Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: OT - WWII quiz

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> World in Flames >> RE: OT - WWII quiz Page: <<   < prev  8 9 [10] 11 12   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: OT - WWII quiz - 7/26/2008 6:47:33 PM   
warspite1


Posts: 41353
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: wosung


quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1


quote:

ORIGINAL: wosung

Q4 Well, it’s about treaties. It’s a lawyers question, so to speak, at least concerning some British BB designs after the Treaty signment in Feb. 1922. They fullfilled the words but not the spirit of the treaty. In short, we are searching for constructer’s short cuts.

Q6 Yup, thats right. Am just reading Roskills War at Sea, part 1.

Sorry, if some of those questions are no simple yes/no questions.

Regards

Warspite1

I`m stumped.

The Japanese simply cheated and ultmately failed to ratify the last treaty before WWII. The British only built two classes. The Nelsons, which I believe were treaty compliant although suffered from reduced range and speed in order to make the weight but keep the 16-inch allowed. The KGV`s were built with 14-inch guns but designed to withstand higher calibre (thinking correctly that other nations may not ratify). Aside from that, the British belatedly did what Japan and America were doing and modernised some of the existing capital ships - although lack of money and resources meant only Warspite, Queen Elizabeth, Valiant and Renown were modernised to any great extent.



Q4 Thats right for the Japanese: They didn’t ratify the 1936 following treaty and thus abrogated the Washington Naval treaty system for the year 1940. But their constructeurs began to plan and build the Yamaoto class ships from 1934 onwards. Their quite sophisticated solution for the next six years was: Bamboo-curtains. Start to build them bigger and hide them. If nobody sees the ships nobody can complain and thus no treaty is violated.

For the British: Well it’s a question of how to define tonnage. Nelson class (nelson and Rodney) were completed in 1927 as first British treaty BB’s. Their standard displacement was even 1300 tons below treaty obligations. But they also had vertical bulkheads under the water line, which, in war time, could be filled with 2800 tons of water as an additional anti-torpedo armour.

But compared with Japanese and German treaty violations this was only a minor short cut.

Regards


Warspite1

Good job then given she was hit by a torpedo in the Med on Operation Halberd.

(in reply to wosung)
Post #: 271
RE: OT - WWII quiz - 7/26/2008 6:50:57 PM   
wosung

 

Posts: 692
Joined: 7/18/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1


quote:

ORIGINAL: terje439


quote:

ORIGINAL: wosung

When you look closely, same def. problem you have in the navies with cruisers. What was in WW2 a heavy, what a light cruiser? Does definition depend more on tonnage or on main artillery calibre (6 or 8 inch)?

Regards



I know this one!! The whim of the guy doing the writeup for MWiF!

Warspite1

The term heavy and light did not really exist at the time of the 1922 Naval Treaty. Essentially "Treaty Cruisers" were set at 10,000 max tonnage (anything over counted against battleship limits) and 8-inch guns (The British had 7.5-inch ships in existence it wanted to keep).

Initially anything with 8-inch guns was a Heavy and 6-inch was a light. Overtime the distinction probably got blurred. I see that WIF has the British Neptune class as a heavy cruiser type - although if built they would have been 6-inch gunned. The Town class was well over 10,000 tons but with 6-inch guns and they were officially a light cruiser.

As a general rule therefore I think it depends on gun size.




That’s right about treaty class cruisers. That’s what I wanted to point at. Cruiser defintions aren’t very easy. Later “heavy” (by tonnage) British US and Jap cruisers tended to have only but more 6 inch guns.

Regards

(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 272
RE: OT - WWII quiz - 7/28/2008 4:15:00 PM   
composer99


Posts: 2923
Joined: 6/6/2005
From: Ottawa, Canada
Status: offline
The 'kickapoo joy juice' question is still outstanding (Steve's non-WWII answer notwithstanding).

I will give the answer next week if no one gets it before then.

_____________________________

~ Composer99

(in reply to wosung)
Post #: 273
RE: OT - WWII quiz - 7/28/2008 7:00:16 PM   
cockney

 

Posts: 83
Joined: 11/15/2006
From: London
Status: offline
thought it was a type of soda
and I found this picture.




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

never piss off a sgt major

(in reply to composer99)
Post #: 274
RE: OT - WWII quiz - 7/28/2008 8:09:01 PM   
NeBert

 

Posts: 53
Joined: 2/11/2007
Status: offline
Maybe a picture-Q?
Who knows Type and manufacturer of this nice bird?




