Flintlock76It doesn't make sense that the Germans would abandon a train full of loot in an area soon to be occupied by the Soviets.
It makes perfect sense if you can't move the train in time to 'escape' and you want to keep the godless Asiatics from getting the goodies. You bury any trace of its presence, and come back if you can ... we and the Russians made damn sure for several years they couldn't, and quite possibly everyone in a position of 'coming back' didn't survive to a time they might have tried.
There are plenty of examples where people buried gold in their backyards to prevent it from theft, and then died without telling. What would be inexplicable would be leaving it unhidden or poorly hidden while you still had a perceived option to keep it from confiscation...
I'm going to put a little railroadin' back into this thread.
Here's a ten minute video from Dr. Mark Felton, a British historian. It's about a Nazi / Hungarian gold train on the run from the Red Army toward the end of WW2.
Very informative and entertaining, with a whiff of "Kelly's Heroes" toward the end.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tm_4NETGXpc
By the way, I don't believe the story of a Nazi gold train hidden in an old tunnel somewhere in Poland. It doesn't make sense that the Germans would abandon a train full of loot in an area soon to be occupied by the Soviets. Just how were they planning on getting back to it? The point of hiding treasure today is so you can come back next week, next year, or at some point in the future and retrieve it.
And Merry Christmas to you and yours Sailor! And "Fair winds and followin' seas to ye" in the New Year!
"If" you say? How could I not? I've loved biplanes all my life and there is no way I'm not going to enjoy that flight! Merry Christmas, Wayne and to everybody on the forum and best wishes for 2020!
If you enjoy the flight in the Tiger Moth as much as I enjoyed the ride in a Stearman you'll have done just fine!
Charlie- Lufhansa owns a JU-52 that was owned by Martin Caidan who wrote the story "The Six-Million Dollar Man." and many other aviation themed books. I well recall watching "The Battle of Britain" with my old man who was rapt by the flight sequences in that film, as was I. If you go to the Imperial War Museum at Duxford, there is a gap in the spacing of the hangars- that's where the one was that was blown up in the movie. If you like old aircraft, go to Duxford- it is well worth going to England and I'm going again this summer. I was going to sign up to fly in a two-seater Spitfire, but that costs almost 3,000 pounds for a half-hour so I'll have to settle for a flight in a Tiger Moth.
Anyone remember that classic aviation movie "Battle of Britain" from 1969?
I saw it with a friend of mine after it opened in our part of New Jersey, he was an warbird fan like I was, and when they rolled the opening credits to that great "Ace High March" and we (and everyone else in the theater) saw that head-on shot of the JU-52 you could tell who the aviation fans in the theater were, including us!
There was a loud GASP, and then the muttering and whispers started, " Oh my God, WHERE did they get that JU-52 from?!!!"
No CGI back in those days, we were looking at the real thing!
Incredible film, more like a time machine!
For those who haven't seen it, this is what I'm talkin' about...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cNVVoH9-QH0
A pre-war, Lufthansa Ju-52/3m makes various flight in Germany. I saw it once flying over the Englischer Garten in Munich. Good old Tante Ju was originally an airliner suitable for military transport usage, like the DC 3.
duplicate
The French grabbed quite a few German goodies after the war, the tooling for JU-52's, Mauser rifles, Walther pistols, German 2-10-0's of various types, you name it.
Hey, fair's fair. They didn't ask to be invaded in 1940. Neither did anyone else the Germans invaded, for that matter.
Anyway, the fact the French built some JU-52's would explain what one was doing derelict at Da Nang airport during the Viet Nam War. "Air Classics" magazine had a photo of it in the magazine around 1970 or so. That JU-52 was a real "W-T-F is THAT doing here?" moment for Air Force veterans who knew what it was!
How's about a six-plane formation flight of JU-52's? The only thing missing are the Fallschirmjaeger.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OfxvL4joSkE
Speaking of Junkers, there's a JU-52 in the Deutsches Museum in Munich. It's partially cut away to show its construction and you can climb aboard. Its little unusual in that it was built in 1951 in France and was retired from their air force in 1980 or so. Built in France, who knew?
Initially the fighter aircraft were given the prefixes E., D., and Dr. for Eindecker, Doppeldeckker and Dreidecker. Late in the war, it was simplified to simply D meaning a single seat fighter. So the last Fokker craft, the small, fast, Platz-designed rotary-engined monoplane was D. VIII.
Other widely-used class prefixes from the Idflieg included: C. and CL. for 2-seat ground attack aircraft; G. for large twin engine bombers; R. for giant multi-engine bombers; and J. for armored ground attack craft, like the metal Junkers J.1.
