BARBAROSSA !

[spanner570]

I for one don't think 'its kinda fun'....... any chance you people can stop this slanging match 'cos that's what is starting to happen.....


This is a friendly, self disciplined forum, one in which the mods. and admin. rarely get involved....Let's keep it that way please.

 

[chris2681]

I for one don't think 'its kinda fun'....... any chance you people can stop this slanging match 'cos that's what is starting to happen.....
This is a friendly forum, one in which the mods. and admin. rarely get involved....Let's keep it that way please.

Your right Ron, I only got involved cause I ACTUALLY PAINTED THAT MODEL. I DO STRIVE FOR HISTORICAL ACCURACY AND WAS JUST PROVIDING HELPFUL INFORMATION TO PATRICK TO FURTHER EXPAND HIS APPARENT VAST KNOWLEGE ON THE GERMAN AFVS OF WW2. NO NEED TO BICKER ABOUT IT AND TO SHOW THERE IS NO HARD FEELINGS I WANT PATRICK TO KNOW IM VERY OPEN TO HIS APPOLOGY (WHEN HE'S READY).

 

[flyjoe180]

Really gents?

 

[grumpa]

I don't know it kinda saps the fun out of Modeling. I never claimed to be a historical know it all on ANY subject, " JUST TRYIN TO BUILD SOME MODELS SIR!" and have some fun. LOVE to ALL! JIM

 

[dubster72]

Again, I point to the fact that the Germans were unprepared for fighting a winter campaign. Requests for vital supplies to do so prior to the onset of winter were considered " defeatist ".


Whilst stories abound that unhelpful supplies were air-dropped to the 6th Army at Stalingrad, that doesn't apply to this situation.


The sources I base my opinions on are those from historians such as Antony Beevor & Max Hastings, all of which clearly state that no whitewash was applied during Barbarossa. Perhaps the title should have been "Typhoon", the operation to take Moscow starting on December 5th? Of course, that still wouldn't fit with using a Panzer III Ausf L.


Information contained on websites is notoriously inaccurate & best to be confirmed by checking with verifiable sources - comic books need not apply! :P


Just to clarify my post that seems to have bothered you two so much, I didn't question a whitewash, but a winter camo scheme. The two are very different things IMHO.

 

[dubster72]

Am I the one who's shouting? I think not

 

[grumpa]

Am I the one who's shouting? I think not

My Dear Patrick in reverence to my respected friend Ron I wish not to continue this slogging match as I fell it detracts from the main purpose of this site IMO which is to enjoy each others work, techniques and comeradery in a common hobby ALL THE BEST JIM

 

[chris2681]

Well every source of info I can find from books and internet say that whitewash was used in the winters of 41 and 42 on the eastern front. So I guess we will have to agree to disagree on this subject. As for it being a Ausf L , the title does not say "Battle of Barbarossa" . Barbarossa was the code name given by Hitler for the invasion of Russia. Ausf L onwards all fought on the eastern front with long 50mm gun because the 42 cal 50mm gun was not enuff to deal with t/34 and kv tanks. Finally Im not shouting one bit. Just a friendly match of wits going on here as far as Im concerned. I for one am not the type of guy to nitpick peoples work to begin with, so by doing so Im sure your not insulted if someone has a rebuttal to your comments.


With Love


Chris

 

[chris2681]

Again, I point to the fact that the Germans were unprepared for fighting a winter campaign. Requests for vital supplies to do so prior to the onset of winter were considered " defeatist ".
Whilst stories abound that unhelpful supplies were air-dropped to the 6th Army at Stalingrad, that doesn't apply to this situation.


The sources I base my opinions on are those from historians such as Antony Beevor & Max Hastings, all of which clearly state that no whitewash was applied during Barbarossa. Perhaps the title should have been "Typhoon", the operation to take Moscow starting on December 5th? Of course, that still wouldn't fit with using a Panzer III Ausf L.


Information contained on websites is notoriously inaccurate & best to be confirmed by checking with verifiable sources - comic books need not apply! :P


Just to clarify my post that seems to have bothered you two so much, I didn't question a whitewash, but a winter camo scheme. The two are very different things IMHO.

And just to clarify my last post, the picture provided on page 2 imho clearly shows some sorta "camo scheme" not a full whitewash. I must assume though its not from a verifiable photographer. Must have been a german propagander shot.:rolleyes:

 

[grumpa]

Well every source of info I can find from books and internet say that whitewash was used in the winters of 41 and 42 on the eastern front. So I guess we will have to agree to disagree on this subject. As for it being a Ausf L , the title does not say "Battle of Barbarossa" . Barbarossa was the code name given by Hitler for the invasion of Russia. Ausf L onwards all fought on the eastern front with long 50mm gun because the 42 cal 50mm gun was not enuff to deal with t/34 and kv tanks. Finally Im not shouting one bit. Just a friendly match of wits going on here as far as Im concerned. I for one am not the type of guy to nitpick peoples work to begin with, so by doing so Im sure your not insulted if someone has a rebuttal to your comments.
With Love


