Anybody else watch it?
Catch it on All 4.
He goes through the same training programme as a WW2 fighter pilot in 1940 to qualify flying a Hurricane, culminating in him re.creating a ‘dogfight’ with a Messeserscmit 109.
He does it, and shows a lot of modesty, and a lot of respect for the guys who did it.
It shows how and why a lot of inexperienced young pilots were killed, by taking on more experienced pilots in a fight.
Also there’s a good documentary on The Dambusters on ITV hub,.Dan Snow tells the true story (that dispels a few myths btw) visiting sites like RAF Scampton standing on places where things actually happened, backed up with photos of the time.
Both good viewing , and unmissable, if like me, this stuff floats yer boat.
He is going to try and set the land speed record on a motorbike in Bolivia next year. The man knows no fear!
Was an eye opener when flying instructor jumped in on dual controls when he banked plane too slowly. Never realised it was so easy to fall out of the sky.
Janos:
Was an eye opener when flying instructor jumped in on dual controls when he banked plane too slowly. Never realised it was so easy to fall out of the sky.
When you think how the wings work banking has to be similar to how centrifugal force keeps a motorbike from falling to the ground on the wall of death.
Inverted flight has to be another can of worms.It’s difficult to understand how an aircraft wing can work at all in those two configurations but it certainly does somehow.
Then there’s the coffin corner equation.
If we were meant to fly we’d have wings.
That’s what I was taught by those who were there in the day and I see no reason to disebelieve them. flightjournal.com/fewest-sup … r_pref_pop
The pro Hurricane bollox is typical hidden agenda of trying to make the case that cheaper is better.
The truth is we almost lost the BoB and did lose the Battle of France in the air because the government put the emphasis on the cheaper and more inferior product when Hawkers could have been turned over to Spitfire production.
It was a great programme but tried to re write history by suggesting that the inferior Hurricane could fight with the 109 on similar if not superior terms as the Spit which is total bs.The Hurricane was actually mainly tasked as a bomber destroyer where possible defended from 109’s by Spits.
Oh and I did have an uncle who worked at Hawkers in Kingston at the time.
It took two and a half times longer to manufacture a Spitfire than it did a Hurricane and the Hurricane was the easier and quicker to repair following battle damage. What Britain needed in Summer 1940 was pilots and aircraft and as many as it could produce, repair or train. The rate of Spitfire production during the Battle was a constant concern. The gun layout in the Hurricane wing made it well suited to going after the bombers. It was Dowding’s insistance on not reinforcing the RAF in France with Spitfires which enabled him to preserve his force for the forthcoming Battle of Britain. It was the attacks, mainly by bombers, on British airfields which came closest to defeating the British; it was the need for the ME109s to provide close ■■■■■■ to the bombers that handicapped the Germans. The Luftwaffe gave up because it found that rather than destroying the RAF it was actually meeting RAF fighters in larger numbers.
I know the Battle of Britain (as WE called it) or the first wave of 'Operation Sea Lion as the Germans called it, was a precedent for a combined beach and Airborne invasion, the likes of D Day…But I can’t for the life of me see why Hitler did not just go for it anyway, either half way through the ‘Battle of Britain’ as a diversionary tactic, or after it.
I reckon he could have achieved his objective with little ground resistance, due to the inferiority in numbers and quality of equipment on our side.
How history would have been so much different if he did not go for Russia on a whim instead.
Would the Americans have intervened in a European war if he we had been invaded,… and how long would the ■■■■ regime and empire have lasted either if they had, or if they had not.
Would we have been in a ‘European Union’ today after all, and would Franglais be happy with it…
Seriously though,.I find all this ‘What would have happened’ stuff fascinating.
Maybe I should get out more.
robroy:
I know the Battle of Britain (as WE called it) or the first wave of 'Operation Sea Lion as the Germans called it, was a precedent for a combined beach and Airborne invasion, the likes of D Day…But I can’t for the life of me see why Hitler did not just go for it anyway, either half way through the ‘Battle of Britain’ as a diversionary tactic, or after it.
I reckon he could have achieved his objective with little ground resistance, due to the inferiority in numbers and quality of equipment on our side.
How history would have been so much different if he did not go for Russia on a whim instead.
Would the Americans have intervened in a European war if he we had been invaded,… and how long would the ■■■■ regime and empire have lasted either if they had, or if they had not.
Would we have been in a ‘European Union’ today after all, and would Franglais be happy with it…
Seriously though,.I find all this ‘What would have happened’ stuff fascinating.
Maybe I should get out more.
