Stuka.

This is coolbert:

This is major! Very much so!

An intact [?] and whole [?] Stuka to be raised from the depths. "Virtually no Original German aircraft left" from that era of the Second World War [WW2]! Thanks in totality to Der Spiegel and the tip from DEC.

This plane can be brought back to life? Perhaps not! If feasible and in fly-able condition, such an airplane would be worth a fortune and double in value each and every year!!

"German Army to Lift WWII Divebomber from Baltic"

"The German army is lifting a Junkers 87 'Stuka' divebomber from the Baltic Sea floor just off the coast. Berlin's military museum is eager to exhibit the feared plane, known for its ear-piercing siren designed to spread panic in World War II. There are virtually no original German aircraft left from either of the two world wars."

"The German army began an operation this week to lift a World War II divebomber from the seabed off the island of Rügen, located in the Baltic Sea just off of Germany's northern coast."

 The Ju-87 at least from 1940 and the Battle of Britain was considered to be an obsolete warplane? Various incarnations of further development from the circa 1940 model existed but the plane was still inadequate?

I had not noticed this before but the Ju-87 and the Soviet Il-2 bear a striking resemblance [Stuka does not have retractable landing gear]? Perhaps the Soviet design bureaus benefited in some manner from espionage or was it a case of independent and parallel development?

You the devoted reader to the blog have to decide for yourself!

coolbert.

Ghosts!

This is coolbert:

From Der Spiegel and the tip from DEC the situation as we all know all too well rapidly deteriorating in Syria, mayhem by criminals now in the pay of the ruling elite the norm.

The Shabiha ("ghosts") at work. Criminal elements, Alawite, Christian, Sunni loyal to Assad terrorizing the populace, freed from prison [?] or recruited with the reward for the miscreants being rape and plunder.

"Assad's Pact With the Devil"

"Syrian Regime Using Hired Killers to Cling to Power"

"The regime of Syrian ruler Bashar Assad has enlisted gangs of murderous thugs known as 'Shabiha.' No assignment is too brutal or bloody for these men who are free to kill, plunder and rape. Assad knows that outright victory over the opposition is his only remaining chance to stay in power."

That Alawite minority [10 %] of the Syrian population in control for over forty years now, opposition to the Assad family and their minions met with extreme force AND NOW THE USE OF CRIMINALS IN A MANNER NOT UNIQUE IN THAT PART OF THE WORLD.

 Indeed, the use of convicts released from prison and criminal elements in an organized and institutionalized fashion as a quasi-military force by a despotic regime perhaps UNIQUE to the Islamic world?

Of this I am not sure. 

 From recent times we have the on-going attacks on the people of Dar Fur by the janjaweed. Criminal gangs mounted horsemen noted for their murder, rape, plunder, scorched earth done at the behest of the Sudanese central government. 

And from past history the Ottomans deploying as standard-operating-procedure bashi bazooks, irregulars with a criminal background, often released convicts, an adjunct to the regular army of the Ottoman, the bashi bazook noted for their atrocity and just plain bad old behavior!!

 Houla today, Hama yesterday [thirty years ago], the Assad family digs in their heels and makes a last ditch effort at survival. And those 3 million gas masks imported from Russia are intended for?

Your guess is as good as mine but it bodes not well!! 

 coolbert.

Mercenary?

This is coolbert:

The chickens are coming home to roost! At least they are in Libya. Thanks to RIANovosti.

Scores are being settled, those complicit with the regime of the Colonel being taught a lesson they will never forget.

In this case MERCENARIES REPUTED TO HAVE FOUGHT FOR THE COLONEL!

"Libya Jails Russian, Ukrainian pro-Gaddafi Mercenaries"

Men however, described a mercenaries but not as that term mercenary commonly, generally, and normally understood! Or are they?

"MOSCOW, June 4 (RIA Novosti) – A Libyan military court handed down on Monday long prison terms to a group of men from former Soviet republics on charges that they worked to repair military equipment for the Middle East country’s late strongman leader, Muammar Gaddafi"

NOT persons picking up a weapon and firing in combat with the intention to kill. Seems these folks are maintenance personnel for the most part, if not exclusively, and NOT combat arms.

Persons nonetheless apparently indeed in the pay of the Colonel, and mercenaries in that sense as the origin of the word would suggest, mercenary as desiring payment for services rendered in the military sphere, of whatever nature.

Lots of eastern Europeans having marketable skills as maintenance types, working on military gear of a complex nature, or even perhaps combat arms as well.

