Author Topic: Spitfire IX overmodeled??  (Read 35614 times)

Offline MiloMorai

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6864
Spitfire IX overmodeled??
« Reply #450 on: February 12, 2004, 02:44:50 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Crumpp
Ummmm MATH Milo-Moron!


44-40 = 4

So No I haven't changed the fact the Allies gained Air Superiority in March '44.  You still lost that one.

Crumpp


And Americans can't see why there are not liked by the rest of the world. Here is a prime example of why, shown by a member of your armed forces.:rolleyes:

LOL, dirt eater better brush up on your math skills.

Sept 40 + 4 = Sept 44 :)

Sept 40 was when the LW went on the defensive in the 'west'.:eek:

Offline gripen

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1914
Spitfire IX overmodeled??
« Reply #451 on: February 12, 2004, 02:55:54 PM »
Crumpp,
I wonder why you are continously requesting something which no one else has talked about? I wrote some couple hundred messages ago (1.2.04):

"Otherwise so far I have not seen any statistics which supports the argument that the LW was actually winning BoB."

After that there has been a lot of discussion but so far noone has  bring in any relevant statistics to support opposite argument. Known statistics are clear: In the end of the 2nd phase the RAF could keep the strenght and still had reserves left while the LW could not keep the strenght  had no reserves.

gripen

Offline Crumpp

  • Parolee
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3671
Spitfire IX overmodeled??
« Reply #452 on: February 12, 2004, 03:28:02 PM »
Ummm because I don't need to waste a bunch of time with posting the statistics.  The Imperial War Museaum, the RAF, and a Historian have already done that and ALL came to the same conclusion.  

You are the one who has to "examine" the data, post some B_S explaination for it and try and convince others to see your point of view.  Your "conclusion" has no basis in fact and is completely contrary to the sources you post.

Crumpp

Offline gripen

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1914
Spitfire IX overmodeled??
« Reply #453 on: February 12, 2004, 04:17:53 PM »
Crumpp,
Well, so far you have not bring any relevant data despite you claimed for example that the LW reserves are proven. IMW link contained no anykind of relevant numbers and your statements on Luftflotte 1 and 4 are plain fiction.

Numbers on RAF site are clear, they could keep the strenght in the end of the 2nd phase and their numbers on their own force prove that Lund does fictious statements. The statistics on LW side are also clear, they had nearly all their Bf 109 in the BoB and they could not keep the strenght in the end of the 2nd phase.

The only thing what we know for sure is that RAF  won. If you wan't to prove that the LW had some chance to win, then you should bring in relevant data to support your arguments and that data is numbers not quotes. Shortly, in data we trust.

gripen

Offline Crumpp

  • Parolee
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3671
Spitfire IX overmodeled??
« Reply #454 on: February 12, 2004, 04:33:53 PM »
The whole site is relevant AND simply supports the conclusions the RAF, IWM, and a noted historian come too about the battle.  My facts / figures are posted on each of the sites and the author makes the argument.:aok

You on the otherhand have to MAKE your argument because in reality it's a fiction YOU are pedaling.:eek:

Crumpp

Offline Angus

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10057
Spitfire IX overmodeled??
« Reply #455 on: February 12, 2004, 08:27:25 PM »
I don't get you Crumpp.
Who is pedalling?
The LW reserves seem to be a bit flaky, while the RAF strength numbers show that their airstrength was not even declining through the battle. If indeed the LW had a good reserve team, then the RAF had also their 12 squadrons of 13th group to play with if they liked.
Easy to say today, for at the time from both points of view it must have looked scary.
From the RAF side being under relentless pressure for so long without seeing any significant dent in the enemy's effort, and from the LW side doing all their best, still to meet the strongest enemy effort when there should have been no enemy!
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 Crumpp

  • Parolee
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3671
Spitfire IX overmodeled??
« Reply #456 on: February 12, 2004, 08:38:26 PM »
You want me to repost what the RAF concluded?? Or can U remember it?

