Bomber Boys- BBC 1.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Lincolnshire
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tiger Tales, both IX and 617 claim to have delivered the sinking bomb. The truth probably is that nobody knows - though associated long-running disputed ownership of the Tirpitz bulkhead was rattling good fun between the two squadrons for many years.
...55573 of them did what they did before dying in the doing of it...
Tonight's programme was, I thought, very reasonably balanced.
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: In the State of Denial
Posts: 1,077
Likes: 0
Received 146 Likes
on
28 Posts
The programme concentrated on Lancasters presumeably because it's the only airworthy bomber & so would make the most interesting television......these programmes are made for the consumption of the general public and so they're pitched at an appropriate level - 'Brother of Obi Wan flies the Lancaster!' - if you want a true historical perspective on Bomber Command then there are better documentaries to watch.
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: England
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The difference is that air superiority over France in 1944 made daylight raids viable. Unescorted daylight raids over Germany were not. That the Beeb peddles the same old anti BC propaganda is par for the course. That the modern RAF does not feel compelled to denounce it is very sad. The only people to unreservedly defend the Bomber Offensive were the veterans themselves. That is not a comment on them. It is a comment on us, who are lucky that 55573 of them did what they did before dying in the doing of it.
You also can't take the 'well the Germans exterminated X million jews so it was warranted' argument, as things simply don't work like that. By that measure, would it have been fair for the allies to imprison and kill 6 million Nazis after the war because they'd done it first?
I can't criticize the actions of the men that did it. They were in the midst of their friends and family being killed, and that detracts from the perspective I have given the priveledge of being able to take having never been involved in it.
So what are you saying Beags, that the RAF should not have killed German civilians, or that it should not have killed so many? How would you have used Bomber Command differently to Harris? That old rogue Speer said that the Bombing Offensive was the equivalent of another front, diverting men and material from the others as well as disrupting the German War Machine. The purpose of fighting a war is to win, victory at all costs. If we haven't got the stomach for it now thank God that our forbears had!
Skittles:
Churchill was by that time morphing into post war politician from war time leader. That he betrayed Harris and BC who had been carrying out the Air Board's Directives is a comment on Churchill not on Harris. Why is Dresden (whose claimed losses in the raid have now shrunk 10-fold) the exception to all the other German cities laid waste? It seems to have been a knee jerk re-action to public opinion by Churchill to denounce it. We should be grateful I suppose that he didn't conduct the entire war on that basis.
The fact that Dresden was razed in 1945 puts end to that perspective. Even the staunch Churchill himself questionned the nature of the attack (admittedly having approved it previously).
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Midlands
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The programme concentrated on Lancasters presumeably because it's the only airworthy bomber & so would make the most interesting television......these programmes are made for the consumption of the general public and so they're pitched at an appropriate level - 'Brother of Obi Wan flies the Lancaster!' - if you want a true historical perspective on Bomber Command then there are better documentaries to watch.
I watched the programme with mounting dismay as "facts" were presented in a disingenuous way, leaving the viewer to draw their own conclusion, which would inevitably be wrong as a result. For example, the "facts" about area bombing would leave someone unaware of the true facts to believe that area bombing arose solely from Arthur Harris, which is not completely correct. Fortunately we did not get the usual spin about Dresden, although the reference to Churchill's now infamous memo did not reveal it had been withdrawn shortly afterwards.
The so called "surgical bomb aiming" is complete rubbish, for a whole host of reasons that anyone who has read even a small selection of books on Bomber Command in WW2 will know, and the comparison with the conditions and technology in WW2 and modern day Afghanistan are mind numbing and appear only to have been invoked simply to reinforce a left-wing perspective that the whole campaign could have concetrated on "Factories". Munitions workers are part of the armed services support - something that was sadly ignored.
The really sad thing is that there were some positives and had there been proper research it would have been potentially a very god programme but the whole thing was spoiled in my opinion by failure to present all of the facts honestly and correctly. The leaving of certain key issues in the air, presumably to allow viewers to draw their own views based on partial truths, and thus perpetuate the usual myths I find deeply offensive to the memories of those who can no longer defend themselves.
All in all yet another lost opportunity to produce an honest and accurate account of happenings which need to be seen against attitudes and conditions 70 years ago rather than against some distorted, disingenuous and completely alien Leftist-focussed agenda of the type now seen daily on the BBC.