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

NeBert

(in reply to terje439)
Post #: 275
RE: OT - WWII quiz - 7/28/2008 9:07:43 PM   
warspite1


Posts: 41353
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: NeBert

Maybe a picture-Q?
Who knows Type and manufacturer of this nice bird?




Warspite1

I remember this from an old airfix model when I was a kid - its a Blohm & Voss BV-something or other reconnaisance plane. Can I have 1/2 point please?

(in reply to NeBert)
Post #: 276
RE: OT - WWII quiz - 7/28/2008 9:08:43 PM   
Froonp


Posts: 7995
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: NeBert

Maybe a picture-Q?
Who knows Type and manufacturer of this nice bird?




Blohm und Voss. Bv141 dude.

(in reply to NeBert)
Post #: 277
RE: OT - WWII quiz - 7/28/2008 10:50:39 PM   
panzers

 

Posts: 635
Joined: 5/19/2006
From: Detroit Mi, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Orm

quote:

ORIGINAL: terje439

Right on everything. Well except for calling the Jagdtiger a tank. No revolving turret=no tank.



When became revolving turret the definition of a tank?

Was revolving turret the definition of a tank during WWII?

With that definition the worlds first tank was not a tank.
Picture of a British Mark I tank near Thiepval, 25 September 1916.


Photograph by Lt. Ernest Brooks.
Imperial War Museum catalogue number Q 2486.

And at last. Not all has that definition today.

From:
Compact Oxford English Dictionary

tank
• a heavy armoured fighting vehicle carrying guns and moving on a continuous metal track.

-Orm



Actually, because of the many tanks in WWII, there ended up being many different classes of tanks. Where the Brits made the first one back in WWI(actually, I thought it was the French), it was the first armored moving machine, so they called it a tank.
As WWII progressed, Germany was always looking to make bigger and better tanks. In the process they stated to make vehicles that were better served to just sit in a bush or something and use it more for sniper like tactics. Thus a new class of tanks were born. So although you can say the jagdtiger or jagdpanther were tanks, yes they were, but they were not meant to be used in the way a regular tiger or panther because of having the ability to shoot on the run with the mobile turrets. The two tanks I just mentioned were used very late in the war and were so heavy that the Germans simply could not waste whatever precious fuel they had left. So they just placed them in a dense forest and just used it as a platform with a nasty gun. It's main purpose was the armor was virtually inpenetrable while having the ability to fire shells that did nothing but disintegrate anything that got in it's way. It was the ultimate defense weapon. So by definition, yes I guess it would be a tank, but in the way they were is in WWII, was it really a tank? When on defence ( like, for instance, the battle of Berlin) it was clearly the most feared weapon in the entire war except for maybe the ME262 jet,also nothing but a defensive fighter, but because of it's immobility, the allies were very quick to surround it and disable it, but not before it was able to destroy anything around for miles away
Added note. I typed this before reading the rest of the posts on this thread. So sorry if I was sounding redundant.

< Message edited by panzers -- 7/28/2008 11:01:44 PM >

(in reply to Orm)
Post #: 278
RE: OT - WWII quiz - 7/29/2008 2:33:36 AM   
Ted1066


Posts: 214
Joined: 12/10/2007
From: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: terje439

Current unanswered questions:

-Neilster: What strange method of guiding American air-launched weapons was suggested by a famous researcher towards the end of the Second World War?

-Warspite1: Which two naval vessels - one Italian, one German were named after the same historical character?

-Tigercub: when was the worlds first computer made and what for?



I'll take a stab at the computer question: I think its the Enigma Machine you're going for, used in Bletchley Park to decrypt the German ciphers.

Cheers,

Ted

(in reply to terje439)
Post #: 279
RE: OT - WWII quiz - 7/29/2008 11:48:21 AM   
monkla

 

Posts: 56
Joined: 3/16/2003
From: Adelaide, Australia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ted1066


quote:

ORIGINAL: terje439

Current unanswered questions:

-Neilster: What strange method of guiding American air-launched weapons was suggested by a famous researcher towards the end of the Second World War?

-Warspite1: Which two naval vessels - one Italian, one German were named after the same historical character?

-Tigercub: when was the worlds first computer made and what for?



I'll take a stab at the computer question: I think its the Enigma Machine you're going for, used in Bletchley Park to decrypt the German ciphers.

