Talk:Schweinfurt–Regensburg mission

I'd hate to edit a decently structured main article, and I'm certainly not up to the task of Merging, or joining the WWII project. But I do think some mention should be made of the RAF, and recent information.

In the "Daily Mail" (a London tabloid newspaper) of 21 March 2007 there was a letter from D. Robert Burns, a participant in the RAF raid of April 1944. His tale alone is fascinating - he was a navigator in a 106 Squadron Lancaster, and was shot down by a Ju88 piloted by the C.O. of Hitler's personal squadron, taking part in unauthorised combat; Roberts verified this and more after the war, from the enemy flight commander.

But of interest here, I think, is the information Roberts gave which puts "Swinish Schweinfurt" in a wider context. After the war he learned two things:

1. Neutral Sweden (presumably SKF) was supplying Germany with ball bearings right through the war. Britain was paying Sweden not to do this, but Germany paid up to five times the normal price so the supply continued.

2. Albert Speer had already moved much of the German production to other parts of Germany and to occupied countries.

When Roberts visited Schweinfurt in about 2002 he learned that two of the five ball bearing works were still Swedish owned, as they had been through the war.

To my mind it's not just nice to get some extra information, it's wonderful that it comes directly from a participant, who followed up on the ground subsequently. I hope someone can add the Roberts information to the main article, wherever it ends up. Edetic 12:22, 26 March 2007 (UTC)


 * The RAF fighter support had already gotten mention, but your suggestion is a worthy one. Its role in the diversions and airfield attacks has now been added. The b-b production had not yet moved in August. Speer had been urging it for some time but decentralization did not begin until September 1943, and then only because of the attack, and was still in progress at the time of the second attack in october. The information about Swedish ball bearings isd absolutely correct. I'll see what I can do to work in the source.--Buckboard 11:45, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Thank you Buckboard, for your positive response. This seems to be a case where Wikipedia is getting more authorative than any one published source! Edetic 21:49, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

opening summary
I reverted the changes to the opening summary and then modified for clarity and greater brevity. The anniversary was not just coincidental, but a milestone. Showing the difference stresses the change in tactics, size, and direction of strategic bombing. The previous changes also implied that being a shuttle mission was related to returning by way of Tunisia--the most important shuttle missions went to the USSR and back in 1944. Also, per wiki, the opening summary should at minimum state a minimum of information relating to the article itself. --Buckboard 02:17, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

The "lack of long-range fighter escort" mentioned in the opening summary and the "(inexplicably) not employing drop tanks" in the mission plan section were deliberate choices by the US Army Air Corps/Air Forces; the P-47C by mid-1943 had a 200 gallon drop tank. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mcguire (talk • contribs) 03:24, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

Results??????
Anyone even remotely familiar with industrial machinery would find it LUDICROUS that it was damaged by flaming machine oil. This was large scale industrial machinery designed to grind steel. The previous used high explosive bombs may have damaged an individual machine with a direct hit (even with bomb sights an average B-17 bomb was lucky to land within a mile of its target) but the damage caused did not shut down the factory. The "incendiaries" were not the firebombs used to decimate the populations of Dresden and Tokyo, these were small thermite charges designed to take down the roofs of the factory buildings. The incapacitation of the ball bearing machinery was caused by exposure to weather and rusting, not due to direct bomb damage. Shjacks45 (talk) 08:09, 20 January 2010 (UTC)


 * While the steel machinary would not burn, the wiring, tubing, controls, supporting structures, etc. would. Additionally, the roof and walls collapsing on the machinary would damage it. Speer himself reported a reduction in capacity, so clearly the machinary was damaged.  Taterbill (talk) 17:37, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

German Losses link
See — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.5.92.30 (talk) 12:27, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

Result: Allied victory
NOT in any context. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 176.93.74.78 (talk) 06:53, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Indeed considering the Allied losses and strategic importance, perhaps this would have been a German victory. I'll add a citation needed. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 07:36, 25 August 2016 (UTC)


 * The 8th Air Force was to take part in Harris' attack on the German capital in what would become the Battle of Berlin but the losses sustained by the 8th Air Force in the Schweinfurt attacks prevented this, and the RAF was instead to carry out the campaign on its own. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.144.50.229 (talk) 08:22, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Schweinfurt–Regensburg mission. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070210111250/http://www.lesbutler.ip3.co.uk/tony/tonywood.htm to http://www.lesbutler.ip3.co.uk/tony/tonywood.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 03:25, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

Citation needed for this claim
This poorly spelt and uncited statement has been removed from the front page until such time as evidence can be found to support it.

"None of the American Airmen captured after the raid survived. The SS collected them all and shipped them to Buchenwald where they were forced to carry 60 pound stone blocks up out of a quarry barefooted.    All perished withing 24 hours."

Graham1973 (talk) 07:48, 12 April 2018 (UTC)
 * It would certainly need a ref. While the Germans were no angels in their treatment of allied POWs and there were occasional atrocities, most POWs survived the war, including captured bomber crews (apart from the few lynched by German civilians of course). Almost no Allied POWs were sent to death camps. --Ef80 (talk) 19:13, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Bruce Marshall's biography of Wing Commander Yeo-Thomas, RAF - the famous SOE agent 'White Rabbit' - says a bit about this. Yeo-Thomas spent some months in Buchenwald concentration camp, eventually escaping in April 1945. Yeo-Thomas reported that a large group of American and British airmen arrived at Buchenwald earlier that year. They were told they were not to be treated as enemy combatants but instead as 'Terror Flyers'. All these newly arrived prisoners were ill treated and a number died as a result, or were formally executed shortly after. There's no specific mention of the 'stone carrying' abuse but the camp was well known for the creative sadism of its guards and for the targetting of Allied aircrew for retribution.86.132.255.75 (talk) 15:24, 29 July 2023 (UTC)
 * I call b/s on this. 2003:DC:F734:700:D88D:A04C:D330:B2D4 (talk) 07:02, 18 August 2023 (UTC)

survivors
My father flew the Regensburg raid as a B-17 tail gunner. After his death, in his safe-deposit box we found a "battle star" awarded to his unit by General George Marshall. The two-page document detailed the specifics of the raid, noting the courage of the crews. After we read it silently together, my mother sat silent for several minutes. Then she whispered, "Your father never told me about that." Archaeoprof (talk) 21:51, 22 August 2023 (UTC)