F-35's Costs Climb Along With Concerns

On Sat, 06 May 2006 09:09:05 -0400, Vince wrote:
Follow-up to set to sci.military.naval

Paul J. Adam wrote:

once we had landed in Normandy (an incredible feat to be sure) we had
overwhelming strength at any point.

Okay, so the Western Allies launch an opposed amphibious assault into
prepared positions, then attack through excellent defensive terrain
against a determined defense, deal with several massed panzer attacks
without giving ground, and eventually break out of the lodgment and
liberate most of France. Mostly with divisions that had never been in
combat before, against a number of experienced German divisions (and some
understrength, weaker divisions, to be sure). All of this in just about
three months, and at just about equal cost (ignoring the 200,000 or so
German POW's, just looking at killed/missing/wounded the numbers are
roughly even).

This somehow supports the argument that the Germans fought better?

And when the Germans were faced with
assaulting an extensively-prepared defence - such as First Alamein or
even more dramatically Kursk, they failed too.

Not just extensively-prepared defenses. Even a cursory examination of the
experiences of Sixth SS Panzer Army at the Bulge would suggest that, at
least in that case, the Germans were unable to perform even with massive
material superiority. I mean, when a Panzer army is attacking just a bit
more than one tired infantry division and is held up for the better part
of two days, you can't say that the Army outfought the division.

Chris Manteuffel
--
"...the war situation has developed not necessarily
to Japan's advantage..." -Emperor Hirohito, August 14, 1945
Email spamtrapped. Try chris@(my last name).name

On Fri, 05 May 2006 16:58:31 -0400, Vince wrote:
Follow-up to set to sci.military.naval

But it is very difficult to find cases of equal strength
forces where they were outfought.

I suggest you read _When the Odds were Even_ by Bonn, about the Vosges
campaign. Little known here in the US, because 7th Army didn't get the
press that the Patton-Bradley-Monty triumvirate got, but a quite effective
assault, across excellent defensive terrain, with little air support,
by essentially even troop strengths.

Why is it difficult to find out information on this campaign? The popular
understanding of the 1944-1945 campaign is badly skewed by the
emphasis on Anglo-American rivalry. As H.P. Wilmott pointed out, most
English-language accounts of that campaign make it seem that the Americans
and the British are the chief antagonists. Because of that focus, the
operations of 6th Army Group, critical as the were, are only lightly
touched on, usually just in a "FDR vs. Churchill: Dragoon vs. Italy"
context. The importance of Marseilles is ignored so that the blame game
over Antwerp can be played, and the attention focuses on the twin failures
of Huertgen and Market Garden, rather than the success of the Vosges.

Chris Manteuffel
--
"...the war situation has developed not necessarily
to Japan's advantage..." -Emperor Hirohito, August 14, 1945
Email spamtrapped. Try chris@(my last name).name

Paul J. Adam wrote:

56
From: Paul J. Adam - view profile
Date: Sun, May 7 2006 2:03 pm
Email: "Paul J. Adam"
Groups: sci.military.naval, rec.aviation.military,
rec.aviation.military.naval
Not yet rated
Rating:
hide options



Paul J. Adam MainBoxatjrwlynch[dot]demon{dot}co(.)uk

Can I again point out that you are posting some 24 hours in the future?
There is a significant horse race on in four hours that could make a
small piece of change for both of us if you can look up who won the
Kentucky Derby in your yesterday and slip the word back in time? None
of us will tell how you did it.

Jack Linthicum wrote:
Paul J. Adam wrote:

56
From: Paul J. Adam - view profile
Date: Sun, May 7 2006 2:03 pm

Can I again point out that you are posting some 24 hours in the future?

Just rebuilt my PC after the motherboard decided to commit seppuku;
looks like the system date was wrong. Should be fixed now.


--
He thinks too much: such men are dangerous.
Julius Caesar I:2

Paul J. Adam MainBoxatjrwlynch[dot]demon{dot}co(.)uk

Paul J. Adam wrote:
Jack Linthicum wrote:
Paul J. Adam wrote:

56
From: Paul J. Adam - view profile
Date: Sun, May 7 2006 2:03 pm

Can I again point out that you are posting some 24 hours in the future?