Cheers,

Ted


I don't know when but I seem to recall from somewhere that it may have been designed in the US and was used to help calculate artillery trajectories?????

Leigh

(in reply to Ted1066)
Post #: 280
RE: OT - WWII quiz - 7/29/2008 4:17:58 PM   
panzers

 

Posts: 635
Joined: 5/19/2006
From: Detroit Mi, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: monkla


quote:

ORIGINAL: Ted1066


quote:

ORIGINAL: terje439

Current unanswered questions:

-Neilster: What strange method of guiding American air-launched weapons was suggested by a famous researcher towards the end of the Second World War?

-Warspite1: Which two naval vessels - one Italian, one German were named after the same historical character?

-Tigercub: when was the worlds first computer made and what for?



I'll take a stab at the computer question: I think its the Enigma Machine you're going for, used in Bletchley Park to decrypt the German ciphers.

Cheers,

Ted


I don't know when but I seem to recall from somewhere that it may have been designed in the US and was used to help calculate artillery trajectories?????

Leigh

wasn't the first computer ENIAC, and was used specifically for intelligence of some sort towards the axis powers? The computer took up an entire room and the fans alone weighed over 1000 pounds to keep it from overheating

(in reply to monkla)
Post #: 281
RE: OT - WWII quiz - 7/29/2008 4:23:30 PM   
composer99


Posts: 2923
Joined: 6/6/2005
From: Ottawa, Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: cockney

thought it was a type of soda
and I found this picture.





Hilarious.

But unless this is from WWII it's not a correct answer (and if it is, it's not the answer I was looking for ).

_____________________________

~ Composer99

(in reply to cockney)
Post #: 282
RE: OT - WWII quiz - 7/29/2008 6:40:43 PM   
NeBert

 

Posts: 53
Joined: 2/11/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

quote:

ORIGINAL: NeBert

Maybe a picture-Q?
Who knows Type and manufacturer of this nice bird?




Blohm und Voss. Bv141 dude.

100% right

quote:


Warspite1

I remember this from an old airfix model when I was a kid - its a Blohm & Voss BV-something or other reconnaisance plane. Can I have 1/2 point please?

Yes sure, - and it was a reconnaisance plane!

_____________________________

NeBert

(in reply to Froonp)
Post #: 283
RE: OT - WWII quiz - 7/29/2008 7:06:48 PM   
Neilster


Posts: 2890
Joined: 10/27/2003
From: Hobart, Tasmania, Australia
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: panzers


quote:

ORIGINAL: monkla


quote:

ORIGINAL: Ted1066


quote:

ORIGINAL: terje439

Current unanswered questions:

-Neilster: What strange method of guiding American air-launched weapons was suggested by a famous researcher towards the end of the Second World War?

-Warspite1: Which two naval vessels - one Italian, one German were named after the same historical character?

-Tigercub: when was the worlds first computer made and what for?



I'll take a stab at the computer question: I think its the Enigma Machine you're going for, used in Bletchley Park to decrypt the German ciphers.

Cheers,

Ted


I don't know when but I seem to recall from somewhere that it may have been designed in the US and was used to help calculate artillery trajectories?????

Leigh

wasn't the first computer ENIAC, and was used specifically for intelligence of some sort towards the axis powers? The computer took up an entire room and the fans alone weighed over 1000 pounds to keep it from overheating

This was answered above. Colossus pre-dated ENIAC. It was kept secret till the 1970s.

Enigma machines were used to encode messages by the German armed forces.

Cheers, Neilster


< Message edited by Neilster -- 7/29/2008 7:07:13 PM >

(in reply to panzers)
Post #: 284
RE: OT - WWII quiz - 7/29/2008 7:29:14 PM   
cockney

 

Posts: 83
Joined: 11/15/2006
From: London
Status: offline
Q What was the name of the longest stop line built in England during ww2? and where did it run to and from?

_____________________________

never piss off a sgt major

(in reply to Neilster)
Post #: 285
RE: OT - WWII quiz - 7/29/2008 7:49:55 PM   
Neilster


Posts: 2890
Joined: 10/27/2003
From: Hobart, Tasmania, Australia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: panzers

quote:

ORIGINAL: Orm

quote:

ORIGINAL: terje439

Right on everything. Well except for calling the Jagdtiger a tank. No revolving turret=no tank.



When became revolving turret the definition of a tank?

Was revolving turret the definition of a tank during WWII?