I found a video of a gent named Mikael Carlson and his rotary-engined Fokker Dr.I replica. This one's a bit unusual in that Mikael doesn't do the usual fly-past and tail-chasing dogfight routine, he does aerobatics with the triplane and demonstrates what it was capable of and how lethal it could have been in capable hands. Quite a sight. Breathtaking actually!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=90SGaZaZjCc
The Dr.I, the DVII, and the DVIII were designed by Rheinhold Platz. Tony Fokker wasn't really doing much design work by 1917, he was primarily handling the business end of the company.
Just a nitpick: the Fokker series uses Roman numerals and decimal point, with no space after the point (as there would be if the point were a punctuation 'period'), and as charlie hebdo indicated the 'r' in Dr.I is lowercase (I believe Dr is an abbreviation for the German word 'Dreidecker', meaning '[aircraft with] three wings')
If I recall correctly the same man designed both the Dr.I and the D.VII, and the ability to fly at high AOA (the 'hanging on the prop) is not so much to increase rate of climb but to permit getting the guns to bear stably on the relatively unprotected undersides of other aircraft. Many WWI aircraft were notable for very short ground runs and phenomenal subsequent climb rates compared to more familiar modern aircraft; the Dr.I would be just as effective at 'rapid response to altitude' as it is in using lift in vectored turns, again as charlie hebdo indicated, but in a terrible cost in forward speed -- something I think was quite remedied in the D.VII.
Flintlock76 You recall pretty good 54, I thought I was the only one who remembered the "Hunley" film.
You recall pretty good 54, I thought I was the only one who remembered the "Hunley" film.
I also remembered the "Hunley" episode of "The Great Adventure" along with the ones you mentioned plus the founding of the ASPCA, the story of the Franklin and Edwin Drake's oil well (missed that both times it aired, and finally watched it on YouTube).
Haven't seen any sign of a DVD collection, but a few episodes are on YouTube.
In actual fact, it was the first episode of a television anthology series about American history called "The Great Adventure," which ran for one season in the early 60's. I remember the show quite well, Jackie Cooper played Lt. Dixon, CSA, the "Hunleys" last commanding officer.
VERY good series, but unfortunately like most anthology-type TV shows it failed to find an audience. Typically without a regular cast of characters audiences don't seem to connect with a series. The one notable exception was "The Twilight Zone.
In addition to the "Hunley" story the shows I remember told the stories of a young Andrew Jackson, Harriet Tubman (Ruby Dee played Harriet), the Wounded Knee Massacre, the flight of Jefferson Davis after the fall of Richmond (Michael Rennie played Davis), and World War Two hero Roger Young.
I'd love to see it again. I don't know if it's available on DVD or not.
There was a made-for-TV Hunley film done about 20 years ago for TNT. Pretty dull and forgettable, I don't think it's ever been re-broadcast.
There's lots of films of DR 1s on You Tube, but years ago I watched a D7 take off in about 100 feet, it went straight up and then the pilot made it hang on the propeller- my father was an expert on WW1 aircraft and told me about it when I was a kid-I saw it with my own eyes. The D7 was part of the Old Rhinebeck Aerodrome's collection.
I recall a film about the Hunley- It kept sinking and then was raised and used again and the exact same guys were in it, cranking the prop. A Disney film, maybe?
charlie hebdo As to the Dr.1, one of it's greatest assets was its rapid climb rate because of the three lifting surfaces (more accurately 3.5, including the plane between landing wheels).
As to the Dr.1, one of it's greatest assets was its rapid climb rate because of the three lifting surfaces (more accurately 3.5, including the plane between landing wheels).
Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.
Flintlock76They caught on and hung on in the Mediterranean because of the Med's fluky and unreliable winds.
The point of a ship like a trireme is not that it substitutes for 'sail' in long-distance operation. It is how maneuverable, and fast in randomly-chosen straight lines and trajectories in a combat situation, the ship is. It's the same consideration that makes something like a triplane a better dogfighter -- the ship can turn dramatically quickly, and accelerate and jink away from most concerted ball or shell fire, then turn and drive to engage a ram or spar torpedo with what can be great precision. Like a Zero it would rely upon speed and not armor for its effect. (Needless to say, you don't staff it with convicts under the whip; you use motivated and intelligent people who can respond almost instinctively with practice...)
I've always been interested in the idea of building a bi- or trireme with modern crew-shell materials and technology, and training a few cohorts of volunteer heavy-eight men in how to run one effectively.
Note the effect of rapid-firing guns with timed explosive projectiles, the use of machine guns, and daisy-cutter-type shrapnel on the practical use of anything that relies on lightness and human power. That's a big reason why you don't see the idea used for anything practical any more.
We'll never know what happened for certain since all those involved were killed, but I suspect there was a misfire on one of the guns that wasn't caught. Standard procedure for a misfire on the big guns was to wait one hour before opening the breech, in case there's a "slow burn" on one of the powder bags.
