Author Topic: Why Were The Allies So Successful  (Read 13464 times)

Offline Bruno

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1252
      • http://4jg53.org
Why Were The Allies So Successful
« Reply #180 on: May 17, 2006, 11:03:31 AM »
There were plenty of spies in the German High Command as well. Canaris (Abwehr chief)w as actively aiding the British (Anzio for example). The Soviets had various networks inside Germany (Rote Kapelle, the Lucy Ring, Rote Drei etc..)

Third Reich security was breeched very early in the war and had huge consequences, like at Kursk for instance...

Offline Angus

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10057
Why Were The Allies So Successful
« Reply #181 on: May 17, 2006, 12:49:45 PM »
And they strung Canaris up very close to the allied lines 1944 or was it 45?

The first fine example of very good intelligence job in WW2 might be considered the Scuttling of Graf Spee BTW.
It was very interesting to carry out the flight trials at Rechlin with the Spitfire and the Hurricane. Both types are very simple to fly compared to our aircraft, and childishly easy to take-off and land. (Werner Mölders)

Offline Furball

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 15781
Why Were The Allies So Successful
« Reply #182 on: May 17, 2006, 12:53:28 PM »
america won the war because of pilots like ben affleck saving britian and then america at the battle of britian and pearl harbour and then bombing japan and america won the war by capturing germanys code machine and stealing their uboat and torpedoing things and dont forget stealing all the gold and the tiger tank by that oddball person and shooting up the train station woofwoof :lol :rofl :lol :mad: :furious :furious
I am not ashamed to confess that I am ignorant of what I do not know.
-Cicero

-- The Blue Knights --

Offline Hap

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3908
Why Were The Allies So Successful
« Reply #183 on: May 17, 2006, 12:55:31 PM »
:huh

Offline Furball

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 15781
Why Were The Allies So Successful
« Reply #184 on: May 17, 2006, 12:57:33 PM »
u suk hap why dnot you lern sum history :mad: :furious :mad: :mad: :furious :rofl :rofl :furious
I am not ashamed to confess that I am ignorant of what I do not know.
-Cicero

-- The Blue Knights --

Offline E25280

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3475
      • http://125thspartanforums.com
Why Were The Allies So Successful
« Reply #185 on: May 17, 2006, 03:13:05 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Angus
There was a flip side on that, - especially regarding the war with the U boats.
The Germans were also listening to  the Brits.....

None the less, Enigma, Ultra, and whatever the name was of the US codebreaking of the Japanese were quite important.

Good point Have :)
The "whatever the name was" in your post was "Magic."
Brauno in a past life, followed by LTARget
SWtarget in current incarnation
Captain and Communications Officer~125th Spartans

"Proudly drawing fire so that my brothers may pass unharmed."

Offline Angus

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10057
Why Were The Allies So Successful
« Reply #186 on: May 17, 2006, 06:55:14 PM »
Magic ah yes.

The guy who broke the code was known for frequently wearing some certain sort of sandals if my memory does not betray me..... :)
It was very interesting to carry out the flight trials at Rechlin with the Spitfire and the Hurricane. Both types are very simple to fly compared to our aircraft, and childishly easy to take-off and land. (Werner Mölders)

Offline joeblogs

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 649
Overy's Why the Aliies Won
« Reply #187 on: May 18, 2006, 08:40:23 AM »
Prompted by this thread I picked up a copy of this book.

There are many intersting tidbits.

First, Overy doesn't believe in determinism about the war. The allies could have lost. Apparently Stalin seriously considered suing for peace in October 1941 and Hitler thought he would.

There's a good chance Britain and the U.S. would have lost the war of the Atlantic, or won it too late. The Germans had broken the British maritime cypher and could track the convoys pretty well. The Germans also changed their naval code and blacked out Bletchley Park for nearly a year. Two things made the difference - 10 cm radar and excellent guesswork based on signals intelligence. Had those come 6-9 months later the merchant marine might have been too small to feed Britain and permit a build up of the US military in the European theater.

Other tidbits. At the beginning of WWII, France and the UK were out producing Germany in tanks and aircraft. That's due in part to Germany's exhasuting it's gold reserves which limited its ability to import crucial raw materials.

When the Germans launched the invasion of Russia, they deployed 3,350 tanks and 650,000 horses. They never fully mechanized their infantry or supply units.

By the fall of 1941, Germany had under it's control twice the steel production capacity that Russia had left. They had more than Britain even before Poland fell. The puzzle is why Germany got so little out of these spoils. In 1942 Russia was outproducing Germany in tanks and planes despite having less capacity than what was available to Germany. I'll have to read more to see why that happened.

