Real time Discusion thread

[stevep]

Aug 25, 2019 10:53:01 GMT lordroel said:

Aug 25, 2019 10:46:04 GMT stevep said:

  Lordroel

  No problem.  Your putting in a lot of work and providing a valuable record that could be very useful for writers of future TLs as there's a lot of information neatly coordinated by date there.  With the scale of the projects and the fact your updating them daily some things are bound to slip through.  I did add a PS to my previous post that I suspect another paragraph is a propaganda story or possibly some serious misunderstanding by tired and confused troops. - Where some Germans disguised as French forces attacked some of Haig's 1st Corp men.

  Steve

I try to work a month ahead of the Great War, this allow me to update and add stuff to them op onto the day i need to publish them, the same goes for the Second World War timeline, also i have completed the Cuban missile Crisis project and which i find very good, i am now thinking depending if i get enough information to work on and begin the Gulf War - Operation Desert Storm in real time projecht.

I also have the Spanish-America War under consideration, that is if i get daily events for it.

  Bloody hell, that's a workload.  Mind you it could get worse.  A day by day for the French Revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars 1793-1815 - a 23 year project - would be a step [or 20 ] too far.

  Even with preparing them a month beforehand your still got to present everything in pretty much real time, i.e. an entry each day.  Please don't overdo it.

  Steve

[lordroel]

Aug 25, 2019 13:19:55 GMT stevep said:

Aug 25, 2019 10:53:01 GMT lordroel said:

I try to work a month ahead of the Great War, this allow me to update and add stuff to them op onto the day i need to publish them, the same goes for the Second World War timeline, also i have completed the Cuban missile Crisis project and which i find very good, i am now thinking depending if i get enough information to work on and begin the Gulf War - Operation Desert Storm in real time projecht.

I also have the Spanish-America War under consideration, that is if i get daily events for it.

  Bloody hell, that's a workload.  Mind you it could get worse.  A day by day for the French Revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars 1793-1815 - a 23 year project - would be a step [or 20 ] too far.

  Even with preparing them a month beforehand your still got to present everything in pretty much real time, i.e. an entry each day.  Please don't overdo it.

  Steve

Well you might be true, it is a worload, but i have fun making it.

At lease stevep, you have not ask me to make the 100 Years War in realtime, but i think smaller project lasting not longer than a year might be good to do if as i have said, there is a daily update for it, one war i might think of doing also is the Football War of 1969, if i can get enough information for the 4 days of fighting that is.

I will promise not to over do it.

[stevep]

   Lordroel

  Something of a duplication in the WWII thread today.  Under the Battle of the Atlantic you have:

In Iceland, The Costal Command of the RAF establishes an air base to help in convoy protection. At this stage there are only outdated Fairey Battle aircraft situated there, but this base will soon expand. RAF Coastal Command begins anti-U-boat patrols from Iceland, using the Fairey Battle aircraft.

  Then separately at the end under an Iceland heading you have:

RAF Coastal Command establishes its first air base to protect the sea lanes. This is becoming urgent because the U-boats operating out of French ports now can reach out into the middle of the Atlantic. The first patrols use obsolete Fairey Battles. The patrols are only as good as the aircraft used, and the increasing range of operation of RAF (and later USAAF) aircraft is destined to have a major influence on the Battle of the Atlantic.

 

  Also a misspelling of coastal in the 1st case.

   Steve

[stevep]

   Lordroel

  On the this day thread a small point but for the entry.

1810 – Napoleonic Wars: The French Navy defeats the British Royal Navy, preventing them from taking the harbour of Grand Port on Île de France.

  It might be useful that this was the name for what is now called Mauritius and according to its Wiki entry was also its preceding name before the French occupied it in 1715.  Otherwise since the term Île de France is generally used to refer to the central region of N France around Paris it might be a bit confusing.