Hitler was a puppet, a great orator or gobshyte, he was controlled by his generals, majors uberluberoytenants and drug dealers, they all wanted their own thing and it all collapsed like a pack of dominos, we were very fortunate that there was so much internal politics and infighting.
cav551:
It took two and a half times longer to manufacture a Spitfire than it did a Hurricane and the Hurricane was the easier and quicker to repair following battle damage. What Britain needed in Summer 1940 was pilots and aircraft and as many as it could produce, repair or train. The rate of Spitfire production during the Battle was a constant concern. The gun layout in the Hurricane wing made it well suited to going after the bombers. It was Dowding’s insistance on not reinforcing the RAF in France with Spitfires which enabled him to preserve his force for the forthcoming Battle of Britain. It was the attacks, mainly by bombers, on British airfields which came closest to defeating the British; it was the need for the ME109s to provide close ■■■■■■ to the bombers that handicapped the Germans. The Luftwaffe gave up because it found that rather than destroying the RAF it was actually meeting RAF fighters in larger numbers.
As opposed to B17 pilots being happy knowing that the Mustangs and TBolts were doing their job of escorting them well away from them and where they didn’t see them in action.
Yes Spitfire manufacture made high production demands.
So why wouldn’t we have wanted Hawker production turned over to making Spits instead of the obsolete ( by 109 standards ) Hurricane.
We didn’t want easy to repair we needed the highest possible kill ratio of 109’s.Without destroying the 109 escorts, which the Spitfire was obviously mainly tasked with, there was no defence against the bombers because the Hurricanes ( basically a Hawker Fury bi plane without the top wing ) would have been massacred.
The truth is the Spit was as happy killing bombers or 109’s unlike the Hurricane and we won the BoB despite the Hurricane and the stupidly low MoD orders for and production of the Spitfire.
The fate of the RAF in France proved it as did Dowding’s pro Spitfire anti Hurricane view.
As usual the Brit government preferred treasure than lives and wasn’t worthy of leaders like him and those that he had to send to die.Then as usual re writing history to cover its tracks.
robroy:
I know the Battle of Britain (as WE called it) or the first wave of 'Operation Sea Lion as the Germans called it, was a precedent for a combined beach and Airborne invasion, the likes of D Day…But I can’t for the life of me see why Hitler did not just go for it anyway
^
That’s also exactly what I was also told by by all those from the day.They all really thought that the invasion would happen soon after Dunkirk and we had no chance.
The 303 armed Spit and Hurricane were no good for air to ground attack and the army had been shattered in France.
The general consensus is that Hitler thought that our navy was too strong and his too weak at that point for his invasion force to get through and the RAF was too strong for the Luftwaffe to take on the Navy with air attacks.
Luckily for us it was arguably a bad call .
Having said that they obviously wouldn’t have heard/known about this at the time.But he seems to be saying that was after the Battle of Britain had taken place.
Not before it by just going for it as everyone thought they would and which probably would have been the game changer for the Germans.Bearing in mind the Luftwaffe had massacred what ground attack forces like Blenheims and Fairey Battles we had during the Battle of France before the Battle of Britain had taken place. youtube.com/watch?v=DQ8kJfeVd4Q&t=13s 4.19 - 6.29
Hmmm interesting theory.
So who was the Alpha male in the ■■■■ Party do you reckon…Goebbles? Himmler?
He definitely kept Goering his deputy at bay all by himself
A lot of his early loyal friends were done away with,.the likes of Roehm who started off the Brownshirts for instance, as far as I remember reading, it was purely down to him and the mood he was in on the day.
As for his military Wermacht Generals, they were scrapping themselves over him, in case in his eyes they ■■■■ ed up…look at Rommel, probably his finest General and tactician.
As for his drug addiction that came much later,.as he was basically a hypochondriac as well as everything else.
Sorry if I sound like a certain person on here , but I have genuinely studied this stuff in school days.
robroy:
As for his military Wermacht Generals, they were scrapping themselves over him, in case in his eyes they [zb] ed up…look at Rommel, probably his finest General and tactician.
To be fair being implicated in a failed attempt to blow up the Fuhrer with a brief case bomb didn’t help Rommel’s career.
I also believed my Dad’s view that there was a conspiracy between Adolf and Edward VIII and Hess was the ‘fixer’ which was seen as being too inconvenient by the establishment on both sides if it got out during/after the war.The rest was history for Hess.
I’d agree that the Goerings, Doenitzes and Hesses and even to a lesser extent Adolf himself let alone Rohm were all useful idiots.
