Who Could Have Won WWII?

[aspqrz]

Originally Posted by RN7

The Battle of Britain occurred in 1940

Indeed it did.

Originally Posted by RN7

Distance from Berlin to London: 933 km
Distance from Berlin to Glasgow: 1,205 km
Distance from Berlin to Cardiff: 1,140 km
Distance from Hamburg to London: 721 km
Distance from Hamburg to Glasgow: 949 km
Distance from Hamburg to Cardiff: 920 km

Heinkel He 177 heavy bomber range 1,540 km.
Arado Ar 234 jet bomber range 1,556 km, maximum speed 742 km/h.

Heinkel He-177: Aka Luftwaffenfeuerzeug ('Luftwaffe Lighter') because, like the B-29, it kept bursting into flame at exactly the most embarrassing moments possible.

Only available after September 42 as a semi-usable aircraft, and only in small numbers (~600 built in the next 20 months, about 30 per month, and from then to August 44, when production ceased, the rate was around ~34 a month ... as a comparison, ~7300 Lancasters were produced from 1941, and ~11400 Wellingtons from 1936, and ~6100 Halifaxes from 1940.

Arado Ar-234: Only 210 produced, and only operational from September 1944. They were also hangar queens ... 'The Jumo 004 engines were always the real problem; they suffered constant flameouts and required overhaul or replacement after about 10 hours of operation.'

Why? The problem with the Nazi jet engine program is well known - lack of tungsten. Something they could. not. get.

And, oh. deer. The actual operational radius (the 'there and back' range for non-suicide non-one way missions) for the Ar-234 was 800 klicks, not ~1500 (that's the one way suicide mission range).

The Commonwealth managed to produce 26,000+ bombers to the piddling 1000 you think are so great.

Originally Posted by RN7

The principle escort fighter for Allied bombing raids on Germany was the P-51 Mustang, an American aircraft.

Which wasn't worth spit until it was fitted with BRITISH RR Merlin engines.

Originally Posted by RN7

The He 219 night fighter had a range of 1,540 km.
The Bf110F-4/G-4 night fighter had a range of 2,410 km.
The Me-262 jet fighter which was used as a day and night fighter had a range of 1,050 km which was superior to a de Havilland Mosquito F Mk. II and about the same as a Hawker Tempest V without drop tanks but a lot faster.

HE-219: Only 300 built, from mid 43. Mincemeat during the daytime.
Bfe-110: ROTFL! A worthless aircraft except as a Night Fighter ... where, quite properly, it remained over Germany.
Me-262: Operational from April 44, ~1400 produced. Another hangar queen ... for the same reason. Worse, in fact, did you know that the Jumo engines had a tendency to, without any warning whatsoever, catastrophically self destruct and shed turbine blades ... which is why they were mounted under the wings (to provide some protection for the pilot) ... and they were, like the jets in the Arados, good for about 10-12 hours before needing a complete rebuild, then another 10-12 hours before they were junked ... if, of course, they didn't catastrophically fail first.

Bf-109: Rather more common than any of the above. Operational Radius = 850 klicks.
Fw-190: Again, more common than any of the above. Operational Radius = ~835 klicks.

Operational Radius = This is the 'there and back again' range ... half the maximum combat range, in effect ... and this is the actual maximum escort range. Practically, escort range will be much much less than half the operational radius because, oh, y'know, there's an actual need to have fuel to fight off those attacking RAF fighters?

The Brits produced ~132,000 aircraft, a large proportion of which were complex multi-engine types. Canada produced another ~16000.

The Russians built ~158,000.

Germany built ~120,000 and the Italians ~18,000. Mostly simpler single engine types.

And British jet engines didn't catastrophically fail or need to be junked after 20 flight hours.

So your point is, what, exactly?

Phil

[RN7]

Originally Posted by aspqrz

Heinkel He-177: Aka Luftwaffenfeuerzeug ('Luftwaffe Lighter') because, like the B-29, it kept bursting into flame at exactly the most embarrassing moments possible.

Sorry but did you not state " The UK had large underground factory complexes for all sorts of things and, indeed, much of their industry was actually completely beyond the range of German bombers and more was beyond the range of unescorted German bombers (aka 'sitting ducks')".

The He-177 was available despite its limitations, and it could hit any part of the UK. Unlike the USAAC and RAF who were focused on developing strategic air power, the Luftwaffe was primarily a tactical force used to support the Wehrmacht and remained one due to occupying most of Europe in the early war and the later necessities of the Eastern front. Also could British bombers have attacked Japan like the B-29?

