General Discussions
This is the place to discuss general issues related to the U-boat war or the war at sea in WWII.
RE: 200\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
Posted by:
JD Thomas
()
Date: June 20, 2001 09:14PM
<HTML>I don\'t discount anyone\'s intelligence or experience. However, anyone that expresses themselves rudely and anonymously to me is, in my and most peoples opinion, a coward. In fact, the only point I have tried to make is that anti-sub warfare was far more advanced in \'45 than a lot of folks realize, and that in fact the German U-Boat service had the highest attrition rate of any branch of their military. That is indisputable fact. The United States literally engorged men, food, fuel, equipment and anything else to Britain and our allies. We did not lose ONE troop ship, not one.
Rainer Bruns wrote:
-------------------------------
Hi JD,
Would you care to take another try addressing points and questions in my last post to you?
Your experience in ordnance during the last couple decades does not disqualify you from commenting here, but is not neccessarily germain to the way ASW was conducted from the cockpit of an Avenger prior to landing again on his jeep-carrier in WW2. Yes, MAD was in it\\\'s infantcy then.
We appreciate the benefit of your experiences, but please don\\\'t assume, that ALL of us here at this forum just crawled out from under a rock. (Some, we meet here, might have :-)) There are some serious researchers here and, yes, there is also quite a bit of relevant experience represented here as well. Rgds, RB</HTML>
Rainer Bruns wrote:
-------------------------------
Hi JD,
Would you care to take another try addressing points and questions in my last post to you?
Your experience in ordnance during the last couple decades does not disqualify you from commenting here, but is not neccessarily germain to the way ASW was conducted from the cockpit of an Avenger prior to landing again on his jeep-carrier in WW2. Yes, MAD was in it\\\'s infantcy then.
We appreciate the benefit of your experiences, but please don\\\'t assume, that ALL of us here at this forum just crawled out from under a rock. (Some, we meet here, might have :-)) There are some serious researchers here and, yes, there is also quite a bit of relevant experience represented here as well. Rgds, RB</HTML>
Subject | Written By | Posted |
---|---|---|
Crews | JD Thomas, USN (ret) | 06/19/2001 12:16AM |
RE: Crews | Roy Prince | 06/19/2001 01:40AM |
RE:200ft..? | Ted Armstrong | 06/19/2001 07:40AM |
RE:200ft..? | JD Thomas | 06/19/2001 11:28AM |
where and when | ray schwartz | 06/19/2001 02:13PM |
RE: where and when | Rainer Bruns | 06/19/2001 02:53PM |
RE: where and when | jd thomas | 06/19/2001 03:42PM |
RE: where and when | Tim | 06/19/2001 10:58PM |
U-boat vs A/C | Tim | 06/20/2001 10:44PM |
RE: U-boat vs A/C | Tim | 06/21/2001 12:25AM |
RE: where and when | Tim | 06/19/2001 11:04PM |
RE: where and when | JD Thomas | 06/19/2001 03:00PM |
RE: where and when | JD Thomas | 06/19/2001 03:01PM |
RE: 200\'?? | Rainer Bruns | 06/19/2001 01:24PM |
RE: 200\\\'?? | JD Thomas | 06/19/2001 02:58PM |
RE: 200\\\\\\\'?? | Rainer Bruns | 06/19/2001 03:19PM |
RE: 200\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'?? | John Griffiths | 06/19/2001 03:40PM |
RE: 200\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'?? | jdthomas | 06/19/2001 03:51PM |
RE: 200\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'?? | Jim | 06/19/2001 04:02PM |
RE: 200\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ | JD Thomas | 06/20/2001 09:03PM |
RE: 200\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'?? | Rainer Bruns | 06/19/2001 04:41PM |
RE: 200\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ | JD Thomas | 06/20/2001 09:14PM |
RE: 200 | Rainer Bruns | 06/21/2001 12:38AM |
RE: 200\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'?? | John Griffiths | 06/20/2001 05:33PM |
200 ft is too deep | kurt | 06/19/2001 05:54PM |
RE: 200 ft is too deep | J.T. McDaniel | 06/20/2001 12:09AM |