From that era immediately after the end of the apartheid government in South Africa, mercenaries in the employment of Sandline and Executive Outcomes from the recent history as applicable to those individuals fighting on the battlefield in the traditional manner!

The Colonel too for a long time employing the services of the CIA renegade case officer Edwin Wilson. Wilson recruiting Americans and using same to train an entire generation of disreputables arcane and secret arts all having a military application, quite often deadly.

Made that hard bed and now having to sleep on it? Good luck!

coolbert.

Peacock.

This is coolbert:

As originally from Harry and the Sharkhunters web site http://www.sharkhunters.com:

On this date in 1944:

"Today, the 4th of June, marks the 68th anniversary of the capture of U-505 off the African coast.  This was the first time since the War of 1812 that the U.S. Navy captured an enemy Man-O-War on the high seas"

That capture of the German submarine U-505 an event now a thing of legend. The vessel nearly sunk, floated and towed as a prize of war, unheard of in modern warfare.

"We Captured a Submarine..."

"American sailors had not captured an enemy vessel on the high seas since the war of 1812. The last time the US Navy had boarded and captured a foreign enemy Man-Of-War in battle on the high seas had been back in 1815 when the U.S. Sloop PEACOCK, boarded and captured H.M.S. (His Majesty’s Ship) BRIG NAUTILUS in the Strait of Sunda, East Indies."

The last occasion an American warship capturing an enemy man-o-war on the high seas in 1815, with a most interesting twist. From the wiki this most interesting item:

"Peacock departed New York 23 January 1815 . . .  and rounded the Cape of Good Hope into the Indian Ocean, where she captured three valuable prizes. On 30 June, she captured the 16-gun brig Nautilus . . .  in the Straits of Sunda, in the final naval action of the war. Boyce informed Warrington that the war had ended. Warrington suspected a ruse and ordered Boyce to surrender. When Boyce refused, Warrington opened fire, killing and wounding 15 men aboard Nautilus. When Boyce provided documents proving that the Treaty of Ghent, ending the war, had been ratified, Warrington released the prize . . .  A court of inquiry in Boston a year later, of course exonerated Warrington of all blame."

The last naval action [?] of the war and the capture accomplished when hostilities had ceased, the WAR HAD ENDED WITH A NEGOTIATED SETTLEMENT, THIS NOT KNOWN TO THE COMMANDER OF THE PEACOCK!!

Comments:


* Please recall the land Battle of New Orleans [1815] also occurring under similar circumstances, the war having already ended. 2,000 of the finest English soldiers sacrificed for no gain!

 * During the American Civil War NO Confederate naval warships were captured on the highs seas by a vessel of the US Navy? Some devoted reader to the blog knows the answer to this?

 * British warship [Nautilus] captured by American warship [Peacock] in the Sunda Strait, Dutch East Indies! So far from home! American naval power has had global reach for over two hundred years and continues to do so.

 * That sloop Peacock continuing to perform yeoman service even in those years in the aftermath of 1815. Patrolling and engaging pirates in the Indian Ocean and the South China Sea. Sounds just like today, doesn't it?

 coolbert.

AAA II.

This is coolbert:

 AAA - - conclusion. 

 Here from various Internet web sites some images of anti-aircraft-artillery from that period of the Great War [WW1].

 The weapon of choice for the most part a rapid-firing high velocity field gun of three inch [75 mm] bore mounted on a truck of a carriage in such a manner so that the barrel can be elevated to an almost vertical position.

  Ad hoc field expedient designs the development of which should be understood in a constant state of flux for the entire time of the conflict.

A British truck [lorry] with a three-inch [75 mm] gun mounted. 

Canadian troops so says the caption servicing and operating a AAA piece circa 1918. 

This too caught my attention. Used by the English and German both but found to be wanting [?] is the 37 mm auto-cannon!

First an innovation pre-war and intended to be used against massed formations of ground troops but put into service as an expedient AAA piece.

NOT favored for some reason?

I would have thought a mass of these guns in an assemblage firing all-at-once on the same target could have put a "wall of steel" into the path of an approaching enemy aircraft, considerations of height, distance, etc., being minimized. The ideal solution to the AAA problem?

This was not the case? 

German AAA unit using the 37 mm cannon. That Darth Vader type of mask and helmet creating a very sinister appearance emblematic of the "brutal Hun" soul-less and inhuman. 

 Heavy [?] machine guns [MG] mounted on poles too were used in the latter days of the conflict again as expedient weaponry, defense against ground strafing combat aircraft. I am thinking of machine guns of 12.7 mm [50 caliber] and such! Lewis guns of the .303 caliber perhaps more favored for the close-quarters AAA mission?

coolbert.