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: London
Posts: 2,916
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Any historian will confirm that it was a IX(B) Sqn Lancaster that dropped the bombs that sank it!
Can someone please enlighten me then as to why Sqn Ldr (Retd) Tony Iveson DFC would not be telling the truth??
After all, he is ex 617 Sqn and was on the Tirpitz raid.
Or is this a Sqn rivalry thing .....
After all, he is ex 617 Sqn and was on the Tirpitz raid.
Or is this a Sqn rivalry thing .....
The rot started well before the Tirpitz bit, comparing the bombing of Hamburg with the Nazi Extermination Camps
I was also uncomfortable about the poorly researched and unfair references to Bomber Harris.
these programmes are made for the consumption of the general public and so they're pitched at an appropriate level.
The media obsession with 'celebrities' strikes yet again.
How would you have used Bomber Command differently to Harris?
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 5,197
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Although Harris followed through the city bombing campaign with dogged determination, he did not conceive the idea or have any part in its discussion. The plan to switch targeting priority from precision bombing of specific targets to the area bombing of industrial centres was conceived by Air Ministry planners and supported by Lord Cherwell, Churchill’s Chief Scientific Advisor who justified the policy as the ‘dehousing’ of industrial workers. Area bombing came about as a result of the technical difficulties of precision bombing at night at that time. The policy was endorsed by Churchill and orders to carry it out were formally issued to Bomber Command before Harris (who was in America at the time the policy was decided) had taken up his command.
In fact, Harris himself did not personally believe that city bombing would affect German morale, but he did believe that by destroying German industrial cities, the Germans would eventually be unable to continue waging war.
Harris has also been criticised by his detractors for continuing city bombing when others were pressing him to concentrate on more specific strategic targets such as German oil production at a time later in the war when technical developments had made precision bombing possible. Harris did not believe that bombing specific targets like oil was the quickest way to win the war. However, he did follow his orders and put considerable effort into bombing oil refineries when weather permitted (for instance, in December 1944 and January 1945 Bomber Command dropped twice as many tons of bombs on oil targets as the USAAF). He also continued the bombing offensive against cities. This campaign was supported by Churchill and the War Cabinet until almost the end of the war and culminated in Churchill’s demand that Bomber Command attack Berlin and other large cities in East Germany.
The eastern cities of Chemnitz, Leipzig and Dresden were identified as targets. Bomber Command had not bombed Dresden before, despite the fact that Harris had been authorised to attack the city several months previously. He had become reluctant about the idea as he felt the long distance to Dresden, particularly in winter, would put his crews at unnecessary risk. There was also little information available about the target and its defences. However, when the specific order to bomb Dresden came through via the Air Ministry from the headquarters of General Eisenhower, the overall Allied commander, Harris was obliged to carry it out, although the fact he requested the order in writing reveals his true feelings about the operation.
Both the RAF and USAAF bombed Dresden causing a very high level of destruction and casualties. Later, Churchill issued a memo criticising ‘acts of terror and wanton destruction’ in reference to the attack. The Air Ministry and Harris were stunned by this, as it had been Churchill himself who instigated the raid. Churchill withdrew the memo but it was a sign of things to come.
In fact, Harris himself did not personally believe that city bombing would affect German morale, but he did believe that by destroying German industrial cities, the Germans would eventually be unable to continue waging war.
Harris has also been criticised by his detractors for continuing city bombing when others were pressing him to concentrate on more specific strategic targets such as German oil production at a time later in the war when technical developments had made precision bombing possible. Harris did not believe that bombing specific targets like oil was the quickest way to win the war. However, he did follow his orders and put considerable effort into bombing oil refineries when weather permitted (for instance, in December 1944 and January 1945 Bomber Command dropped twice as many tons of bombs on oil targets as the USAAF). He also continued the bombing offensive against cities. This campaign was supported by Churchill and the War Cabinet until almost the end of the war and culminated in Churchill’s demand that Bomber Command attack Berlin and other large cities in East Germany.
The eastern cities of Chemnitz, Leipzig and Dresden were identified as targets. Bomber Command had not bombed Dresden before, despite the fact that Harris had been authorised to attack the city several months previously. He had become reluctant about the idea as he felt the long distance to Dresden, particularly in winter, would put his crews at unnecessary risk. There was also little information available about the target and its defences. However, when the specific order to bomb Dresden came through via the Air Ministry from the headquarters of General Eisenhower, the overall Allied commander, Harris was obliged to carry it out, although the fact he requested the order in writing reveals his true feelings about the operation.
