Skip to main content

How did the British win the Battle of Britain?

How did the British win the Battle of Britain? It was looking extremely tentative at first. The Luftwaffe was sending wave after wave of bombers that were focused on air fields and radar stations which really wore the British down. The air fields were caught unprepared taking heavy losses with one big issue being the advanced warning systems to allow for the pilots to get into the air to defend against the bombers. It was really tight for a while where the British had a hard time getting planes into the air fast enough and getting them assembled fast enough in order to be able to replace the losses that were taken in the beginning of the battle. Due to the Nazis having near air superiority over Britain it was decided that aircraft production would be splintered into pieces of industry that were scattered across Britian which would serve to lower losses when the factories were targeted. One of the costs of assembling in pieces scattered is that the logistics of moving the pieces so they...

How did the British win the Battle of Britain?

How did the British win the Battle of Britain?



It was looking extremely tentative at first. The Luftwaffe was sending wave after wave of bombers that were focused on air fields and radar stations which really wore the British down. The air fields were caught unprepared taking heavy losses with one big issue being the advanced warning systems to allow for the pilots to get into the air to defend against the bombers.

It was really tight for a while where the British had a hard time getting planes into the air fast enough and getting them assembled fast enough in order to be able to replace the losses that were taken in the beginning of the battle. Due to the Nazis having near air superiority over Britain it was decided that aircraft production would be splintered into pieces of industry that were scattered across Britian which would serve to lower losses when the factories were targeted.

One of the costs of assembling in pieces scattered is that the logistics of moving the pieces so they could eventually be assembled into a workable aircraft were stretched thin. This meant planes were not being created fast enough. This would prove to be a good gamble though as more and more factories were bombed it meant that should those factories had been producing the aircraft as whole then each bombed factory would have been a critical loss for Britain where scattered factories working on pieces had the ability to absorb the loss and still keep functioning.

Due to the Nazis being unable to shut down the aircraft factories the bleed on the Luftwaffe proved to be too significant. Between the losses and the British being able to install better antiaircraft gun emplacements to start blanketing the sky in puffs of aircraft destroying smoke, aligned with the increasing numbers and range of the radar stations that were being created the losses to the Luftwaffe were untenable, so Hitler decided to bomb the cities out of existence.

There is a false telling of events which state that the Nazis had attacked London and as a result Berlin was bombed which caused retaliatory strikes back onto the cities of Britain. The truth is that the Brits had been bombing German city targets since May of 1940 for military and war industry targets. The tit for tat bombing that supposedly started the bombing of British cities is a fallacy.

When the Nazis stopped bombing air fields and radar stations they allowed the British air force to build up its resistance in numbers by getting some plane in stock and pilots trained in Canada. The training efforts gave them clear skies to learn how to fly which paid off immensely in terms of combat experience and survivability.

As the cities burned the population of Britain banned together in unity to stand against the Nazis. The bombing of the cities had the opposite effect that Hitler was hoping for. Hitler figured it would break the publics will but it steeled their resolve against the Nazis and spelled the end of the hopes of invading Britain for the Nazis.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

What is the Most Dangerous Situation You Ever Willfully Put Yourself Into?

  What is the Most Dangerous Situation You Ever Willfully Put Yourself Into? Photo by  Vincentiu Solomon  on  Unsplash I parachuted in behind enemy lines for what would turn out to be a near suicide mission. As soon as I landed I could see that the enemy was everywhere. I immediately began to look for cover to assess the situation. At first I was greeted by an eerie silence but then suddenly out of the blue I heard this blood curdling battle cry, which I could tell instantly it was the enemy. If these people found me I feared it would mean certain death, little did I know what I had coming in my future. I quickly found myself some cover and slid up tight between this green gawdy plant thing and what I could only assume was a tree or something as it was extremely hard and immovable. I never took the time to analyze it. Instead, I pressed up against it as tight as I could and I depended on the shadows to conceal what the tree and the plant thing had left in the open. O...

Why do you think that the US could lose it’s top position as a world leader?

  Why do you think that the US could lose it’s top position as a world leader? Photo by Kenny Eliason on Unsplash Sadly, some of the things you have been saying are good assessments of the situation and I believe there is credibility there for why the US is on a down spiral. #1) The Russians figured something out quite a while ago and they ran an experiment in the US in 2016 to see if it was true. People go up in arms that it was to mess with the election and yes, it was partly but that wasn’t the point in itself. By getting that hacker team to focus on the US they were able to spread disinformation and sow seeds of discord that had incalculable effects moving forwards. That hacker group a) showed the world that the US was vulnerable b) it showed that democracy has some major weaknesses that can be exploited c) it showed the threat of total free speech and free speech of the press d) it made the American electoral system seem fraudulent, or at very least not a credible and fa...

What are the potential drawbacks of nationalizing an industry?

 What are the potential drawbacks of nationalizing an industry? It depends on what industry and what the purpose of nationalizing it is. The industries that it makes the most sense to nationalize have some criteria in my opinion: They should be static industries that do not change very much or very quickly in terms of the core of it’s business. It should be an industry that is key to public security, public safety, or the public’s interest. It should be something that is mammoth in size so that it doesn’t affect any small businesses by having it nationalized. It should add value by nationalizing it - such as continuity, consistency, stability etc. There should be a pain point that is needing to be addressed that centralizing that industry under the government addresses it. It should be specialized enough that there is not a lot of competition. It wouldn’t be small business or medium businesses getting put out of business - it should be an industry where it would be cost prohibitive...