Originally Posted by aspqrz

Only available after September 42 as a semi-usable aircraft, and only in small numbers (~600 built in the next 20 months, about 30 per month, and from then to August 44, when production ceased, the rate was around ~34 a month ... as a comparison, ~7300 Lancasters were produced from 1941, and ~11400 Wellingtons from 1936, and ~6100 Halifaxes from 1940.

But still available and were are talking about the real war not a war between the British Commonwealth (with or without the USSR) against Germany without American involvement. Also the Halifax was not without its critics and the Wellington was not a heavy bomber. The Wellington was a twin engine medium bomber with good range but very low ceiling height, and the Germans also produced nearly 27,000 medium bombers in various guises.

Originally Posted by aspqrz

Arado Ar-234: Only 210 produced, and only operational from September 1944. They were also hangar queens ... 'The Jumo 004 engines were always the real problem; they suffered constant flameouts and required overhaul or replacement after about 10 hours of operation.'.

But it still existed and it was almost impossible to intercept and showed the potential that Germany had to produce relevant aircraft in the real world and a hypothetical war.

Originally Posted by aspqrz

Why? The problem with the Nazi jet engine program is well known - lack of tungsten. Something they could. not. get.

Although they did get some from supposedly neutral Portugal and Spain.

Originally Posted by aspqrz

And, oh. deer. The actual operational radius (the 'there and back' range for non-suicide non-one way missions) for the Ar-234 was 800 klicks, not ~1500 (that's the one way suicide mission range).

What was the operational range from occupied northern France and the Low Countries to British industrial centres? Also is there some reason why you feel that you have to lecture people about military terms or is it that you just feel that you have a monopoly on knowledge?

Originally Posted by aspqrz

The Commonwealth managed to produce 26,000+ bombers to the piddling 1000 you think are so great.

The UK actually produced 34,689 bombers of all types, plus another 3,967 reconnaissance aircraft. The German produced 18,235 bombers of all types plus 12,539 ground attack aircraft and 6,299 reconnaissance aircraft.

Originally Posted by aspqrz

Which wasn't worth spit until it was fitted with BRITISH RR Merlin engines.

A well known fact and did the RAF use the Mustang to escort its bombers on raids against Germany?

Originally Posted by aspqrz

HE-219: Only 300 built, from mid 43. Mincemeat during the daytime.

Which is why the Luftwaffe used than at night like RAF night fighters.

Originally Posted by aspqrz

Bfe-110: ROTFL! A worthless aircraft except as a Night Fighter ... where, quite properly, it remained over Germany.

But still available in large numbers and it was considered a potent night fighter. Its weaponry could cripple or destroy any Allied bomber in seconds and was capable of wreaking immense destruction, but it was vulnerable to Allied escort fighters. It was partially replaced by the better Me-210 and Me-410.

Originally Posted by aspqrz

Me-262: Operational from April 44, ~1400 produced. Another hangar queen ... for the same reason. Worse, in fact, did you know that the Jumo engines had a tendency to, without any warning whatsoever, catastrophically self destruct and shed turbine blades ... which is why they were mounted under the wings (to provide some protection for the pilot) ... and they were, like the jets in the Arados, good for about 10-12 hours before needing a complete rebuild, then another 10-12 hours before they were junked ... if, of course, they didn't catastrophically fail first..

Well the Jumo 004 was the world's first turbojet jet engine that was placed in production and operationally used so you can't expect it to have been perfect. And a lot of its flaws were to do with the scarcity or raw materials and the design that had to take into account the shortages of strategic materials. Because of the lower quality steels and alloys available the Jumo 004 had a service life of between 10-25 hours, although maybe twice that in the hands of skilled pilot who knew the limitations of the power plant. That incidentally is more than the service life of modern Chinese built knock offs of Russian jet engines. At the end of the war Germany was building 1,500 Jumo 004 a month and it was considered possible that they could build up to a 100,000 a year by mid-1946. Also the Me-262 was still a very potent and versatile fighter aircraft was it not?

Originally Posted by aspqrz

Bf-109: Rather more common than any of the above. Operational Radius = 850 klicks.
Fw-190: Again, more common than any of the above. Operational Radius = ~835 klicks..

Well if we are talking about daylight German bombing raids from occupied France and the Low Countries then we can use a whole load of different types of German fighters including the Me-262 than can reach Britain.

Originally Posted by aspqrz

Operational Radius = This is the 'there and back again' range ... half the maximum combat range, in effect ... and this is the actual maximum escort range. Practically, escort range will be much much less than half the operational radius because, oh, y'know, there's an actual need to have fuel to fight off those attacking RAF fighters?.

