Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
continued.
The following 27 PR Mk XI were lost to engine related troubles - its noteworthy how much trouble the Merlin 70 series gave:
Pattle, I am not sure if your remark related to the British General Lucas was a sarcastic response to the previous generalizations about the British Infantry or not.
Lucas was in fact American, from Wiki ;
In the Spring of 1943, Lucas was sent overseas as a deputy to Eisenhower, and briefly took command of II Corps (9–19 September 1943). On 20 September 1943, Lucas was given command of VI Corps, taking over from Major General Ernest J. Dawley. On January 22, 1944, from the deck of the cruiser USS Biscayne, Lucas was relieved of command after Operation Shingle, the amphibious landing at Anzio. Lucas was highly critical of the plans for the Anzio battle, believing his force was not strong enough to accomplish its mission. His confidence was not reinforced when the mission was scaled back by last-minute orders and advice from his commander, Lieutenant General Mark W. Clark, who told him not to "stick his neck out". After nine days of preparation to reenforce his position and four weeks of extremely tough fighting, Lucas was relieved by Clark and replaced with Major General Lucian K. Truscott as the commander of VI Corps at Anzio. Lucas spent three weeks as Clark's deputy at Fifth Army headquarters before returning to the United States.
So it would seem the accusation that Anzio was a bloodbath due to the inertia caused by the British is completely false.
Many of the screw ups in Italy were of US origin - particularly Mark Clark who caused the timidity in the first place, then when the breakout happened, he went for glory in Rome rather than trapping the Germans before the could retreat and dig in again!
Oh yes sorry, thanks for putting me right on this one, somebody must have slipped something in my tea.
Montgomery's plan once Caen had not fallen as planned was, in his words, "to assault to the West of the river Orne and to develop operations to the South and South-East, in order to secure airfield sites and to protect the eastern flank of First US Army while the latter is capturing Cherbourg........"
Montgomery was a complicated character. One of his flaws was an inability to admit when he was wrong.
Yeah, that's right...the Americans came and saved all of Europe while the timid commonwealth troops gratefully hid behind the advancing American soldier. YaY we saved the world...
I'm trying to see where that was posted in this thread and I'm also trying to see how it pertains to Aerial Recon over Europe...
The tendency of disparaging about British and Commonwealth legions is not that there were too Lee Enfields and erhm, Shermans on the beach, but the fact that in the next two months they seemingly did little else than camping in front of Caen, and sipping tea.
Now, if you though the PR XI was bad, here is the PR Mark III and IV - the major PR type of 1941-1943.
the PR Mark III . 17 produced. Nine shot down.
PR Mark IV
1941 97 PR Mark IV ... 44 lost to enemy action (45%) 7 to engine failures...
1942 136 PR Mark IV... 32 lost to enemy action (23,5%), mostly in the same year and in the MTO.
For some recce information have a look at my site - Airrecce The story of photographic reconnaissance
If you have any questions, please ask away.
Mick
They had some technical advantages over the Germans which helped a lot (eg a Mossie could survive over Germany, a Ju-88 couldn't over Britain). But they key was the importance they put into it . This gave them a key strategic (and later tactical) advantages.
I have absolutely no doubt that if they placed similar priority on it they would have been able to maintain a good capability right to the end, albeit their lack of a fast twin would have caused issues with VLR recon in contested airspace.
Both Spit and Mossie high altitude recon (particularly later models with 2 stage Merlins and Griffons) really were pretty immune to to whatever the Germans could do, despite (by mid 43) their formidable air defences.
So 39, 40 Germans were way ahead. 41 the British were catching up and pulling ahead in the strategic side, 42 they caught up and had pulled ahead in the tactical side. By 43 (and the US had came to the party in a big way and became excellent as well very quickly) the Germans weren't even in the game, in the west at least.
Hmm.
Well at least in case of the Spitfire PR IV and PR IX it was already shown that they were simply not immune to that mysterious force that caused them to fail to return from operations (credits to Aozora's meticulous research work pointing out that that it is not "proven" that it had anything to do with German air defences).
However, the relative number of PR sorties posted cast some serious doubts on that assessment.
I didn't say they were totally immune , just that the loss rate was acceptable.
Galland, I have quoted this here before in this forum, was that he admitted that until they got the 262 they could do nothing about them .. and he was talking about Mossies, which meant both the daylight bombers and recon ones.
Spits at 40,000ft+ level (higher than the Mossies) what could take them down? Nothing basically, which is why the British used them into the early 1950s as the early Gen 1 2 jets could not get up there.
Well at least in case of the Spitfire PR IV and PR IX it was already shown that they were simply not immune to that mysterious force that caused them to fail to return from operations (credits to Aozora's meticulous research work pointing out that that it is not "proven" that it had anything to do with German air defences).
Well for example 109G-1s at 46,000 feet... These (along some other similar types) were pressurized high altitude fighters with NO2 boosting and it was what they were meant for after all.