Both the RAF and USAAF bombed Dresden causing a very high level of destruction and casualties. Later, Churchill issued a memo criticising ‘acts of terror and wanton destruction’ in reference to the attack. The Air Ministry and Harris were stunned by this, as it had been Churchill himself who instigated the raid. Churchill withdrew the memo but it was a sign of things to come.
Excerpt from:Commanders | Bomber Harris
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Middle England
Posts: 546
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, I enjoyed it for what is was, and loved the shots of the Lanc in her natural environment. The programme wasn't produced for the likes of some on here, it was produced for normal individuals...
Having been bombed when I was very young at Yeovil, the bombers came over in broad daylight, Junkers I think. My Dad was manning an AA gun protecting Westlands, I can still remember our house shaking when the house next but one received a direct hit.
So I never really worried about German casualties and I now see Dresden as being a victim of the shock and awe tactics of the time.
So I never really worried about German casualties and I now see Dresden as being a victim of the shock and awe tactics of the time.
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,573
Received 421 Likes
on
222 Posts
The squabbling about "sinking" Tirpitz between the two RAF bomber squadrons always bemused me somewhat. Years before I joined the RAF I had read about the earlier disabling of the ship by midget submarines. This may have been the end of her career in any case, because she may already have been sitting on the bottom before the RAF got involved at all.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: N London
Posts: 120
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I personally enjoyed the program for what it was, as others have said it was not a documentary about the Lancaster.
The only thing which was glossed over, in my opinion, was the first two years of the war i.e before the Lancaster. The bombing was carried out by, as, one poster has said already, Stirlings and Halifax. One aircraft not mentioned at all if my ears did not let me down was the Wellington. It may have only had 2 engines but it did a great job for Bomber Command throughout the war. In fact I believe it was the only bomber built for the duration. The punishment it could take was also legendary, thanks to its structure.
The only thing which was glossed over, in my opinion, was the first two years of the war i.e before the Lancaster. The bombing was carried out by, as, one poster has said already, Stirlings and Halifax. One aircraft not mentioned at all if my ears did not let me down was the Wellington. It may have only had 2 engines but it did a great job for Bomber Command throughout the war. In fact I believe it was the only bomber built for the duration. The punishment it could take was also legendary, thanks to its structure.
Beagle:
For all the scientific aids that BC had at its disposal, it was from start to finish a very blunt instrument. The reason that it bombed cities was because it could find them at night, with luck. Crews survived an average of as little as 7 missions so the more experienced ones that beat that statistic led the others as Pathfinders using Oboe, H2S etc, to mark the target. Even so it was a crude but effective weapon, fit for smashing cities, de-housing and killing the population and hence disrupting war production. It meant at least that on D-Day the Allies could wade ashore unhindered by the Luftwaffe which would otherwise have made a closely run thing a disaster. It is very easy for us these days to suggest that they should have switched targeting, been more precise, been more effective. Harris knew that he had been given a club to wield. He used it as such.
Once H2S was in service, by switching to the bombing of counterforce rather than countervalue targets.
I watched last night with mixed feelings. Although it had a good 'narrative', supported by great imagery, it was also selective, with only one en passant mention of the other 'heavies' (and no mention of their proportionately higher casualty rates). This compares with the Battle of Britain Spitfire myth. Moreover, I was a little disturbed at the moral equivalency of comparing the death camps with the area bombing campaign. After all, it was total War, and as one of the AGs stated, 'they started it!'.
Coincidentally, I was back in the UK last week and picked up a copy of Sir Arthur Harris's 'Bomber Offensive' which he wrote in 1947 (Oxfam - GBP 2.99). It is a cracking read - his description of pre-war and waritme inter-service rivalries would ring true today. He also gives particular attention to the merits of area bombing (well, he would, wouldn't he?) by describing the industrial dislocation that the campaign caused (and backed up by OPRE and the US Strategic Bombing Survey). It cross-references well with the post war interrogations of Speer and Goering, amongst others (see Richard Overy's chilling book 'Interrogations'). One point to recall (again, hardly mentioned last night) was that this was a Combined Bomber Offensive, with the aims and objectives agreed by the US and UK. Having spent time in Germany and researched some of the local aspects of the CBO, I soon learned that the dislocation spread to the remotest parts of the country, due to huge population and industrial displacement - and the concommitant load on the assailed transport infrastructure. I also spoke with one old dear who 'preferred' to be bombed at night by the RAF - as she claimed these raids were more accurate in Upper Bavaria than daytime USAAF raids (supported by the evidence on the round-the-clock raids on Memmingen night-fighter clusters, for example).
