![]() The metaphor of the Knights of the Air sits uneasily with the one more commonly used by the Baron himself – that of hunting. The whole ethos was symbolised by Baron Manfred von Richthofen, the Red Baron. For them, it made the war just about bearable. Drawn at first mainly from the cavalry, the pilots too liked to think of themselves as Knights of the Air, nobly jousting man-to-man in fair fights. Revolted by the anonymity of the arbitrary slaughter in the trenches, every belligerent country seized on the exploits of its fighter pilots to create heroes for the public to worship. The use of the fighter pilot as a hero had its roots in the air fighting of the 1914-18 war. Nazi ideology fostered the cult of the warrior-hero who could overcome all foes through his prowess in battle. The Germans were already heavily committed to mythology. He then began deliberate myth-making to turn the young fighter pilots into heroes. He announced on June 18th that the Battle of Britain was about to begin, and so gave it its name before it started in earnest. Churchill was determined to defeat the peace lobby and continue belligerence, but he needed victory in the air, or his precarious hold on the reins of government could fail. It is, however, quite extraordinary that the British should subsequently convince themselves that they could have won by doing the opposite.Įxtraordinary, but understandable given the circumstances.Īfter winning a shattering victory in France, Hitler very reasonably expected Britain to make peace. Given all the above, the second side – the Germans – had the odds stacked heavily against them from the outset, and indeed they never came close to achieving any of their muddled goals. R P Beamont’s Hurricane of 609 Squadron, showing five victories and just fitted with glaze shields for night fighting – October 1940.The first side won, of course – the British. That, in a nutshell, was the Battle of Britain. On the other side, a country with an economy so inefficient that despite spending almost twice as much as its opponent it failed to match its output fielding a force led by a romantic amateur who instigated a chaotic planning process, improvised tactics and was completely misled by faulty intelligence a weapons-system which had some very potent elements but neglected modern communications technology and lacked depth of reserves and troops who fought as gifted individuals, guided by an aristocratic old-world ethos which was sporting and chivalrous. ![]() On one side, a country with an economy working at full-steam, out producing the other in key weaponry at the rate of two to one fielding a force led by hard-bitten professionals working to a carefully prepared strategic and tactical plan developed with the help of first-rate intelligence a weapons-system which not only brilliantly exploited the latest applied technology but was also extraordinarily robust and troops who fought as disciplined teams, and displayed ruthless determination. Imagine two nations drawn up to do battle. His book The Most Dangerous Enemy – A History of the Battle of Britainis published by Aurum Press and he will be familiar to many for his ‘in vision’ television consultancy role in programmes on the Battle of Britain and celebrated British fighter aircraft. ![]() Stephen Bungay is a Director of the Ashridge Strategic Management Centre, where he works as a management educator and consultant. First published in the Centre’s Journal Everyone’s War, Issue No.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |