 21. USCGC Eagle / Horst Wessal
 22. Alternatives to the A-bombs
 23. HIST: Trivia/militaria
 24. Invasion of Kyushu / Operation OLYMPIC
 25. Trivia: Nazi escapees
 26. USCG Eagle
 27. Soviet slang
 28. WEAP:Japanese Planes? (2)
 29. "Martyred Villages"
 30. Re[2]: Stalingrad etc. (was Re: Movie "Das Boot")
 31. TRIVIA: Decks
 32. Nazi Escapees
 33. Russian Aircraft Museum
 34. [INF] USAAF 10 JAN 45

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

Date:    Mon, 9 Jan 1995 01:25:09 EST
From:    "Steve L. New" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Soviet Aircraft

    The best english language reference that I've seen on Russian (Soviet)
    display aircraft is the Squadron/Signal publication "Red Ladies in
    Waiting", soft cover, list $9.95.

    Squadron's catalog descibes it as:

    "The former Soviet Union had a number of facilities to store and
    display aircraft, including complexes at Khodinka, Ramenskoye and
    Tushino.  Also includes coverage of facilities in Hungary and the
    former East Germany.  Over 150 photos, 8 pages in color, 64 pages."

    Aircraft covered run from WWII through today.  Photos cover aircraft on
    display and awaiting preservation.

    These can be found in model hobby shops and bookstores, or ordered
    direct from Squadron (#9-SS6065):

          Squadron Mail Order
          1115 Crowley Drive
          Carrollton, TX  75011-5010

    Steve New
    [email-masked]
    Just an Armadillo on the shoulder of the information superhighway.

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

Date:    Mon, 9 Jan 1995 04:00:16 PST
From:    "Keller, Theron P." <[email-masked]>
Subject: INF: USN Chronology 01-09-95

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

1945
01/09 Tue. Army forces land in Lingayen Gulf area, P. I., under cover
           of naval gunfire and carrier-based aircraft. Gen. Douglas
           MacArthur is in overall command of the operation. Vice
           Adm. T. C. Kinkaid commands the naval forces, and Lt. Gen.
           W. Krueger is the ground force commander. In support of
           the landings, aircraft fast carrier task force (Vice Adm.
           J. S. McCain) bomb Japanese airfields and shipping in the
           Formosa, Ryukyus, and Pescadores Islands areas.
            United States naval vessels damaged:
             Battleship MISSISSIPPI (BB-41), by suicide plane,
              Philippine Islands area,
              16 d. 08'N., 120 d. 18'E.
             Battleship COLORADO (BB-45), accidentally by United
              States naval gunfire, Philippine Islands area,
              16 d. 08'N., 120 d. 10'E.
             Light cruiser COLUMBIA (CL-56), by suicide plane,
              Philippine Islands area,
              16 d. 08'N., 120 d. 10'E.
             Destroyer escort HODGES (DE-231), by suicide plane,
              Philippine Islands area,
              16 d. 22'N., 120 d. 12'E.
             Transport WARHAWK (AP-168), by suicide boat, Philippine
              Islands area,
              16 d. 20'N., 120 d. 10'E.
             Oiler GUADALUPE (A0-32), by collision, Philippine
              Islands area,
              20 d. 06'N., 121 d. 34'E.
             LST 925 and LST 1028, by depth charges, Philippine
              Islands area,
              16 d. 20'N., 120 d. 10'E.
            Japanese naval vessels sunk, Formosa area:
             Submarine chaser NO. 61, by carrier-based aircraft,
              22 d. 40'N, 120 d. 04'E.
             Submarine chaser NO. 90, by carrier-based aircraft,
              22 d. 40'N., 120 d. 00'E.
             Coast defense vessel NO. 3, by carrier-based aircraft,
              27 d. 10'N., 121 d. 45'E.

Information compiled by U.S. Navy Historians.  For more information,
contact the Naval Historical Center at (202) 433-3940.
Archived by: "Larry W. Jewell" <[email-masked]>
Posted by:
Theron P. Keller
Logicon, Inc.
Dahlgren, VA  22448 USA
[email-masked]

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

Date:    Mon, 9 Jan 1995 04:20:41 -0800
From:    John Davis <[email-masked]>
Subject: INF: 50 Years Ago - 10-JAN-1945

On 10-JAN-1945, the following occurred -

World War II - The Battlefronts
-------------------------------
Western Front - In the British 2nd Army sector, the 51st Division reaches
Laroche. In the U.S. 1st Army sector, most of the Laroche-Salmchateau road
has been cleared by VII Corps. The 2nd Armoured Division captures Samree.
The 83rd Division takes Bihain. Units of the 82nd Airborne Division secure
the bridgehead across the Salm River near Gran Halleux. In the 3rd Army
sector, the 87th Division captures Tillet. The 101st Airborne Division
renews its attack toward Noville clearing a portion of Bois Jackques. Units
of the 35th Division capture Villers-la-Bonne-Eau. In the 7th Army sector,
units of the 45th Division enter Althorn, on the left flank of the Bitche
salient.

Philippines - On Luzon, the Americans continue to land in the Lingayen
Gulf. The beachhead is now considerably expanded. Units of the 40th
Division take Labrodor while other units push towards Aguilar, reaching the
Umanday area. Units of the 37th Division speed inland to San Carlos. In the
I Corps area, the 6th Division drives south and southeast to Mapandan and
the vicinity of Santa Barbara. The 43rd Division takes San Jacinto without
opposition and pushes on toward Manoag.

Burma - Units of the Chinese 38th Division crosses the Shweli.

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

Sources: "United States Army in World War II, Chronology 1941-1945" compiled
by Mary H. Williams, Office of the Chief of Military History, Department of
the Army, "2194 Days of War" by Cesare Salmaggi and Alfredo Pallavisimi,
"Facts On File Yearbook 1945, Person's Index Of World Events" edited by R.L.
Lapica.

Copyright 1995 by John B Davis, ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

Previous articles are archived at ftp.webcom.com in directory /pub/jbd/www
and can be accessed via the WWW by URL: http://www.webcom.com/~jbd/ww2.html.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
John Davis                Cary, North Carolina                 [email-masked]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Date:    Mon, 9 Jan 1995 08:19:04 EST
From:    Mike Fetters <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Smithsonian Contact Needed

I can tell you that the Smithsonian is very interested in trying to
figure out what went wrong with the exhibition. Last week, the Christian
Science Monitor reported (accurately) that the new SI Secretary, Michael
Heyman, will initiate an extensive review of our exhibitions process and
this exhibition in particular. I think that our greatest errors were not
in the scholarship (though I'm not saying that was perfect, either), but
in the process. The SI went to the Air Force Association, the American
Legion, the VFW, DAV and other military/veterans organizations because
we wanted their input. Perhaps we went too late, or perhaps we
underestimated the depth of the concerns voiced by those groups, but we
wanted to hear their concerns. It goes way back (1990) to when we
re-opened the Sea-Air Operations Gallery, when the Association of Naval
Aviators provided significant assistance in the development of that
gallery (they are even listed at the entrance with other sponsors). We
had hoped to repeat that kind of relationship, but (obviously) it didn't
work out. I'm sure there will be no shortage of post-mortems on this
exhibition and process (historians, media, internal reviews, etc.), and
I'm looking forward to the results because I definitely think that the
Smithsonian can learn from this recent experience and do a better job of
serving the public in the future. I can tell you that I do not believe
there was EVER an intent to dishonor American servicemen or servicwomen.
I've got a little brother in the Navy and, personally, would not be part
of such an effort. I think that when this exhibition opens in May,
people will agree that we did a good job with an incredibly complex and
sensitive subject. We'll get bad reviews, but I bet we get an even
greater number of positive reviews.

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

Date:    Mon, 9 Jan 1995 08:23:07 EST
From:    Alan Wild <[email-masked]>
Subject: Inf: 3rd Army Chronology - 8Jan45

January 8, 1945
D-Day +216

-Another day of overcast skies prohibited air activity.

-Patton issues reorganization as follows:

        94th Inf Div to XX Corps,
        90th Inf Div to III Corps,
        4th Armored Div to VIII Corps,

 This coincided with preparations to attack at 1000 hours on the 9th.

********

Alan Wild, Sr. Prog/Analyst
ACC - Lippitt - URI
Kingston, RI  02881

I am the NRA.

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

Date:    Mon, 9 Jan 1995 08:54:00 EST
From:    "Eliot K. Friedman" <[email-masked]>
Subject: WEAP: US Heavy Bomber Comparison

    I've been wondering about the comparative capabilies of the B-17 and
    B-24 bombers.  Both were successful designs, produced in large numbers
    during WW II, and according to a book I've been thumbing through
    (forget the title), had nearly identical range, speed, and bomb load
    characteristics.

    This being the case, why would one or the other be more suitable for
    any particular mission profile?  Why clutter up the logistical tail
    with two sets of factories, spare parts, flight and maintenance crew
    training programs, etc?

    I can understand the Pentagon supporting multiple development programs.
    Either plane could have turned out to be a failure in combat.  But once
    proven effective, why would both be kept in production?  Did each plane
    really fill some particular combat requirement better, or did homefront
    political and/or economic realities prevent either one from being
    phased out?

    I'm sure some of our aircraft fans here have some good answers.

    -El

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

Date:    Mon, 9 Jan 1995 08:14:46 GMT-6
From:    "Robert T. Moore" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Medals

Hello, William!

Thanks for the note and hope you had a wonderful holiday season.

>     I have several questions regarding real and replica medals.  I have a
> Pour le Merite replica, a Knight's Cross w/leaves+swords, and a Luftwaffe
> pilot's badge.  All of them are made with solid steel.  In the case of
> the leaves and oaks, the two are of the same steel mold.  The black paint
> on the KC and the blue paint on the PlM are just that - paint, rather than
> some special material.  Is this accurate?

    Will try to answer your questions, if someone else hasn't already.
The KC was made of 900 quality silver and was so stamped on the back
edge of the decoration. The "paint" was black lacquer.

    I am not familiar with the PLM, but I do have info on this if you
still need it. Please advise.

        Were the original medals just
> cheap pieces of steel with paint?

    Absolutely not. They were jeweled items and worth a great deal.
All metals used were precious or semi-precious.

 Or were they made of
real silver and/or
> gold?

    Absolutely. The KC with Oakleaves and Swords were of genuine
silver and so marked. The Diamonds to this decoration consisted of 43
diamonds inlaid onto the oakleaf portion of the decoration. In the
case of Rudel's singular decoration, that too was of geniune gold and
diamonds. These decorations are in the possession of his son and are
said to be locked in a bank vault in Southern Germany.

Also, I bought my replica Luftwaffe pin for some 25 bucks or somthing
> like that.  I was flipping through an aviation history mag and saw it for
> 5 to 15 bucks.  Is there a difference in quality between replicas?  TIA

    Probably. They are certainly easier to come by, and in some
cases, with today's technology, the copies are of better quality.

    Hope this helps, and please let me know about the PLM info.

    All the best.

    Terry

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

Date:    Mon, 9 Jan 1995 08:48:08 EST
From:    Alan Wild <[email-masked]>
Subject: Inf: 3rd Army Chronology - 9Jan45

January 9, 1945
D-Day +217

-G-2 indicates the possibility of an enemy thrust toward Luxemburg and Metz.
 The Twelfth Army Group informed 3rd Army that a directive from SHAEF
 indicated the the 3rd might be held up in their attack in the Bastogne area
 and divert divisions to the Moselle River area, southeast of Luxemburg
 to meet a possoble German attack. General Patton makes remarks about
 "another case of higher command seeing phantom devils where none existed".

-Artillery supports III Corps in their attack at 091000. The 26th Inf Div
 reaches highground over the town of Wiltz. 90th Inf Div captures Berle and
 Trentelhof.

-101st Airborne adavances 2 miles into Recogne.

-In bad weather XIX TAC sent out 24 sorties in bomber escorts.

-Gen Patton complains about shipment of winter clothing sitting in LeHarve,
 waiting for transport. Gen Lee of ComZ requests 3rd Army use their own
 trucks to transport supplies. 3rd Army vehicles were employed on the front.
 ComZ vehicles were acused of "... move office equipment ... to more plush
 surroundings".

***Source: _Patton's Third Army, a Chronology_ by Charles Province.
   Typos are mine.

Alan Wild, Sr. Prog/Analyst
ACC - Lippitt - URI
Kingston, RI  02881

I am the NRA.

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

Date:    Mon, 9 Jan 1995 09:44:11 EST
From:    "Steve L. New" <[email-masked]>
Subject: WEAP:  US Heavy Bomber Comparison

     Text deleted

     >But once proven effective, why would both be kept in production?  Did
     >each plane really fill some particular combat requirement better, or
     >did homefront political and/or economic realities prevent either one
     >from being phased out?

     >I'm sure some of our aircraft fans here have some good answers.

     >-El

     Although the B-24 had greater range and altitude performance over the
     B-17, a fact that gave the B-24 a preference in selection for Asian
     operations, the two aircraft did really fit a similar performance
     envelope.

     Production of both aircraft was maintained basically because the Army
     Air Force needed all the heavy bombers it could get.  Although it may
     have been possible to get all of the many factories involved in
     production of heavy bombers and assemblies to convert to a single
     design, this would have involved the risk that a shortage of a single
     component/assembly would halt all heavy bomber production.  As it was,
     if a shortage of B-17 engines occurred, B-24 production would continue
     unaffected.

     Finally, it may not have been possible to coerce Boeing to build B-24s
     or Consolidated to build B-17s.  I'm not sure of the laws in effect
     during the war, but I am aware that in more than one occasion, when an
     aircraft manufacturer was asked to produce another company's airframe
     (North American to build Curtis P-40s for instance) the answer was
     essentially "No, we have a better idea to offer you."

    Steve L. New
    [email-masked]
    Just an armadillo on the shoulder of the information superhighway.

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

Date:    Mon, 9 Jan 1995 09:32:16 EST
From:    Alan Wild <[email-masked]>
Subject: Inf: 3rd Army Chronology - 10Jan45

January 10, 1945
D-Day + 218

-G-2 estimates that German stengths in front of 3rd Army lines at 74,000,
 the equivalent of about 9 divisions and 220 tanks/assault vehicles.
 Replacements were thought not to keep up with losses.

-Small advances in experienced by all III Corps units. 6th Calvalry captures
 Betlange, Watrange, and Harlange. 6th Armored offers fire support for
 35th Inf Div which captures Villers-le-Bonne-Eau and Lutremange.

-VIII Corps clears Tillet and Bonnerue.

-XIX TAC flew 325 sorties, dropping 182 tons of bombs claiming 246 vehicles,
 14 tanks or armored vehicles, 145 railroad cars, and 4 bridges.

-A train wreck at Messancy destroys most of munitions destined for Supply
 Point #39 at Mellier serving VIII Corps. Some ammunition was salvaged
 by round the clock activity.

-1,806 displaced persons were in camps in 3rd Army areas.

**********

Alan Wild, Sr. Prog/Analyst
ACC - Lippitt - URI
Kingston, RI  02881

I am the NRA.

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

Date:    Mon, 9 Jan 1995 09:33:04 GMT-6
From:    "Robert T. Moore" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: WW II Mysteries

Hello, Allan!

Would like to respond to this, if I may.

> It is a fact -- so I have understood -- that the Bolshevik leaders
> hoped for World War I to develop into a revolution in Germany.

    That is accurate.

> Was Germany's role so important for the Bolsheviks that Stalin in
> the thirties poured money into Germany to support the Nazis to become
> strong enough to root out Social Democrats and Pacifists?

    Never heard of that, as Russia and particularly Stalin at the
time was more concerned with forced collectivization and the
resultant famine that that had created. It is true that there was a
connection with American financing of Hitler's pre-election
campaigns, but nothing to the extent you suggest by Stalin.

 I have heard
> that this is true, but I cannot believe it. His intentions being that
> Hitler would do the chores for him in Germany as well as Europe, and
> when the conditions were ripe, then he would attack not only Germany,
> but all Western-European countries. Can this be true?

    Yes and no. Stalin had feared this tactic would be used against
him by the Western Allies in an attempt to get him or Germany to
fight each other and then step in after all was over.

  > Thanks in advance!

    Hope this has been of help and thanks again.

    Terry

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

Date:    Mon, 9 Jan 1995 09:40:21 GMT-6
From:    "Robert T. Moore" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: BATTLE OF THE BULG

Hello, Ben!

I will attempt to answer your questions on this interesting topic
later on today.

There are explanations. For the most part, the Allies did expect an
attack but one from farther north in the area around Cologne/Aachen.
Will explain later on.

    More later.

    Terry

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

Date:    Mon, 9 Jan 1995 17:10:01 +0100
From:    Emmanuel Gustin <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: WEAP: US Heavy Bomber Comparison

On Mon, 9 Jan 1995, Eliot K. Friedman wrote:

>     This being the case, why would one or the other be more suitable for
>     any particular mission profile?  Why clutter up the logistical tail
>     with two sets of factories, spare parts, flight and maintenance crew
>     training programs, etc?

First of all, it is not simple to switch production. The choice is not
between two sets of factories or one set of factories. Its between having
two sets of factories, or half of the factories producing nothing useful
for several months. Availability is as important a quality for a combat
aircraft as anything else. For example, production of the Curtiss P-40
continued during the entire war, despite the availability of much better
designs.

The B-17 was originally designed as a long-range medium bomber, in a time
were few people in the US considered getting involved in warfare in
Europe and Asia. The B-24 was a later design, developed by Consolidated
in preference to building B-17s. In theory, the B-24 had a twice as large
bomb capacity; in practice this advantage vanished. The B-17 was easier
to fly, and alledgedly sturdier. The B-24 had longer range, and was
therefore more suitable for operations in the Pacific and maritime
patrol. It was advantegaous enough to have both.

Also, don't forget that production of the B-17 and B-24 began to run up
when both bombers were still unsatisfactory; the B-17E and B-24D were not
really combat-ready aircraft. The USAAF could only hope that at least one
of them would develop into a satisfactory bomber. When the B-17F and B-24H
began the enter service, the production had already gained momentum. It
was more effective to just continue it.

Emmanuel Gustin

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

Date:    Mon, 9 Jan 1995 09:23:12 CST
From:    Michael P LaForge <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: PVT Shafer

On 12 April 1945, the 63d Division was clearing enemy positions along the
Kocher River line south of Weissbach Germany.  The bAttle of the Bulge had
long been over.

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

Date:    Mon, 9 Jan 1995 10:17:53 -0600
From:    "William L. Huber - SAA" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Stalingrad etc. (was Re: Movie "Das Boot")

>         Sometimes, Patton wore one pistol.
>         Sometimes, Patton wore two pistols.
>
> Regards, Sidney.

Seems like I remember him wearing one ivory handled revolver at the
hip but he also carried an .380 automatic as well.

Interesting story David, I know the feeling when a couple of vets are
telling war stories and you practically sprain and ear trying to
listen in.  If I had a nickle for every hour I spent at a gunshow
listening to vets while trying to look interested in a table full of
duck decoys....

What's the going price on panzerschrecks these days anyway?

Cheers, Bill Huber / [email-masked]

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

Date:    Mon, 9 Jan 1995 11:34:00 EST
From:    "Eliot K. Friedman" <[email-masked]>
Subject: WEAP:  US Heavy Bomber Comparison

    Steve New replies to my query about the logic of maintaining similar US
    heavy bomber designs.

>    Although the B-24 had greater range and altitude performance over the
>    B-17, a fact that gave the B-24 a preference in selection for Asian
>    operations, the two aircraft did really fit a similar performance
>    envelope.

    I did get the impression from reading the 50 Years Ago mission
    descriptions that the B-24 had a significantly greater range, but
    the stats I've read contradict this, which is what motivated my
    original question.

>    Finally, it may not have been possible to coerce Boeing to build B-24s
>    or Consolidated to build B-17s.  I'm not sure of the laws in effect
>    during the war, but I am aware that in more than one occasion, when an
>    aircraft manufacturer was asked to produce another company's airframe
>    (North American to build Curtis P-40s for instance) the answer was
>    essentially "No, we have a better idea to offer you."

    I doubt the manufacturers could out-and-out refuse to build any
    particular design.  Certainly, they could suggest alternatives, but if
    the DoD insisted on a particular design, it wouldn't make legal,
    economic or political sense to refuse war work while production
    facilities sat idle.

    El

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

Date:    Mon, 9 Jan 1995 10:57:02 -0600
From:    "William L. Huber - SAA" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: German Ocean Liners??

> Does anyone know if any German ocean liners were "seized" at the outbreak of
> the war? If so, were they turned into Allied troops ships?
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> John Davis                Cary, North Carolina                 [email-masked]
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi John,

I know that German merchantmen were seized and presumably any ship
flying the German flag in allied ports was treated likewise.  I speak
up on this because in the course of some research I was doing I came
across the obituary of an SS officer and in it they mention that his
father was a captain of a merchantman being held in Cuba.  From that I
assume that at least the crews were held for the duration of the war
but precisely what happened to the ship I cannot say.

Cheers, Bill Huber / [email-masked]

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

Date:    Mon, 9 Jan 1995 10:22:47 GMT+6
From:    Esaul Zermeno Bautista <[email-masked]>
Subject: <No subject given>

I hope that somebody could help me.
  My situation is that I had been searching for the movie STALINGRAD'
But is hard to find in Mexico , could anybody tell me how I can get it
or where i can obtain or buy or something.....

Thanks in advance.
      Alfredo Zermeno Bautista.

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

Date:    Mon, 9 Jan 1995 11:46:31 GMT-6
From:    "Robert T. Moore" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: BATTLE OF THE BULG

Hello, again, Ben!

Sorry about the hiatus but have been trying to get organized after
being out of school for three weeks.

Will try to answer very briefly your questions to a complicated
situation.

Why was there an "intelligence" failure?

1. Viewed from the Allied side:

    Eisenhower and his chief of intelligence, Major-General Sir
Kenneth Strong, along with Bradley and others, had predicted a major
German assault emminating from the Cologne/Aachen area, as
concentrations there suggested such. Also, it was clear to the
Germans, the High Command and others, that the Roer River dams in
that part of the country were major Allied targets, and had to be
captured, if they were to gain access to the Ruhr. Thus, Allied
intentions were focused on this part of the front. As it later turned
out, the Germans did their best to assist the Allies in keeping their
attention focused on this area.

    It must also be considered that by December 1944, Eisenhower had
only 60 divisions on the continent of Europe. The closer his forces
came to the German border, the longer became his front. This meant
that he had to look for barriers that could be easily defended from
the enemy with a minimal amount of troops, particularly if he were to
concentrate his forces for major assaults elsewhere as he had to do
at Arnhem and Antwerp.

    Since the area of the Ardennes was a quiet sector, he left that
area to be defended by 4 divisions and given the length of the front
there, 85 miles, he was thus forced to require each division to man a
front of 20 miles each instead of the 4 or 5 miles recommended in
most military manuals.

    All this was noticed by Adolf Hitler. He did his best to maintain
Allied preoccupation with the Ruhr area and thus keep their attention
diverted from the Ardennes escapade. To do this, he deliberately
maintained the ruse that the Germans were weak in this area by using
it in the same way as the Allies, namely to rest tired troops and
reconstitute new divisions. I won't go into all the detail but will
briefly give some reasons why the Americans were surprised in the
Ardennes.

   It must not be overlooked that by December 1944, the
Allies were infected with a common malady found among victory-flushed
troops. Ever since the landings in Normandy, the British and
Americans had advanced from one victory to another and had made
spectacular gains, as you well know. It was natural to think that
with such massive German withdrawals coupled with huge military
losses, that the belief within the Allied camp was that the Germans
were finished. Only one more push and the whole affair with Germany
woudl be over. That was the thinking in December 1944 within the
Western Allied camp, from army commander to GI in the front lines.

    This led to carelessness. With the current military situation at
the time of both German and Allies, it is easy to understand why the
Americans particularly were surprised at the German assault in this
area.

    From the German side:

    What Hitler did to maintain the ruse of German weakness in the
Ardennes centered around secrecy, as mentioned in other posts. Here
is what AH did to ensure that.

    1. Required only written orders to be formulated and delivered to
all personnel with a need-to-know, thus skirting the use
of Enigma.

    2. Transferred "tired" troops to the Ardennes with all equipment,
left there for a time, withdrawn but leaving behind all heavy
equipment that could and was easily camouflaged or stored for later
use.

    3. All other troop or vehicular movement was made at night.

    4. In areas close to the anticipated front, aircraft flew up and
down the front line to cover the sound of motorized traffic.

    5. During the night preceding the attack, straw was laid on the
roadways to cover the sound of motors, horses and men.

    As you can see, this worked to the disadvantage of the Germans as
well as to the Americans. Field commanders had no idea who there
neighbors were, in essence, and had no idea that the troops to either
side of them were of any fighting value, as they had not trained
together for the operation. This also led to confusion in the German
lines as well.

    In many cases, officers had not trained with their subordinates
in the field, particularly those transferred at the last minute and,
yet, were expected to carry through.

    You also ask the question why Eisenhower didn't fire anyone over
this. There was no reason to. Eisenhower himself ran a calculated
risk with fortifying the Ardennes with so few troops, something he
was forced to do given the military situation described above. If he
were going to fire anyone, he would have to start with the officers
responsible in the front lines all the way up to his own
headquarters. He could not do that, and he certainly couldn't fire
anyone for a situation he himself had accepted at the time.

    I hope this helps to answer your questions. If you have any
others, I will be very glad to attempt a response.

    All the best, and good luck this New Year 1995.

    Terry

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

Date:    Mon, 9 Jan 1995 12:04:25 GMT-6
From:    "Robert T. Moore" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: TRIVIA: Schindler's List

Hello, Christopher!

    Will try to answer your questions if someone else hasn't already.

  First, Amon Goethe, the camp commandante
> > and the movie's bad guy, only has the rank of Untersharfuhrer at the beginning

    I, too, saw this movie for the first time over the holidays. I
saw no technical fault on the Waffen-SS uniforms used. If memory
serves me correctly, Goethe received one promotion during the time
span covered in this movie. He went from Untersturmfuehrer to
Hauptsturmfuehrer (captain).

> > Isn't this rank a little low for a commandant?

    Not really. Rudolf Hoess was only a Sturmbannfuehrer and went to
Obersturmbannfuehrer while commandant of Auschwitz.

 (I think it's equal to a
> > Lieutenant).  Theodore Eicke was an Oberstfuhrer or something (general).

    Theodor Eicke attained the rank of Obergruppenfuehrer or the
equivalent to Lieutenant-General in the British and American forces.

    Hope this helps.

    Terry

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

Date:    Mon, 9 Jan 1995 13:08:37 EST
From:    "Steve L. New" <[email-masked]>
Subject: WEAP:  US Heavy Bomber Comparison

     >>Steve New replies to my query about the logic of maintaining similar
     >>US heavy bomber designs.

     >Although the B-24 had greater range and altitude performance over the
     >B-17, a fact that gave the B-24 a preference in selection for Asian
     >operations, the two aircraft did really fit a similar performance
     >envelope.

     >>I did get the impression from reading the 50 Years Ago mission
     >>descriptions that the B-24 had a significantly greater range, but
     >>the stats I've read contradict this, which is what motivated my
     >>original question.

     >Finally, it may not have been possible to coerce Boeing to build
     >B-24s or Consolidated to build B-17s.  I'm not sure of the laws in
     >effect during the war, but I am aware that in more than one occasion,
     >when an aircraft manufacturer was asked to produce another company's
     >airframe (North American to build Curtis P-40s for instance) the
     >answer was essentially "No, we have a better idea to offer you."

     >>I doubt the manufacturers could out-and-out refuse to build any
     >>particular design.  Certainly, they could suggest alternatives, but
     >>if the DoD insisted on a particular design, it wouldn't make legal,
     >>economic or political sense to refuse war work while production
     >>facilities sat idle.

     >>El

     So El, after deleting the major thrust of my response, and responding
     to the side issues, "What's your point?"

    Steve L. New
    [email-masked]
    Just an armadillo on the shoulder of the information superhighway.

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

Date:    Mon, 9 Jan 1995 12:15:46 GMT-6
From:    "Robert T. Moore" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: HIST: Trivia

Hello, David!

No, it wasn't the Horst Wessel Lied. That was the anthem of the
NSDAP.

 > Horst Wessel? Just a guess.

    Will keep looking into it. Thanks for the response though.

    Terry

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

Date:    Mon, 9 Jan 1995 12:53:33 -0600
From:    JEFF ROBERTS <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: INF: USN Chronology 01-09-95

> Subj: INF: USN Chronology 01-09-95
>
>             United States naval vessels damaged:

>              Transport WARHAWK (AP-168), by suicide boat, Philippine
>               Islands area,
>               16 d. 20'N., 120 d. 10'E.

Suicide BOAT?

I knew that the Japanese planned to use suicide boats against OLYMPIC and
CORONET but have never heard of their actual employment.  Any further
information regarding their use would be appreciated.

Thanks,

Jeff Roberts
[email-masked]

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

Date:    Mon, 9 Jan 1995 13:14:29 -0600
From:    "Robert J. Granvin" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: WEAP:  US Heavy Bomber Comparison

Trying exactly to sound like an advertisement, I could make the suggestion
that everyone might want to visit St. Paul the weekend after Oshkosh this
August (4, 5 and 6 -- Holman Field) when we'll have the B-29, B-24 and B-17
on the ramp permitting up close and personal inspection and comparison of
each aircraft, solving this question once and for all.  :-) :-)

(It's within the charter, because it deals with comparison of WWII heavy
bombers.. :-)  I love pushing the envelope.  :-)

--
\\ Robert J. Granvin                                 User Services Specialist
// School of Statistics - University of Minnesota            [email-masked]

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

Date:    Mon, 9 Jan 1995 13:23:21 GMT-6
From:    "Robert T. Moore" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: France's Forgotten Past / Dracy

Hello, Bill!

Just a quickie note to your post.

> Regarding the original post that began this thread, the one that
> mentioned the documentary on the camp near Paris called Drancy, did
> any of the list members happen to videotape that program?  I am
> looking for a copy so if you happened to get it please email me at
> [email-masked]

    Did you ever see the 4-hour documentary called "The Sorrow and
the Pity" which dealt exclusively with France's relationship to
Germany during the Occupation?" If not, that is one to see. It won a
major movie prize in Europe for the best documentary of 1972.

    Thanks.

    Terry

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

Date:    Mon, 9 Jan 1995 14:23:00 EST
From:    "Eliot K. Friedman" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re[2]: PVT Shafer, 63rd Division

Re: PVT Shafer...

> On 12 April 1945, the 63d Division was clearing enemy positions along the
> Kocher River line south of Weissbach Germany.  The bAttle of the Bulge
> had long been over.

    This didn't catch my eye on the first pass, but I've got a similar
    story that might lead to something.

    My dad was in the 63rd Division.  He'd been in some sort of OCS program
    where he stayed in college, but "got pulled out midway through his
    senior year because the Army needed men on account of the Bulge",
    according to my mother.

    I always assumed she had her facts wrong, and that my dad couldn't
    possibly have gotten pulled out of school, sent through basic training,
    signal school, and gotten to Europe in time to get a Purple Heart and a
    promotion to Sergeant, all between the Bulge and V-E Day.  My own
    suspicion was that Dad decided the Army would be more fun than taking
    his Differential Equations final exam.

    This Shafer story tells me that there was considerable confusion on the
    home front about the day to day progress at the fronts, and maybe that
    the 63rd got to Europe quicker than most.

    In any case, last time I visited my parents, I saw my dad had a 63rd
    Division Veteran's Association newsletter lying around, which surprised
    me, as his Army life has never been something he's cared to relive.  I
    recall the Association is having some sort of reunion in the Catskills
    resort area of NY State this year.  They may have some people there
    who'd remember Private Shafer.  I can ask my dad for the address, if
    the original poster is interested in following up.

    El

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

Date:    Mon, 9 Jan 1995 14:42:28 EST
From:    Mike Long <[email-masked]>
Subject: USCGC Eagle / Horst Wessal

Steve,

Yup, I'll second that third hand info.

The Coast Gaurd training ship EAGLE was the former German training ship
Horst Wessal. I don't know about the Conrad but I've got some nice pictures
of both vessels from my canoe (C.W.Morgan too for that matter)

Mike

PS (Steve I've tried to back channel you but no luck, so I'm bothering
    the whole list.  )

Michael Long
Programmer Analyst II
University of Connecticut
196 Auditorium Road, U-138    |   Bitnet: [email-masked]
Storrs, Connecticut, USA      | Internet: [email-masked]
                   06269-3138 |    Phone: (203) 486-1352

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

Date:    Mon, 9 Jan 1995 13:46:41 GMT-6
From:    "Robert T. Moore" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Alternatives to the A-bombs

Hello, Eliot!

Just an addendum to your post.

>     That being said, gratuitous slaughter isn't great either.  Thus, I
>     wonder why I haven't heard any serious mention of a third strategy,
>     blockade.

    Blockade was mentioned, I believe in earlier posts. It was
certainly considered by the Allies, but there were problems with such
a policy.

    1. There was always the risk that some ships could get through,
as no blockade is airtight.

    2. It would take months, if not years, to starve out the
Japanese, and the Allies could not maintain such a long-term
blockade, as their respective constituencies were wanting a much
quicker solution.

    3. It would have required a prodigious number of ships to
maintain a blockade of many months duration, and the required
logistics of resupply, refueling and relief of personnel would have
been prohibitive over the long haul.

 Allied air/naval superiority was so overwhelming by 1945
>     that continued naval blockade of the home islands would have left the
>     Japanese with the immediate, inescapable choice of surrender or
>     starving to death in the dark.  No glorious battlefield.

    Certainly not, but it would have taken a long time to get the
Japanese to that point, and don't forget that the Japanese had been
under blockade early in the war, albeit through submarines, where
possible.
 >
>     Would this have been more "humane" than the nuclear strategy?

    Again, that depends on how you view the problem. Humane, perhaps
in our view, but barbaric from the viewpoint of the Japanese. And,
given the justifiable feeling at the time of Americans toward the
Japanese, humaneness was not on the upper end of the average person's
vocabulary.

 It
>     certainly would have generated far fewer Allied casualties than
>     invasion.

    Perhaps, but the commitment of time and effort would have
been tremendous.

    If I'd been advising Truman, and the A-bombs hadn't
worked, >     I'd have recommended it over invasion any day.

    Perhaps, but Truman did the proper thing and he never regretted
making that decision. However, in war, the idea is to inflict as much
damage on the enemy as quickly as possible and force him from the
battlefield. Blockade would not have accomplished that.

    Thanks, and hope this has been of help.

    All the best.

    Terry

>     El

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

Date:    Mon, 9 Jan 1995 13:58:02 GMT-6
From:    "Robert T. Moore" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: HIST: Trivia/militaria

Hello, Warren!

I take it that this deals with the ropes used to hang the major war
criminals sentenced to death at Nuremberg in October 1946.

> Patrick Marsden posted on pieces of rope used in the Nuremberg hangings.
> Question: How does one verify the provenance of such items? [Or were
> they possibly "reproductions"? ;-)]

    In any case, any one marketing these for sale is pulling a fast
one on the public.

    Those ropes were all burned, and a brand new one was used to hang
each of the condemned.

    The reason for this was to prevent anyone from profiting from the
sale of the ropes, and to prevent the likelihood of any of them being
used to glorify the past.

    Hope this helps. BTW, the official US hangman was Master Sergeant
John Woods, of San Antonio, TX. Up to the time of his employment at
Dachau, he had hanged over 300 men.

    All the best.

    Terry

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

Date:    Mon, 9 Jan 1995 13:55:06 CST
From:    Robert Hohlt <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Invasion of Kyushu / Operation OLYMPIC

Hello all,

Hope everyone had a wonderful holiday season.

I would like to share with you list members some information I went after
during my trip back home this Christmas.  Remembering all of the
discussions on our list about the A-Bombs, Enola Gay, the Smithsonian and
the many discussions spawned by these topics,  I asked my father about
his USAAF duty at the end of the Pacific war.  My father told me he was
training in St. Petersburg, Florida for an O.S.S. operation he had
volunteered for.  I remember my father telling me this story years ago but
the discussions on our list concerning operation Olympic and what would
have happened, brought this back to mind for me.

Some of you probably know better than I about this but here goes anyway.

The Japanese islands were not as isolated from each other as they might
have appeared.  Apparently, the Japanese islands, Kyushu, and the others
had railroad tunnels which connected the islands with the mainland.  These
were subchannel and subterranean rail links between the Japanese mainland
and the islands,  like the new France / England chunnel(sp?).

Anyway, my father was training in St. Petersburg, Florida for a mission
which would take out the underground tunnels before operation OLYMPIC was
to start.  The operation was to use 85 foot boats painted to resemble
Japanese fishing boats, which would then be sunk on top of the underground
tunnels.  My Father said they were going to load each of the 85 ft boats
with 50000 lbs of explosives.

[ I have no idea if it would work, or how big a hole in the ocean floor
50000 lbs of TNT would make.  I am just relaying info to you list readers
as my Father told it to me. ]

These 85 ft boats were to be controlled from B-17s using TV and remote
control.  My fathers job on one of the B-17s was to be a TV focus person
since the early TV sets required constant focusing.

An officer was required to fly/pilot/drive the boat via the TV and remote
control.  My father also said that as insurance,  each 85 ft boat was to be
accompanied by two 35 ft boats each packed with 5000 lb of TNT which would
be sent to RAM into anything which challenged the bigger boats.  He said
these smaller boats could make better than 40 knots.

My father said that he was really worried about having to go on this mission
since the B-17 would have had to remain in the area for a while until the
big boat could be sunk over the tunnel.

Like Ben Frank and John Ausland, my father is happy that Hiroshima and
Nagasaki brought the war to an end and therefore made his O.S.S. mission
unnecessary.  I have no way of knowing, but perhaps those A-Bombs saved
his life.  Obviously had he gone on the mission and been shot down/captured
or killed by enemy aircraft or flak, my chance of existence is remote.

If any of you list experts have any more information on these O.S.S missions
to destroy the underground rail lines between the Japanese islands before
operation Olympic please let me know.  I would also be very happy to pass
along any questions or comments any of you listers have for my father and
his mission/training.

Regards and Happy New Year.

Robert Hohlt, Jr.

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

Date:    Mon, 9 Jan 1995 14:22:58 GMT-6
From:    "Robert T. Moore" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Trivia: Nazi escapees

Hello, William!

Will try to answer your questions, but a complete listing will be
well nigh impossible, as it is still not certain who is alive today
or then or what the status of some of those people was at the time.
However, will give you what I know off the top of my head.

>      Who are some Nazis that have never been found and are assumed to
> have escaped to South America (or Antartica, as some seem to think)?

    Klaus Barbee-the Gestapo chief of Laon went to South America.
    Adolf Eichmann-Argentina
    Josef Mengele-Argentina, Paraguay
    Joachim Peiper was not a war criminal at the time of his death as
he had been released from Landsberg Prison after serving time there
for the Malmedy Massacre. He had immigrated there with his wife and
daughter.

