But Nelson Mandela and Victoria Beckham don't *really* count. who Actually, it was Sir CHARLIE Drake. -- Beav VN 750 Zed 1000 OMF# 19
And they'll probably say the same thing today as they did in the 40's. "You Brits are fghting a war, we Poles are fighting the Germans". It was apparently very "personal" for them. Well according to an old Pole I used to know. -- Beav VN 750 Zed 1000 OMF# 19
Oh yes indeed. A solid base is essential, but a well made steel "trolley" with little (if any) flex didn't appear to cause any problems. I suppose if he'd been making parts for a Volvo Space Shuttle, it may have, but he wasn't, so it didn't. -- Beav VN 750 Zed 1000 OMF# 19
I wonder if this system actually originated with Marks and Spencer? All their suppliers (of most things, if not all) had to run their companies in accordance with M&S "rules", one being that nothing was allowed to be bolted down or stored directly on the floor. I suspect that this came mainly from the food side of things as being able to move EVERYTHNG allowed for a high degree of hygiene. Just a thought, mind. -- Beav VN 750 Zed 1000 OMF# 19
I used to work in a factory making tin boxes, many of which were destined for M & S. ISTR that apart from the fact that the machinery involved weighed several tons, there were H & S rules that presses and such *must* be bolted down. I suppose that was a different situation, though, not making the actual food itself but the containers for it.
You're 100% correct on this one Darren. The front end presses will have been bolted down as will the inkers, neckers, decorators etc right through to the baling machines. I've been in plenty of food production areas supplying M&S amongst others where a lot of the equipment is bolted down but the important fact is that anywhere that contamination can take place the equipment can be easily and quickly removed for cleaning.
Yes, but this is irrelevant here. It's also irrelevant, if we return to the point of whether the original Barbarossa could have worked (and I maintain it could, and it *so* nearly did), because the T34 wasn't available in any numbers for another year or so. OK, two instances in small-scale engagements. Shit happens. Otherwise, I'm sorry, but whatever you think, the Wehrmacht kicked the shit out of everyone, except when they faced overwhelming odds in men and materiel. (Oh, and the Waffen SS was even more effective) Well, yes, this is my point. The Wehrmacht won.
Them were the days. My mum cooked à la Marguerite Patton during the war, it's why I'm built of sturdy stuff. That and National Milk, Cod Liver Oil, and Orange Juice you could stand a spoon up in.
Apparently SOE got an altitude-triggered bomb onto Hitler's aircraft, ready for one of his trips. As the plane climbed, it received a radio warning of bad weather. Consequently, the plane never reached the 10,000 foot altitude at which the bomb would have triggered. SOE had to mount another operation to get the bomb off the aircraft before it was discovered.
FFS, do some research. I think you're confusing this with the documented atempt when a bomb, disguised as bottles of brandy, was smuggled onto his Condor. It failed to detonate, and (at great personal risk), the perpetrators recovered the bomb. SOE, AFAIK, never had anything to do with it, and certainly did not attempt anything with an altimeter fuse. I mean, airliners were unpressurised then and mostly flew well below 10,000 feet anyway.
Yes, I'd agree here. I think this is fair. Had the Germans not behaved so abominably in the East, had they enlisted more local support (and Christ knows they got enough anyway), and had they let the captured area have some degree of self-determination, then it might have gone very differently. Oh, and if they'd started in May, as planned, before they got diverted into the Balkans. But they gambled everything on a lightning strike to behead the moneter before it really woke up. And they so *very* nearly succeeded. Stalin even tried to make peace and give up the Ukraine. OK, I concede there have to be occasions when they were beaten by inferior forces. Very, very few, though. And you can only provide two examples. Now see below. OK, you asked. France, Belgium, Netherlands, 1940. France and Britain had more guns, more men, more tanks and (yes) more aircraft. And they lost. Crete, 1941. Britain was sitting in total control of an island, and the Wehrmacht attacked it entirely from the air, and were incapable of dropping anything more than light artillery. The Wehrmacht won (at a cost). Russia, 1941. Russia had more men, weapons, guns and aircraft. They got their arses kicked. Middle East, 1941-42: Rommel had fewer men, fewer resources, less materiel, and he whipped the 8th Army. He lost in the end, because we built up our materiel and denied him his supplies. No other reason. Kharkov, 1943, the recapture of. An utterly astonishing piece of generalship. France, 1944: Michael Wittmann, tank ace, utterly *hammered* a British armoured column. Yes, a small-scale engagement, but worth mentioning. I could go on.... True. The Germans' were better than anyone else's.. They lost, yes, because Russia, Britain and the US had more men, guns, ships and aeroplanes. And more oil. And more money. And the blame for losing the war lies more with Hitler than the Wehrmacht. The Wehrmacht was the finest land fighting force on the planet at the time. Sorry, but it *was*.
Well, you wouldn't know this, but in the mid-sixties I destroyed thousands of SOE's altitude-switched bombs. They were designed to use PE as the explosive, which was filled into the unfolded bicycle-tube-like attachment. You might have researched that these were set to go off at 10,000 feet; and frankly your description appears of one of these hidden in a bottle. Stauffenburg's bomb also used SOE explosive. AFAICS you need to do some research.
Fine. And this was 1943. The bomb was dismantled afterwards by the perps. It used an acid timer. The acid timer did its stuff, the striker pin hit the detonator, and the det failed. See above. Might well have done. Didn't use an altitude detonator, though, did it? Nope. See above, and check for yourself.
They didn't. They just used it better. And look elsewhere than Wiki. Wrong again. The French 75mm was still an outstanding gun. The French air force was at least as powerful as the German, but they just parked most of it out of the way. This is irrelevant to the central point - the Wehrmacht won, despite not enjoying an advantage in men and materiel. What they had might have been *better* and was certainly used better (cf: concentration of armour). Which proves my point. But the Wehrmacht still won. Actually, Russian strategy at the beginning was to *advance*. Which they did. And lost millions of men in encirclements. Seriously, you really need to read more. He had no option. He was ordered to. And there was no evacuation possible. The Wehrmacht had many superb generals and field marshals: more than the Allies. Manstein, von Rundstedt, Halder, von Manteuffel, Model, Guderian. You have to think really hard to come up with a list as good as that from the Allies. Patton, Zhukov, Montgomery, maybe Chuikov, Eisenhower. And that's from three nations, not one. Yes ;-) They lost, yes. But unit for unit, they were still the best. They didn't have enough units.
