Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title Newest to Oldest

Pages: PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NEXT

StobieWan 10/24/2009 6:24:08 PM

So, you're not going to respond to a single point raised, and you're going to contradict yourself by continuing to harp on about numbers being the major factor here?

I give up. Give the 1945 guys access to captured secret Nazi flying saucer technology, plus ray guns.

Pointless, utterly pointless.

Ian

Quote Reply

RedParadize 10/24/2009 6:58:30 PM

So, you're not going to respond to a single point raised, and you're going to contradict yourself by continuing to harp on about numbers being the major factor here?

I give up. Give the 1945 guys access to captured secret Nazi flying saucer technology, plus ray guns.

Pointless, utterly pointless.

Ian

Battlespace management is very important, i don't contest it. My response was it might not be enough.

I gave up too

Quote Reply

StobieWan 10/24/2009 7:11:16 PM

You never started - you've been given dozens of well argued points to play with and you've ignored them all.

I don't think you really understand how hard it is to put numbers into play against an enemy who has total air dominance, who can perform reconnaissance at will and can inflict crippling an unanswerable losses at their leisure.

The numbers you have set so much store by have to organise, arm, fuel and take off. That takes time and the modern day forces can watch every detail of those preparations and interdict them at every stage. Hell, they can have Predators with hellfire over the damn pub the bomber and fighter crews are drinking at the night before - they can't even get into a car in safety.

The numbers have to be useable - you'd think one man vs 90 was a foregone conclusion but if you pu the one man behind an MG42 and the 90 into a landing craft, 800 metres away, then you perhaps see some difficulties in bringing the numeric advantages to bear.

Ian

So, you're not going to respond to a single point raised, and you're going to contradict yourself by continuing to harp on about numbers being the major factor here?

I give up. Give the 1945 guys access to captured secret Nazi flying saucer technology, plus ray guns.

Pointless, utterly pointless.

Ian

Battlespace management is very important, i don't contest it. My response was it might not be enough.

I gave up too

Quote Reply

gf0012-aust 10/24/2009 8:44:01 PM

as much as I hate throwing pure stats into debates (because it usually ends up generating another round of platform comparisons as opposed to focussing on systems awareness/logistics issues) the following is worth looking at:

again, this is just USAF in GW1 - its not their entire asset committment - the US was not on a total war footing as it comparitively was in WW2. The US economy was still functioning in free trade environment and not geared to supporting a war effort as it was in WW2

again, this is the 1991 synopsis, its not the post battle review material that was done later and emphasised other issues such as the impact of space based theatre management.

the logistics numbers are important to note. a WW2 force has no opportunity to counter the 1991 logistics churn. they are being attrited from day 1 - they can never catch up as they are unable to dicate events.

I haven't hilighted the tactical issues, just the logistics and overmatch data. from that point its self evident.

Airpower in Operation Desert Storm

USAF FACT SHEET 91-03 Special Edition - May 1991

The conflict in the Persian Gulf began on Aug. 2, 1990, after talks between representatives from Iraq and Kuwait did not resolve grievances over oil pricing. On that date, Iraq's president -- Saddam Hussein -- sent his armies to invade Kuwait. The small, defenseless country was no match against Iraq. The Iraqi troops crushed Kuwait and brutalized its people.

Operation Desert Shield Ordered

On the day of Kuwait's invasion, President George Bush immediately placed a U.S. economic embargo against Iraq. The United Nations Security Council quickly followed suit. On Aug. 7, after Saddam Hussein refused to remove his troops from Kuwait, President Bush ordered Operation Desert Shield to begin. The goal: liberate Kuwait and force the aggressors back to Iraq.

Headquarters U.S. Central Command would direct the coalition of allied forces against Saddam Hussein. Under the command of Army Gen. H. Norman Schwarzkopf, CENTCOM immediately set preplanned preparations in motion. CENTCOM's function: to coordinate U.S. force deployment to the Persian Gulf region to help defend Saudi Arabia and provide security to other Arab states.

Air Force Lt. Gen. Charles A. Horner, the allied coalition's supreme air commander, began coordinating all air actions related to the buildup, and within days, established Headquarters Central Command Air Forces (Forward) in Saudi Arabia. From this headquarters the air actions that would bring an end to the war were put into operation.

Five fighter squadrons, a contingent of AWACS, and part of the 82nd Airborne Division moved into the theater within five days. In total, 25 fighter squadrons flew non-stop to the theater. Within 35 days the Air Force deployed a fighter force that equaled Iraq's fighter capability in numbers.

In late August, President Bush signed an order authorized members of the armed forces reserves to be called up for active duty. Throughout the campaign, Air Force Reserve and Air National Guard members flew and maintained aircraft for strategic and tactical airlift, fighter and reconnaissance operations, as well as tanker support.

Quote Reply

RedParadize 10/24/2009 9:27:50 PM

Hello again StobieWan

I am not the avocate of the WW2 side, so dont expect me to answer every argument! You must understand that i don't say ww2 would won. I said they would have a chance in some circonstance.