Chris

My Dear Son, please let this be the end of all this vitriol, after all every one is entitled to their own thoughts and opinions, while some may thrive on such "intellectual" one upmanship I certainly do not. I have no points to prove and no one {except Mom} to impress. Certainly ALL my plates are full with no room for such silliness. So lets carry on and keep that damn cat off the shelf LOVE DAD

 

[chris2681]

Ok sorry this is the last post. I see you said you base your opinions on that of Max Hastings and Anthony Beevor, two journalists. That's fine I guess if two JOURNALISTS say that there wasn't any whitewash or winter camo schemes than it must be fact. I for one know that journalists and social media are the best referances for fact. They must be, contrary to pictures and books. Without journalists and media we might never have found out about things like "global warming" or other things like bigfoot or in your guys case the beast of bodmin moor. Ok im done. :D

 

[grumpa]

Ok sorry this is the last post. I see you said you base your opinions on that of Max Hastings and Anthony Beevor, two journalists. That's fine I guess if two JOURNALISTS say that there wasn't any whitewash or winter camo schemes than it must be fact. I for one know that journalists and social media are the best referances for fact. They must be, contrary to pictures and books. Without journalists and media we might never have found out about things like "global warming" or other things like bigfoot or in your guys case the beast of bodmin moor. Ok im done. :D

PLEASE!

 

[dubster72]

As you've both had a few last words, permit me to have mine.


There's certainly no vitriol coming from me - I've presented my points calmly & without personal attacks.


FYI Chris, typing in capital letters is shouting on the internet.


Also FYI Operation Barbarossa ended on September 6th 1941 with the issuing of Führer Directive No. 35 which was the commencement of Operation Typhoon. So if a thread is entitled " Barbarossa ", surely it is logical to infer that it relates to that particular operation.


The Ausf L was ordered in early 1942, and played no part in Barbarossa.


The 2 gentlemen are respected writers, journalists & historians with many acclaimed books about WWII to their names.


If my point about historical accuracy offended anyone then I apologise. My intention was not to ruffle anyone's feathers, but to ascertain certain pertinent facts. This is not in order to feel superior in of myself (or any other veiled insult you care to give).


It's my belief that we are attempting to reproduce "snapshots" of actual events & therefore it is important that, within reason, those events are portrayed as accurately as possible. Otherwise our view of history becomes distorted, leading to all kinds of problems, not least the potential to repeat past mistakes.


Clearly we'll never see eye-to-eye on this matter so as you've said, it's best to finish this discussion.

 

[grumpa]

As you've both had a few last words, permit me to have mine.
There's certainly no vitriol coming from me - I've presented my points calmly & without personal attacks.


FYI Chris, typing in capital letters is shouting on the internet.


Also FYI Operation Barbarossa ended on September 6th 1941 with the issuing of Führer Directive No. 35 which was the commencement of Operation Typhoon. So if a thread is entitled " Barbarossa ", surely it is logical to infer that it relates to that particular operation.


The Ausf L was ordered in early 1942, and played no part in Barbarossa.


The 2 gentlemen are respected writers, journalists & historians with many acclaimed books about WWII to their names.


If my point about historical accuracy offended anyone then I apologise. My intention was not to ruffle anyone's feathers, but to ascertain certain pertinent facts. This is not in order to feel superior in of myself (or any other veiled insult you care to give).


It's my belief that we are attempting to reproduce "snapshots" of actual events & therefore it is important that, within reason, those events are portrayed as accurately as possible. Otherwise our view of history becomes distorted, leading to all kinds of problems, not least the potential to repeat past mistakes.


Clearly we'll never see eye-to-eye on this matter so as you've said, it's best to finish this discussion.

Please except my sincere apology ,had no idea you set the standards for the site, you must be a very busy man indeed! If I had any intention of insulting you, which is something I would NEVER do it certainly would not have been veiled. I have tried to bow out gracefully, please allow me to do so without any further ado. Once again ALL THE BEST JIM

 

[chris2681]

As you've both had a few last words, permit me to have mine.
There's certainly no vitriol coming from me - I've presented my points calmly & without personal attacks.


FYI Chris, typing in capital letters is shouting on the internet.


Also FYI Operation Barbarossa ended on September 6th 1941 with the issuing of Führer Directive No. 35 which was the commencement of Operation Typhoon. So if a thread is entitled " Barbarossa ", surely it is logical to infer that it relates to that particular operation.


The Ausf L was ordered in early 1942, and played no part in Barbarossa.


The 2 gentlemen are respected writers, journalists & historians with many acclaimed books about WWII to their names.


If my point about historical accuracy offended anyone then I apologise. My intention was not to ruffle anyone's feathers, but to ascertain certain pertinent facts. This is not in order to feel superior in of myself (or any other veiled insult you care to give).


It's my belief that we are attempting to reproduce "snapshots" of actual events & therefore it is important that, within reason, those events are portrayed as accurately as possible. Otherwise our view of history becomes distorted, leading to all kinds of problems, not least the potential to repeat past mistakes.


Clearly we'll never see eye-to-eye on this matter so as you've said, it's best to finish this discussion.

ok I give up you win. you and your two writers that you base your opinions on are correct and all the books and websites I based my opinions on are wrong.(cause you say so) fyi im whispering now hence all lower case letters. good day to you sir.