View Single Post
  #2  
Old 27th July 2007, 14:22
Nick Beale's Avatar
Nick Beale Nick Beale is offline
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Exeter, England
Posts: 6,221
Nick Beale is a jewel in the roughNick Beale is a jewel in the roughNick Beale is a jewel in the roughNick Beale is a jewel in the rough
Re: Placing the Fairey Battle.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tcolvin View Post
But Hastings is one who would say the Battle was obsolescent. So we have gone full circle, and are back at the beginning. The Battle was a newer design than the Bf109 for example.
BC was not 'ill-prepared' except in the sense that its tactics and philosophy of war were wrong. BC believed in a strategic air force when what was needed was all-arms.
BC was not 'largely ill-equipped' unless you think the Battle was obsolescent.
BC was ill-equipped only in the sense that it lacked the weapons to do what it wanted, which was to knock Germany out of the war through bombing.
It is immaterial that the Battle's design was newer than the Bf 109, it was obsolete because by May 1940 it didn't have a prayer anywhere in daylight where there were Bf 109s above it or Flak concentrations below it. It was neither suitable for the environment it had to fight in nor did it have the development potential to make/keep it viable.

I say that Bomber Command was ill-prepared to conduct the war it had dreamed of fighting since, according to Hastings, it appears not to have tested the concept in any meaningful way and then taken steps to adapt to the lessons learned. It seems rather to have placed its faith in prophesies (Douhet, Mitchell, maybe even H.G. Wells for all I know). Being properly prepared to conduct strategic bombing still doesn't mean it'll work of course.
__________________
Nick Beale
http://www.ghostbombers.com
Reply With Quote