BASH.

This is coolbert:

 BASH once more. Bird strike. 

 Israeli military helicopter sustaining a bird strike nearly bringing the chopper down. That most senior Israeli ground force military commander on board as are almost a dozen other senior officers. A near disaster barely averted.

"Bird forces GOC's helicopter to make emergency landing"

"GOC Army Headquarters Sami Turgeman comes out of chopper crash unscathed in fourth close-call incident involving him in last few years"

"A nerve-wracking incident occurred on Thursday when the black hawk helicopter which had GOC Army Headquarters Major-General Sami Turgeman and 10 other senior officers on board was forced to make an emergency landing in southern Israel."

 "a bird hit the helicopter's main blade."

"Two air force pilots announce an emergency situation and landed the helicopter smoothly, in spite of the severely damaged blade."

That rotor blade of a helicopter very susceptible to damage, especially wobble as might be the case with a bird strike. Pilots unable to compensate or over-compensating an out-of-control chopper the result.

At least until recently THE U.S. ARMY INSTRUCTIONS FOR MARKING A HELICOPTER LANDING ZONE WITH ENGINEER TAPE EXACTLY ASS BACKWARDS, CREATING A LOT OF DANGER FROM THAT TAPE IF NOT SECURED GETTING BLOWN INTO THE ENGINE OR ENTANGLING THE ROTOR BLADES A CRASH WITH LOSS OF LIFE BEING THE RESULT.

Who needs AAA when you have birds? Tzahal the Israeli Defense Forces suffering more warplanes "downed" from bird strikes over a period of decades than from enemy fire!!

coolbert.

AAA I.

 This is coolbert:

AAA!

From the previous blog entry the topic of which was the observation balloon from the era of the Great War [WW1].

"Attacking enemy combat aircraft subjected to massed and dedicated AAA [anti-aircraft-artillery] fire, withering and intense."

Anti-aircraft-artillery [AAA] as it was known at the start of the Great War a NON-ENTITY?

Since the various general staff officers of the various combatants had the attitude toward the combat airplane as a curiosity and oddity not worthy of serious consideration as a weapon of war! The twinning of the words combat and airplane of itself is a curiosity and oddity as would  have been the case in 1914. NO SUCH thing even existed to my knowledge. Observation perhaps YES, but combat as that term understood, NO!

How much less must it have been the case then that the general staff officers of the various warring parties had given serious consideration to DEFENDING AGAINST THE WARPLANE? Almost none I would have to think.

AAA during the war becoming a combat arm as that term understood, dedicated units formed and armed, doctrine and tactics developed to what was at the time a degree of usefulness as was commensurate with the technology available during that period.

From several web sites concerning WW1 AAA we have these comments:

"The concept of an Anti Aircraft Artillery guns was not even to the imagination of field commanders in the early part of the Twenty Century. Aviation was a new field of battle at that time; a much misunderstood one too. But, as with any new human-developed field, there were countermeasures being developed almost at the same time that the first few planes took to the air."

Solutions to the problem of ground forces shooting down attacking enemy aircraft done on an expedient basis, ad hoc for the most part:

Solutions for the most part consisting of field guns of three inch bore [75 mm] modified and mounted on vehicles or carriages in such a manner as to allow the barrel to be raised to almost the vertical position, that caliber of gun [75 mm] found to be the weapon of choice.

The results of which are generally described as for the most part "useless"!!

"In general, these ad-hoc solutions proved largely useless"

Consider that an actual "shoot-down" was a very rare occurrence so it seems that DETERRENCE was more a factor with AAA of the period.


"Few aircraft were actually directly shot down, each requiring an average 4,000 - 4,500 shells, but guns were often employed in aerial barrages to deny an airspace to aircraft rather than to simply shoot down individually targeted aircraft . . . 'in the BEF [i.e. on the Western Front] stress was laid on long-range deterrent fire'"

By 1918 however, the ground-strafing attack warplane becoming an integral part of the blitzkrieg style offensive as originated with the German, effective allied counter-measures adopted in the form of machine-guns mounted on poles [for 360 degree traversing action] a quick and resourceful response, more "deadly" and effective!

"As aircraft started to be used against ground targets on the battlefield, the AA guns could not be traversed quickly enough at close targets and, being relatively few, were not always in the right place (and were often unpopular with other troops), so changed positions frequently. Soon the forces were adding various machine-gun based weapons mounted on poles. These short-range weapons proved more deadly"

AAA of the Great War era obviously an ever evolving process, counter-measures constantly in development  AND a new branch of combat arms being created in the process.

coolbert.