How did London's landmarks stay intact in ww2?

[kj35]

Think about it. I've just been watching a documentary on London's bridges.  Given the amount and targeting of the Luftwaffe in ww2 how the hell did all the palaces, Buckingham,  tower of London, parliament stay intact? And all the bridges? Wouldn't you  if at war have carpet bombed the lot?

Edited January 14, 2021 by kj35

[HistoryIsComplex]

The most obvious explanation is that Hitler wasn't targeting them.

 

Which opens up a whole can of worms...

[oz93666]

WWII era bombing was very inaccurate

 

 "With less than 50 per-cent cloud coverage an average B-17 Fortress Group could be expected to place 32.4% of its bombs within 1000 feet (ca. 305 meters) of the aiming point when aiming visually." 

 

In addition London raids were at night , barrage balloons and flak to keep the attackers at a high altitude , they didn't have the number of aircraft to carpet bomb , trying to hit a bridge would be a waste , most bombs would go in the river ... 

 

So they concentrated on large vital  areas like the docks .

 

[HistoryIsComplex]

8 hours ago, oz93666 said:

WWII era bombing was very inaccurate

 

 "With less than 50 per-cent cloud coverage an average B-17 Fortress Group could be expected to place 32.4% of its bombs within 1000 feet (ca. 305 meters) of the aiming point when aiming visually." 

 

In addition London raids were at night , barrage balloons and flak to keep the attackers at a high altitude , they didn't have the number of aircraft to carpet bomb , trying to hit a bridge would be a waste , most bombs would go in the river ... 

 

So they concentrated on large vital  areas like the docks .

 

 

You could calculate, in minutes and seconds, how long it would take for a German bomber flying at a set speed to be directly above a given target in London.

 

Turning the lights off, shooting AA guns would not work against a fleet of bombers trying to hit the same target every night.

 

At least some of the targets should have been damaged.

[screamingeagle]

8 hours ago, oz93666 said:

WWII era bombing was very inaccurate

 

 "With less than 50 per-cent cloud coverage an average B-17 Fortress Group could be expected to place 32.4% of its bombs within 1000 feet (ca. 305 meters) of the aiming point when aiming visually." 

 

In addition London raids were at night , barrage balloons and flak to keep the attackers at a high altitude , they didn't have the number of aircraft to carpet bomb , trying to hit a bridge would be a waste , most bombs would go in the river ... 

 

So they concentrated on large vital  areas like the docks .

 

 carpet bombing solved that....

[MarpatV2]

22 hours ago, kj35 said:

Think about it. I've just been watching a documentary on London's bridges.  Given the amount and targeting of the Luftwaffe in ww2 how the hell did all the palaces, Buckingham,  tower of London, parliament stay intact? And all the bridges? Wouldn't you  if at war have carpet bombed the lot?

|Maybe some werent in the specific target area? some would survive by chance. Many, like St Pauls and the Palace, did get hit by bombs. The Germans didnt have the capacity for heavy carpet bombing in the war as their bombers were of the medium type and not suitable.

[MarpatV2]

30 minutes ago, HistoryIsComplex said:

 

You could calculate, in minutes and seconds, how long it would take for a German bomber flying at a set speed to be directly above a given target in London.

 

Turning the lights off, shooting AA guns would not work against a fleet of bombers trying to hit the same target every night.

 

At least some of the targets should have been damaged.

But we had radar too, searchlights were used at night as well as nighfighters equipped with early radar.

 

Do you think they would risk aircraft and lives to knock a few monuments down when they could destroy targets essential for the war  effort?

[MarpatV2]

27 minutes ago, screamingeagle said:

 carpet bombing solved that....

Germans never had that capacity though

[HistoryIsComplex]

4 minutes ago, MarpatV2 said:

But we had radar too, searchlights were used at night as well as nighfighters equipped with early radar.

 

Do you think they would risk aircraft and lives to knock a few monuments down when they could destroy targets essential for the war  effort?

 

Few things demoralize/panic a population more than the news that parliament/key government buildings have been bombed overnight.

 

If Hitler's objective had been to demoralize Britons, this would have been a prime objective for him.

[MarpatV2]

2 minutes ago, HistoryIsComplex said:

 

Few things demoralize/panic a population more than the news that parliament/key government buildings have been bombed overnight.

 

If Hitler's objective had been to demoralize Britons, this would have been a prime objective for him.

Wouldnt matter as the gov were in bunkers underground. I doubt if it would have damaged moral any further.