A similar incident happened on the USS New Jersey during the Vietnam War, but without the horrific result. One of the guns misfired, the gun captain caught it, and "downed" the gun for the one-hour time. On opening the breech they found one of the powder bags had twisted so the igniter pad on the bag wasn't in line with the primer.
So an accident was avoided. They reloaded the powder and fired out the shell.
Not long after the accident on the Iowa I asked some WW2 Navy vets I knew about any turret accidents on the battlewagons during WW2. They told me that as far as they knew nothing like what happened on the Iowa happened during the war, the word would have gone through the fleet pretty quickly if it had, despite any efforts to keep a lid on it.
In a lot of ways, the naval big guns are a lot like steam locomotives, they're as safe as YOU make them. Strict attention to detail and procedure, no short-cuts, and no carelessness tolerated.
Interesting the loading of the 16 inch guns. Those powder bags certainly could help us understand the Iowa turrent accident.
Backshop, 54light15 could probably explain it better than I can, he's the old Navy vet, but sailors work hard for those ratings, so they prefer to (or used to) be referred to as, for example, Machinist Mate First Class, Bosun's Mate Second Class, and so forth. It's also correct to call them "Petty Officer" if you're not sure of the specialty (there's lots of 'em!) or "Seaman" if he or she hasn't reached petty officer status yet.
No mistaking a Chief Petty Officer, he or she is always called "Chief!"
I've heard Army enlisted personnel refer to themselves by "E" status, say "E4" or "E5" but I don't know how common a practice that is. "E" status is enlisted grade status, and it's an administrative classification for a rank, not the rank.
I've never heard enlisted Marines refer to themselves by anything other than the traditional rank designations, i.e. corporal, sergeant, staff sergeant, and so on.
Overmod mentioned galleys. They caught on and hung on in the Mediterranean because of the Med's fluky and unreliable winds. French and Spanish frigates built for Mediterranean service kept rowing ports right up to the 19th Century.
54light15Cox is a sailboat term, isn't it?
No, it's worse, it's crew. I don't think I've ever seen the Navy use an abbreviation other than coxs'n in any 'official' form, but 'cox' is the common term for the same word in the slightly different crew sense. I don't think the Navy used galleys in combat, even at Tripoli, although there are some great advantages in maneuverability in some instances, and of course the Hunley was a galley with slightly different 'rowing' technique...
I believe the British had wireless air-to-ground communication on some aircraft by 1918, however it was far from universal. Wireless sets were still bulky and heavy, and with photography and gunnery you'd need an observer who could send and recieve Morse code in addition to the other two skills. I don't know if the French or the Americans (or the Germans for that matter) ever tried airborne wireless.
Balloons would have been a lot more useful for spotting targets, they could be connected to the ground by telephone. In fact, WW1 is when observation balloons really came into their own. They'd been tried in earlier wars like the American Civil War but in wars of movement they were more trouble than they were worth, they had a hard time keeping up with the armies. The static Western Front of WW1 eliminated that problem.
Anyway, the procedure for observation aircraft would have been to spot nice big juicy targets for the railroad guns, and then forward the information after landing through the proper channels to the fire control center.
Am I the only one who finds it curious that the Navy is the only military service where you are known by your qualification and not your rank? You're a Machinist Mate, Yeoman, Coxwain, etc, and not a Seaman, Petty Officer, etc. In the Army, Air Force and Marines, it doesn't matter what your job is, you're known by your rank.
Back then, they might have used motorcycles for advance spotting. I don't think there was air-to-ground wireless communication in 1917. Balloons used for artillery spotting had telephones with wires to the ground receiver. I've always spelled it cox'n. Cox is a sailboat term, isn't it? There were no sailboats in the Nav when I was in except that one in Boston.
ORNHOOIf the battery had automobiles assigned to it for the use of the (landlocked) officers, would coxswains be assigned as drivers?
Probably not; they'd have chauffeurs assigned based on knowledge of operation of a motor vehicle. Probably little different from the drivers assigned to motor trucks carrying supplies to the gun crew.
The question might come up if the 'automobiles' available for officers' use were armored cars built to be autonomous 'raiding' units (as were used, if I remember correctly, by Lawrence of Arabia) -- but this doesn't seem like something the contemporary Navy would make much use of.
Anyone interested in the care and feeding of a 16" naval rifle? I found a neat video about the same.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0OmOQs0ziSU
Aside from obvious changes in procedure from a turret mount to a railroad mount, loading those 14" guns during WW1 probably wasn't all that different.
If the battery had automobiles assigned to it for the use of the (landlocked) officers, would coxswains be assigned as drivers?
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.