Crumpp

Offline gripen

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1914
Spitfire IX overmodeled??
« Reply #457 on: February 12, 2004, 11:05:04 PM »
Crumpp,
Data please. Like this:

Fighter Command Serviceable Aircraft as at 0900 hours, 7th September 1940

* Blenheim - 44
* Spitfire - 223
* Hurricane - 398
* Defiant - 20
* Gladiator - 9
* Total - 694

Fighter Command Serviceable Aircraft as at 0900 hours, 15th September 1940

    * Blenheim - 47
    * Spitfire - 192
    * Hurricane - 389
    * Defiant - 24
    * Gladiator - 8
    * Total - 660

Fighter Command Serviceable Aircraft as at 0900 hours, 30th September 1940

    * Blenheim - 45
    * Spitfire - 218
    * Hurricane - 403
    * Defiant - 13
    * Gladiator - 8
    * Total - 687

gripen
« Last Edit: February 12, 2004, 11:10:43 PM by gripen »

Offline Crumpp

  • Parolee
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3671
Spitfire IX overmodeled??
« Reply #458 on: February 13, 2004, 06:42:20 AM »
I credited you with more sense than this.
What good is data without a conclusion?  Have you taken debate in school yet? :rolleyes:

Why bother to post more data.  This thread has a wealth of data posted by both sides.  To show one side is completely useless and to draw no conclusions from it is a waste of time.  Pure philibuster tactics.

Just go to any site and post their conclusion or comments about Phase II of the battle that support your increasingly desperate view.

I will concede your point IF you can find a site that draws the same conclusions you do!  How simple is that?  Post it and you have won the argument?  Otherwise you've slipped into a moronic babble about plane numbers which are neither new nor enlightening.  In fact your getting those numbers from the one of the sites I quote their conclusion!

Do not digress into irrelevancies.  All you have to do is POST:


ONE SITE THAT agrees with you that the LW couldn't have won if they continued to use Phase II tactics!

Do that AND:
 
You can shout "Hercules!! Hercules!!" and go home triumphant!

Crumpp

:aok

Offline gripen

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1914
Spitfire IX overmodeled??
« Reply #459 on: February 13, 2004, 07:30:43 AM »
Crumpp,
The question has been if there is statistics which supports the argument that the LW was actually winning BoB? If the relevant data exists then everyone can draw his/her own conclusion. All relevant data seen so far actually indicates that the LW was losing even in the 2nd phase despite what ever a historian or a web site concludes.

Basicly, if you want to prove that such data exists then please post it. So far you have stated just that you "don't need to waste a bunch of time with posting the statistics" because you have found a historian and web sites which support you. If you had stated this couple hunred messages ago, it would have saved really a bunch of time; it actually means that you don't want to discuss about this.

gripen

Offline Crumpp

  • Parolee
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3671
Spitfire IX overmodeled??
« Reply #460 on: February 13, 2004, 08:19:05 AM »
Good GOD!!:mad:
 
You want Stats, Just reference ANY of the sites you or I are posting from.  We are using the same ones for numbers, Moron.

I quoted the Imperial War Museum, The RAF, And a noted Historian CONCLUSIONS about phase II of the BoB!!

You have yet to produce ANY site which supports your conclusions.  Do it.  Simple as that.

Fact's are, you cannot.  Facts are, your argument is not supported by history.  Everytime I have asked you to that simple thing you have sidestepped it.
 

 
Here Gripen,


Just like this. As Agent Friday used to say, "Just the facts".


Even the Imperial War Museaum says the LW almost won in September.

http://www.iwm.org.uk/online/battle...in/overview.htm

"The crucial period of the battle was between 24 August and 15 September. Fighter Command came closest to losing when its vital sector airfields around London were attacked. The decisive turning point came on 7 September when the Luftwaffe switched its attention to the capital. This tactical blunder allowed Fighter Command to recover its strength rapidly to inflict, on 15 September, losses significant enough to show the Germans the battle could not be won."

Notice the wording: "Came closest to losing..."

No lets look at Lund's conclusions about the BoB found on page 26 of the his document and pg 31 under adobe thumbnails:

"In the final analysis, perhaps the Germans
could have won. Perhaps, if they had
aggressively pursued either campaign
strategy they could have won, but that will
always remain conjecture."