It was the Himmlers and Heydrichs who were the really scary definition of the evil that hijacked Germany in the form of these scum.
While the Spitfire not the Hurricane was excalibur and the definition of the sword in the unfolding clouds in the words of Jerusalem and Hawker’s employees knew it.
robroy:
Hmmm interesting theory.
So who was the Alpha male in the ■■■■ Party do you reckon…Goebbles? Himmler?
He definitely kept Goering his deputy at bay all by himself
A lot of his early loyal friends were done away with,.the likes of Roehm who started off the Brownshirts for instance, as far as I remember reading, it was purely down to him and the mood he was in on the day.
As for his military Wermacht Generals, they were scrapping themselves over him, in case in his eyes they [zb] ed up…look at Rommel, probably his finest General and tactician.
As for his drug addiction that came much later,.as he was basically a hypochondriac as well as everything else.
Sorry if I sound like a certain person on here , but I have genuinely studied this stuff in school days.
I was actually trying to cut him off at the pass when I read about how Crap the Hurricane was, in the opinion of others. [emoji14]
cav551:
It took two and a half times longer to manufacture a Spitfire than it did a Hurricane and the Hurricane was the easier and quicker to repair following battle damage. What Britain needed in Summer 1940 was pilots and aircraft and as many as it could produce, repair or train. The rate of Spitfire production during the Battle was a constant concern. The gun layout in the Hurricane wing made it well suited to going after the bombers. It was Dowding’s insistance on not reinforcing the RAF in France with Spitfires which enabled him to preserve , 77 planeshis force for the forthcoming Battle of Britain. It was the attacks, mainly by bombers, on British airfields which came closest to defeating the British; it was the need for the ME109s to provide close ■■■■■■ to the bombers that handicapped the Germans. The Luftwaffe gave up because it found that rather than destroying the RAF it was actually meeting RAF fighters in larger numbers.
As opposed to B17 pilots being happy knowing that the Mustangs and TBolts were doing their job of escorting them well away from them and where they didn’t see them in action.
The B17s that went on the two Schweinfurt raids didn’t see escorts, perhaps, but must have seen 109s and FWs. They had 26% losses of aircraft and 22% of the ‘happy’ aircrew, 77 planes, 590 KIA,43 wounded and 65 POW.
cav551:
It took two and a half times longer to manufacture a Spitfire than it did a Hurricane and the Hurricane was the easier and quicker to repair following battle damage. What Britain needed in Summer 1940 was pilots and aircraft and as many as it could produce, repair or train. The rate of Spitfire production during the Battle was a constant concern. The gun layout in the Hurricane wing made it well suited to going after the bombers. It was Dowding’s insistance on not reinforcing the RAF in France with Spitfires which enabled him to preserve , 77 planeshis force for the forthcoming Battle of Britain. It was the attacks, mainly by bombers, on British airfields which came closest to defeating the British; it was the need for the ME109s to provide close ■■■■■■ to the bombers that handicapped the Germans. The Luftwaffe gave up because it found that rather than destroying the RAF it was actually meeting RAF fighters in larger numbers.
As opposed to B17 pilots being happy knowing that the Mustangs and TBolts were doing their job of escorting them well away from them and where they didn’t see them in action.
The B17s that went on the two Schweinfurt raids didn’t see escorts, perhaps, but must have seen 109s and FWs. They had 26% losses of aircraft and 22% of the ‘happy’ aircrew, 77 planes, 590 KIA,43 wounded and 65 POW.
Yep ‘temporary loss of air superiority over Gemany’.Bearing in mind that Goering said he knew the war was lost when he saw the Mustangs over Berlin.
Ironically the Spitfire came out of all that smelling of roses even though it was obviously never designed as a long range ■■■■■■ fighter just like the TBolt wasn’t.
Tbolt v FW190 who would have thought it.
Why not use the Mosquito F MkII.
Oh and check out Doolittle’s strategy here ‘’ abandon the bombers’’ ‘‘shoot down the fighters’’ as and where.Exactly what Galland had called for in the Battle of Britain.
As I said happy air crews with ■■■■■■ fighters doing what they were designed to do.
‘‘Freed of close bomber ■■■■■■ duty allied fighters, particularly the P51, decimated the Luftwaffe’’.
Bearing in mind that the FW190 D9 wasn’t in it at that point in time and which was a game changer v P51.
Galland was obviously no fool and he rated the Spitfire from the Battle of Britain to the Griffon powered MkXIV over Germany.Saying that the best thing about the MkXIV was that there were so few of em.If only Mitchell could have seen it.Hopefully maybe he did maybe he’s even reading this. .