Most of the argument turned around modern side the total dominance of the sky, and i never contested it. For the other argument, the 2 one in your last post are more or less representative of them. I will try my best to find a way for WW2 side to work around them:

"I don't think you really understand how hard it is to put numbers into play against an enemy who has total air dominance, who can perform reconnaissance at will and can inflict crippling an unanswerable losses at their leisure."

Understand your point here. motivation of troops is primordial. Specialy hard agaist an enemy that would look like UFO for us. But if pilot understand that withdrawal would automaticly result in a lost. they might preform their duty knowing they have high chance to die. About the recon, ww2 side only need to know is where are the airfield to be effective.

"The numbers you have set so much store by have to organise, arm, fuel and take off. That takes time and the modern day forces can watch every detail of those preparations and interdict them at every stage. Hell, they can have Predators with hellfire over the damn pub the bomber and fighter crews are drinking at the night before - they can't even get into a car in safety."

WW2 need to strike first. They also need to have most of their plane in the sky before the bomb start to fall on them. If these 2 condition are present they have a chance. On how they could perform that before modern side start to move, we can speculate. Political raison seem the most likely to work.

"The numbers have to be useable - you'd think one man vs 90 was a foregone conclusion but if you pu the one man behind an MG42 and the 90 into a landing craft, 800 metres away, then you perhaps see some difficulties in bringing the numeric advantages to bear."

If the MG42 only have 10 rounds its gonna be a bit hard. And dont forget about the outcome of D-day.

Keep in mind that I am a french speaking Canadian, it is very time consuming for me to make a clear and precise responce in english. In fact, gf0012-aust f already added anoter while i was writing this one. So forgive me if I dont have the time to reply to every post.

Quote Reply

gf0012-aust 10/24/2009 9:59:06 PM

About the recon, ww2 side only need to know is where are the airfield to be effective.

no its not. they have to be able to mount and prosecute an effective mission to be able to do that. The USAF of 1991 can see them on the ground, can see them preparing on the ground, can see them forming up. They're dead before they start. You fail again to understand the sheer difference in what sensor advantages the USAF of 1991 has.

Of all the years you picked, you made it 1991. This is the first time that a battle is managed with space based assets. the USAAF can't even reach out and challenge because they have no capacity to strike the comms nodes which are 6000km away in some instances - or worst case are in space and can be managed by JSTARs etc.... The E3's and JSTARS can outrun and outrange anything in the USAAF. They can sit in Paris and see what is happening in London without even leaving safe airspace.

for gods sake man. they can't strike first as they can't even see that far. USAF can read everything they do, they can kill their airfield comms, they can jam their aircraft comms, they can completely decapitate their ability to see and talk and not have to leave their own protected airspace to do so. what bit do you NOT understand about this.

I seriously question whether you want to engage in serious analysis whern you ignore the fndamental tenets of what is involved.

USAAF doctrine of 1945 cannot even conceptualise against the doctrine of USAF 1991. Its irrelevant what the political intent and reason of USAAF is because they cannot do anything to dictate the warfighting conditions necessary for them to achieve their objective.

there are 10 critical vectors involved and you have not addressed any of them except make comment that they need to strike first? how when where when they cannot see where the 1991 tech enemy is? they don't have the height to get to the AWACs and JSTARS which are on constant CAP. so if they try to send anything up to counter the cap or strike airbases they are already visible. they can't apply compression, they can't apply mass. at any point where they elect to sally critical mass the 1991 force will standoff and kill them out of 1945 weapons contact range

seriously, you are starting to look like a troll. engage in the debate properly

Quote Reply

RedParadize 10/24/2009 10:47:39 PM

So, for you no condition could possibly lead to a WW2 victory?

Quote Reply

gf0012-aust 10/25/2009 12:25:48 AM

So, for you no condition could possibly lead to a WW2 victory?

its got nothing to do with what I "want". its about a clinical analysis of how and what is needed for a technologically inferior WW2 force to change 10 of the vectors to win the air war.

USAAF cannot even remotely come close.

its about military science - not about wish lists.

Quote Reply

Beryoza Red Paradize 10/25/2009 3:09:00 AM

Rather than drive gf insane by getting him to explain this to you a hudred times, how about YOU explain to him just how you believe the USAAF has any sort of a chance v the USAF.

Explain how you believe the USAAF would be able to conceal, disperse, and defend the aircraft, stores, weapons, fuel, and aircrews on the ground

Explain how you believe the USAAF would be able to identify the key USAF airbases, C3 installations, etc

Explain how you believe the USAAF can effectively plan and co-ordinate its own strikes

Explain how you believe the USAAF can launch, then assemble, its thousands and thousands of aircraft

Explain how you believe the USAAF pilots will ignore the unimaginable slaughter and press on to try to destroy the USAF positions

Explain how you believe USAAF aircraft are capable of destroying modern airbases, especially with dispersed, camoflaged and hardened installations and aircraft shelters.

Explain what kind of effects you're expecting from the USAAF attacks

Explain how they'd fare on the return trip

Explain how you believe they'd have any sort of an airbase left to return to

Explain how you believe they might be able to launch a second sortie.

Quote Reply

gf0012-aust 10/25/2009 3:49:53 AM

Rather than drive gf insane by getting him to explain this to you a hudred times

too late, my head's done in already. I'm going to lurk from this point on. :)

Quote Reply

PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NEXT