Why the lecture again? What is the operational combat radius from any number of points along the coast of occupied Europe to British industrial centres? And where did Britain gets its fuel from?

Originally Posted by aspqrz

The Brits produced ~132,000 aircraft, a large proportion of which were complex multi-engine types. Canada produced another ~16000.?

The Russians built ~158,000.

Germany built ~120,000 and the Italians ~18,000. Mostly simpler single engine types..

Soviet Union
100,636: Fighters and Ground-Attack Aircraft
021,116: Bombers of all type

Britain
49,422: Fighters and Ground-Attack Aircraft
34,689: Bombers of all type

Germany
068,266: Fighters and Ground-Attack Aircraft
018,235: Bombers of all type

Incidentally in 1944 Germany produced nearly as many fighters as Britain and Russia combined (26,326 versus 28,643)

Originally Posted by aspqrz

And British jet engines didn't catastrophically fail or need to be junked after 20 flight hours.?

But British industry had not the same constraints placed on it through material shortages as Germany and had the availability of American resources and technology

Originally Posted by aspqrz

So your point is, what, exactly?

You know I just dunno what to make of you.

[aspqrz]

Quote:
Originally Posted by*aspqrz*
Heinkel He-177:*Aka*Luftwaffenfeuerzeug*('Luftwaffe Lighter') because, like the B-29, it kept bursting into flame at exactly the most embarrassing moments possible.

Originally posted by RN7
Sorry but did you not state " The UK had large underground factory complexes for all sorts of things and, indeed, much of their industry was actually completely beyond the range of German bombers and more was beyond the range of unescorted German bombers (aka 'sitting ducks')".

Indeed I did.

However, I fail to what that specific claim has to do with whether the He-177 was a piece of crap or not. And, indeed, I am sure everyone following this thread is as mystified by the non-connection as I am.

Because, of course, there is no connection.

Originally posted by RN7
The He-177 was available despite its limitations, and it could hit any part of the UK. Unlike the USAAC and RAF who were focused on developing strategic air power, the Luftwaffe was primarily a tactical force used to support the Wehrmacht and remained one due to occupying most of Europe in the early war and the later necessities of the Eastern front. Also could British bombers have attacked Japan like the B-29?*

And your point is what, exactly? That a pathetic failure as a bomber that was produced in tiny numbers late in the war existed. Sure. It did.

He-111: Combat Radius with Bombload (4400 kg), ~600 klicks.
Ju-88: Combat Radius with Bombload (2100 kg), ~832 klicks.
Do-17: Combat Radius with Bombload (1000 kg), ~660 klicks.

These were the actual 'bombers' (for want of a better term) the Luftwaffe had. None had the range needed. As I said. Your attempts to bring in furphies like the disastrous failure that was the He-177 and the Ar-234 which, despite your claims, did not have the required range, notwithstanding.

Note that they all fail to have the range to reach all of the UK.

Originally Posted by*aspqrz*
Arado Ar-234:*Only 210 produced, and only operational from September 1944. They were also hangar queens ...*'The Jumo 004 engines were always the real problem; they suffered constant flameouts and required overhaul or replacement*after about 10 hours of operation.'

Posted by RN7
But it still existed and it was almost impossible to intercept and showed the potential that Germany had to produce relevant aircraft in the real world and a hypothetical war.

It existed as a failure. It existed so late in the war as to be irrelevant.

And, most importantly of all, and I note you carefully snipped this pertinent fact from your reply, it did not have the range that you claimed.

It could not reach the whole of the UK.

Originally Posted by*aspqrz*
Why? The problem with the Nazi jet engine program is well known - lack of tungsten. Something they could. not. get.

Originally posted by RN7
Although they did get some from supposedly neutral Portugal and Spain.

Nowhere near enough. The UK bought almost all of it up, pricing Germany out of the market. Lack of Tungsten does not equal no Tungsten.

Something you would no doubt be aware of if you have done any research are the following facts ...

* The Squeeze Bore AT gun production was ended and widespread use also ceased as early as 1942 because the barrel and ammo required tungsten.

* Production of Tungsten cored AT ammo ceased around 1942 for the same reason

* The specific reason was (see Tooze, "Wages of Destruction") that Germany did not have enough even for industrial use (it was required for high speed machine tools vital for producing a lot of stuff like, oh, Tanks, Artillery, Smallarms, Submarines, Aircraft etc) and stockpiles were declining faster than the limited amounts smuggled in from Portugal and Spain could replace.

