Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Misc. Forums > Aviation History and Nostalgia
Reload this Page >

Battle of Britain 3 Days To Save The UK

Aviation History and Nostalgia Whether working in aviation, retired, wannabee or just plain fascinated this forum welcomes all with a love of flight.

Battle of Britain 3 Days To Save The UK

Old 1st Oct 2021, 07:14
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Australia
Age: 55
Posts: 2,049
Battle of Britain 3 Days To Save The UK

SBS Australia Saturday Night 0835 pm, second part of this 3 part series.

Watched a few minutes of the first episode, from last week and so far so good.
Stationair8 is offline  
Old 1st Oct 2021, 21:02
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: 11 GROUP
Age: 74
Posts: 1,159
Saving Britain

Originally Posted by Stationair8 View Post
SBS Australia Saturday Night 0835 pm, second part of this 3 part series.

Watched a few minutes of the first episode, from last week and so far so good.
What saved Britain (and eventually Europe) was Churchills ability to convince the Full and war cabinet that we should fight on after Dunkirk. He did this on May 28th 1940 in a brilliant move that saw a major decision made not to sue for peace with Hitler. Dowding had already saved precious aircraft to defend the Country and had faith in our air defence system (the only one in the world) That is what saved Britain.
POBJOY is offline  
Old 1st Oct 2021, 21:44
  #3 (permalink)  
JetBlast member 2005.
JetBlast member 2006.
Banned 2007
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: The US of A - sort of
Posts: 4
I've often wondered if Chamberlain knew exactly what he was doing when he held up the piece of paper. That he knew it would be the end of not only his political career, but also his reputation, but that he was prepared to pay that price in the hope that it would give us enough time to rearm

Had we not had that extra sliver of time, would Dowding have had anything to save?
Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaargh! is offline  
Old 1st Oct 2021, 22:07
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: london
Posts: 635
Dowding built the air defence system. Regardless of the aircraft Dowding refused to send to France, Beaverbrook was pivotal in diverting resources to fighter production during the BoB.
Fighter Command lost 40% of its strength from early August to the end of August.
Yet the number of aircraft available rose steadily from late June until late October , actually peaking at the end of August.
rolling20 is offline  
Old 2nd Oct 2021, 01:23
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Róisín Dubh
Posts: 1,274
Hitler saved Britain by various means. A) After the defeat of France he ordered research into expensive new projects like the ME262 be ceased. B) He ordered advancement in bomber development (such as the Condor) be ceased. C) he genuinely wanted to spare Britain as he saw them as a future ally against communism.

Hitler and Churchill were both genocidal monsters (no arguments that Hitler was worse). The Victor got to write his own epitaph unsurprisingly.
Una Due Tfc is offline  
Old 2nd Oct 2021, 02:01
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 773
Hitler saved Britain by various means.
Interesting take on history even if totally incorrect. I think Crazy Adolf was just more obsessed with Russia rather than pleasantly disposed to Britain.

One of the better outcomes of technology and the internet is that I can watch docos like this one on my Ipad while happily engaging in my favourite hobbies.
Lookleft is offline  
Old 2nd Oct 2021, 08:06
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Ferrara
Posts: 3,661
The German Armed forces had no contingency plan for a rapid, opportunistic invasion of the UK. Hitler quite rightly remembered how the French had pulled themselves off the floor in 1914 (and even in 1870) and wanted to be absolutely sure that this time there would be no comeback.

the British had an untested Air defence system but the month or so's breathing space after Dunkirk was just enough to survive- up fighter production and re equip the infantry
Asturias56 is offline  
Old 2nd Oct 2021, 10:54
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: OZ
Posts: 1,033
Aaaaa etc,
Chamberlain knew exactly what he was doing I believe. He well knew that Britain could not possibly go to war and survive at that point, not a hope in hell.
So I totally agree that Chamberlain was a true patriot in that he willingly sacrificed his career and reputation for the good of Britain.
An outstanding politician richly deserving a much better memory than he has these days.
mustafagander is offline  
Old 2nd Oct 2021, 14:02
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Central UK
Posts: 566
Churchill, a "genocidal monster"?

I don't think I've ever read such a ludicrously deluded or simply ridiculous post on this forum!

On which planet did you learn your 'history'?
meleagertoo is offline  
Old 2nd Oct 2021, 14:49
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Róisín Dubh
Posts: 1,274
Originally Posted by meleagertoo View Post
Churchill, a "genocidal monster"?

