wlm@uunet.UU.NET (William L. Moran Jr.) (06/09/89)
From: bywater!archet!wlm@uunet.UU.NET (William L. Moran Jr.)
Can someone recommend a good book on the Battle of Britain?
Specifically, what I'm interested in are the opportunities the Germans
had to win (i.e. attacking British fighter bases - which was stopped to
bomb cities). Something written by a German might be nice as I've read
many books which were written by Brits - the tone of these is usually
- `` The brave lads flying Spitfires and Hurricanes (both superior to
any planes the huns had) were so good as to make the outcome
sure'' :)
Almost as though the British wanted an appearance of danger so that
movies made about the battle would be better. Thanks in advance.
Bill Moran
--
arpa: moran-william@cs.yale.edu or wlm@ibm.com
uucp: uunet!bywater!acheron!archet!wlm or decvax!yale!moran-william
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
``There is Jackson standing like a stone wall. Let us determine to die,
and we will conquer. Follow me.'' - General Barnard E. Bee (CSA)henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) (06/14/89)
From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) >Can someone recommend a good book on the Battle of Britain? Despite his reputation being primarily that of a fiction writer, Len Deighton's "Fighter" is the best I've seen, including quite a bit of debunking of standard myths. (Also recommended: his "Blitzkrieg", on the Battle of France in 1940. Beware, "Bomber" is fiction.) >Specifically, what I'm interested in are the opportunities the Germans >had to win (i.e. attacking British fighter bases - which was stopped to >bomb cities)... Deighton makes one intriguing suggestion, which of course (as he states) can never be proved or disproved. The shift to city attacks, widely (although not unanimously) considered a crucial blunder, came about because the RAF bombed Berlin, infuriating Hitler. The RAF did this because Churchill ordered retaliation for a minor incident in which a couple of off-course bombers did minor damage to London. Churchill knew that yielding control of the air to the Germans, even temporarily, would make an invasion much more likely, so the fighter bases were vital. He knew that bombing attacks on cities weren't likely to do militarily-important damage. He was a very smart man, and understood Hitler better than any of his comtemporaries. Did he order that raid deliberately, with full understanding of the probable results?
mayse@p.cs.uiuc.edu (06/14/89)
From: mayse@p.cs.uiuc.edu I would recommend: 1. "The First and the Last," by Adolf Galland 2. "Wing Leader," by J. E. Johnson These are about the entire war, but should have good info on the Battle of Britain. Although the authors were direct participants, I think you'll find both books to be fairly objective.
welty@lewis.crd.ge.com (richard welty) (06/14/89)
From: welty@lewis.crd.ge.com (richard welty)
In article <7290@cbnews.ATT.COM>, William L. Moran Jr. writes:
=Can someone recommend a good book on the Battle of Britain?
=Specifically, what I'm interested in are the opportunities the Germans
=had to win (i.e. attacking British fighter bases - which was stopped to
=bomb cities). Something written by a German might be nice as I've read
=many books which were written by Brits - the tone of these is usually
=- `` The brave lads flying Spitfires and Hurricanes (both superior to
= any planes the huns had) were so good as to make the outcome
= sure'' :)
=Almost as though the British wanted an appearance of danger so that
=movies made about the battle would be better. Thanks in advance.
i'm interested in this topic as well, but what i'm after is a good
account written since the declassification of Ultra (thus taking into
account the major effect of radio intelligence on British response.)
the history of wwii (or rather, our perspective on it)
has been completely changed by the declassification of Ultra.
it will likely be years before the written histories catch up
(there is a passage in _The German Generals Talk_ with regards
to a general who was captured by Montgomery in North Africa which
makes much more sense once you understand Ultra.)
richard
--
richard welty welty@lewis.crd.ge.com welty@algol.crd.ge.com
518-387-6346, GE R&D, K1-5C39, Niskayuna, New York
``but officer, i was only speeding so i'd get home before i ran out of gas''krees@zaphod.axion.bt.co.uk (kearton rees) (06/16/89)
From: kearton rees <krees@zaphod.axion.bt.co.uk> >From article <7458@cbnews.ATT.COM>, by welty@lewis.crd.ge.com (richard welty): > > i'm interested in this topic as well, but what i'm after is a good > account written since the declassification of Ultra (thus taking into > account the major effect of radio intelligence on British response.) > It looks like I've been missing something. What is/was Ultra and in what forms is the information available? [mod.note: Ultra was the British code-name for their codebreaking staff; in particular, the group that worked with the captured German "Enigma" cyphering machine. By breaking the German's top secret code, the British were able to gain critical inside information. The fact that the code could be broken was carefully concealed, and it wasn't until the late 70's (?) that the actually admitted the existance of Ultra. Many of the decisions taken during the war were based on Ultra intercepts, but other stories were made up to cover the real source; thus, much of the history written previous the the Ultra disclosure simply repeats these fables. I'm sure other subscribers can flesh out the details; I've just hit the highlights to prevent a deluge of submissions 8-) - Bill ] Kearton krees@axion.bt.co.uk #--------------------------------------------------------------# krees@axion.bt.co.uk British Telecom Research Labs., Martlesham Heath, Ipswich, Suffolk, IP5 7RE United Kingdom. #--------------------------------------------------------------#