  Thanks

  Steve

[lordroel]

Aug 27, 2019 11:12:33 GMT stevep said:

   Lordroel

  Something of a duplication in the WWII thread today.  Under the Battle of the Atlantic you have:

In Iceland, The Costal Command of the RAF establishes an air base to help in convoy protection. At this stage there are only outdated Fairey Battle aircraft situated there, but this base will soon expand. RAF Coastal Command begins anti-U-boat patrols from Iceland, using the Fairey Battle aircraft.

  Then separately at the end under an Iceland heading you have:

RAF Coastal Command establishes its first air base to protect the sea lanes. This is becoming urgent because the U-boats operating out of French ports now can reach out into the middle of the Atlantic. The first patrols use obsolete Fairey Battles. The patrols are only as good as the aircraft used, and the increasing range of operation of RAF (and later USAAF) aircraft is destined to have a major influence on the Battle of the Atlantic.

 

  Also a misspelling of coastal in the 1st case.

   Steve

Seems I need another proof reader troll, will fix it.

[lordroel]

Zo we are now 1 year in the World War II in the real time project, any comments so far.

[stevep]

Sept 1, 2019 7:38:07 GMT lordroel said:

Zo we are now 1 year in the World War II in the real time project, any comments so far.

  A hell of a lot of detail and reading the recent days activity in the BoB it shows just how the RAF was being pressed.  I think we're got used to the idea that a German invasion was never on, if only because they lacked the capacity and the RN would, albeit probably at some loss, have slaughtered any forces caught at sea.  However your articles shows how great the strain was on the men and women involved in the front line battles FC was involved in.

[lordroel]

Sept 1, 2019 10:19:01 GMT stevep said:

Sept 1, 2019 7:38:07 GMT lordroel said:

Zo we are now 1 year in the World War II in the real time project, any comments so far.

  A hell of a lot of detail and reading the recent days activity in the BoB it shows just how the RAF was being pressed.  I think we're got used to the idea that a German invasion was never on, if only because they lacked the capacity and the RN would, albeit probably at some loss, have slaughtered any forces caught at sea.  However your articles shows how great the strain was on the men and women involved in the front line battles FC was involved in.

And we know the Battle of Britain is not over, the worst has yet to come.

[stevep]

   Lordroel

  In todays WWII post I noticed a typo.  You had

Hptm. Wilhelm Balthasar of Stab III./JG 3 destroyed his twenty-fourth Allied aircraft southeast of London before being severely wounded. He made it back to England but was out of war operations until February 1941.

  Presuming that should be France rather than England?

However, as it stands in early September, if Sea Lion is ever to be attempted, it should be done immediately. The imminent arrival of the 50 destroyers from the United States (see below) would turn the naval equation solidly and permanently against the Germans, but those ships will take time to arrive. Having Luftwaffe bases established on both sides of the Channel before their arrival would largely nullify their local impact.

  I would say this would be a dubious assumption.  By most accounts the 50 DDs were not only of a fairly obsolete design but also in bad conditions so it too some time before they could be used in RN service.  Also they were used overwhelmingly where they were most needed, i.e. in the Atlantic.  The RN already had an overwhelming superiority in northern waters in terms of stopping and probably slaughtering any invasion/supply units they caught.  I think the boat had already sailed in terms of any chance of a successful Sealion, if such a thing ever existed.

Hitler also reaches a decision on Operation Sea Lion based on this discussion, or at least flowing from the decision announced at it. Operation Sea Lion is on. Hitler's orders provide that the Wehrmacht will be given 10-days lead time before the invasion. The new earliest date for Operation Sea Lion landings now is moved from 15 September to 21 September (S-Day), with the ships to sail on 20 September.

The plan now (it has gone through numerous revisions) is to land two airborne divisions first, followed by nine other divisions. Included will be 250 panzers. The 16th Army will land four divisions at Folkestone, while 9th Army will and 2 divisions at Eastbourne and 3 divisions at Brighton. They would face a dozen British divisions of varying states of readiness. The UK has an inventory of roughly 350 Valentine and Matilda tanks (Prime Minister Churchill having just sent off several shiploads to the Middle East) and 500 antitank weapons - a strong, but not overwhelming, defensive force. The 9 picked Wehrmacht divisions against the assorted British divisions would be a fair fight.