Just rebuilt my PC after the motherboard decided to commit seppuku;
looks like the system date was wrong. Should be fixed now.


--
He thinks too much: such men are dangerous.
Julius Caesar I:2

Paul J. Adam MainBoxatjrwlynch[dot]demon{dot}co(.)uk

Rats

On Sun, 07 May 2006 19:03:00 +0100, "Paul J. Adam"
wrote:

Vince wrote:
Paul J. Adam wrote:
Opinions vary, to be honest (with a consistent grouping around "very
good", to be sure). Read Max Hastings' "Overlord" and you'll marvel at
how the far-superior Wehrmacht won the battle of Normandy (or at
least, be bemused how they could ever have been dislodged).

once we had landed in Normandy (an incredible feat to be sure) we had
overwhelming strength at any point.

Not really, no: we were landing and supplying forces across beaches,
subject to the caprices of Channel weather (which could be, and was,
very nasty), and pitting inexperienced troops against veterans on
terrain they'd had time to prepare.

The odds against on Overlord were very significant, but to give the
forward German divisions full 'veteran' status is probably overmuch,
many were 'white bread' garrison troops and not really that good.
But, the oft discussed medium deep maneuver reserve concept was just
plain bad, ObWest should have known better by then and been able to
count airplanes adequately to know the odds of a successful
counterattack response against that kind of tactical airpower as near
zero. Once again we owe a heck of a lot to Fuehrer 'intuition'.

Certainly the men who seized the Odon crossings, held off
counter-attacks by elements of six panzer divisions, drew in the German
strategic reserves, and withstood the attacks that were supposed to
break them, would disagree that they had "overwhelming strength", but
their success suggests that the Wehrmacht had similar difficulties
attacking in Normandy countryside as anyone else (it was the inability
of the Germans to destroy 15th Scots, despite throwing in their entire
reserve, that led Rommel on 29 June to propose a fighting retreat to the
Seine)


Flipping it around, though - if you can't make an attacker's life an
expensive and painful misery at places like Monte Cassino or the
Normandy bocage, what use are you? And when the Germans were faced
with assaulting an extensively-prepared defence - such as First
Alamein or even more dramatically Kursk, they failed too.

the Kursk was simply overwhelmingly strong.

Perhaps a maxim of excellent soldiers is "don't attack where the enemy
has built seven layers of defensive lines precisely in order to defeat
your plan"? While the Germans were good at "mission command" at lower
ranks, their commanders - with a few exceptions - ranged from spineless
to clueless.

Indeed, do pay attention: the enemy may have a plan of his own.

Mind you, when a senior Wehrmacht officer admitted to an inconvenient
truth, he could find himself out of a job very fast (cf von Rundstedt in
July 1944, telling Keitel that Germany's strategic options in the West
consisted of 'Make peace, you fools!' and being promptly replaced by von
Kluge) which has to be included in any assessment of their ability.

On Sat, 06 May 2006 19:31:02 +0100, "Paul J. Adam"
wrote:

Jack Linthicum wrote:
Paul J. Adam wrote:

56
From: Paul J. Adam - view profile
Date: Sun, May 7 2006 2:03 pm

Can I again point out that you are posting some 24 hours in the future?

Just rebuilt my PC after the motherboard decided to commit seppuku;
looks like the system date was wrong. Should be fixed now.

Damn. I was hoping that we could make some money on TVG, here!!! ;-)


Bill Kambic
Haras Lucero, Kingston, TN
Mangalarga Marchador: Uma Raça, Uma Paixão

wrote:

:On Sat, 06 May 2006 19:31:02 +0100, "Paul J. Adam"
wrote:
:
:Jack Linthicum wrote:
:
: Can I again point out that you are posting some 24 hours in the future?
:
:Just rebuilt my PC after the motherboard decided to commit seppuku;
:looks like the system date was wrong. Should be fixed now.
:
amn. I was hoping that we could make some money on TVG, here!!! ;-)

I just figured he'd accidentally walked into the wrong police call box
to connect up....