In any case, it explains the inconvenient fact that German Jet aircraft were ineffective toys in a strategic and operational sense (if not an immediate tactical sense) due to their pathetic engines ... and were always going to remain so.

Quote:
Originally Posted by*aspqrz*
And, oh. deer. The actual*operational radius*(the 'there and back' range for non-suicide non-one way missions) for the Ar-234 was*800 klicks, not ~1500 (that's the one way suicide mission range).

Originally posted by RN7
What was the operational range from occupied northern France and the Low Countries to British industrial centres?

Um. Logical error here. Operational Range does not change according to where an aircraft is based ... it is fixed. It remains 800 klicks regardless of whether it is based in Berlin, or Paris, or Boulogne.

And the Ar-234 didn't have the range you claimed.

Which I note you do not admit was an error on your part.

Originally posted by RN7
Also is there some reason why you feel that you have to lecture people about military terms or is it that you just feel that you have a monopoly on knowledge?*

In this specific instance I was merely pointing out, to you, that the figure you gave was for maximum one way range rather than operational radius. And, since you made the mistake, I felt it wise to explain what operational radius was and how it differs from maximum range.

I note that you still don't admit that your claim was wrong.

Originally Posted by*aspqrz*
Which wasn't worth spit until it was fitted with BRITISH RR Merlin engines.

Originally posted by RN7
A well known fact and did the RAF use the Mustang to escort its bombers on raids against Germany?

The Commonwealth Airforces mainly made night attacks against Germany. Overwhelmingly. They were not normally escorted for the obvious reason that escorts such as the USAAF required for its daylight precisionless bombing attacks were not needed because of, well, the darkness.

Did the Commonwealth Airforces in the UK use American aircraft? Sure. They bought a lot before Pearl Harbour and a lot after.

Did they use the RR Merlin engined Mustang. Yep.

So what?

The premise is that the Commonwealth can win the war without active US involvement, not that the US magically falls off the face of the earth.

Originally posted by RN7
Incidentally in 1944 Germany produced nearly as many fighters as Britain and Russia combined (26,326 versus 28,643)

Nope. All German late war production figures are heavily doctored by Speer. He deliberately double counted, counted remanufactured or repaired wrecked airframes as new production, included the last week of the previous month's production and the first week of the next month's production for a given month's production routinely (double counting again) ... as is detailed in a number of works on the German War Economy (see the work by Tooze mentioned above).

His deliberate obfuscation of records was so thorough that, though we know he was doing it and we know the scale of what he was doing, we cannot work out how much of the claimed production was real and how much was a lie. We just know that the figures for 44-45 are so tainted as to be close to worthless.

Originally Posted by*aspqrz*
And British jet engines didn't catastrophically fail or need to be junked after 20 flight hours.

Originally posted by RN7
But British industry had not the same constraints placed on it through material shortages as Germany and had the availability of American resources and technology*

And would continue to have even if the US did not actively enter the war. They would have bought it, and the US would have sold it, as it did before Pearl Harbour.

It is becoming increasingly clear that your knowledge of the war effort by all parties involved in WW2 is ... generously ... somewhat deficient ...

But feel free to continue to dig a deeper hole for yourself.

Phil

[RN7]

Originally Posted by aspqrz

Indeed I did.

However, I fail to what that specific claim has to do with whether the He-177 was a piece of crap or not. And, indeed, I am sure everyone following this thread is as mystified by the non-connection as I am.

Because, of course, there is no connection.

Well I think you are the only one who has claimed that. And if you can't see the connection with stating that British industry is beyond the range of German bombers, and yet then we have the He-177 with a combat radius of 1,540 km which can carry 6,000kg of ordinance internally and another 7,200 kg externally then I don't know what that says about your train of thought.

You know they were used over Britain in Operation Steinbock in 1944 which was a failure. But from the most easily accessible source "wikipedia" the tactics used by the He-177 pilots allowed for higher speed and constant change of altitude which made interceptions difficult, increasing the survivability of the aircraft but decreased accuracy. With an average loss rate of 60% for all types of bomber used in Operation Steinbock, the He 177's loss rate below 10% made them the most survivable bomber in the campaign.

Originally Posted by aspqrz

And your point is what, exactly? That a pathetic failure as a bomber that was produced in tiny numbers late in the war existed. Sure. It did.