Gosh that is exactly what I have been saying.

http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/ww2/batlbrit.pdf


A site that deals in WWII artifacts:

"The Battle of Britain raged over the skies of southern England throughout that late summer of 1940 - the Luftwaffe lost a total of 1,733 aircraft from July to October, the RAF 915. Had he but known it, Göering was only 24 hours from victory at one point according to British Flight Command. All our reserves were spent and our pilots were exhausted. Incredibly, Göering decided that the Luftwaffe were taking too much of a punishment from the British fighters and he ordered his planes to switch their attention away from the British airfields and towards the British cities. Whilst this was bad news for the civilian populations of the industrial cities, this gave the R.A.F. and the aviation industry a reprieve and a crucial breather to re-arm and re-stock. It also meant that a German invasion of Britain had to be postponed and that Germany was soon to turn its attention eastwards - a decision which was arguably to cost them the war."


http://www.retrosellers.com/features61.htm

Notice it says "All our reserves were spent"


And Finally the Royal Air Force:


"Heavy fighter losses in France saw Dowding warn the War Cabinet of the dire consequences should the present wastage rates continue, and a letter dated 16 May 1940 is one of the great documents of history. After covering the evacuation from Dunkirk, he had just enough aircraft to fight the Luftwaffe in the one place they could be effectively used - within the comprehensive air defence system he had built in the UK. Even so, he admitted that the situation was "critical in the extreme" and while it is true that the immortal "Few" - his 'chicks' as Churchill christened them - won the Battle using the organisation he had created, the Luftwaffe lost it through bad leadership, faulty tactics and mistaken target selection."


http://www.raf.mod.uk/bob1940/commanders.html

Well that is straight from the horses mouth. Let see your sources without YOUR opinion placed on them. Just quote them without making an argument.

No amount of "data manipulation" to advance YOUR own view will change the facts of history.

End of Story

Crumpp

Offline gripen

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1914
Spitfire IX overmodeled??
« Reply #461 on: February 13, 2004, 08:53:28 AM »
Crumpp,
You should post relevant statistical data like numbers on the LW reserves. It has been pointed out several times that Lund's numbers are false. Retrosellers and the page you linked on the RAF site contains no any kind of relevant statistical data for analysis, just anecdotal comments.

The question is if there is relevat statistics which supports the argument that the LW was actually winning BoB. So far you have posted none. The facts needed are statistical data, not conclusions.

My argument is well supported in history: The RAF won BoB. All other is pure speculation as this whole discussion.

gripen

Offline Angus

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10057
Spitfire IX overmodeled??
« Reply #462 on: February 13, 2004, 10:15:12 AM »
Under the extremely critical situation, the RAF did not disband a squadron, they did not abandon a fighter station, their force actually grew, and they did not utilize the 12 squadrons kept under the command of 13th group.
The IInd phase switch by the LW gave the RAF some breathing space, however they could have moved several squadrons a bit further inland had they chosen to. It ALMOST came to that, that would have been what Dowding called a defeat. But it did not.
The British won a very decisive victory, and the LW was never again in any form to challenge them in daylight over Britain.

Crumpp, you are ranking yourself together with Barbi this time.
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 gripen

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1914
Spitfire IX overmodeled??
« Reply #463 on: February 13, 2004, 11:49:05 AM »
Basicly the problem in this thread is that Crumpp can't see the diffrence between the fact and a speculation.

gripen

Offline Crumpp

  • Parolee
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3671
Spitfire IX overmodeled??
« Reply #464 on: February 13, 2004, 04:31:38 PM »
So lets write the RAF, IWM and conventional History and PROCLAIM.....


WITHOUT a Shred of evidence to back his rewriting History..


Gripen has showed us the light!!

                       :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl

Just post a ONE SINGLE SITE THAT  SAYS THE SAME THING YOU DO GRIPEN!


Don't try and warp the argument for those too lazy to read the thread.  Nobody is claiming the RAF didn't win the BoB or even remotely saying the LW could have destroyed the RAF.  

I want to see were the RAF wasn't losing and in a critical point at the end of Phase II?  Even the RAF say it was!!

Crumpp