Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

We are so used to seeing film of every other combatant country's military activities that you have to wonder if any Australian had even a Box Brownie. But there is film. It seems that Australia's National Film and Sound Archive has begun to release some from its holdings. This one shows the activities of an RAAF squadron operating somewhere in the South-west Pacific. What makes it a very "respectful" film is that it covers the activities of everyone involved in operations, from the civil engineers landing just behind the infantry to an assessment of the work the ground crews were faced with when the aircraft returned from a sortie.

 

  • Like 3
Posted

Good to see some history from an Aussie perspective.
 

Despite many decades of reading about WWII aeroplanes, that’s the first time I’ve seen a P-40 being started by ground crew; cranking up a flywheel starter, as on many German fighters.

I’ve seen images of the Japanese using a small truck that backed up to their fighters with a belt-driven overhead shaft to engage the spinner.

  • Like 1
Posted

Jolly good show, OME, old chap! Don't you just love the rousing soundtrack? Empire and King and all that, eh?? Tally-ho!!

 

Just a minor correction to your intro - they are military engineers, not civilian engineers. They wore military uniforms and were part of the military forces. They came from the Royal Australian Engineers if they were Army, or they were RAAF military engineers in the RAAF Airfield Construction Squadrons. The ACS's had a long and illustrious record and history, but the RAE Construction Squadrons also carried out airfield and road works. The Field Engineer Squadrons of the RAE dealt with mine warfare, demolition, and front-line pioneer work, breaching enemy defences such as wire and trenches and bunkers. The RAE blokes carry a chromed axe on Anzac Day parades.

 

The Cat graders were just about all manufactured in Waugh & Josephsons (Caterpillar agents for NSW) huge industrial factory. W&J built around 600 Cat graders between 1937 and 1945, and even supplied them to some of the U.S. Forces for airfield and road works.

  • Informative 1
Posted
9 hours ago, onetrack said:

The Cat graders were just about all manufactured in Waugh & Josephsons (Caterpillar agents for NSW) huge industrial factory. W&J built around 600 Cat graders between 1937 and 1945, and even supplied them to some of the U.S. Forces for airfield and road works.

As you pointed out on a previous thread, the Americans’ far-sighted ban on supplying graders to Japan sure made a difference during the war.

  • Like 1
Posted
10 hours ago, onetrack said:

Just a minor correction to your intro - they are military engineers, not civilian engineers.

I didn't know how to label those blokes, so I just used the general term for that sort of earthmoving work, to distinguish it from other types of ginger beers.

  • Like 1
Posted (edited)

All engineers of the "private" rank are called Sappers. The word "Sapper" comes from the term "to sap", i.e., to weaken or suck strength from something.

The pioneer military engineers are at the front lines of the forces, dismantling or blowing up barbed wire obstructions, destroying pillboxes and bunkers, demining minefields and defusing booby traps, building bridges over natural and constructed obstructions. A lot of civilian gold and coal miners were included in pioneer Engineer companies, as their tunnelling experience was very useful to undermine the enemy by tunnelling.

 

The biggest and most devastating Engineers explosion of WW1 - the biggest explosion the world had seen, prior to an Atomic blast - was the Messines mines explosions in 1917, when the British Engineers tunnelled under German positions and planted 19 huge mines containing a total of around 1,000,000 lbs (453,720kgs) of explosive. When the 19 mines were detonated, they killed many hundreds of Germans and produced massive craters that are still visible today.

 

The infantry in WW2 were delighted at the appearance of bulldozers, they were used in the front line to fill in craters, make rough roads, shove building debris out of the way - and doze over trenches and bunkers. As a result, quite a percentage of dozers at the front were armoured. They were also used on the beaches to develop access between beaches and inland areas, and to pull landing craft in closer, and to de-bog trucks and jeeps. Numerous generals have stated that the bulldozer was the 3rd most useful of all the War machines, just behind aircraft and tanks.

 

Civilian engineers and construction tradespeople in the U.S. were formed into Construction Battalions during WW2 - "CB's", or "SeeBees" as they became known. The SeaBee's were given rank and had limited formal military induction and training.

The SeaBees were set up specifically for construction tasks, and not expected to act as fighting forces - but as always, the line was often blurred between the SeaBees and the infantry, especially when they came under enemy attack.

 

Edited by onetrack
  • Thanks 1
  • Informative 2
Posted

Me too, I was born 2 days after Hiroshima and I studied civil engineering in the 1960's. I always thought that the first engineers were military ones and civil engineers came later.