I don't think I've ever read such a ludicrously deluded or simply ridiculous post on this forum!

On which planet did you learn your 'history'?
Well he opened concentration camps in Kenya in the 50s, in which many thousands of civilians were killed (Obama’s grandfather was a survivor, he had his balls crushed by red hot steel bars). Using concentration camps to wipe out civilian populations based on ethnicity is the definition of genocide, no?

The Bengal famine was deliberately engineered by his government in 43 lets not forget. About 3 million people died in that one.

The man was a colonial bar steward, but thankfully less of a bar steward than the little Austrian chap.

You ask where I learned my history. I ask, genuinely, were you ever taught about British concentration camps in Kenya in the course of your education?

Last edited by Una Due Tfc; 3rd Oct 2021 at 01:36.
Una Due Tfc is offline  
Old 2nd Oct 2021, 16:58
  #11 (permalink)  
JetBlast member 2005.
JetBlast member 2006.
Banned 2007
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: The US of A - sort of
Posts: 4
Originally Posted by Lookleft View Post
I think Crazy Adolf was just more obsessed with Russia rather than pleasantly disposed to Britain.
Always interesting to play Historical What If

I have read that Hitler's ultimate goal was to attack and defeat Russia (or Communism if you prefer) and it seems logical that the first strike would be to the West to secure the rear flank and gain/capture men and materiel. Britain being a Colonial power would possibly have been invited to join in rather than be invaded especially as invasion would be a costly affair. But it would still invaded if necessary. The US was at the time a rather small player on the world stage [1] and if you look at race relations in the thirties and forties you might ask: disregarding the attack on Pearl Harbor, which would have been the more logical side for it to join? ... especially if there was a pact between Germany and Britain [2]

It's easy to look at history through the lens of what we now know, and equally easy to forget that in 1939 things could have gone either way. There were after all quite a few British people who thought we should side with Germany

[1] Was WWII the best thing that ever happened to America?
[2] It is ironic that the US play a significant role in the defeat of Nazism with a segregated military
Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaargh! is offline  
Old 3rd Oct 2021, 04:12
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 773
Using concentration camps to wipe out civilian populations based on ethnicity is the definition of genocide, no?
I like how you answered your own question correctly. One definition of genocide is:
the deliberate killing of a large number of people from a particular nation or ethnic group with the aim of destroying that nation or group.
the problem now is the definition changes according to who is interpreting the legal frame work.

You ask where I learned my history. I ask, genuinely, were you ever taught about British concentration camps in Kenya in the course of your education?
Indeed the question about where you learnt your history needs to be asked because at its most basic you are getting it wrong. It may surprise you to learn that the first British concentration camps, in fact the first concentration camps were in South Africa during the Boer War. Rounding up the civilian population was an effective , if very cruel, way of suppressing the Boer insurgency/freedom fighters. Not genocide but in today's world possibly a war crime. What the Brits were doing in Kenya, which you either didn't know or failed to mention, was suppressing quite a vicious guerilla uprising by groups wanting independence. So the concentration camps would have been in response to that and which had proved effective in SA. The Brits had also suppressed a communist insurgency in Malaya so they had a proven strategy of dealing with in country uprisings. Their response was a military and security response but in no way does it meet the genocide definition. Crazy Adolf set about completely obliterating European Jewry as an aside to his military ambitions. To say the British actions are the same is simply incorrect.
Lookleft is offline  
Old 3rd Oct 2021, 05:53
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: South East of Penge
Age: 71
Posts: 1,593
It's the emotional inference from the term "Concentration" that aggravates the issue, by confounding the understanding with that of actual Extermination Camps.
Haraka is online now  
Old 3rd Oct 2021, 07:33
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Farnham, Surrey
Posts: 1,295
Originally Posted by rolling20 View Post
Dowding built the air defence system. Regardless of the aircraft Dowding refused to send to France, Beaverbrook was pivotal in diverting resources to fighter production during the BoB.
Fighter Command lost 40% of its strength from early August to the end of August.
Yet the number of aircraft available rose steadily from late June until late October , actually peaking at the end of August.
Lots of people contributed to the Battle of Britain in lots of different ways. One of the points made by Derek Wood in the meticulously researched "Narrow Margin" is the way British industry comprehensively out-performed German industry from the mid 1930s to the end of the war (which is a controversial finding given the traditional views about German industrial efficiency). They produced larger numbers of aircraft (and tanks, and ships, and guns), they proved more resilient to attack by restoring production more quickly after bombing, and they had a far more effective support & repair organisation which gathered damaged aircraft & components to build usable ones from the damaged parts to supplement new production. This meant that Britain was never at any time short of aircraft - just pilots. In contrast the Luftwaffe often suffered AOGs due to basic lack of spares - the industrial focus was on building new types rather than sustaining the extant operational capability.

PDR
PDR1 is offline  
Old 3rd Oct 2021, 07:45
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Ferrara
Posts: 3,661
The problem with Chamberlain isn't so much 1938 but 1939-40 when he proved incapable of fighting a war - the Norway Campaign was just the last in a series of really awful actions of his Govt. It was only after he was replaced that fighter production REALLY took off
Asturias56 is offline  
Old 3rd Oct 2021, 09:06
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: 11 GROUP
Age: 74
Posts: 1,159
Being prepared

The main difference in our defeat in France and our success in defending the homeland was the RAF had a 'system' for air defence albeit untested. As this was unique in world wide terms it was also a fairy well kept secret. The fact that the system worked (together with the Observer Corps back up) gave us that opportunity to deploy our limited forces to the best advantage. The effect on the Luftwaffe taking real casualties (and loosing crews) must have been a shock to their morale after having such a quick run through France. Had Russia not received the help we could provide after the BoB (we eventually sent them over 2,000 hurricanes) then their situation may not have prevailed.
POBJOY is offline  
Old 3rd Oct 2021, 11:53
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Róisín Dubh
Posts: 1,274
Originally Posted by Lookleft View Post
Indeed the question about where you learnt your history needs to be asked because at its most basic you are getting it wrong. It may surprise you to learn that the first British concentration camps, in fact the first concentration camps were in South Africa during the Boer War. Rounding up the civilian population was an effective , if very cruel, way of suppressing the Boer insurgency/freedom fighters. Not genocide but in today's world possibly a war crime. What the Brits were doing in Kenya, which you either didn't know or failed to mention, was suppressing quite a vicious guerilla uprising by groups wanting independence. So the concentration camps would have been in response to that and which had proved effective in SA. The Brits had also suppressed a communist insurgency in Malaya so they had a proven strategy of dealing with in country uprisings. Their response was a military and security response but in no way does it meet the genocide definition. Crazy Adolf set about completely obliterating European Jewry as an aside to his military ambitions. To say the British actions are the same is simply incorrect.
Ah yes, suppressing a vicious guerilla war...for their independence. Just like using the black and tans in Ireland or famine as a weapon in India, kill those pesky civilians and take the heat out of the whole situation. It worked for centuries but then came along print media and radio and suddenly it did more harm than good (ie increased anti Empire feeling and support for independence).

The estimates vary wildly on the number of Kenyan civilians killed in those camps, from about 30k to well over 100k. The facts are the civilian population of a particular ethnic group (Mau Mau) were systematically rounded up, tortured, starved or just plain murdered with the intention of making them disappear or stop fighting for their independence, whichever occurred first (the women tended to have broken glass bottles shoved up their orifices for example, both as a form of torture and to make them infertile, again to wipe out the ethnic group). It only stopped when, as usual for the 20th century, the failing empire realised they had gone too far, could no longer suppress the insurrection and needed to get the hell out of Dodge fast (whilst burning as much incriminating documentation as possible).

Last edited by Una Due Tfc; 3rd Oct 2021 at 12:08.
Una Due Tfc is offline  
Old 3rd Oct 2021, 13:01
  #18 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: South East of Penge
Age: 71
Posts: 1,593
"a particular ethnic group (Mau Mau)"
Really?

( A bit like calling the I.R.A. "a particular ethnic group")
Haraka is online now  
Old 4th Oct 2021, 04:34
  #19 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Australia
Posts: 57
Agreed Haraka, the main tribe making up the Mau Mau were the Kikuyu, although many other tribal groups participated in the Mau Mau.
Ndegi is offline  
Old 4th Oct 2021, 08:09
  #20 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Ferrara
Posts: 3,661
"the way British industry comprehensively out-performed German industry from the mid 1930s to the end of the war "

The Germans weren't on anything like the same war footing as the UK until late '44 and even then Speer could never get Hitler to go for an absolute war economy

The British were ruthless from Day 1, introduced tough rationing, mobilising vast numbers of women and total Govt direction of all aspects of National Life - the Germans were still worrying about drafting servants as late as '43
Asturias56 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.