Jack Posted December 21, 2007 Share Posted December 21, 2007 So how many myths are out there regarding WW2.......??? I am going to start and happy to be corrected :coffee2: 1. Jeeps lasted longer than there predicted 'two' week life span? 2. GMC's were never known as Deuce & Half's during the war - this was a Korean/Vietnam period term? 3. Spitfires were not the hero's of the Battle of Britain - it was in fact the Hurricane with a 60% kill ratio? 4. Britain never won the Battle of Britain - the Germans lost it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N.O.S. Posted December 21, 2007 Share Posted December 21, 2007 3. Spitfires were not the hero's of the Battle of Britain - it was in fact the Hurricane with a 60% kill ratio? For SPITFIRE and HURRICANE, read PILOTS ? :whistle: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nick Johns Posted December 21, 2007 Share Posted December 21, 2007 And the good old favourite that there was always someone who knew someone who had bought a new Jeep still in its crate after the war for £10.....yeah right :roll: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony B Posted December 21, 2007 Share Posted December 21, 2007 As for number one. The expected life span of a vehicle in combat was 3,000 hours or 125 days. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick W Posted December 21, 2007 Share Posted December 21, 2007 No. 4. The germans decided to stop, they could have continued but didnt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snapper Posted December 21, 2007 Share Posted December 21, 2007 No. 4. The germans decided to stop, they could have continued but didnt. Interesting. They did make the tactical change from hitting airfields to bombing cities, which is attributed to the victory because the change seriously improved Dowding's options. But you are entirely correct that in terms of attrition they could have gone on and on. However, we also know the whole point of the battle was to prepare for an invasion for which they were wholly unprepared in real terms, how they were supposed to land from barges in places like Rye bay is a bit of a mystery. And of course, der Fuhrer's eyes had fatally turned to the East. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ashley Posted December 21, 2007 Share Posted December 21, 2007 So how many myths are out there regarding WW2.......??? 3. Spitfires were not the hero's of the Battle of Britain - it was in fact the Hurricane with a 60% kill ratio? Hi, i belive that there was actually more Hurricanes than Spitfires in the R.A.F. at the time, but the Spitfire being new was credited with winning the battle for the R.A.F propaganda to strike fear into the Axis forces / civilian populace and confidence into the Allied forces / civilian populace... Ashley Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abn deuce Posted December 21, 2007 Share Posted December 21, 2007 2. GMC's were never known as Deuce & Half's during the war - this was a Korean/Vietnam period term? From all that I know this #2 is true , the terms I have read that were used during WWII were ...6 By or 6 By 6......Jimmy or GMC.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick W Posted December 21, 2007 Share Posted December 21, 2007 Sorry about this , but who is your avatar Jack, its bugging me. Looks like some folky bloke? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
antarmike Posted December 21, 2007 Share Posted December 21, 2007 A saw a very beleivable TV program in which it was claimed Hitler never seriously intended to invade britain. He did not have enough landing craft, he had no way of bringing over armour, his navy would have been blown apart by a very powerful and intact Royal Navy, and his sights were always set on Russia after taking France and the low countries. The RAF did not save Britain from invasion, it was never a real possibility. The progarm called on some poeple very close to Hitler to support the claim that Britain was a half hearted side show.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick W Posted December 21, 2007 Share Posted December 21, 2007 Wasnt it because Hitler always believed England would become allied to Germany? Therefore had no desire to destroy ts forces, hence letting a majority of forces out of Dunkirk and holding his troops, where he could have swept in? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rambo1969 Posted December 22, 2007 Share Posted December 22, 2007 Another myth is that everyone stuck together and the wartime spirit was unbreakable. But there was plenty of looting and thieveing, my grandad even shot a looter during the war. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
antarmike Posted December 22, 2007 Share Posted December 22, 2007 another myth is that everyone helped build Spitfires by giving their pots and pans and the railings from their front walls. There was the biggest pile of totally unsuitable scrap collected. It kept the public happy cos they thought they were making sacrfifices and helping, but what they gave would have been best laft were it was. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony B Posted December 22, 2007 Share Posted December 22, 2007 A saw a very beleivable TV program in which it was claimed Hitler never seriously intended to invade britain. He did not have enough landing craft, he had no way of bringing over armour, his navy would have been blown apart by a very powerful and intact Royal Navy, and his sights were always set on Russia after taking France and the low countries. The RAF did not save Britain from invasion, it was never a real possibility. The progarm called on some poeple very close to Hitler to support the claim that Britain was a half hearted side show.... Operation Sealion was gamed in 1978 at Shrievnham Staff College. The participants were both British and German genrals who would have been in command. The outcome was the collapse of the German forces after 3 days. Mainly because the Royal Navy interdicted the Logistic lines. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Hayward Posted December 22, 2007 Share Posted December 22, 2007 Another 'myth' of WW2 is that the USA had no idea that the Japanese would attack Pearl Harbour. That dastardly attack was a complete surprise - I think not! And what 'luck' that all the US Navy Carriers, that were essential to operations in the Pacific, just happened to be out at sea at the time! It's an interesting thought, how things might have been if the US Navy had intercepted and sunk the Japanese Carriers on the way to Pearl Harbour. US public opinion might have accused their own side of starting an unnecessary war and blamed the military for attacking a poor defenseless Japanese Navy 'just out on manoeuvres' in international waters. As it happened the 'surprise' attack was so shocking that US was able to join the war on the Allies side - for which GB must be truly thankfull, as without them we would never had won WW2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woa2 Posted December 22, 2007 Share Posted December 22, 2007 another myth is that everyone helped build Spitfires by giving their pots and pans and the railings from their front walls. There was the biggest pile of totally unsuitable scrap collected. It kept the public happy cos they thought they were making sacrfifices and helping, but what they gave would have been best laft were it was. I have seen photographs of the railings being used as re-inforcing in the concrete of Pill Box construction. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pop larkin Posted December 22, 2007 Share Posted December 22, 2007 How about the one where General Patton came to the rescue of the 101st Airborne in the battle of the Bulge. To this day the 101st denies that it ever needed to be rescued :-) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bodger Baz Posted December 22, 2007 Share Posted December 22, 2007 How about the one where General Patton came to the rescue of the 101st Airborne in the battle of the Bulge. To this day the 101st denies that it ever needed to be rescued :-) the 101st needing to be rescued!!! NEVER :shake:!!! they won the war single handed, didn't they?!?!? :rofl: :rofl: :tup: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jessie The Jeep Posted December 22, 2007 Share Posted December 22, 2007 I thought John Mills, David Niven and Noel Coward won the war?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Posted December 22, 2007 Author Share Posted December 22, 2007 How about the one where General Patton came to the rescue of the 101st Airborne in the battle of the Bulge. To this day the 101st denies that it ever needed to be rescued :-) Yes that is an interesting one - their casualty was so high that wouldn't have been able to hold for much longer than they did. Further more - E Company (BoB fame) suffered less casualties than most - 501st took huge casualties. The tank battalions played a massive role in the defense of Bastogne - but not very often acknowledged. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Posted December 22, 2007 Author Share Posted December 22, 2007 Yes that is an interesting one - their casualty was so high that wouldn't have been able to hold for much longer than they did. Further more - E Company (BoB fame) suffered less casualties than most Just to put it into context and in the first two weeks of fighting the casualtie list for E/506th from 18 December to 31 December, 1944 is: KIA-none, MIA-none, 1 Seriously Wounded in Action (SWA), and 3 Lightly Wounded in Action For A/506th Don Burgett's company (same time period) 15 KIA, plus 3 DOW (Died of Wounds), plus 7 MIA, with 43 SWA and 13 LWA Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Enigma Posted December 22, 2007 Share Posted December 22, 2007 About Pearl Harbour; military the best thing for the US was to get attacked while in the harbour..politacally also. Why? Simple; a ship sunk in the ocean can't be salvaged...almost ALL ships got back in the war within a short span of time. Also sailors inside the harbour water had a good chance to get ashore, in the sea they wouldn't have made it. The thing about seeing the airplanes on Radar but believing it to be B-17's, just imagine all the ships trying to get to the sea and getting caught offshore or iside the harbour entrance, sinking and blocking it... Politics, a surprise attack arouses the best response (infamy). When warned about the attack and responding the US would still be annihalated with maximum loss of morale because they wouldn't be able to fight the Japs whom they considered inferiour...after Pearl Harbour all opposition to join the war was gone. Still a lot of lost lives but less when they had a open battle in the Sea... About the carriers, could they have defended the Harbour or fleet in open Sea? The Japs were superiour in dogfighting with there vulnerable but more agile Zero's. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick W Posted December 22, 2007 Share Posted December 22, 2007 Two fat ladies - 88 Bingo reference but the name 2 fat ladies given to Flak 88's which usually operated in pairs, true or false? I dont know... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ackack Posted December 26, 2007 Share Posted December 26, 2007 As for number one. The expected life span of a vehicle in combat was 3,000 hours or 125 days. There were over a million allied vehicles stockpiled in Europe at the end of the war. Actual production wasn't a great deal more than this so the sums don't seem to add up. We did leave behind 75,000 vehicles and guns at Dunkirk with only about 5000 remaining in the UK! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Farrant Posted December 26, 2007 Share Posted December 26, 2007 There were over a million allied vehicles stockpiled in Europe at the end of the war. Actual production wasn't a great deal more than this so the sums don't seem to add up. To add to all this, the US Governments life expectancy of the Willys jeep was 90 days, so why are there so many of them still around? Probably because many did not see actual combat. All these figures banded about on "life expectancy", were purely guess work so that they could work out in advance, required production figures, again, not knowing when the war would end either. Also, vehicles were being rebuilt or overhauled so unless written of in a crash or blown up, they were in effect, recycled. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.