Well the point would be that the US and Britain concentrated on developing long ranged bombers from the early stages of the war because of the fact that Germany overran most of Europe, and to strike Germany by air they needed to. The Germans hadn't that priority in the early stages of the war, although it later proved a misguided strategy. However with no US involvement in the war would British bombing of Germany have been that successful, and of course there would have been no escort fighters for daylight bombers. Would in this scenario have Germany had time to develop long ranged bombers?

Originally Posted by aspqrz

He-111: Combat Radius with Bombload (4400 kg), ~600 klicks.
Ju-88: Combat Radius with Bombload (2100 kg), ~832 klicks.
Do-17: Combat Radius with Bombload (1000 kg), ~660 klicks.

These were the actual 'bombers' (for want of a better term) the Luftwaffe had. None had the range needed. As I said. Your attempts to bring in furphies like the disastrous failure that was the He-177 and the Ar-234 which, despite your claims, did not have the required range, notwithstanding.

Note that they all fail to have the range to reach all of the UK.

He-111: Combat radius 1,200 km with a bombload (2,000 kg), less with heavier bombload
JU-88A: Combat radius 1,046 km with a bombload (2,000 kg), less with heavier bombload
Do-17: Combat radius 1,160 km with a bombload (500 kg), less with heavier bombload

Not heavy bombers granted but is a bomb is a bomb and Germany had a lot of these aircraft. What would the operational range of German bombers be to British industrial centres of from any of the Luftwaffe bases in occupied France and the Netherlands?

http://www.ww2.dk/Airfields%20-%20Netherlands.pdf
http://www.ww2.dk/Airfields%20-%20France.pdf

And Germany was also developing the Do 317, He-274 and Ju-290/390 at the end of the war. The technical merits of these aircraft may have been unproven or debatable but the intent was there, and in a scenario were the British Commonwealth is at war with Germany without American resources they may have been built.

Originally Posted by aspqrz

It existed as a failure. It existed so late in the war as to be irrelevant.

And, most importantly of all, and I note you carefully snipped this pertinent fact from your reply, it did not have the range that you claimed.

It could not reach the whole of the UK.

What exactly did I snip. If you mean the range of the Arado Ar 234? Then its combat radius was 1,100 km with a bombload of (1,500 kg).

Originally Posted by aspqrz

Nowhere near enough. The UK bought almost all of it up, pricing Germany out of the market. Lack of Tungsten does not equal no Tungsten.

Something you would no doubt be aware of if you have done any research are the following facts ...

* The Squeeze Bore AT gun production was ended and widespread use also ceased as early as 1942 because the barrel and ammo required tungsten.

* Production of Tungsten cored AT ammo ceased around 1942 for the same reason

* The specific reason was (see Tooze, "Wages of Destruction") that Germany did not have enough even for industrial use (it was required for high speed machine tools vital for producing a lot of stuff like, oh, Tanks, Artillery, Smallarms, Submarines, Aircraft etc) and stockpiles were declining faster than the limited amounts smuggled in from Portugal and Spain could replace.

I don't think it's any secret that Germany was affected by shortages of strategic materials and alloys. How do you know what secretive and fascist Spain and Portugal was secretly shipping to Nazi Germany? In 1944 Spain limited its official shipments of tungsten ore to Germany to 40 tons a month which ended after D-Day. Britain was so concerned with what Spain was supplying Germany that it stopped Spanish oil shipments throughout most of 1944. With no America involved in WW2 then we would have no D-Day in 1944 and far less restraint on what Spain and Portugal were willing to supply Germany.

Also did Britain develop this technology beyond the Littlejohn adaptor it used from 40mm anti-tank guns?

Originally Posted by aspqrz

In any case, it explains the inconvenient fact that German Jet aircraft were ineffective toys in a strategic and operational sense (if not an immediate tactical sense) due to their pathetic engines ... and were always going to remain so.

But lethal ones all the same, and jets rapidly replaced turbo-props as frontline military aircraft in the mid-to-late 1940's.

Originally Posted by aspqrz

Um. Logical error here. Operational Range does not change according to where an aircraft is based ... it is fixed. It remains 800 klicks regardless of whether it is based in Berlin, or Paris, or Boulogne.

But distance does change due to location, and an aircraft based in occupied France and the Netherlands would be a shorter distance from Britain than an aircraft based in Germany and that parameter would be relevant to the respective operational range in question.

Originally Posted by aspqrz

And the Ar-234 didn't have the range you claimed.

Which I note you do not admit was an error on your part.

You mean the range of the Arado Ar 234? Then its combat radius was 1,100 km with a bombload of (1,500 kg).

