PDA

View Full Version : History channel and history books



XyZspineZyX
09-11-2003, 09:29 PM
A few times in discussions the history channel and wings channel have been brought up as sources.The other day in a 2 hour show about Albert Haushofer the documentary claimed that Japanese aircraft esp jet aircraft were far in advance of American.Whilst I love the shinden it was never fitted with a jet engine and their 262 clone was about 100 slower than the original.On that note in Edwin P. Hoyt's "199 days the battle for stalingrad".he states on page 88 that the german strength in summer of 42 was 6.2million men,3230 tanks,and 3,400 aircraft.If they had that much in 42 it would have been a cakewalk.He also states that Gorbachev gave a figure of 27 million men as casualties on page 92.Acoording to his figures if you add in the civilians it would be almost 50 million casualties.That would be 1/3 of the population.This book has won many awards.It has been mainly civilian planes on the wings channel so I don't know about any glaring errors in the last few days.So be careful about sources and use your grey matter with many different sources to find the truth.

XyZspineZyX
09-11-2003, 09:29 PM
A few times in discussions the history channel and wings channel have been brought up as sources.The other day in a 2 hour show about Albert Haushofer the documentary claimed that Japanese aircraft esp jet aircraft were far in advance of American.Whilst I love the shinden it was never fitted with a jet engine and their 262 clone was about 100 slower than the original.On that note in Edwin P. Hoyt's "199 days the battle for stalingrad".he states on page 88 that the german strength in summer of 42 was 6.2million men,3230 tanks,and 3,400 aircraft.If they had that much in 42 it would have been a cakewalk.He also states that Gorbachev gave a figure of 27 million men as casualties on page 92.Acoording to his figures if you add in the civilians it would be almost 50 million casualties.That would be 1/3 of the population.This book has won many awards.It has been mainly civilian planes on the wings channel so I don't know about any glaring errors in the last few days.So be careful about sources and use your grey matter with many different sources to find the truth.

XyZspineZyX
09-11-2003, 09:38 PM
The problem with the History Channel is not, as some beleive, that it has a biased slant...rather, the problem it that is a TV show. For whatever reason, any errors or inaccuracies tend to end up in the production of whatever show is on the History Channel. Maybe their reference material is bad, maybe their production schedule is so tight they cannot make corrections after the shoot. I rather beleive it's the latter. Like it or not, they're in the business of making Money, not the business of spreading the Truth. Many folks assume the History Channel must be 100% correct, and that the content is screened somehow for accuracy, but the truth is it's a TV channel and trusting the TV to give 100% accurate information is a gamble. I've heard the European version is a bit better, but having never seen it, I can't say.

XyZspineZyX
09-11-2003, 09:48 PM
turenne wrote:
- On that note in Edwin P. Hoyt's "199
- days the battle for stalingrad".he states on page 88
- that the german strength in summer of 42 was
- 6.2million men,3230 tanks,and 3,400 aircraft.If they
- had that much in 42 it would have been a cakewalk.

I agree with most of what you said but on this point, he may be right as the german army had, during the war up to 10 million men in the East (this was the highest number they ever had on the Eastern Front, at the time of the battle of Kursk, they never had so many before nor after that battle).

The number of german troops on the 22/06/1941 was nearly 4 million (3.8 million in fact) and they were more numerous at the time of Stalingrad, and you had to add to this total the other Axis allied countries : Romania, Hungary, Finland, and Italy (for the latter, they sent up to 220,000 men to the Eastern front), so even if I don't know the exact number, I think the number given is credible.

And the numbers for tanks and aircrafts are close to those of the 22/06/1941.

Anyway, as they didn't have appropriate logistics (mostly fuel deliveries) to support an attack on even half the Eastern front, I don't think that, whatever their number, they would have been able to launch a bigger offensive.

XyZspineZyX
09-11-2003, 11:54 PM
Nicli,sorry but the germans lost almost a million men in Russia from summer of 41 to summer of 42 and were never able to fill the gaps.Also with the foolishly inadequate manufacturing of armaments the germans I believe had 1,800 tanks and selfpropelled guns.The aircraft amount is ridiculous unless he's counting useless hulks also.In the same blurb the author also states that the germans had more troops available that the Russians in summer of 42.From the start of barbarossa to the end of the war Russia had more men tanks and airplanes available.I believe germany had 60 million citizens and I've read as much as 180 million for Russia.

XyZspineZyX
09-11-2003, 11:58 PM
The History Channel is nice but give me a good book with documented sources any day. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

<CENTER>http://www.world-wide-net.com/tuskegeeairmen/ta-1943.jpg <marquee><FONT COLOR="RED"><FONT SIZE="+1">"Straighten up.......Fly right..~S~"<FONT SIZE> </marquee> http://www.geocities.com/rt_bearcat

<CENTER><FONT COLOR="ORANGE">vflyer@comcast.net<FONT COLOR>
<Center><div style="width:200;color:red;font-size:18pt;filter:shadow Blur[color=red,strength=8)">99th Pursuit Squadron