 

Hitler used all methods to beat enemies. Using the V1 and V2 was a supreme example of this. A V2 couldnt be heard in flight and its speed meant it reached London in a very short time. They also had huge warheads. Unexpected instant destruction is far more likely to demoralise a person than seeing parliament bombed.

[HistoryIsComplex]

1 minute ago, MarpatV2 said:

Wouldnt matter as the gov were in bunkers underground. I doubt if it would have damaged moral any further.

 

Hitler used all methods to beat enemies. Using the V1 and V2 was a supreme example of this. A V2 couldnt be heard in flight and its speed meant it reached London in a very short time. They also had huge warheads. Unexpected instant destruction is far more likely to demoralise a person than seeing parliament bombed.

 

In many countries where Parliament buildings have been attacked - look at the Capitol siege, the shelling of the Duma or the Reichstag fire - the news wreaks havoc with the local population.

 

You are underestimating what the sudden destruction of a symbolic seat of government does to the average person psychogically.

 

 

[Prince Arthur]

On 1/14/2021 at 11:28 PM, kj35 said:

Think about it. I've just been watching a documentary on London's bridges.  Given the amount and targeting of the Luftwaffe in ww2 how the hell did all the palaces, Buckingham,  tower of London, parliament stay intact? And all the bridges? Wouldn't you  if at war have carpet bombed the lot?

 

Agreed - the German's were a well-oiled Military Machine - how did they miss so many obvious London targets?

 

A suggested explanation......

 

Hitlers Handlers – The Knights of the Garter (George and the Dragon)

On the run-up to World War II, the Knights of the Garter master-minded all sides of the conflict to ensure a battle of epic proportions would result.

Of the elite 24 appointed Knights of the Garter (a British Order), it is surprising how many were actively working for the Nazis or were well acquainted with high level Nazis including Hitler and Göring.

 

[screamingeagle]

15 hours ago, MarpatV2 said:

Do you think they would risk aircraft and lives to knock a few monuments down when they could destroy targets essential for the war  effort?

from the psycholgical point,yes i do think they would risk it.....

 

15 hours ago, MarpatV2 said:

Germans never had that capacity though

i agree ,i meant they would just narrow the area where is a vital target.......

 

 

i remeber on the old forum was a thread "did Hitler lost war on purpouse"

and there was 5 or 7 very interesting points to support that claim

[Prince Arthur]

The Duke of Windsor and his French Residences – World War 2

During the German occupation of France in WW2, Edward, Duke of Windsor, asked the German forces to place guards at his Paris and Riviera homes; they did so.

Ref:

Page 52 - The House of Windsor. Author - Andrew Roberts edited by Antonia Fraser (2000). London: Cassell and Co  ISBN 0-304-35406-6.

(Antonia Fraser is the daughter of Frank Pakenham, 7th Earl of Longford – Knight of the Garter #943)

 

[Fluke]

Excellent thread Kj. Often thought about this myself. Interesting food for thought. 

 

My very limited knowledge on the subject would have been the refueling. I can't find the information now but in the battle of britain and perhaps throughout they had a matter of hours to dump their bombs and then head back because of fuel constraints? 

 

 In terms of London they would fly down the Thames estuary and they would only have a limited time to drop bombs before making their way back to germany. That and having to deal with dogfights interceptions from spitfires. On their way back to germany they would sometimes drop any lefrover bombs sometimes in rural places or the river/sea. 

 

London was obviously a key area. South east would have been woolwhich arsenal to cut off the artilliary supply which would have presumably decreased our chances of holding off the germans. My nan got bombed out pretty bad, my other nan bombed out in catford. The East was worse as far as i know. 

 

Of course this is all the official narrative and you would have thought with the amount of bombs they dropped on major uk cities they would have managed to blow up some major landmarks. Perhaps the major blackout helped and the technological advaces back then they couldn't locate the sites in time without being struck down. 

 

 

 

I was sure they bombed buckingham palace and found this link. 

The bombing

There were early warning signs that Buckingham Palace may have been a target for the Luftwaffe. On the 8th September a 50-kilogram bomb fell on the grounds of the Palace, but luckily didn't explode, and was later destroyed in a controlled explosion.

On the morning of the 13th, King George VI and Queen Elizabeth were minding their own business and drinking some tea, when they heard a rumble and a crash.

A German raider had dropped five high explosive bombs on the Palace. The Royal chapel, inner quadrangle, Palace gates, and the Victoria memorial were all hit by the bombs. Four members of the Palace staff were injured, one of whom would die.

 

In a letter, Queen Elizabeth described how she heard the 'unmistakable whirr-whirr of a German plane' and the 'scream of a bomb'. Thankfully, the King and Queen went unharmed in the incident.