    Otto Skorzeny-Spain. He was head of Mercedes-Benz in Madrid.
    Leon Degrelle-lived under an assumed name in Madrid, Spain.

    I wouldn't say that Skorzeny was a war criminal, as he was not
put on trial for the commission of war crimes. He and many others
with no incriminating war record merely immigrated to other countries
to start life anew. Others went overseas at the behest of other
governments, such as Werner Baumbach, the General of the Bombers who
went to Argentina to help build or train the Argentinian Air Force.
Adolf Galland was another.

    The above are the only ones that come to mind. There were lesser
fish with an incriminating background who were much less glamorous,
such as concentration camp guards who fled where possible, such as
John Demjanjuk. But the really big-wigs are listed above or were
already mentioned to you in earlier posts.

    BTW, Rudolf Hess wasn't the only German official occupying a
prison cell until the 1990's when he committed suicide. There was
also Walter Reder, a major in the Waffen-SS, who was responsible for
the deaths of 1600 Italian civilians. The Italians sentenced him to
life imprisonment in the Gaeta military prison near Rome, and was
released some 8 years ago, but has since died. He lived in Vienna,
Austria.

    Another one that sat in the same prison with Reder was Josef
Kammler, the head of the Gestapo in Rome. He was smuggled out of the
prison in a suitcase by his wife. He was imprisoned for his role in
the execution of 250 Italians in what came to be called the Ardeatine
Massacre.

> The only person that I can think of is Muller and Bormann (though it
> was mentioned that he went to the Soviets).  TIA

    No proof of that. Bormann died trying to leave Berlin. Mueller
was rumored to have gone over to the Soviets and the like, but there
was no proof of that. It was also rumored that he was in Albania
helping the Albanians with their security service, but, again, no
proof.

    Hope this helps, and if you have any other question, please don't
hesitate to ask.

    All the best.

    Terry

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

Date:    Mon, 9 Jan 1995 16:26:51 EST
From:    Mike Long <[email-masked]>
Subject: USCG Eagle

The following is taken from "THE U.S.COAST GUARD BARQUE EAGLE"
 a handout given at the U.S.C.G. Academy here in New London.

Eagle, the largest Tall Ship flying the Stars and Stripes and the only
Square-rigger in U.S. Government Service, is the seventh Coast Guard
cutter to bear the name in a proud line dating back to 1792. The ship
was built in 1936 by the Blohm and Voss shipyard in Hamburg, Germany,
and commisioned as Horst Wessel, one of three sailing ships operated
by Nazi Germany to train cadets for the growing German Navy. Early in
WWII it was converted to a cargo ship, transporting men and supplies
throughout the Baltic Sea, but continued a training mission as well.
The ship is said to have downed three aircraft in combat during this
period. Following WWII, it was taken as a war prize by the United States
and a Coast Guard crew--aided by the German crew still on board-- sailed
the ship in 1946 from Bremehaven to its new homeport in New London, CT.
Eagle now serves as a seagoing classroom for the future offices of the
U.S.Coast Guard.
Eagle has a steel hull .40 thick, two full length steel decks with a
platform deck below and a raised forecastle and quarterdeck; and
weather decks made up of three inch thick teak over steel. There are
over 5 miles of rigging; 200 lines are used to control the sails and
yards.

Length, Overall      295.0ft
Length, Waterline    231.0ft
Beam,greatest         39.1ft
Freeboard              9.1ft
Draft (Fully loaded)  16.0ft
Disp    "      "        1816 tons
Sail Area             22,227 sq ft
Speed (under power)       10 knts
Speed (undersail)   up to 17 knts
Anchors                3,860 lbs

Mike

Michael Long
Programmer Analyst II
University of Connecticut
196 Auditorium Road, U-138    |   Bitnet: [email-masked]
Storrs, Connecticut, USA      | Internet: [email-masked]
                   06269-3138 |    Phone: (203) 486-1352

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

Date:    Mon, 9 Jan 1995 17:11:05 -0400
From:    Mike Yaklich <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Soviet slang

For Gudmundur Helgason:
        Sorry to take so long to reply; don't know much Soviet slang but offhandhere are a few air force terms:
        The MBR-2 seaplane, a real crate with high wing and a single centrally-
mounted engine on the wing, was known as the "ambar" ("barn"), a play on words
on the phonetic pronunciation of the letters MBR in Russian (also probably an
apt description of its flying characteristics).  Many of these aircraft remainedin use with Soviet fleet air forces in a reconnaisance role.
        The lend-lease US P-39 Airacobra (USSR received roughly half of the
9,000 or so produced) was known as the "kobry" (Russianization of "Cobra")
or as the "britschik" (roughly, "little shaver").
This was a very-widely encountered aircraft, several of the top ten Soviet
aces flew it for much of the war, including number two Aleksandr Pokryshin,
credited with 59 victories (he also bounced German #2 ace Barkhorn in 1944)
and the Glinka brothers.
        Finally, the LaGG-3 fighter used in 1941-42 was nicknamed (again in
a pun on the designation) "Lakirovani Garantirovani Grob" or "Varnished
Guaranteed Coffin" due to its high-gloss finish (to enhance speed) and its
problematic handling.
        I have a feeling there are a few more rattling around my brain, if
any surface I'll relay them to you.  Hope this helps.

        Regards

        Mike Yaklich

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

Date:    Mon, 9 Jan 1995 17:16:33 -0500
From:    "Mr. Scott Hannon" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Re[2]: PVT Shafer, 63rd Division

Eliot K. Friedman writes:

re: US 63rd Infantry Division

>    My dad was in the 63rd Division.  He'd been in some sort of OCS program
>    where he stayed in college, but "got pulled out midway through his
>    senior year because the Army needed men on account of the Bulge",
>    according to my mother.
>
>    I always assumed she had her facts wrong, and that my dad couldn't

With the end of the war thought to be winding down, the Army decided it
would it wouldn't be needing a lot of soldiers with specialized skills
in a year or two (the war would be over by then), so tens of thousand of
Army men in college (or other advanced training schools) suddenly found
themselves in the infantry (which the Army, by fall-44, was getting in
desperate need of). These troops were used in large part to flush out a
few divisions still in the USA awaiting final training and shipment
overseas. These men were already in the Army, so I think they'd all have
already completed basic training (the college was for advance specialty
training...pilots/crew, engineering, etc).

I don't know exactly what proportion of these men went where, but I
do know a few thousand went to the 103 Infantry Division, and probably
the other newly formed divs sent to Europe at the end of '44 (63 and 70
and maybe others).

The 63rd Infantry Division wasn't fully formed as an operational
division until early February 1945, but it's infantry elements had been
on/near the front since mid-December as Task Force Harris. The force was
soon parcelled out, with one regiment each going to the 3, 44, and 100
IDs of 6th Army Group.

The three inf regts saw their first major actions in the Nordwind and
Colmar battles of January 1945 (operating with the above named divs).

Unfortunately, there are not many easily available sources dealing
with the division or its elements. I think there was a divisional
history (and maybe a regimental history) published a few decades ago.
But they are now very difficult to find (some may have been re-printed
but AFAIK are no longer available). There may be a 63 ID history
available thru Turner Press for $50...I don't remember.

One fairly easy to find book that deal with the Nordwind/Colmar
battles (and thus briefly on the 63rd ID's operations) is Charles
Whiting's _Operation Nordwind_. It's probably now out of print, but
used copies (hardcover or paperback) shouldn't be too hard to find.
Also the US Army's Center for Military History _Riviera to Rhine_
(available from the Gov't Printing Office for about $30). Both were
published within the last few years.

Scott.
Scott Hannon, Mon Jan 9 1995 ([email-masked])

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

Date:    Mon, 9 Jan 1995 17:17:08 -0400
From:    Mike Yaklich <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: WEAP:Japanese Planes?

Emmanuel, I'll defer to your knowledge of WW2 aircraft any day.  I thought
I read that term "hikoki" somewhere but until I find it I'll admit my
knowledge of Japanese doesn't go much beyond being able to order sushi
without embarrasing myself.  If I forgot P (land-based light bomber) in
the Japanese scheme it was a typo (like placing J after K).  BTW, do you
have any specs for the R and S types you mentioned that you could post to
the list, and/or operational and flight history??