Originally Posted by aspqrz

In this specific instance I was merely pointing out, to you, that the figure you gave was for maximum one way range rather than operational radius. And, since you made the mistake, I felt it wise to explain what operational radius was and how it differs from maximum range.

I note that you still don't admit that your claim was wrong.

No I gave just you a rough range figures not based on operational range or variable distances. The ranges are open to debate based on location but a relatively basic term such as operational range is not something that I need to be lectured on.

Originally Posted by aspqrz

The Commonwealth Airforces mainly made night attacks against Germany. Overwhelmingly. They were not normally escorted for the obvious reason that escorts such as the USAAF required for its daylight precisionless bombing attacks were not needed because of, well, the darkness.

And without USAAC daylight bombing would that not affect the amount of damage that could be inflicted on German industry

Originally Posted by aspqrz

Did the Commonwealth Airforces in the UK use American aircraft? Sure. They bought a lot before Pearl Harbour and a lot after.

Did they use the RR Merlin engined Mustang. Yep.

So what?

The premise is that the Commonwealth can win the war without active US involvement, not that the US magically falls off the face of the earth.

But then we would have no US Eight Air Force based in England, or any other US army, air or navy forces in Europe, the Med and North Africa. Also no obligation to supply the British Commonwealth with state-of-the-art US weaponry.

Originally Posted by aspqrz

Nope. All German late war production figures are heavily doctored by Speer. He deliberately double counted, counted remanufactured or repaired wrecked airframes as new production, included the last week of the previous month's production and the first week of the next month's production for a given month's production routinely (double counting again) ... as is detailed in a number of works on the German War Economy (see the work by Tooze mentioned above).

His deliberate obfuscation of records was so thorough that, though we know he was doing it and we know the scale of what he was doing, we cannot work out how much of the claimed production was real and how much was a lie. We just know that the figures for 44-45 are so tainted as to be close to worthless.

I've also heard that been stated about Speer in the past and as you say that we just don't know what the real figure are the best way to gauge the true figures would be to go by casualties. In 1944 US forces lost 11,618 aircraft in Europe (nearly ten times what they lost in the Pacific) and I've heard higher figures as well. US 8th Air Force and RAF Bomber Command losses in Europe also increased considerably in 1944 (I can break down the monthly losses from 1943-45) when German fighter production also spiked, so maybe there is some truth to it.

Originally Posted by aspqrz

And would continue to have even if the US did not actively enter the war. They would have bought it, and the US would have sold it, as it did before Pearl Harbour.

But would not have shared everything (relatively speaking) with Britain either.

Originally Posted by aspqrz

It is becoming increasingly clear that your knowledge of the war effort by all parties involved in WW2 is ... generously ... somewhat deficient ...

But feel free to continue to dig a deeper hole for yourself.

Is it and am I?

[aspqrz]

Originally Posted by*aspqrz*
Indeed I did.

However, I fail to what that specific claim has to do with whether the He-177 was a piece of crap or not. And, indeed, I am sure everyone following this thread is as mystified by the non-connection as I am.

Because, of course, there*is*no connection.

Originally posted by RN7
Well I think you are the only one who has claimed that. And if you can't see the connection with stating that British industry is beyond the range of German bombers, and yet then we have the He-177 with a combat radius of 1,540 km which can carry 6,000kg of ordinance internally and another 7,200 kg externally then I don't know what that says about your train of thought.

And I think the entire rest of the world is mystified by your train of thought in thinking that a piece of crap that was produced in small numbers at the tail end of the war had of being relevant when the overwhelmingly vast majority of Nazi bomber production was of Medium and Light Bombers which did not have the range to bomb all of the UK. And didn't have the capacity, either.

They produced thousands of He-111s, Do-17s and Ju-88s and ~600 of the failed He-177.

As for their payload vs. range. You are operating under the common, and charming, delusion that maximum range, or even maximum operational radius, was achievable with maximum bombload.

For operation Steinbock, and you evidently read, but failed to comprehend, the Wikipedia article, they carried 5600 kilos, not 13200 kilos.

You also failed to note, or comprehend, that they had a greater than 50% operational failure rate during that campaign … 8 of the 14 (!) committed had to RTB with overheating or burning engines.

A monumental piece of crap.

If you're going to cite a source, at least read and comprehend it all.

You know they were used over Britain in Operation Steinbock in 1944 which was a failure. But from the most easily accessible source "wikipedia" the tactics used by the He-177 pilots allowed for higher speed and constant change of altitude which made interceptions difficult, increasing the survivability of the aircraft but decreased accuracy. With an average loss rate of 60% for all types of bomber used in Operation Steinbock, the He 177's loss rate below 10% made them the most survivable bomber in the campaign.