In a poignant statement, Queen Elizabeth also said 'I am glad we have been bombed. It makes me feel I can look the East-End in the face'. 

https://britishheritage.com/history/buckingham-palace-bombing-wwii

[rideforever]

I've flown down the Thames estuary on commercial airliners many times on the way to Heathrow and it's easy navigation.

If they weren't targetted they weren't targetted.

But then Hitler offered peace to Britain 3 times ... under the terms that everyone returns to their starting positions.

Britain didn't want it.
And ... Coronavirus is just downstream of the continuing disaster

[Prince Arthur]

Why was London treated differently to Warsaw in WW2?

The Luftwaffe bombed Warsaw heavily during the invasion of Poland in 1939. Then in 1944 the German Army, in revenge for the Warsaw Uprising that saw the Polish Resistance hit back against their German occupiers, launched an assault aimed at leaving nothing left of the city. Warsaw was shelled and bombed before teams with flamethrowers went in to burn what remained, including the historical archives and some of the most important library collections in Europe. CHURCHES, PALACES, and LIBRARIES that dated back to the 13th century were all razed to the ground. When the war ended the Warsaw Reconstruction Office took six years planning the reconstruction of the Old Town of Warsaw using street-maps from the 18th century.

 

The Old Market Square, ROYAL CASTLE, city walls and PALACES were all rebuilt in the 1960s and the OLD TOWN is now a UNESCO World Heritage Site.

 

 

Edited January 18, 2021 by Prince Arthur

[screamingeagle]

2 hours ago, Prince Arthur said:

and LIBRARIES that dated back to the 13th century were all razed to the ground. When the war ended

libraries always a key target,always.....by church or goverment 

[EnigmaticWorld]

2 minutes ago, screamingeagle said:

libraries always a key target,always.....by church or goverment 

 

I still want to know happened to vast libraries in France that had the info that linked Judaism to freemasonry. Why do I stop hearing about them in history books after the 1920s? Seems like we're missing key info because of that, but we won't hear about it because it doesn't involve Christians.

[EnigmaticWorld]

Just now, MarpatV2 said:

Lol, more nazi apologies. Hitler signed a pact with Stalin and broke that. His offers tended to be to the convenience of the nazis. Who would want to work a deal with them which would allow their genocide to continue? why are you trying to make Hitler out as some reasonable guy just wanting peace?

 

Yeah it's totally that simple. /s

 

You act like there aren't genocidal bolshevik freaks on the other side too.

[MarpatV2]

17 minutes ago, EnigmaticWorld said:

 

Yeah it's totally that simple. /s

 

You act like there aren't genocidal bolshevik freaks on the other side too.

Well there were. I never once said there wasnt. There is actually a memorial at Cannock Chase to all the Poles murdered by the Russians after the joint nazi/ Russian invasion of Poland.

[rideforever]

19 minutes ago, MarpatV2 said:

Lol, more nazi apologies. Hitler signed a pact with Stalin and broke that. His offers tended to be to the convenience of the nazis. Who would want to work a deal with them which would allow their genocide to continue? why are you trying to make Hitler out as some reasonable guy just wanting peace?

 

Well ... he did offer the Brits peace several times with the criteria that the Germans return to their starting positions thereby conceding a large area of land.

But actually my post was about navigation down the Thames Estuary by plane ... which like I said is so easy ... going along I personally looking out of the window can follow where I am in London from obvious landmarks ... and I was not on a bombing run.  So if I can so could the Germans and if they didn't bomb things then that was a choice.

Possibly they ... Hitler didn't want to destroy Britain anyway.   He felt Britain was an essential part of the world as it existed then, and that there were some connections between Germany and Britain.

But then there is the question of the British Royal Family paying for their wars and schemes with money from rich Jews.  That's why the British Royalty pushed through in 1740ish a law to naturalise Jews which was rejected by the ordinary Brits in the street and so repealled in 1754.

In other words the British on the street may have agree with Hitler whilst the British Royal family had big debts with the Jews and so sided with them.

Anyway ... long story bla bla bla

[EnigmaticWorld]

If the cabal, in their own words, talked about genociding Germans long before WW2, I think people should be able to look into both sides of what happened back then without fear of being arrested. That's all I will say.

[Coldrum]

[kj35]

Hitler was either very sure and/or assured of victory that he left these places for himself, which is a theory i'd heard given Edward v111 th alleged leanings and that really wouldn't surprise me. OR there was some other reason. Like the elites hedging their bets.