With the benefit of omniscience derived from hindsight, knowing the true state of affairs on both sides as of 3 September 1940, the decision to invade England probably already is too late. The British military has recovered, strengthened its defenses, and fought the Luftwaffe to a standstill. RAF Fighter Command is bowed but not broken; even after large recent losses, it has 600-700 fighters ready to defend the beaches - not the 100-350 believed by the Luftwaffe. The Royal Navy remains amply able to defend the Channel. More importantly, the British (via Churchill's rapport with Roosevelt) have solidified their arrangements with the Americans and made them virtual allies in the war. An invasion in July 1940, with a maximum Luftwaffe effort to establish temporary local air superiority rather than frittering away strength on other attacks, would have made infinitely more sense despite the obvious risks.

However, as it stands in early September, if Sea Lion is ever to be attempted, it should be done immediately. The imminent arrival of the 50 destroyers from the United States (see below) would turn the naval equation solidly and permanently against the Germans, but those ships will take time to arrive. Having Luftwaffe bases established on both sides of the Channel before their arrival would largely nullify their local impact.

It is now or never for the Wehrmacht in terms of defeating England by frontal assault (as opposed to either economic strangulation at sea or a peripheral strategy in the Mediterranean, neither of which have worked against the British previously). At least making the effort with a reasonable possibility of success would be worth any number of losses. Leaving the British undefeated at your back - especially if you have some half-cocked notions of starting new wars in the East - is never a winning proposition. The British must be finished off once and for all, and any price is worth paying once they have their hands around your neck. Peace terms must be slapped down on the throne at Buckingham Palace quickly or the British will never go away and ultimately find a way to beat you: there is 300 years of history to prove that, going back to Philip II. Napoleon would nod in agreement.

Operation Sea Lion is a huge gamble, and Hitler is the biggest military gambler of the millennium. The attempt seems worthwhile - but right away, not in 1941. Time is the Wehrmacht's enemy. This decision is perhaps the biggest of the war.

  You repeat this entire section.  It might be best to delete the 1st version as then Hitler's statement calling for the burning of London is immediately followed by the paragraph criticising it, which I suspect is what you intended.

[lordroel]

Sept 3, 2019 10:50:39 GMT stevep said:

   Lordroel

  In todays WWII post I noticed a typo.  You had

Hptm. Wilhelm Balthasar of Stab III./JG 3 destroyed his twenty-fourth Allied aircraft southeast of London before being severely wounded. He made it back to England but was out of war operations until February 1941.

  Presuming that should be France rather than England?

However, as it stands in early September, if Sea Lion is ever to be attempted, it should be done immediately. The imminent arrival of the 50 destroyers from the United States (see below) would turn the naval equation solidly and permanently against the Germans, but those ships will take time to arrive. Having Luftwaffe bases established on both sides of the Channel before their arrival would largely nullify their local impact.

  I would say this would be a dubious assumption.  By most accounts the 50 DDs were not only of a fairly obsolete design but also in bad conditions so it too some time before they could be used in RN service.  Also they were used overwhelmingly where they were most needed, i.e. in the Atlantic.  The RN already had an overwhelming superiority in northern waters in terms of stopping and probably slaughtering any invasion/supply units they caught.  I think the boat had already sailed in terms of any chance of a successful Sealion, if such a thing ever existed.

Hitler also reaches a decision on Operation Sea Lion based on this discussion, or at least flowing from the decision announced at it. Operation Sea Lion is on. Hitler's orders provide that the Wehrmacht will be given 10-days lead time before the invasion. The new earliest date for Operation Sea Lion landings now is moved from 15 September to 21 September (S-Day), with the ships to sail on 20 September.

The plan now (it has gone through numerous revisions) is to land two airborne divisions first, followed by nine other divisions. Included will be 250 panzers. The 16th Army will land four divisions at Folkestone, while 9th Army will and 2 divisions at Eastbourne and 3 divisions at Brighton. They would face a dozen British divisions of varying states of readiness. The UK has an inventory of roughly 350 Valentine and Matilda tanks (Prime Minister Churchill having just sent off several shiploads to the Middle East) and 500 antitank weapons - a strong, but not overwhelming, defensive force. The 9 picked Wehrmacht divisions against the assorted British divisions would be a fair fight.

