Aircraft Weapons, their Pro Allied slant in WiTP

[rtrapasso]

ORIGINAL: pauk


*forgot the name of british air commander who stated this? (was it "bomber" Harris?)

Looking this up: "In a tone of despair, the British prime minister, Stanley Baldwin, had said in 1932, "The bombers will always get through.""

[pauk]

hey rtapasso, i know that i can count on you (like always!)

[Mike Scholl]

ORIGINAL: rtrapasso

Looking this up: "In a tone of despair, the British prime minister, Stanley Baldwin, had said in 1932, "The bombers will always get through.""

It does figure that a statement this sweeping and this wrong would have to be made by a politician with NO actual espertise on the subject. But at least it inspired RAF Fighter Command to develop the equipment and doctrine to prove him wrong---so it did some good in the long run.

[pompack]

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl

ORIGINAL: rtrapasso

Looking this up: "In a tone of despair, the British prime minister, Stanley Baldwin, had said in 1932, "The bombers will always get through.""

It does figure that a statement this sweeping and this wrong would have to be made by a politician with NO actual espertise on the subject. But at least it inspired RAF Fighter Command to develop the equipment and doctrine to prove him wrong---so it did some good in the long run.

But Mike, he was only expressing what his own experts, the RAF senior commanders, were telling him. They were taking that position to expand their share of the budget, but the pre-war "Bomber Barons" (to use a phrase from a few years later) really believed it. The studies predicting 100,000 civilian dead the first week were RAF studies based upon scaling up the WWI Zepplin (sp[&:]) raids on Britain. They were pushing a MAD strategy two decades before advancing technolgy made it feasible (if that is the word to describe MAD[8|]).

[ChezDaJez]

I think he was referencing the caliber of aircraft weapons.

Now that I reread his post, I think you're right.

Chez

[marc420]

Just shows that the experts are usually quite full of it.

Right there with the geniuses that said WWI couldn't last more than a few months and that the US Army would be greeted in Baghdad with people waving flags and throwing flowers at their feet. And what else, let see ...bombers couldn't sink a battleship, the Ardennes can't be used for an attack, Russia will collapse like a rotten structure if we just kick the door in, there's a light at the end of the tunnel in Vietnam.

Generally, from the track record I'd say if you hear anyone who claims to be a military expert saying what will certainly happen in the next fight, the proper response should be bull$#!^!

[pad152]

The problem with this whole thread is it has no context

No the problem is Brady still hasn't find out how to use a spell checker[X(]. Reading his posts give me a headache.[:-]

[EUBanana]

ORIGINAL: marc420

Just shows that the experts are usually quite full of it.

Depends on the expert, Hugh Dowding didn't agree with Stanley Baldwin...