Luftwaffe and Allied Air Forces Discussion Forum  

Go Back   Luftwaffe and Allied Air Forces Discussion Forum > Discussion > Allied and Soviet Air Forces

Allied and Soviet Air Forces Please use this forum to discuss the Air Forces of the Western Allies and the Soviet Union.

 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #11  
Old 27th July 2007, 17:36
tcolvin tcolvin is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Topsham, England
Posts: 422
tcolvin is on a distinguished road
Re: Placing the Fairey Battle.

Quote:
Originally Posted by RodM View Post
Tony,

"You say 'ill-prepared'. The mot juste is 'incompetent'. "

Based on this 'measurement' it stands to reason that the army was incompetent for not being equipped and ready to effectively counter the Blitzkrieg, or incompetant in the defence of Greece, Crete and Singapore. Then again, the navy must have been incompetant for allowing the successful 'Channel Dash', losing the Repulse and Prince of Wales, and not being able to effectively deal with the U-Boat threat between 1939-41.

Cheers

Rod
The policy of 'Limited liability' meant that almost all the money went to the RAF throughout the 1930's rearmament. The RAF got what it wanted. That is the basis of the charge of incompetence. The RAF was not constrained. They wanted Fairey Battles and they got them; Blenheims, Hampdens, Wellingtons, Spitfires, Hurricanes - anything they wanted, and as many of them as they wanted.

The army got very little until the last moment. The RAF fought against all attempts by the army to get money, and they succeeded. The RAF claimed it could sink battleships, so the RN did not need money for new battleships. That was why Bismarck and Tirpitz were the largest battleships in the world when they were launched. Think of that. And how long did it take the RAF to sink the Tirpitz? You know the answer. Was it 5 years?

The RN was convicted of incompetence over the Channel Dash. But where were the bombers that the RAF promised could sink any battleship nearing Britain's shores? The money had been spent on bombers. Where were they?

The sinking of POW and Repulse was due to the weakness of the RAF in Malaysia. There were masses of RAF fighters whiling away the time on tarmac in Britain with nothing to do because their enemy was fighting the Russians. The RAF should have been in Malaya.

The RN lacked escorts in 1939-41 to sink U-boats. Churchill begged FDR for 50 rust bucket three-stackers from FDR. Why was the RN short of escorts? You guessed it. They had been denied the funds because the RAF had to have the money, and with it the RAF would destroy any threat up until the moment they were sked to deliver on their promises Then, oops, the excuses started, such as the excuse that the Fairey Battle was obsolescent.

As I have been saying all along; air was too important to be left to the RAF.
Reply With Quote
 

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
12 SQUADRON FAIREY BATTLE L4949 malcolmjameswilson Allied and Soviet Air Forces 4 4th May 2007 17:15
Downed Fairey Battle D-RH Griffon Luftwaffe and Axis Air Forces 8 23rd July 2006 09:12
Battle Of Britain Books Jim Oxley Books and Magazines 3 13th March 2006 05:56
Claims identites Adam Allied and Soviet Air Forces 3 27th May 2005 00:05
Non-Operational Unit victories in the Battle of Britain Larry Allied and Soviet Air Forces 2 6th January 2005 23:05


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 04:45.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2026, 12oclockhigh.net