Anyway, my life has been relatively free from wars, and I give credit to the atomic bombs for this. Alas, they figured out how to have a war by attacking countries with no bombs, but by then I was a bit too old to be conscripted.

  • Informative 1
Posted

Atom bombs are an obscene concept. MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction has deterred  the sane amongst us. There's only ONE Country so far that's used atomic Bombs in anger and we can debate why till the cows come home. It was most likely to show off and stop the Russian advance east. That's nearly 80 years ago.  Nev

  • Like 3
  • Agree 1
Posted

78 years ago, there was only one country that had such bombs. I reckon the question is "why didn't they use them much more and stop any other from having them?"

My answer is they they believed their own propaganda and thought that they had plenty of time to decide.

  • Informative 1
Posted

And they couldn't be sure it would not create an uncontrollable chain reaction either. Fair amount of irresponsibility going on. Same with Menzies polluting this place with Plutonium to kiss the Brit @R$e$ wit A bomb testing.  Nev

  • Agree 1
Posted

More Japanese civilians, military AND POWs were killed by saturation fire bombing than by the two A-bombs. 

 

Using A-bombs was probably the lesser of two evils. The opinion, probably on both sides, was that an invasion would have resulted in a much higher death toll, and after four years of war, everyone was tiring of the deaths, especially in the USA where the democratic system meant that Truman had to give remaining as President serious consideration. 

  • Agree 1
  • Informative 1
Posted
3 hours ago, Bruce Tuncks said:

78 years ago, there was only one country that had such bombs. I reckon the question is "why didn't they use them much more and stop any other from having them?"

They sure tried!

US military leaders wanted to clobber their Soviet Allies to ensure America dominated the post-war world. One story has the Generals asking for 192 A-bombs to wipe out every major Soviet target.

Scientists who were aware of this insanity and tried to share nuclear secrets with America’s Soviet Allies came to a sticky end. 
 

image.jpeg

  • Informative 1
  • 2 weeks later...
Posted

If you read a sf book in which a planet full of warring tribes had one tribe that developed A bombs, you would be surprised if others were allowed to do the same.

Personally, I reckon the US believed their own propaganda to the extent that they thought they had much more time.

I must admit to being surprised to read that the A bombs were not the cause of the Japanese surrender, but the cause was the Russian invasion of some islands after a belated declaration of war. Total bs, thought I. Mind you, the Japanese don't trust the russians to this day.

  • Informative 1
Posted

I don't think it IS BS. also the US would treat the Emperor with respect and the Russians wouldn't. Japanese still dispute Russian held, previously Japanese territory.  Nev

  • Agree 2
Posted

The wartime Japanese government was quite prepared to sacrifice millions of civilians to keep out the foreign invaders. They had over ten thousand planes and numerous other craft ready for kamikaze missions. The tipping point was the massive and rapid Soviet onslaught. They’d never been able to beat the Russian and knew how the Bolsheviks had massacred the Russian royals. Suddenly, surrender to MacArthur was the only hope of saving their culture. 
 

MacArthur was quite an imperfect character, but one thing he should be admired for is steering that defeated fascist state towards becoming a peaceful modern democracy. I believe the current Constitution of Japan is largely his work.

 

image.jpeg

  • Informative 1
Posted

This video casts some light on the Japanese diplomatic thinking prior to and during WWII. What I learned from it was that the Russians had beaten the Japanese in 1939 in a campaign the Japanese started to expand into Russia's Siberian territory. Japan had its fingers burned, so decided not to poke the Russian Bear. Japan even stood back while the Americans sent military supplies across the North Pacific into Russian territory, and these supplies aided Russia against Japan's niminal ally, Germany. Obviously that would have stopped as soon as the USA declared war on Japan.

 

Actually, after watching this video, I am coming to the opinion that it was the USA's attempts to stifle Japan's attacks on China through trade embargoes, especially on oil, that forced Japan into invading South-East Asia. The USA might have been militarily neutral, but definitely not financially neutral. 

 

 

  • Agree 1
  • Informative 1
Posted

US denied them access to rubber Fuel , minerals and other necessities. Nippon talked about the SE ASIA Co Prosperity treaty but in the early 30's Japan Built Harley Davidson bikes under Licence as the RIKUO.   The war started with Korea and China 2 years before the larger commitment. Nev

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...