OT - WWII quiz

[NeBert]

ORIGINAL: Neilster

I'm talking about the end of the war. The jagdpanther and tigers were meant specifically for defense. As for the me262's: Do you even know what their attack range was?. Hardly used for an offensive weapon. It was just a super fast jet airplane meant to go up and hunt down enemy fighters and bombers in the immediate vicinity and come right back to refuel. To say it was a gas whore is a gross understatement.

What do you mean by "the end of the war"? The Germans were still conducting armoured operations to the very end. Fuel became increasingly scarce, yes, but what you wrote about tank destroyers being unmoving pillboxes is garbage.

The Me 262 project was begun before WW2 and it was designed as an interceptor. That means it was meant for all fighter roles and not, as you seem to suggest, some sort of point-defence weapon. As I have already explained, they were mostly used defensively due to Germany's war situation by the time they were introduced but they were often used offensively as well, especially as fighter-bombers.

Although its Junkers Jumo 004s had quite high fuel consumption, the Me 262 had large tanks and its range of 1050km compared quite well to many of its piston-engined contemporaries. The FW 190D for example had a range of 800km. I know a bit about this stuff because as well as studying WW2 for many years, I'm a gas-turbine specialist and was an aircraft technician on fighters.

Cheers, Neilster

I agree to Neilster´s Me262-statements and Patrice´s opinion that it might be mixed up with the Me163 interceptor.
The Me262 actually had more range than the Fw190 of the Me109 at that time (I also have similar numbers above in my archive).

regards

[terje439]

Some more Qs

Q1: What British official was dismissed from office during WWI, and reinstated in the same office just prior to WWII, and what office?

Q2: General Patton once stated: "I grew up with statues and images of "them", initially beliveing they were images of "God the Father" and "God the Son"". Of whom did he speak?

Q3: During the Battle of Britain, several ideas were cast forth to help ease the pressure on the British Isles. One of the rejected ideas would have required a huge ammount of inflated rubber. What was the idea? *hint* think HUGE

[Neilster]

ORIGINAL: terje439

Some more Qs

Q1: What British official was dismissed from office during WWI, and reinstated in the same office just prior to WWII, and what office?

Q2: General Patton once stated: "I grew up with statues and images of "them", initially beliveing they were images of "God the Father" and "God the Son"". Of whom did he speak?

Q3: During the Battle of Britain, several ideas were cast forth to help ease the pressure on the British Isles. One of the rejected ideas would have required a huge ammount of inflated rubber. What was the idea? *hint* think HUGE

1. Winston Churchill. First Lord of the Admiralty (I think it was called).

Cheers, Neilster

[terje439]

ORIGINAL: Neilster

1. Winston Churchill. First Lord of the Admiralty (I think it was called).

Cheers, Neilster

Yup. Do you know what caused his removal from this post during WWI?

[Neilster]

ORIGINAL: terje439

ORIGINAL: Neilster

1. Winston Churchill. First Lord of the Admiralty (I think it was called).

Cheers, Neilster

Yup. Do you know what caused his removal from this post during WWI?

Gallipoli I think. Still a bit of a sore point with us Aussies.

Cheers, Neilster

[terje439]

Yes, he was forced to resign over Gallipoli

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: Neilster

ORIGINAL: terje439

ORIGINAL: Neilster

1. Winston Churchill. First Lord of the Admiralty (I think it was called).

Cheers, Neilster

Yup. Do you know what caused his removal from this post during WWI?

Gallipoli I think. Still a bit of a sore point with us Aussies.

Cheers, Neilster

Warspite1

Neilster - why is this a sore point with you Aussies?

[Froonp]

ORIGINAL: warspite1
Neilster - why is this a sore point with you Aussies?

Weren't a lot of Australians dead in Gallipoli ?

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: Froonp

ORIGINAL: warspite1
Neilster - why is this a sore point with you Aussies?

Weren't a lot of Australians dead in Gallipoli ?

Warspite1

Yes - about 7,300 Australians were killed and 2,400 New Zealanders. 25,000 British were killed in the same campaign. I was wondering why this particular battle irks some ANZAC`s so much.

[panzers]

ORIGINAL: NeBert

ORIGINAL: Neilster

I'm talking about the end of the war. The jagdpanther and tigers were meant specifically for defense. As for the me262's: Do you even know what their attack range was?. Hardly used for an offensive weapon. It was just a super fast jet airplane meant to go up and hunt down enemy fighters and bombers in the immediate vicinity and come right back to refuel. To say it was a gas whore is a gross understatement.