-Blogs

Offline Hap

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3908
Re: Overy's Why the Aliies Won
« Reply #188 on: May 18, 2006, 12:55:48 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by joeblogs
At the beginning of WWII, France and the UK were out producing Germany in tanks and aircraft.


can this be true?  Sept of '39, Britain manufacturing more aircraft than Germany???  :huh :huh

hap

Offline joeblogs

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 649
Re: Re: Overy's Why the Aliies Won
« Reply #189 on: May 18, 2006, 01:19:42 PM »
Britain + France


Quote
Originally posted by Hap
can this be true?  Sept of '39, Britain manufacturing more aircraft than Germany???  :huh :huh

hap

Offline gripen

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1914
Why Were The Allies So Successful
« Reply #190 on: May 18, 2006, 01:45:17 PM »
AFAIK at the time France fell, they were producing alone more planes than the Germany. If there had been a bit more time...

gripen

Offline Angus

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10057
Why Were The Allies So Successful
« Reply #191 on: May 18, 2006, 01:50:43 PM »
More tidbits.
I did read that France had more aircraft than the LW. Will have to check though.
Britain also may have had more than Germany and at the time of BoB the Brits were producing more.
However that didn't always show in the air, since the Germans usually were on the slashing side of a front of small depth with rather larger distances. (Short flight time over a large posible area)
Anyway, in 1939 as well as 1940 the LW was definately the most powerful and modern airforce in the world.
It was very interesting to carry out the flight trials at Rechlin with the Spitfire and the Hurricane. Both types are very simple to fly compared to our aircraft, and childishly easy to take-off and land. (Werner Mölders)

Offline GtoRA2

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8339
Why Were The Allies So Successful
« Reply #192 on: May 18, 2006, 01:53:54 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by LEDPIG
Yea it seems to me a large amount of kills and deaths in air combat occured by:

     someone sneaking up and shooting someone from behind

     attacking only when you had the advantage

     diving on an opponenent with superior speed and running

     attacking with superior numbers

  In the MA we calls these moves "dweeb" moves but in real life this was how it was done. You can't respawn and try it again in real life this was no joke.  I personally don't think these are "dweeb" moves i think this is smart fighting and caters to your best interests, i.e. you living other guy dying.  Iv'e never heard a real fighter pilot be dishonored by his cowardly tactics iv'e only ever heard them say kill quick and run, try to avoid a long drawn out conflict. I suppose this was particularly important when pitting a 109 against a 47 for instance where a P-47 has no business figthing a 109 on it's terms. It's like a one armed man trying to beat Mike Tyson. As happens in the MA repeatedly the guy with the most altitude and speed rules the engagement and it appears the allies made this a rule, thus allowing them to whip some axis prettythang.


Exactly, in real life you stack the deck to win if you can if your life is on the line.

You leave and fight another day of the odds are not in your favor.

Offline GtoRA2

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8339
Re: Overy's Why the Aliies Won
« Reply #193 on: May 18, 2006, 01:57:41 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by joeblogs
Prompted by this thread I picked up a copy of this book.

There are many intersting tidbits.

First, Overy doesn't believe in determinism about the war. The allies could have lost. Apparently Stalin seriously considered suing for peace in October 1941 and Hitler thought he would.

There's a good chance Britain and the U.S. would have lost the war of the Atlantic, or won it too late. The Germans had broken the British maritime cypher and could track the convoys pretty well. The Germans also changed their naval code and blacked out Bletchley Park for nearly a year. Two things made the difference - 10 cm radar and excellent guesswork based on signals intelligence. Had those come 6-9 months later the merchant marine might have been too small to feed Britain and permit a build up of the US military in the European theater.

Other tidbits. At the beginning of WWII, France and the UK were out producing Germany in tanks and aircraft. That's due in part to Germany's exhasuting it's gold reserves which limited its ability to import crucial raw materials.

When the Germans launched the invasion of Russia, they deployed 3,350 tanks and 650,000 horses. They never fully mechanized their infantry or supply units.

By the fall of 1941, Germany had under it's control twice the steel production capacity that Russia had left. They had more than Britain even before Poland fell. The puzzle is why Germany got so little out of these spoils. In 1942 Russia was outproducing Germany in tanks and planes despite having less capacity than what was available to Germany. I'll have to read more to see why that happened.

-Blogs



German tanks were overly complex.  Even the panzer three and Four were pretty complicated and hard to make. I bet russia could churn out atleast 2 t-34s for every Panzer 4 the Germans made, and I bet its closer to 5 or 10 to one for the Panther and Tiger.

Offline Thrawn

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6972
Re: Re: Overy's Why the Aliies Won
« Reply #194 on: May 18, 2006, 02:10:27 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Hap
can this be true?  Sept of '39, Britain manufacturing more aircraft than Germany???  :huh :huh

hap


Of course, Churchill was smart he put a Canadian (Lord Beaverbrook) in charge in of aircraft production.  ;)

I don't have bomber production numbers handy but here are some fighter production numbers from "The Battle of Britain", by John Lake.

1939  Britain   Germany
June   446        14
July     496        220
Aug    476        173
Sept   467        218
Oct     469        144
Total   2354      919


The British didn't **** around, they went to a total war economy right away, the Germans didn't.  Plus the British government had Crown "shadow" companies set up before the war.  They would produce whatever the economy wanted at the time, but they could switch over to arms production at the drop of a hat.  And the British aircraft repair organisation was second to none.  

The Luftwaffe could have destroyed every aircraft on the ground one day, and the next every fighter squadron would have been complete resupplied with new fighters.  Plenty of planes, not enough pilots though.