swampyankee
Chief Master Sergeant
- 4,022
- Jun 25, 2013
replaced by later post
Last edited:
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Understand, but if the result of WW2 were reversed, you can see pretty much how the Nazis would have handled the leaders of the losing countries. To the victor goes the spoils.
I don't wish to engage in the morality of strategic bombing here; that's not what this thread is about, but if we are going to point fingers, every one of the major protagonists of WW2 were guilty of it. The fact is, that it happened meant that the leadership of each of the countries involved felt it was a necessary means to achieve their aims, rightly or wrongly and as observers of history we should deal with that as rationally and thoughtfully as we can.
That was my thinking as well. Without WMD nor hundreds of available aircraft this sounds about as effective as the Japanese balloon bombs.
If the Germans did assemble a few hundred long range bombers the US would soon install radar to detect them. And a hundred or more Junkers Ju 390-sized bombers plodding along at about 190 knots IAS (and ground speed will be less as they're flying into the jet stream) at 25,000-30,000 feet or so would be detected by US ground-based radar many miles out, sufficiently that a massive Air Force interception would be ready to meet these poor, unescorted bastards. And how do you keep a fleet of bombers together through thousands of miles flying into often bad weather, night, etc?
But this does present some questions on the US response, and possible overreaction. What fighters does the US divert from the ETO, PTO and Lend Lease to protect its shores? And then we must consider what the Germans give up to build a long range bomber force.
As for radar, can the US stick it the top of skyscrapers to get the best distance? And could we see any early NORAD with Canada-USA cooperation on continental air defence, since the Germans may fly the curvature to come across Newfoundland to hit NYC?
I figured that was more an excuse to make the idea more palatable, than an actual justification. Many air-power types largely wanted to hammer the population because they figured the population was the political center of gravity and was the weakest chain in the link, so of you kill huge numbers rapidly and brutally, we'd cry uncle and force a surrender.Civilians make the guns civilians make the tanks civilians feed the troops and i am guessing most of the troops where made by civilians.
More like loose friends in peace, and strangers/enemies in time of war.ethics and war are strange bed fellows
I was under the impression that we had them based on the coast.Were there no P-38's stationed as interceptors on either the west or east coast in 1943? Not sure it would divert that much from the AAF inventory that was already there for just that purpose.
True enough and, considering most of the approach to North America would be in airspace that's contested by nobody, there wouldn't be much to distract from navigation.Uh, Guys, look at maps, to get to New York the great circle routes are going to come in over Boston and/or down the Maine coast. yes they can dog leg around a bit. But unless you appouch New York from the South east you have 60-100 miles of land to fly over or next to (counts flying down the south side of long Island).
And I already was under the assumption that we had radar sites placed in various areas of the United States as well. Not sure how well arranged they were, but Gordon Saville supposedly reconfigured them prior to 1943.Germans try this stunt more than about twice and the US puts radar picket ships 60-100 miles off shore.
The A9/A10 rocket would have had the range. It was a V-2 like rocket that had the fins extended to the nose (it was kind of like a chine, similar to the SR-71), atop a booster stage that connected the tail and fins for launch.Long range V-2 is the way to go.
One even hit one Oak Ridge and slowed down the nuclear program.The Japanese were the ones who actually managed to land hits on the US (with little effect, save for the "Battle of Los Angeles") with their Subs, sub-launched aircraft and of course, the Fu-Go balloons.
Generally that's the rule: Right lies in the ability to impose your will on other people. It's why predatory personalities naturally gravitate to power (they lack the restraints most people have to pursue power -- concern for other human beings, obligations or commitments, morality and shame -- a group of people without virtue only know fear and force).Understand, but if the result of WW2 were reversed, you can see pretty much how the Nazis would have handled the leaders of the losing countries. To the victor goes the spoils.
The B-19 (XBLR-2) had a range of over 5,000 miles with a load and over 7,500 miles in ferry mode. The B-15 (XBLR-1) was close to the B-19 in range, but slower.IIRC the US XBLR intercontinental bomber project in the late-1930s originally sought a 4,000 mile operational radius. (They never came close.)
Are you saying that the Doolittle raid on Tokyo was silly/pointless/stupid/counter-productive? And only served to strengthen the Japanese resolve?
Any flight from Berlin and almost all of the rest of Germany by the shortest route takes you over the UK. Brest in France seems to be closer at about 3,350 miles. However the shortest route takes you over Newfoundland and Nova Scotia and pretty much the route taken by convoys too. The time taken means if a raider ever did hit New York US and UK forces have almost day to bring it down trying to get back. With aviation in 1943 it would be a considerable achievement as a peacetime stunt just to build a plane to go from Brest to New York and back unopposed and without defensive armament or a bomb load.Hey pbehn,
The distance from New York city to Berlin is just under 4,000 miles. IIRC the US XBLR intercontinental bomber project in the late-1930s originally sought a 4,000 mile operational radius. (They never came close.)
If we use the performance of a B-17F at max TOGW for a performance comparison, the best cruise speed would be a TAS of about 180/225 mph at SL/30,000 ft. If we use an average TAS of 200 mph for both legs it would require a minimum of 40+ hours for the round trip from Berlin to New York. The total range could be decreased somewhat by using airfields closer to the US than Berlin, but not by more than about 200 miles if the base is located in Germany. When you add in time for correction of navigational errors and required reserves you can figure a total flight time capability of at least 48 hrs.
I don't know if the April 18, 1942 raid had a great impact on Japan; though having just returned from March 31 to April 10, 1942 attack on Ceylon and the British Eastern Fleet, Nagumo never again ventured into the Indian Ocean. So, that's something Churchill and Sommerville might thank FDR and Doolittle for.Are you saying that the Doolittle raid on Tokyo was silly/pointless/stupid/counter-productive? And only served to strengthen the Japanese resolve?
That balloon hit near Hanford, Washington, NOT Oak Ridge, Tn.One even hit one Oak Ridge and slowed down the nuclear program.
.
I stand corrected... that makes a lot more senseThat balloon hit near Hanford, Washington, NOT Oak Ridge, Tn.