PS I also caught a boo-boo, the Shiden was N1K2-J (not N1K1).

Regards

Mike Yaklich

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

Date:    Mon, 9 Jan 1995 17:19:26 EST
From:    Henry Sirotin <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: "Martyred Villages"

Dear William,

I'm not sure what the Holocaust Museum criterion was- probably the loss
of the Jewish community, But in at least some cases, that would have
been close to the entire town, especially for some of the smaller
market towns. Why not give the Museum a call?

HS

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

Date:    Mon, 9 Jan 1995 15:49:58 CST
From:    "SCHERRER, TIM" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re[2]: Stalingrad etc. (was Re: Movie "Das Boot")

I don;t know about Panzerschrecks but some repro Panzerfausts, which
were extra production pieces for "Stalingrad" were being sold by WWII
Products Ltd in St. Louis for $189, or $199--these are the Rommel
goggles people if that rings a bell.

I have a friend of mine who made a "schreck" out of pvc pipe and
plastic.  I don;t know if he sells but I could ask if you are game.  He
made a faux MP-28 that looks pretty good--out of wood and plastic as
well.  It's non-firing in case you hadn;t guessed.  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:    Tue, 10 Jan 1995 00:42:56 +0100
From:    Emmanuel Gustin <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: WEAP:Japanese Planes?

On Mon, 9 Jan 1995, Mike Yaklich wrote:

> the Japanese scheme it was a typo (like placing J after K).  BTW, do you
> have any specs for the R and S types you mentioned that you could post to
> the list, and/or operational and flight history??

*Operational* history? No, that just doesn't exist. These are very obscure
types. I've never seen a photograph of them. They are the kind of aircraft
get listed in footnotes, just to be complete. I would appreciate if someone
had some more information about these types, for they seem interesting
enough.

The Aichi S1A Denko ('Lightning Bolt') nightfighter was the last Aichi
aircraft design. It had a crew of two, and was powered by two Nakajima Homare
NK9K-S radial engines.  Armament is reported as four 30mm cannon and two
20mm; the radar was probably a copy of a German type. The S1A is reported to
have had a top speed of 589km/h, which is not particularly good. Two were
built.

The Yokosuka R2Y Keiun ('Beautiful Cloud') was a fast land-based
reconaissance aircraft. Logic demands that there must have been a R1x, but I
never heard about it. The R2Y flew only once, before the prototype was
destroyed in a bombardment. It was powered by two coupled 1700hp Atsuta 30
engines, driving three-bladed contrarotating propellers. In my view, and
keeping in mind that the Atsuta itself was not a very good engine, such
engine installation must have been troublesome beyond the bearable. But such
madness is not unique, not even for Japanese WWII aircraft.

> PS I also caught a boo-boo, the Shiden was N1K2-J (not N1K1).

Sorry Mike, the N1K1-J was called Shiden and the N1K2-J Shiden-Kai. The
N1K1-J was a direct land-based adaptation of the N1K1 floatplane fighter, the
N1K2-J was the thoroughly re-designed version.

Emmanuel Gustin

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

Date:    Mon, 9 Jan 1995 18:01:34 -0600
From:    "Tim J. Watts" <[email-masked]>
Subject: TRIVIA: Decks

Hope this doesn't sound too off the wall.  It is my understanding that
the flight decks of U.S. carriers in the 1930's were covered with wood
(teak, I think).  If so, and if it was teak (which I think came from
Southeast Asia, which was occupied by the Japanese), what was used for
all the new construction during the war and for repairs to existing
decks?  Was some other wood used, or were the decks really made of
steel?

TIA
Tim J. Watts
Valparaiso University

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

Date:    Mon, 9 Jan 1995 23:19:18 GMT+1
From:    SYSTEM OPERATOR <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: WEAP:  US Heavy Bomber Comparison

"Steve L. New" <[email-masked]> writes:

>      Production of both aircraft was maintained basically because the Army
>      Air Force needed all the heavy bombers it could get.  Although it may
>      have been possible to get all of the many factories involved in
>      production of heavy bombers and assemblies to convert to a single
>      design, this would have involved the risk that a shortage of a single
>      component/assembly would halt all heavy bomber production.  As it was,
>      if a shortage of B-17 engines occurred, B-24 production would continue
>      unaffected.

This is a very interesting question. Could a shortage of a component ever
occur ? I have trouble imagining how this could happen. Is there a
historical precedent ?

>   Finally, it may not have been possible to coerce Boeing to build B-24s
>      or Consolidated to build B-17s.  I'm not sure of the laws in effect
>      during the war, but I am aware that in more than one occasion, when an
>      aircraft manufacturer was asked to produce another company's airframe
>      (North American to build Curtis P-40s for instance) the answer was
>      essentially "No, we have a better idea to offer you."

I may be totally ignorant about wartime capitalism, but did Boeing and
Consolidated make profits out of the war ??
Thanks Steve for the very interesting answers.

Arnaud.

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

Date:    Tue, 10 Jan 1995 00:12:31 GMT+1
From:    SYSTEM OPERATOR <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: France's Forgotten Past / Dracy

"Robert T. Moore" <[email-masked]> writes:

>     Did you ever see the 4-hour documentary called "The Sorrow and
> the Pity" which dealt exclusively with France's relationship to
> Germany during the Occupation?" If not, that is one to see. It won a
> major movie prize in Europe for the best documentary of 1972.

Makes me think,
If you want to read some French without having to return to school,

Henry Amouroux also just finished writing his immense work (about ten
volumes) on this France during the occupation.
A recommended reading and a mine of information.
Also,
"La vie des Francais sous l'Occupation", Henri Amouroux, Robert Laffont.
See also,
"L'Histoire de Vichy", Robert Aron, 1945
"Vichy France", Robert O.Praxton
"Parades and politics at Vichy", R. O.Praxton (Princeton, 1966)
"Militarbefehlshaber in Frankreich 1940-44", Hans Umbreit, 1968
"The New Order and French economy", Alan S.Milward
"La politique de nazification en Alsace", Lothar Kettenacker

If you have limited time, just try "Histoire de la Seconde Guerre Mondiale",
by Pierre Miquel, for a history of the war by a French Historian. I am
reading it at the moment and it has 150 interesting pages on the Fall of
France.

With even more limited time, try Philippe Masson's "Une Guerre Totale",
another history of WWII. Haven't read it, but it is next.

Arnaud.

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

Date:    Mon, 9 Jan 1995 19:24:18 -0500
From:    Burt Knight <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: HIST: Trivia

USS Eagle, 1784 ts, 10 kn, 90 man crew, WIX 327 is the 'Horst Wessel', Hamburg,
1936
Tovarich is of similar size and crew, not listed in the 1980 Weyer's, is the
'Gorch Focke', also Hamburg

Tovarich was sailing in the 80's because she arrived in Boston Harbour with the
Tall Ships.

BWK

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

Date:    Mon, 9 Jan 1995 16:30:03 -0800
From:    David Alvarez <[email-masked]>
Subject: Nazi Escapees

Robert T. Moore> Another one that sat in the same prison with Reder was
Josef Kammler, the head of the Gestapo in Rome.

Herbert Kappler was the Gestapo chief in Rome from 1939 to June 1944,
although technically he was the police attache at the German embassy.
After the German occupation of Rome he was effectively the police chief
of the city until the German withdrawal.  Part of his job was to run
intelligence operations targeted on the Vatican.  He was responsible for
the execution of 335 Italians at the Ardeatine Caves in reprisal for a
bomb attack on a German column in Rome which left 33 Germans dead.

David Alvarez

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

Date:    Mon, 9 Jan 1995 17:47:37 EST
From:    Chris Morton <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: TRIVIA: Schindler's List

"Robert T. Moore" <nshore!ncoast!usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu!PCAD-ML.ACTX.EDU!RTMOORE> writes:

> Hello, Christopher!

