Recent content by stubbsy

Buffnut453 and Shortround6, I think the outcome of the 1937 meeting entirely rational given the facts at the time. My argument is that given the reality of the ineffectiveness of daylight bombing in 1940-1941, without LR fighter support, two options could have been run in parallel: first, to...

Sorry Edgar, but I think you are too accepting of the previous historiography on this topic and appear averse to discerning what happened from the evidence. You will note that I try to provide evidence for each of my posts. In this case, for example, I note that the minutes I posted earlier...

Mike, From my perspective the point of the debate surrounds a issues of ethics and morality and a number of counterfactuals or what if's. Firstly, the RAF bombed by night to avoid German fighters because when in bombed by day, as they had planned before the war, without fighter escorts the...

A good question on what escort and protect meant. The minutes of the Air Fighting Sub Committee discussed this issue in 1937, see below:

So to sum up where I am coming from; Did the RAF have designs for a long range escort fighter? 1. Not really, because Portal, Sholto Douglas and Leigh-Mallory were convinced the Spitfire, modified with LR tanks, couldn't compete with its LW adversaries. 2. But, a strategic requirement had been...

"In answer to the thread question, long range escorts were never necessary so the RAF didn't bother. Source: This thread Well, Churchill, when he wrote to Portal on 7 Oct 1941, suggested that the RAF ought to provision LR fighters to denude enemy AD and enable a daylight bombing campaign to...

So this brings me to the next question, if Leigh-Mallory's team assessed a Spitfire IX with a 45gal external tank had an operational range of 230 miles, how was it that the Mustang with only 30 extra gallons more fuel than the Spitfire and NO drop tanks was, according to Shortround6, rated by...

This picture shows the internal, rear fuselage, fuel tank fitted at Wright Field for the Spitfire IX. It had an approximate 42 gallon capacity, as opposed to the Vickers modification which provided 72 gallons. The extra weight affected the fuel/weight balance characteristics, which required...

A very interesting file ref picture. Do you know date were the figures provided, as Leigh-Mallory told Portal, on 14/10/1943, [ref AHB The Planning and Preparation of the Allied Expeditionary Air Force for the Landings in Normandy (Air Ministry) Appendix I/53, Air 41/66 TNA] that the Spitfire...

Where's the advantage of putting a 27 gallon tank behind the pilot, which remains full of volatile fumes when "empty," and interferes with the pilot's rear/downward view, against hanging a 30 gallon tank under the fuselage, from where it can be dumped when empty? Edgar, your question...

Good question. I think the answer lies in the the uncombined nature of the Combined Bomber Offensive. If the Bomber forces had become combined under a single Coalition Command organisation, headed by the Americans (as they requested), the six months from Jan to Jun 1943 would have focused...

Steve, I think most comments in history fora are tinged with a little bit of hindsight, after all we are not facing the difficult decisions faced by the commanders on the spot. Analysing the past is what History is about, and pointing out errors is part of the process. The question on this...

Except, of course, the 'Brass' were wrong in 1937/38, as at the time they believed that in the next war bombers would not suffer unacceptable losses if not escorted. The experience of the RAF's 9 and 37 sqns over the Heligoland Bight on 18 Dec 1939, exposed the fallacy of the is thinking -...

Then I think you'll like how 'A Blind Spot?..' deconstructs Leigh-Mallory's thinking on the long-range fighter issue and the American decision to ignore his direction and side-line him at every opportunity after they called him out on the topic. I am confused how you come to the...