soc.history.war.world-war-ii

"Robert Sveinson" wrote in message
news:70jBj.14142$0M3.1580@newsfe17.lga...
> "Louis C" wrote in message
> news:ec23b7fe-a9a2-4629-8812-a2b0a14f4e42@34g2000hsz.googlegroups.com...
>
>> Richard Davis now seems to have put his book online so everyone can
>> access it.
>
>> The text is available here:
>
> For the bombing of Hamburg that resulted in the fire storm
> no credit is given to the USAAF for their contribution.

Since the USAAF did not cause the firestorm it seems strange they
should be given credit. Tons = short tons = 2,000 pounds.

Germany 8th Air Force target Hamburg/Blohm & Voss
25-Jul-1943 UB/Yards Visual bombing by 68 aircraft 12 lost
100.0 tons of HE and 56.0 tons of incendiaries

Germany 8th Air Force target Hamburg/Howald 26-Jul-1943
UB/Yards Visual bombing by 54 bombers 2 lost 97.0 tons of HE
and 29.2 tons of incendiaries.

> For the bombing of Dresden the USAAF is not given any credit
> for bombing on October 7, 1944, nor any credit for their bombing
> on January 16, 1945.

Germany 8th Air Force target Dresden/Friedrichstrasse 7-Oct-1944
Industrial Area, Visual bombing by 30 aircraft 72.5 tons of HE dropped.

Germany 8th Air Force target Dresden 16-Jan-1945 Marshalling
Yard Visual bombing by 133 aircraft 2 of which were lost, 279.8 tons
of HE and 41.6 tons of incendiaries dropped.

> Credit for the USAAF bombing of Dresden on March 2, 1945
> has also been omitted.

Germany 8th Air Force target Dresden 2-Mar-1945 Marshalling
Yard H2X bombing by 406 aircraft of which 8 were lost 940.3 tons
of HE and 140.5 tons of incendiaries were dropped.

> It also appears that the USAAF bombing of Schaufhausen
> is missing.

Switzerland 8th Air Force, Schaffhausen (note spelling) 1-Apr-1944
Industrial Area using H2X 38 aircraft dropping 23.2 tons of HE and
73.3 tons of incendiaries.

The spreadsheets were checked correct? No book could be
readable if every raid was mentioned in detail. The spreadsheets
give the detail.

> And the author uses Wikipedia as a source for facts.

For the explanation of GEE and Oboe. Hardly central to any
conclusions. The sort of technical details Wiki is good for, as
opposed to opinions on the commanders etc. With Wiki
likely to be around for a few years for people to use.

> Had the Wikipedia credits had dates with the references
> one could check to see whether the fact is the same
> today as it was on the date of the reference.

Oh good, why not check the edit history and see how much
the entries have changed.

Why is the book and/or data so disliked?

Geoffrey Sinclair
Remove the nb for email.