Um.

Ah.

From the Wikipedia article …

“Of the 14 He 177 sent out during*Operation Steinbock, one suffered a burst tire, and eight returned with overheating or burning engines. Of the four that reached London, one was lost to night fighters.”

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heinkel_He_177

Perhaps you didn't actually read the article, or perhaps you felt that no-one else would – or maybe you're just doing what the Soviets did so well …

I think the rest of the world would regard operational failure by 8 of the 14 brand new aircraft committed to be indicative.

And, of the four that managed to reach the target, carrying less than half the maximum bomb load (against London, mind, not the far north of England … unless you seriously expect us to believe that they could have carried more over a longer range?), they suffered 25% casualties.

Like massaging figures much?*

Quote:

Originally Posted by*aspqrz*
He-111:*Combat Radius with Bombload (4400 kg), ~600 klicks.
Ju-88:*Combat Radius with Bombload (2100 kg), ~832 klicks.
Do-17:*Combat Radius with Bombload (1000 kg), ~660 klicks.

These were the*actual*'bombers' (for want of a better term) the Luftwaffe had. None had the range needed. As I said. Your attempts to bring in furphies like the*disastrous*failure that was the He-177 and the Ar-234 which,*despite your claims, did*not*have the required range, notwithstanding.

Note that they*all*fail to have the range to reach all of the UK.

Originally posted by RN7
He-111: Combat radius 1,200 km with a bombload (2,000 kg), less with heavier bombload*
JU-88A: Combat radius 1,046 km with a bombload (2,000 kg), less with heavier bombload
Do-17: Combat radius 1,160 km with a bombload (500 kg), less with heavier bombload

I hear an echo.

And a failure to understand.

Originally Posted by*aspqrz*
It existed as a failure. It existed so late in the war as to be irrelevant.

And, most importantly of all, and I note you*carefully*snipped this pertinent fact from your reply,*it did not have the range that you claimed.*

It could*not*reach the whole of the UK.

What exactly did I snip. If you mean the range of the Arado Ar 234? Then its combat radius was 1,100 km with a bombload of (1,500 kg).

What exactly did you snip?

Oh, only the claim that it had a range of 1556 km.

Now down to 1100 km and still wrong.

The actual operational radius was 800 klicks.

Originally Posted by*aspqrz*
Nowhere near enough. The UK bought almost all of it up, pricing Germany out of the market. Lack of Tungsten does not equal no Tungsten.

Something you would no doubt be aware of if you have done any research are the following facts ...

* The Squeeze Bore AT gun production was ended and widespread use also ceased as early as 1942 because the barrel and ammo required tungsten.

* Production of Tungsten cored AT ammo ceased around 1942 for the same reason

* The specific reason was (see Tooze,*"Wages of Destruction") that Germany did not have enough even for industrial use (it was required for high speed machine tools vital for producing a lot of stuff like, oh, Tanks, Artillery, Smallarms, Submarines, Aircraft etc) and stockpiles were declining faster than the limited amounts smuggled in from Portugal and Spain could replace.

Originally posted by RN7
How do you know what secretive and fascist Spain and Portugal was secretly shipping to Nazi Germany?

Oh deer. How do I know these things?

I read them in Books.

Hint: WW2 ended in 1945.

The Fascist regimes in Spain and Portugal have been gone for several decades.

The things they kept semi-secret during the war are now readily accessible in books that have been published since then. Many of which I have read or consulted.

Perhaps it might be an idea if you widened your reading list?

Originally Posted by*aspqrz*
In any case, it explains the inconvenient fact that German Jet aircraft were ineffective toys in a strategic and operational sense (if not an immediate tactical sense) due to their pathetic engines ... and were always going to remain so.

Originally posted by RN7
But lethal ones all the same, and jets rapidly replaced turbo-props as frontline military aircraft in the mid-to-late 1940's.

Well, Jets certainly were lethal. Just not German ones.

What happened after WW2 is nice, but irrelevant. As you well know.

Originally Posted by*aspqrz*
Um. Logical error here. Operational Range does not change according to where an aircraft is based ... it is*fixed. It remains 800 klicks regardless of whether it is based in Berlin, or Paris, or Boulogne.

The quote I was replying to, carefully excised by you, was … “Also is there some reason why you feel that you have to lecture people about military terms or is it that you just feel that you have a monopoly on knowledge?* “

Originally posted by RN7
But distance does change due to location, and an aircraft based in occupied France and the Netherlands would be a shorter distance from Britain than an aircraft based in Germany and that parameter would be relevant to the respective operational range in question.