With the benefit of omniscience derived from hindsight, knowing the true state of affairs on both sides as of 3 September 1940, the decision to invade England probably already is too late. The British military has recovered, strengthened its defenses, and fought the Luftwaffe to a standstill. RAF Fighter Command is bowed but not broken; even after large recent losses, it has 600-700 fighters ready to defend the beaches - not the 100-350 believed by the Luftwaffe. The Royal Navy remains amply able to defend the Channel. More importantly, the British (via Churchill's rapport with Roosevelt) have solidified their arrangements with the Americans and made them virtual allies in the war. An invasion in July 1940, with a maximum Luftwaffe effort to establish temporary local air superiority rather than frittering away strength on other attacks, would have made infinitely more sense despite the obvious risks.

However, as it stands in early September, if Sea Lion is ever to be attempted, it should be done immediately. The imminent arrival of the 50 destroyers from the United States (see below) would turn the naval equation solidly and permanently against the Germans, but those ships will take time to arrive. Having Luftwaffe bases established on both sides of the Channel before their arrival would largely nullify their local impact.

It is now or never for the Wehrmacht in terms of defeating England by frontal assault (as opposed to either economic strangulation at sea or a peripheral strategy in the Mediterranean, neither of which have worked against the British previously). At least making the effort with a reasonable possibility of success would be worth any number of losses. Leaving the British undefeated at your back - especially if you have some half-cocked notions of starting new wars in the East - is never a winning proposition. The British must be finished off once and for all, and any price is worth paying once they have their hands around your neck. Peace terms must be slapped down on the throne at Buckingham Palace quickly or the British will never go away and ultimately find a way to beat you: there is 300 years of history to prove that, going back to Philip II. Napoleon would nod in agreement.

Operation Sea Lion is a huge gamble, and Hitler is the biggest military gambler of the millennium. The attempt seems worthwhile - but right away, not in 1941. Time is the Wehrmacht's enemy. This decision is perhaps the biggest of the war.

  You repeat this entire section.  It might be best to delete the 1st version as then Hitler's statement calling for the burning of London is immediately followed by the paragraph criticising it, which I suspect is what you intended.

Thans, edit it.

[stevep]

Sept 3, 2019 10:53:30 GMT lordroel said:

Sept 3, 2019 10:50:39 GMT stevep said:

   Lordroel

  In todays WWII post I noticed a typo.  You had

  Presuming that should be France rather than England?

  I would say this would be a dubious assumption.  By most accounts the 50 DDs were not only of a fairly obsolete design but also in bad conditions so it too some time before they could be used in RN service.  Also they were used overwhelmingly where they were most needed, i.e. in the Atlantic.  The RN already had an overwhelming superiority in northern waters in terms of stopping and probably slaughtering any invasion/supply units they caught.  I think the boat had already sailed in terms of any chance of a successful Sealion, if such a thing ever existed.

  You repeat this entire section.  It might be best to delete the 1st version as then Hitler's statement calling for the burning of London is immediately followed by the paragraph criticising it, which I suspect is what you intended.

Thans, edit it.

  Lordroel

  You removed the big duplication but also a short paragraph criticising Hitler's decision and his preference for burning things/enemies.  Suspect that wasn't intended.  Also still have the 1st typo about the German pilot being badly injured but making it back to England.

  Steve

[lordroel]

Sept 3, 2019 11:30:11 GMT stevep said:

Sept 3, 2019 10:53:30 GMT lordroel said:

Thans, edit it.

  Lordroel

  You removed the big duplication but also a short paragraph criticising Hitler's decision and his preference for burning things/enemies.  Suspect that wasn't intended.  Also still have the 1st typo about the German pilot being badly injured but making it back to England.

  Steve

Sorry, my trolls are doing their best during my vacation, will fix it when I have time.