What do you mean by "the end of the war"? The Germans were still conducting armoured operations to the very end. Fuel became increasingly scarce, yes, but what you wrote about tank destroyers being unmoving pillboxes is garbage.

The Me 262 project was begun before WW2 and it was designed as an interceptor. That means it was meant for all fighter roles and not, as you seem to suggest, some sort of point-defence weapon. As I have already explained, they were mostly used defensively due to Germany's war situation by the time they were introduced but they were often used offensively as well, especially as fighter-bombers.

Although its Junkers Jumo 004s had quite high fuel consumption, the Me 262 had large tanks and its range of 1050km compared quite well to many of its piston-engined contemporaries. The FW 190D for example had a range of 800km. I know a bit about this stuff because as well as studying WW2 for many years, I'm a gas-turbine specialist and was an aircraft technician on fighters.

Cheers, Neilster

I agree to Neilster´s Me262-statements and Patrice´s opinion that it might be mixed up with the Me163 interceptor.
The Me262 actually had more range than the Fw190 of the Me109 at that time (I also have similar numbers above in my archive).

regards

Wow! my aplologies to you Neilster. I can't believe after all these years thinking the ME262 had that 65 mile range when all along it was the rocket plane. With the supreme knowledge I have of WWII, I am so embarrassed to admit that I missed the boat in that one. I was so sure I was right that I went to my World war II almanac to point it all out only to find out you are right on the money. Kudos to you.
As far as the tanks/tank destroyers go, Are you talking about events right up until the German surrender in May of '45? because I know for a fact that there were using those tanks for that reason in the battle of Berlin. I don't mean to be getting into a pissing match about it, but those things consumed gas similar to that of the vehicle transporter for the space shuttles, and we both agree guel was a major problem for them by that time.

[paulderynck]

ORIGINAL: terje439

Some more Qs


Q2: General Patton once stated: "I grew up with statues and images of "them", initially beliveing they were images of "God the Father" and "God the Son"". Of whom did he speak?

Q3: During the Battle of Britain, several ideas were cast forth to help ease the pressure on the British Isles. One of the rejected ideas would have required a huge ammount of inflated rubber. What was the idea? *hint* think HUGE

Q2 Grant and Sherman?

Q3 The plan to use an iceberg as a huge floating aircraft carrier?

[Orm]

ORIGINAL: warspite1

Yes - about 7,300 Australians were killed and 2,400 New Zealanders. 25,000 British were killed in the same campaign. I was wondering why this particular battle irks some ANZAC`s so much.

Australia (and of course New Zeeland) was a young nation at this time and it was the first major battle it was involved in. The ANZAC (Australian and New Zeeland) troops fought bravely (as all troops in the campaign including the turks) during the campaign but had little success against the turks. The Australians felt that the British officers and leaders let their brave troops down (it was an illmanaged campaingn on the allied side) . An impression that was cemented when the ANZAC troops fought on the western front.

Some movies about the war also strengthens this opinion. Long time ago I saw a movie about Australian troops at Gallipoli and I was amazed at the incompetence of the British officers (in the movie). I am not sure that the officers were that bad but seeing the movie makes you frustrated with the British officer corps and saddened by the useless slaughter of the heroic Australian troops.

Many Australians percive the ANZAC troops as heroes badly led (betrayed?) by British officers and politicians.

Maybe someone from Australia can enlighten me if I got something wrong.

-Orm

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: Orm

ORIGINAL: warspite1

Yes - about 7,300 Australians were killed and 2,400 New Zealanders. 25,000 British were killed in the same campaign. I was wondering why this particular battle irks some ANZAC`s so much.

Australia (and of course New Zeeland) was a young nation at this time and it was the first major battle it was involved in. The ANZAC (Australian and New Zeeland) troops fought bravely (as all troops in the campaign including the turks) during the campaign but had little success against the turks. The Australians felt that the British officers and leaders let their brave troops down (it was an illmanaged campaingn on the allied side) . An impression that was cemented when the ANZAC troops fought on the western front.

Some movies about the war also strengthens this opinion. Long time ago I saw a movie about Australian troops at Gallipoli and I was amazed at the incompetence of the British officers (in the movie). I am not sure that the officers were that bad but seeing the movie makes you frustrated with the British officer corps and saddened by the useless slaughter of the heroic Australian troops.

Many Australians percive the ANZAC troops as heroes badly led (betrayed?) by British officers and politicians.

Maybe someone from Australia can enlighten me if I got something wrong.

-Orm

Warspite1

I don`t think you have a whole lot wrong in terms of sentiment - and I guess its that that saddens me.