With that definition the worlds first tank was not a tank.
Picture of a British Mark I tank near Thiepval, 25 September 1916.


Photograph by Lt. Ernest Brooks.
Imperial War Museum catalogue number Q 2486.

And at last. Not all has that definition today.

From:
Compact Oxford English Dictionary

tank
• a heavy armoured fighting vehicle carrying guns and moving on a continuous metal track.

-Orm



Actually, because of the many tanks in WWII, there ended up being many different classes of tanks. Where the Brits made the first one back in WWI(actually, I thought it was the French), it was the first armored moving machine, so they called it a tank.
As WWII progressed, Germany was always looking to make bigger and better tanks. In the process they stated to make vehicles that were better served to just sit in a bush or something and use it more for sniper like tactics. Thus a new class of tanks were born. So although you can say the jagdtiger or jagdpanther were tanks, yes they were, but they were not meant to be used in the way a regular tiger or panther because of having the ability to shoot on the run with the mobile turrets. The two tanks I just mentioned were used very late in the war and were so heavy that the Germans simply could not waste whatever precious fuel they had left. So they just placed them in a dense forest and just used it as a platform with a nasty gun. It's main purpose was the armor was virtually inpenetrable while having the ability to fire shells that did nothing but disintegrate anything that got in it's way. It was the ultimate defense weapon. So by definition, yes I guess it would be a tank, but in the way they were is in WWII, was it really a tank? When on defence ( like, for instance, the battle of Berlin) it was clearly the most feared weapon in the entire war except for maybe the ME262 jet,also nothing but a defensive fighter, but because of it's immobility, the allies were very quick to surround it and disable it, but not before it was able to destroy anything around for miles away
Added note. I typed this before reading the rest of the posts on this thread. So sorry if I was sounding redundant.

1. "Tank" was a codename. It stuck.

2. The turretless German vehicles you describe were officially tank-destroyers, not tanks. Turret-rings were difficult and expensive to produce and a larger weapon could be mounted in a vehicle if it didn't have a turret. In defensive warfare, the lack of a turret was less of a disadvantage and as the Germans desperately needed tank killing armour after 1942 they produced more and more tank-destroyers.

3. Tank-destroyers most definitely moved around. Apart from getting to and from battlefields, they tended to shoot and scoot (often in reverse) from one good firing position to the next. Your suggestion that they just stayed in a single position due to a lack of fuel is basically nonsense.

4. There were many types of German tank-destroyers. You can't generalise about their resistance to attack, especially away from the frontal arc.

5. The Me 262 wasn't a "defensive fighter". It was a fighter, that due to Germany's war situation was often used in a defensive role to attack bombers. As a fighter-bomber it certainly wasn't used defensively.

6. Reading the other posts in this thread that clearly point out the difference between a tank and a tank-destroyer (grey areas notwithstanding) might have a been a good idea.

Cheers, Neilster

(in reply to panzers)
Post #: 286
RE: OT - WWII quiz - 7/29/2008 7:52:20 PM   
Neilster


Posts: 2890
Joined: 10/27/2003
From: Hobart, Tasmania, Australia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: cockney

Q What was the name of the longest stop line built in England during ww2? and where did it run to and from?

The GHQ line? I think it ran from the west coast (possibly north of Wales) to the Thames estuary, taking in London.

Cheers, Neilster

(in reply to cockney)
Post #: 287
RE: OT - WWII quiz - 7/29/2008 9:13:09 PM   
cockney

 

Posts: 83
Joined: 11/15/2006
From: London
Status: offline
Well done it was indeed the GHQ line running from the Taunton line near Bristol to the Thames estuary, to protect London and the industrial midlands. 

_____________________________

never piss off a sgt major

(in reply to Neilster)
Post #: 288
RE: OT - WWII quiz - 7/29/2008 9:26:18 PM   
cockney

 

Posts: 83
Joined: 11/15/2006
From: London
Status: offline
 Q. who was Teruo Nakamura?

_____________________________

never piss off a sgt major

(in reply to cockney)
Post #: 289
RE: OT - WWII quiz - 7/30/2008 6:40:28 AM   
panzers

 

Posts: 635
Joined: 5/19/2006
From: Detroit Mi, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Neilster


quote:

ORIGINAL: panzers

quote:

ORIGINAL: Orm

quote:

ORIGINAL: terje439

Right on everything. Well except for calling the Jagdtiger a tank. No revolving turret=no tank.