[stevep]

   Lordroel

   On the WWII thread a couple of points:
a) There is a bit early on:

Three Spitfires took off and made for their vectored position at twenty-eight thousand

   Is this 28,000 feet height or some reference to bearing or location?

b) The last paragraph, under China is:

In fact, the decision to bomb London that he announces a few breaths later assures the Luftwaffe's ultimate defeat. This is a major turning point in World War II.

   Assuming that should be much higher, in the discussion about the decision to switch to attacking London rather than FC airfields and facilities.  This is the traditional view although I have seen it argued otherwise and as the thread has mentioned there have been earlier attacks on London and other cities, especially by night but sometimes by day.

  If the LW had continued attacking the airfields they might have forced a temporary withdrawal from the south east and No. 11 group area but an attempt to invade is still likely to be a costly failure for the Germans.  Plus changing the focus to London allows FC and the producing factories to recover.  While a full scale invasion attempt, even on a short front gives the LW so many different roles, often under difficult conditions and would be unable to continue attacking either urban centres or fighter bases to any degree.  Their fighters, especially the Me 109s which they were running low on would have been commited to far more escort operations with FC being able to decide when it could commit forces against them.

  Steve

[lordroel]

Sept 6, 2019 10:30:09 GMT stevep said:

b) The last paragraph, under China is:

In fact, the decision to bomb London that he announces a few breaths later assures the Luftwaffe's ultimate defeat. This is a major turning point in World War II.

   Assuming that should be much higher, in the discussion about the decision to switch to attacking London rather than FC airfields and facilities.  This is the traditional view although I have seen it argued otherwise and as the thread has mentioned there have been earlier attacks on London and other cities, especially by night but sometimes by day.

  If the LW had continued attacking the airfields they might have forced a temporary withdrawal from the south east and No. 11 group area but an attempt to invade is still likely to be a costly failure for the Germans.  Plus changing the focus to London allows FC and the producing factories to recover.  While a full scale invasion attempt, even on a short front gives the LW so many different roles, often under difficult conditions and would be unable to continue attacking either urban centres or fighter bases to any degree.  Their fighters, especially the Me 109s which they were running low on would have been commited to far more escort operations with FC being able to decide when it could commit forces against them.

  Steve

Even then I would assume the LW would loss the Battle of Britain, ore am I wrong.

[stevep]

Sept 6, 2019 10:37:39 GMT lordroel said:

Sept 6, 2019 10:30:09 GMT stevep said:

b) The last paragraph, under China is:

   Assuming that should be much higher, in the discussion about the decision to switch to attacking London rather than FC airfields and facilities.  This is the traditional view although I have seen it argued otherwise and as the thread has mentioned there have been earlier attacks on London and other cities, especially by night but sometimes by day.

  If the LW had continued attacking the airfields they might have forced a temporary withdrawal from the south east and No. 11 group area but an attempt to invade is still likely to be a costly failure for the Germans.  Plus changing the focus to London allows FC and the producing factories to recover.  While a full scale invasion attempt, even on a short front gives the LW so many different roles, often under difficult conditions and would be unable to continue attacking either urban centres or fighter bases to any degree.  Their fighters, especially the Me 109s which they were running low on would have been commited to far more escort operations with FC being able to decide when it could commit forces against them.

  Steve

Even then I would assume the LW would loss the Battle of Britain, ore am I wrong.

  Given what's being reported in the thread I could see FC being forced to withdraw from the 11th Group sector and its bases so likely Goring and the regime would claim a victory here.  However as I say an invasion would fail, probably fairly disastrously for the Germans.  If they didn't come then I could see a continued war of attrition that would eventually force the LW to withdraw.  Simply by bombing London by day their giving FC more time to respond while the Me 109's have very little time to operate that far north.  Plus damaged LW a/c have further to go to reach safety or even the channel so their manpower losses are likely to increase significantly.  As such its costly for both sides but the greater production in the UK and training of pilots plus the home advantage is likely to make it worse for the Germans.

  This is of course ignoring that at some point the LW will have to withdraw to rebuild itself as best it can before Barbarossa.