Not MY questions actually, someone elses.  I hope he appreciates your
assistance.

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

Date:    Mon, 9 Jan 1995 20:26:05 -0500
From:    Thomas Pike <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Russian Aircraft Museum

John Sloan:

Keep up the good work with your tours!

Thomas Pike  (MCS&SMH)

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

Date:    Mon, 9 Jan 1995 19:39:00 EST
From:    mc killop <[email-masked]>
Subject: [INF] USAAF 10 JAN 45

COMBAT CHRONOLOGY OF THE US ARMY AIR FORCES
WEDNESDAY, 10 JANUARY 1945 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
  UC-64, Noorduyn Norseman
  L-5, Stinson Sentinel
  Mosquito, deHavilland
  P-38, Lockheed Lightning
  P-40, Curtiss
  P-47, Republic Thunderbolt
  P-51, North American Mustang

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

AMERICAN THEATER OF OPERATIONS

  ALASKA (Eleventh Air Force): 3 B-24s on an armed photo mission bomb and
photograph Kurabu Airfield on Paramushiru Island, Kurile Islands, scoring
hits on the runway.

  CARIBBEAN (Sixth Air Force): The 32d Fighter Squadron, XXVI Fighter
Command, moves from France Field to Howard Field, Canal Zone with P-39s.

CHINA-BURMA-INDIA THEATER

  CHINA THEATER (Fourteenth Air Force): 2 B-24s bomb the Cap-Saint-Jacques
area of French Indochina. In Burma, 50+ P-51s, P-40s, and P-38s pound various
targets of opportunity throughout the Wanling area and 6 P-40s hit targets of
opportunity in the Muse area. The 25th Fighter Squadron, 51st Fighter Group,
based at Yunnani with P-51s, sends a detachment to operate from Leangshan,
China.

  INDIA-BURMA THEATER (Tenth Air Force): In Burma, 75 fighter-bombers pound
troop concentrations, supplies, tanks, artillery, and buildings at Kawnglang,
Nampa-chi, Man Namman, Pangkai, Mong Yai, Namhsan, Namyao, Se-ping, Panghai,
and in the Hosi area; 17 P-47s knock out a bridge, damage another at Bawgyo
and 2 others at Ho-kho; 8 P-47s support ground forces in the Si-U battle
sector; 8 others hit supplies and ferry crossing at Ta-mawngtawn. 472
transport sorties are flown to forward bases and frontline areas. The 165th
Liaison Squadron (Commando), 1st Air Commando Group, moves from Kawlin to
Ye-U, Burma with UC-64s and L-5s (a detachment is operating from Inbaung,
Burma).

EUROPEAN THEATER OF OPERATIONS (ETO)

  STRATEGIC OPERATIONS (Eighth Air Force): Mission 789: 1,119 bombers and 362
fighters are dispatched to attack airfields, rail targets and bridges in
Germany; most attacks are made using PFF methods; they claim 3-0-0 Luftwaffe
aircraft; 10 bombers and 2 fighters are lost:
  1. 429 B-17s are dispatched to hit the Rodenkirchen (31) and Deutz (10)
highway bridges at Cologne, the South (34) and Hohenzollern (52) rail bridges
at Cologne and the marshalling yard at Karlsruhe (105); 20 hit the secondary
target, the Gereon marshalling yard at Cologne; targets of opportunity are
bridges at Duisburg (11) and Oberkassel (21), Dusseldorf (28) and other (33);
some targets hit visually but most by PFF methods; 5 B-17s are lost, 5
damaged beyond repair and 199 damaged; 10 airmen are KIA, 6 WIA and 48 MIA.
  2. 233 B-24s are dispatched to hit highway bridges at Steinbruck (23),
Schonberg (70), Weweler (60) and Dasburg (20); 1 hits Prum, a target of
opportunity; targets are hit using Gee-H; 2 B-24s are damaged beyond repair
and 7 damaged; 3 airmen are WIA.
  3. 458 B-17s are sent to hit the Hangelar Airfield at Bonn (63); Odendorf
Airfield at Euskirchen (98), Osteheim Airfield at Cologne (83) and Gymnich
Airfield (52); 43 hit the secondary target, the marshalling yard at Cologne;
targets of opportunity are the marshalling yards at Euskirchen (8), Belecke
(8) and Duren (12) and other (26); Gee-H is used in bombing with some visual
sightings; 5 B-17s are lost, 11 damaged beyond repair and 140 damaged; 5
airmen are KIA, 15 WIA and 52 MIA.
  4. The bombers are escorted by 137 of 152 P-51s; 6 P-51s are lost and 1
damaged beyond repair.
  5. 123 P-47s and P-51s make a freelance sweep to cover the bombers; they
claim 1-0-0 aircraft in the air and 2-0-0 on the ground; 1 P-47 and 1 P-51 is
lost (1 pilot MIA); 4 P-51s are damaged beyond repair.
  6. 13 of 15 P-51s dive bomb the marshalling yard at Neustadt without loss.
  7. 6 of 8 P-51s escort 2 Mosquitoes on a photo reconnaissance of the Brux,
Czechoslovakia area.
  8. 28 of 32 P-51s fly a scouting mission.

  TACTICAL OPERATIONS (Ninth Air Force): 30+ B-26s sent against
communications center and road bridge abort due to weather; the XIX Tactical
Air Command escorts the B-26s, flies patrols, attacks bridges and other
targets and supports the US III, VIII, XII, and XX Corps in the Saint-Hubert,
Belgium-Bastogne, Belgium-Wiltz, Luxembourg area, in the Diekirch and
Echternach area of Luxembourg and points to the SE.

MEDITERRANEAN THEATER OF OPERATIONS (MTO)

  STRATEGIC OPERATIONS (Fifteenth Air Force): Weather restricts operations to
photo and weather reconnaissance missions. The 27th and 71st Fighter
Squadrons, 1st Fighter Group, based at Salsola Airfield with P-38s, send a
detachment to operate from Vincenzo Airfield, Italy.

  TACTICAL OPERATIONS (Twelfth Air Force): In Italy, weather restricts
operations but fighter-bombers effectively attack communications and supply
dumps in the C and N Po Valley; the strikes are concentrated in the N and
around Piacenza, and score nearly 50 rail cuts, along with destruction of 80
motor transports and several trains; fuel and ammunition dumps in the Milan
area are bombed and a 400-foot (122 m) naval vessel at Venice is destroyed;
HQ 64th Troop Carrier Group and the 16th and 17th Troop Carrier Squadrons
move from Ciampino to Rosignano Airfield with C-47s.

PACIFIC OCEAN AREA (POA)

  AAFPOA (Seventh Air Force): 30 Guam Island-based B-24s operating in 2
separate formations, bomb airfields on Iwo Jima Island; 2 other B-24s, on
armed reconnaissance, hit airfield on Woleai Atoll, Caroline Islands. Iwo
Jima airfields are hit again on the night of 10/11 Jan by B-24s flying
snooper missions from Guam.

SOUTHWEST PACIFIC AREA [SWPA, Far East Air Force (FEAF)]: On Luzon Island,
Philippine Islands, B-24s bomb Grace Park Airfield and warehouse area near
Manila, A-20s and fighter-bombers pound trucks, trains, railroad yards,
railroads, and highways over wide areas of N and S Luzon, and bomb Vigan and
Laoag Airfields. About 60 P-40s bomb and strafe the Galela area on Halmahera
Island. B-25s and P-38s hit Kendari Airfield on Celebes Island. Other B-25s,
A-20s, and fighter-bombers, operating in smaller forces, hit numerous
shipping and communications targets, airfields, and other targets throughout
the Philippine Islands. HQ XIII Fighter Command moves from Sansapor, New
Guinea to Leyte Island. The detachment of the 12th Fighter Squadron, 18th
Fighter Group, operating from Morotai Island with P-38s, returns to base at
Sansapor, New Guinea.

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

10/0139Z JAN

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

End of WWII-L Digest - 8 Jan 1995 to 9 Jan 1995
***********************************************