Which is, of course, irrelevant to what their operational range was … your claim was that, with the fantasy ranges you cited, they could reach all of the UK … you didn't specify from which bases.

And the actual combat radius – half the combat range (or less) – well, you're still quoting the combat range (the one way range) rather than the combat radius (the there and back to base range) … you still haven't grasped it.

Originally Posted by*aspqrz*
Nope. All German late war production figures are heavily doctored by Speer. He deliberately double counted, counted remanufactured or repaired wrecked airframes as new production, included the last week of the previous month's production and the first week of the next month's production for a given month's production routinely (double counting again) ... as is detailed in a number of works on the German War Economy (see the work by*Tooze*mentioned above).

His deliberate obfuscation of records was so thorough that, though we know he was doing it and we know the scale of what he was doing, we cannot work out how much of the claimed production was real and how much was a lie. We just know that the figures for 44-45 are so tainted as to be close to worthless.

I've also heard that been stated about Speer in the past and as you say that we just don't know what the real figure are the best way to gauge the true figures would be to go by casualties ...

Twaddle.

ROTFLMAO level twaddle.

Phil

[RN7]

Originally Posted by aspqrz

And I think the entire rest of the world is mystified by your train of thought in thinking that a piece of crap that was produced in small numbers at the tail end of the war had of being relevant when the overwhelmingly vast majority of Nazi bomber production was of Medium and Light Bombers which did not have the range to bomb all of the UK. And didn't have the capacity, either.

They produced thousands of He-111s, Do-17s and Ju-88s and ~600 of the failed He-177.

But I thought they built 1,168 He-177's from 1942.

Originally Posted by aspqrz

As for their payload vs. range. You are operating under the common, and charming, delusion that maximum range, or even maximum operational radius, was achievable with maximum bombload.

Nope

Originally Posted by aspqrz

For operation Steinbock, and you evidently read, but failed to comprehend, the Wikipedia article, they carried 5600 kilos, not 13200 kilos.

You also failed to note, or comprehend, that they had a greater than 50% operational failure rate during that campaign … 8 of the 14 (!) committed had to RTB with overheating or burning engines.

A monumental piece of crap.

If you're going to cite a source, at least read and comprehend it all.



Um.

Ah.

From the Wikipedia article …

“Of the 14 He 177 sent out during*Operation Steinbock, one suffered a burst tire, and eight returned with overheating or burning engines. Of the four that reached London, one was lost to night fighters.”

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heinkel_He_177

Perhaps you didn't actually read the article, or perhaps you felt that no-one else would – or maybe you're just doing what the Soviets did so well …

I think the rest of the world would regard operational failure by 8 of the 14 brand new aircraft committed to be indicative.

And, of the four that managed to reach the target, carrying less than half the maximum bomb load (against London, mind, not the far north of England … unless you seriously expect us to believe that they could have carried more over a longer range?), they suffered 25% casualties.

Like massaging figures much?*

And I did say failed did I not and I never stated what payload they were carrying, but they did reach their target.

Quote:

Originally Posted by aspqrz

I hear an echo.

And a failure to understand.

What exactly did you snip?

Oh, only the claim that it had a range of 1556 km.

Now down to 1100 km and still wrong.

The actual operational radius was 800 klicks.

Not from my sources

Originally Posted by aspqrz

Oh deer. How do I know these things?

I read them in Books.

Hint: WW2 ended in 1945.

The Fascist regimes in Spain and Portugal have been gone for several decades.

The things they kept semi-secret during the war are now readily accessible in books that have been published since then. Many of which I have read or consulted.

Perhaps it might be an idea if you widened your reading list?].

But they where still in existence in the Second World War. And yes you can find this information online too its not that hard

Originally Posted by aspqrz

Well, Jets certainly were lethal. Just not German ones.

What happened after WW2 is nice, but irrelevant. As you well know.

The quote I was replying to, carefully excised by you, was … “Also is there some reason why you feel that you have to lecture people about military terms or is it that you just feel that you have a monopoly on knowledge?* “


Which is, of course, irrelevant to what their operational range was … your claim was that, with the fantasy ranges you cited, they could reach all of the UK … you didn't specify from which bases.

And the actual combat radius – half the combat range (or less) – well, you're still quoting the combat range (the one way range) rather than the combat radius (the there and back to base range) … you still haven't grasped it.


Twaddle.

ROTFLMAO level twaddle.

Phil

Well I think Raellus was right about you.