Vince wrote:
I believe that "man for man" the Wehrmacht was simply the toughest most
resourceful and dedicated fighting force of the modern era. They could
be overwhelmed, they could be outgeneraled, they could be cut off from
supplies. But it is very difficult to find cases of equal strength
forces where they were outfought.

Opinions vary, to be honest (with a consistent grouping around "very
good", to be sure). Read Max Hastings' "Overlord" and you'll marvel at
how the far-superior Wehrmacht won the battle of Normandy (or at least,
be bemused how they could ever have been dislodged).

Sydney Jary - hindered by the baggage of actually having commanded an
infantry platoon for some months 1944-45 - was less impressed with the
German infantry skills, which he saw as repetition of opening fire, then
disengaging before the assault came in.

But I've been to el alamein, normandy, Anzio, Cassino, Arnhem, the
Ardennes, Remagen, Berlin and many other battlefields. The sheer
technical skill and personal courage of the german forces is terrifying.

Flipping it around, though - if you can't make an attacker's life an
expensive and painful misery at places like Monte Cassino or the
Normandy bocage, what use are you? And when the Germans were faced with
assaulting an extensively-prepared defence - such as First Alamein or
even more dramatically Kursk, they failed too.


--
He thinks too much: such men are dangerous.
Julius Caesar I:2

Paul J. Adam MainBoxatjrwlynch[dot]demon{dot}co(.)uk

"Fred J. McCall" wrote in message
...
(Harry Andreas) wrote:

:In article ,
wrote:
:
: (Harry Andreas) wrote:
:
: :In article , "Keith W"
: wrote:
: :
: : "Harry Andreas" wrote in message
: : ...
: : In article ,
: : wrote:
: :
: : Note that this is sort of the same approach that lost Germany the
war.
: : Everything was hand-finished to very high standards, while us
sloppy
: : folks cranked out ten times as many tanks as they could because
we let
: : the tolerances be looser and eliminated a lot of the skilled
: : 'touch-labor' in the finishing stages.
: :
: : Hmmm. I wouldn't ride that horse too far.
: :
: : Ever see a 1944 built Walther P-38, or Waffenfabrik Mauser?
: : They didn't spend nearly any time finishing them as compared to
: : the early war versions.
: :
: :
: : The German record was very mixed
: :
: :Keith, I hear ya, and the other posters who have said similar things,
: :but I still object to Mr McCall's statement that, in Germany,
: :"Everything was hand-finished to very high standards".
: :That's just not true. As you point out, it was very selective,
:
: Yes. The big ticket items (which was what I meant by "everything",
: since that is what wars are actually fought and won with) got all the
: hand finishing. Small stuff and aircraft designed specifically to be
: cheap and 'throw away' generally weren't.
:
: So object and be damned to you.
:
ude, you can't say "Everything" and then get mad when someone
:disagrees with you. Everything means everything, not some things...

Dude, I don't "get mad". It's only Usenet. Try and rent a clue...

"Everything was hand-finished..." wasn't the issue with German production.
Read Richard Overy's "Why the Allies Won". The Wehrmacht's besetting sin was
not demanding superior (and useless) manufacturing standards. The main
problems were 1. refusal to stop changing designs and 2. not fully
mobilizing for production until 'way too late.

The Wehrmacht couldn't keep their hand off the production designs, making
changes constantly. It made production inefficient and as important, made
logistics a nightmare. Mobilization didn't happen until Speer was given
overall responsiblity for production. The first years of the war
(1939-1942), when Germany had a real chance to win by knocking the USSR out
of the war saw single-shift production and the largest factory units (Adam
Opel and Volkswagen) only peripherally contributing to war production. As a
side note, when the Barbarossa attack went in, the Wehrmacht had litterally
hundreds of types of trucks and motorcycles in use. Try getting the right
carburetor kit for your broke down truck on the outskirts of Kiev.