Gallipoli is one of those battles that seems to have more than its share of myths - not helped by Mel - I hate the British - Gibson`s film of the same name from the early 80`s to which you no doubt refer. In many ways an excellent - Peter Weir? film - bit of a tear-jerker with a wonderful sound track - Albinoni`s Adagio in G-Minor meets Jean Michel Jarre - but the anti-British stuff just grates.

Gallipoli was just about the one truly brilliant strategic idea in WWI. It was seen as a way of breaking the deadlock - the carnage - of the Western and Eastern fronts. Had it worked......

Sadly, the operation, whilst brilliant in concept was deeply flawed in execution for a number of reasons and failed -
miserably. Those in charge were largely British - however it was not some plot to kill ANZAC`s for goodness sake. The appalling leadership and failure to execute the plan was the reason those ANZACs died, but was the reason the 25,000 British died too. The leader of the ANZAC corps was an Englishman and highly rated by his troops.

It was the battle where the ANZAC forces really came into their own and - if this is not too cliched - helped forge the identity of those young countries. Australians and New Zealanders have every reason to feel proud of their contribution - I sure as hell am and I hope previous contributions to these posts affirm - but it irritates me when the British dead are simply forgotten as though unimportant. According to Mel Gibson we were all sitting on the beaches drinking tea when the ANZAC`s were dying.........

[paulderynck]

Here's a toughie. which campaign saw the death of the highest ranking officer in the U.S. Army to be killed in combat during WW II?

[Sabre21]

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

Here's a toughie. which campaign saw the death of the highest ranking officer in the U.S. Army to be killed in combat during WW II?

There were two of the same rank - LTG Buckner at Okinawa and LTG McNair at Normandy..I don't know of any others that high up (US anyways). McNair was killed by friendly fire though but he was in a combat zone.

Sabre

[paulderynck]

ORIGINAL: Sabre21

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

Here's a toughie. which campaign saw the death of the highest ranking officer in the U.S. Army to be killed in combat during WW II?

There were two of the same rank - LTG Buckner at Okinawa and LTG McNair at Normandy..I don't know of any others that high up (US anyways). McNair was killed by friendly fire though but he was in a combat zone.

Sabre

Yup - looking for Okinawa. My source did not mention McNair - perhaps because of the friendly fire aspect.

[Shannon V. OKeets]

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

ORIGINAL: Sabre21

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

Here's a toughie. which campaign saw the death of the highest ranking officer in the U.S. Army to be killed in combat during WW II?

There were two of the same rank - LTG Buckner at Okinawa and LTG McNair at Normandy..I don't know of any others that high up (US anyways). McNair was killed by friendly fire though but he was in a combat zone.

Sabre

Yup - looking for Okinawa. My source did not mention McNair - perhaps because of the friendly fire aspect.

I read that McNair was in close proximity to Bradley at the time. This was during carpet bombing to break through the hedgerows.

[terje439]

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

ORIGINAL: terje439

Some more Qs


Q2: General Patton once stated: "I grew up with statues and images of "them", initially beliveing they were images of "God the Father" and "God the Son"". Of whom did he speak?

Q3: During the Battle of Britain, several ideas were cast forth to help ease the pressure on the British Isles. One of the rejected ideas would have required a huge ammount of inflated rubber. What was the idea? *hint* think HUGE

Q2 Grant and Sherman?

Q3 The plan to use an iceberg as a huge floating aircraft carrier?

Q2: Well you are kinda close [;)] but not on the mark.
Q3: Were would the inflated rubber be used? So nope.

[paulderynck]

ORIGINAL: terje439
Q3: Were would the inflated rubber be used? So nope.

You wrap it around the iceberg to keep the landing field above water when the berg melts, Silly! [:-]

[Kaletsch2007]

ORIGINAL: terje439

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

ORIGINAL: terje439

Some more Qs


Q2: General Patton once stated: "I grew up with statues and images of "them", initially beliveing they were images of "God the Father" and "God the Son"". Of whom did he speak?

Q3: During the Battle of Britain, several ideas were cast forth to help ease the pressure on the British Isles. One of the rejected ideas would have required a huge ammount of inflated rubber. What was the idea? *hint* think HUGE

Q2 Grant and Sherman?

Q3 The plan to use an iceberg as a huge floating aircraft carrier?

Q2: Well you are kinda close [;)] but not on the mark.
Q3: Were would the inflated rubber be used? So nope.

Q2 If that was close, let me try. Washington and Lee ?
Q3 Put the rubber on roofs of buildings ?