Coincidentally, I was back in the UK last week and picked up a copy of Sir Arthur Harris's 'Bomber Offensive' which he wrote in 1947 (Oxfam - GBP 2.99). It is a cracking read - his description of pre-war and waritme inter-service rivalries would ring true today. He also gives particular attention to the merits of area bombing (well, he would, wouldn't he?) by describing the industrial dislocation that the campaign caused (and backed up by OPRE and the US Strategic Bombing Survey). It cross-references well with the post war interrogations of Speer and Goering, amongst others (see Richard Overy's chilling book 'Interrogations'). One point to recall (again, hardly mentioned last night) was that this was a Combined Bomber Offensive, with the aims and objectives agreed by the US and UK. Having spent time in Germany and researched some of the local aspects of the CBO, I soon learned that the dislocation spread to the remotest parts of the country, due to huge population and industrial displacement - and the concommitant load on the assailed transport infrastructure. I also spoke with one old dear who 'preferred' to be bombed at night by the RAF - as she claimed these raids were more accurate in Upper Bavaria than daytime USAAF raids (supported by the evidence on the round-the-clock raids on Memmingen night-fighter clusters, for example).
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: South Coast
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I also enjoyed the programme and the arguments about the morals of bombing in war I will leave to those who feel it will make a difference now - I will oly add that I believe that what was done was done in the belief that it was the way to proceed with what was available.
I think it is shameful however, that it is only now that the crews get recognition for what they did in the countries name. Churchill was wrong to exclude them and no memorial for such a long time is a national disgrace IMHO
I think it is shameful however, that it is only now that the crews get recognition for what they did in the countries name. Churchill was wrong to exclude them and no memorial for such a long time is a national disgrace IMHO
Poltergeist,
I'm with you.
People may debate the rights and wrongs of the bombing campaign with the benefit of 100% hindsight until the cows come home.
However, what needs never to be forgotten are the deeds of young men who went out night after night into peril knowing their chances of survival were minimal. That it has taken so long to honour them, and in particular the 55,573 who perished, is a national scandal. I look forward to the opening of the memorial later this year.
And, by the way, it was IX (B) Sqn that sank the Tirpitz - the "junior squadron" was merely in attendance!
I'm with you.
People may debate the rights and wrongs of the bombing campaign with the benefit of 100% hindsight until the cows come home.
However, what needs never to be forgotten are the deeds of young men who went out night after night into peril knowing their chances of survival were minimal. That it has taken so long to honour them, and in particular the 55,573 who perished, is a national scandal. I look forward to the opening of the memorial later this year.
And, by the way, it was IX (B) Sqn that sank the Tirpitz - the "junior squadron" was merely in attendance!
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 192
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Get real guys. The film was about the McGregors and the people that flew the aircraft, the rest was infill accurate or not.
Was the campaign controversial? - yes
Was Bomber Harris controversial? - Yes
Was the programme controversial (for some)? - Yes
So what.
Re recognition - be grateful, had a monument been built earlier it would probably have been a small plinth somewhere. You now have an f-ing great thing that takes up half of Picadilly right outside the RAF Club - Bomber would be impressed.
PS My late Dad was in Bomber Command during the war and decorated for it. He was not proud of what he did to civilians in any sense and would be horrified at what is being built in London. He would say it should have been built at the National Arboretum.
Was the campaign controversial? - yes
Was Bomber Harris controversial? - Yes
Was the programme controversial (for some)? - Yes
So what.
Re recognition - be grateful, had a monument been built earlier it would probably have been a small plinth somewhere. You now have an f-ing great thing that takes up half of Picadilly right outside the RAF Club - Bomber would be impressed.
PS My late Dad was in Bomber Command during the war and decorated for it. He was not proud of what he did to civilians in any sense and would be horrified at what is being built in London. He would say it should have been built at the National Arboretum.