[John Vasco]

Ruy,
Perhaps you should answer this: "...Why fill the canal ports with several thousand barges stripped from every river and canal in west Europe? Was it a fun exercise to make us laugh?..."
and this: "...Hmmm, let's waste a lot of staff time and aircrew time by fitting the Bf 110s of 1./Erpr. Gr. 210 with the Seilbomben device control box in the cockpit, and the frame and other accoutrements in stock on the airfield, and devote training time to teaching the crews how the device works, and issue them with maps of southern England showing the exact layout of the HT cable network and what the exact targets would be once the invasion was given the green light. Were the Germans just messing around doing such things? Or was it more a case of them being caught on the hop by the speed of their victory in the Western Camapign of May/June 1940, and so plans to subdue Britain permanently had not reached any kind of advanced stage?...

You see, when you have discussed the latter issue with the Adjutant of the said unit at the time, you do tend to get the whole story of what was going on, and what was intended, the 'bigger picture' so to speak. Believe me, Wolfgang Schenck had the whole lot on it, wrote it down in detail for me. Karl Stoff, a 1. Staffel Bordfunker who would have operated the control box, was able to draw a diagram of the frame that was to be bolted to the underside of the Bf 110, and how the Seilbomben would be in place and released.Would the Germans go to this much trouble for no intention? I very much doubt it.

And you say: "...to fully understand the Battle of Britain also requires the German view of events..." Well, there's a German side of events that I would welcome your comment on (even if it doesn't fit the current myth of no invasion whatsoever).

Over to you, Ruy.