Talk:Circus offensive

Not sure if this is a good name for this article.
 * Wouldn't it be Operation Circus? 216.8.154.254 (talk) 13:44, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Blenheim vs Hampden
Why would they "replace the Hampden with the Blenheim"? The Hampden was a more advanced, powerful, newer bomber than the Blenheim. The Blenheim was a very light twin-engine with a meager 1,000lb bombload and a single .303 gun, and no armor. The Hampden carried up to 4,000lbs, and had 5-6 .303 guns, and armor and self-sealing tanks. It was almost 5 years newer than the Blenheim, IIRC. I could see them replacing valuable Hampdens needed for bombing Germany with obsolescent Blenheims to act as flak-bait under escort (the Hampdens were also vulnerable but were more effective bombers and could carry a usable load to Germany at night, whereas a Bleheim couldn't), but the implication of the article is that "they needed heavier bombers so they replaced the Hampdens with Blenheims". That doesn't make any sense at all, as the slightest glance at the facts will tell you. The Blenheim was a small step up from a Fairey Battle, while the Hampden was almost an effective medium bomber.

64.222.158.24 (talk) 07:29, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

Footnote style
I went with Efn template with the lower roman case, as the documentation noted that alphabet notes look similar to identifiers when a citation is used more than once. GraemeLeggett (talk) 19:18, 24 May 2020 (UTC)