When became revolving turret the definition of a tank?

Was revolving turret the definition of a tank during WWII?

With that definition the worlds first tank was not a tank.
Picture of a British Mark I tank near Thiepval, 25 September 1916.


Photograph by Lt. Ernest Brooks.
Imperial War Museum catalogue number Q 2486.

And at last. Not all has that definition today.

From:
Compact Oxford English Dictionary

tank
• a heavy armoured fighting vehicle carrying guns and moving on a continuous metal track.

-Orm



Actually, because of the many tanks in WWII, there ended up being many different classes of tanks. Where the Brits made the first one back in WWI(actually, I thought it was the French), it was the first armored moving machine, so they called it a tank.
As WWII progressed, Germany was always looking to make bigger and better tanks. In the process they stated to make vehicles that were better served to just sit in a bush or something and use it more for sniper like tactics. Thus a new class of tanks were born. So although you can say the jagdtiger or jagdpanther were tanks, yes they were, but they were not meant to be used in the way a regular tiger or panther because of having the ability to shoot on the run with the mobile turrets. The two tanks I just mentioned were used very late in the war and were so heavy that the Germans simply could not waste whatever precious fuel they had left. So they just placed them in a dense forest and just used it as a platform with a nasty gun. It's main purpose was the armor was virtually inpenetrable while having the ability to fire shells that did nothing but disintegrate anything that got in it's way. It was the ultimate defense weapon. So by definition, yes I guess it would be a tank, but in the way they were is in WWII, was it really a tank? When on defence ( like, for instance, the battle of Berlin) it was clearly the most feared weapon in the entire war except for maybe the ME262 jet,also nothing but a defensive fighter, but because of it's immobility, the allies were very quick to surround it and disable it, but not before it was able to destroy anything around for miles away
Added note. I typed this before reading the rest of the posts on this thread. So sorry if I was sounding redundant.

1. "Tank" was a codename. It stuck.

2. The turretless German vehicles you describe were officially tank-destroyers, not tanks. Turret-rings were difficult and expensive to produce and a larger weapon could be mounted in a vehicle if it didn't have a turret. In defensive warfare, the lack of a turret was less of a disadvantage and as the Germans desperately needed tank killing armour after 1942 they produced more and more tank-destroyers.

3. Tank-destroyers most definitely moved around. Apart from getting to and from battlefields, they tended to shoot and scoot (often in reverse) from one good firing position to the next. Your suggestion that they just stayed in a single position due to a lack of fuel is basically nonsense.

4. There were many types of German tank-destroyers. You can't generalise about their resistance to attack, especially away from the frontal arc.

5. The Me 262 wasn't a "defensive fighter". It was a fighter, that due to Germany's war situation was often used in a defensive role to attack bombers. As a fighter-bomber it certainly wasn't used defensively.

6. Reading the other posts in this thread that clearly point out the difference between a tank and a tank-destroyer (grey areas notwithstanding) might have a been a good idea.

Cheers, Neilster


I'm talking about the end of the war. The jagdpanther and tigers were meant specifically for defense. As for the me262's: Do you even know what their attack range was?. Hardly used for an offensive weapon. It was just a super fast jet airplane meant to go up and hunt down enemy fighters and bombers in the immediate vicinity and come right back to refuel. To say it was a gas whore is a gross understatement.

(in reply to Neilster)
Post #: 290
RE: OT - WWII quiz - 7/30/2008 7:19:25 AM   
Neilster


Posts: 2890
Joined: 10/27/2003
From: Hobart, Tasmania, Australia
Status: offline
quote:

I'm talking about the end of the war. The jagdpanther and tigers were meant specifically for defense. As for the me262's: Do you even know what their attack range was?. Hardly used for an offensive weapon. It was just a super fast jet airplane meant to go up and hunt down enemy fighters and bombers in the immediate vicinity and come right back to refuel. To say it was a gas whore is a gross understatement.


What do you mean by "the end of the war"? The Germans were still conducting armoured operations to the very end. Fuel became increasingly scarce, yes, but what you wrote about tank destroyers being unmoving pillboxes is garbage.

The Me 262 project was begun before WW2 and it was designed as an interceptor. That means it was meant for all fighter roles and not, as you seem to suggest, some sort of point-defence weapon. As I have already explained, they were mostly used defensively due to Germany's war situation by the time they were introduced but they were often used offensively as well, especially as fighter-bombers.

Although its Junkers Jumo 004s had quite high fuel consumption, the Me 262 had large tanks and its range of 1050km compared quite well to many of its piston-engined contemporaries. The FW 190D for example had a range of 800km. I know a bit about this stuff because as well as studying WW2 for many years, I'm a gas-turbine specialist and was an aircraft technician on fighters.

Cheers, Neilster

(in reply to panzers)
Post #: 291
RE: OT - WWII quiz - 7/30/2008 7:50:23 AM   
Froonp


Posts: 7995
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: panzers
I'm talking about the end of the war. The jagdpanther and tigers were meant specifically for defense. As for the me262's: Do you even know what their attack range was?. Hardly used for an offensive weapon. It was just a super fast jet airplane meant to go up and hunt down enemy fighters and bombers in the immediate vicinity and come right back to refuel. To say it was a gas whore is a gross understatement.


Looks like you're confusing Me262 with Me163 here.

(in reply to panzers)
Post #: 292
RE: OT - WWII quiz - 7/30/2008 7:51:17 AM   
Froonp


Posts: 7995
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: cockney

 Q. who was Teruo Nakamura?

A Japanese Pilot ?

(in reply to cockney)
Post #: 293
RE: OT - WWII quiz - 7/30/2008 7:51:52 AM   
Froonp


Posts: 7995
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: cockney

Q What was the name of the longest stop line built in England during ww2? and where did it run to and from?


what is a "stop line" ?

(in reply to cockney)
Post #: 294
RE: OT - WWII quiz - 7/30/2008 8:11:32 AM   
Neilster


Posts: 2890
Joined: 10/27/2003
From: Hobart, Tasmania, Australia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

quote:

ORIGINAL: cockney

Q What was the name of the longest stop line built in England during ww2? and where did it run to and from?


what is a "stop line" ?

A defensive position that usually takes in natural barriers like rivers and higher ground and that has had some field-works incorporated into it. It's mostly a position to fall back to (although the Dyle Line was a stop line that was advanced to) and is usually prepared in some haste, although there were examples like the Stalin Line where significant fortifications existed.

In the event of a successful German invasion of England on the south coast, the Commonwealth forces were to retire to the GHQ line to defend London and the industrial Midlands.

Cheers, Neilster


(in reply to Froonp)
Post #: 295
RE: OT - WWII quiz - 7/30/2008 3:48:27 PM   
cockney

 

Posts: 83
Joined: 11/15/2006
From: London
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

quote:

ORIGINAL: cockney

 Q. who was Teruo Nakamura?

A Japanese Pilot ?



Yes he was Japanese, but not a pilot.

a clue would, that he made the news on his return home.

_____________________________

never piss off a sgt major

(in reply to Froonp)
Post #: 296
RE: OT - WWII quiz - 7/30/2008 5:55:29 PM   
Dave3L

 

Posts: 39
Joined: 7/17/2007
Status: offline
Isn't he the soldier who refused to surrender until the mid-70's?

(in reply to cockney)
Post #: 297
RE: OT - WWII quiz - 7/30/2008 5:55:36 PM   
Norman42


Posts: 244
Joined: 2/9/2008
From: Canada
Status: offline
Would he be the infamous Japanese soldier that was stationed on some small Pacific Isle and remained on duty until the 1960s, when he was discovered and returned home?

_____________________________

-------------

C.L.Norman

(in reply to cockney)
Post #: 298
RE: OT - WWII quiz - 7/30/2008 6:09:45 PM   
Neilster


Posts: 2890
Joined: 10/27/2003
From: Hobart, Tasmania, Australia
Status: offline
I think one dude didn't surrender until 1973ish. They had to get his original commanding officer to tell him it was ok to surrender.

Cheers, Neilster

(in reply to Norman42)
Post #: 299
RE: OT - WWII quiz - 7/30/2008 6:23:05 PM   
cockney

 

Posts: 83
Joined: 11/15/2006
From: London
Status: offline
Teruo Nakamura was discovered by the Indonesian Air Force on Moroti and surrendered to a search patrol on December 18 1974.

The last (as far as we know) Japenese soildier to surrender.

_____________________________

never piss off a sgt major

(in reply to Neilster)
Post #: 300
Page:   <<   < prev  8 9 [10] 11 12   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> World in Flames >> RE: OT - WWII quiz Page: <<   < prev  8 9 [10] 11 12   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

3.422