Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 15 submissions in the queue.
posted by Fnord666 on Sunday April 28 2019, @09:44PM   Printer-friendly
from the signals-in-the-aether dept.

Submitted via IRC for ErnestTBass

In 1940, Britain had retreated back to their island fortress after being throttled in mainland Europe by invading Nazis. They would hide behind the sea and hope that their navy and air force could stop the possible German invasion of their island.

As the Battle of Britain raged on, the German and British air forces went head to head. Something strange happened, the Germans pulled of[sic] a series of highly effective night bombing raids. It's strange because night bombing was incredibly ineffective for the most part.

[...] This German bombing was much more effective than what the British could do at night. As a matter of fact, it was more accurate than what typical bombing could do in the day time.

Source: https://medium.com/lessons-from-history/england-was-almost-destroyed-by-radio-waves-df70830e8593


Original Submission

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(1)
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday April 28 2019, @09:50PM (19 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday April 28 2019, @09:50PM (#836055)
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday April 28 2019, @10:05PM (18 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday April 28 2019, @10:05PM (#836058)

      Radio waves aka Radar saved the British.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday April 28 2019, @10:43PM (1 child)

        by Anonymous Coward on Sunday April 28 2019, @10:43PM (#836066)

        If you've listened to BBC radio in the last decade, you wouldn't be so certain.

        • (Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday April 28 2019, @11:02PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Sunday April 28 2019, @11:02PM (#836069)

          They start hiring wogs as announcers?

      • (Score: 2) by PartTimeZombie on Sunday April 28 2019, @10:56PM (3 children)

        by PartTimeZombie (4827) on Sunday April 28 2019, @10:56PM (#836067)

        The Luftwaffe switching from bombing Fighter command airfields in southern England is what won the Battle of Britain.

        If they had kept it up for just a few more days they might have won. (The battle, not the War. The Royal Navy would have sunk any invasion fleet, even without air cover).

        • (Score: 1) by pTamok on Monday April 29 2019, @02:09PM (2 children)

          by pTamok (3042) on Monday April 29 2019, @02:09PM (#836254)

          The Luftwaffe switching from bombing Fighter command airfields in southern England is what won the Battle of Britain.

          If they had kept it up for just a few more days they might have won. (The battle, not the War. The Royal Navy would have sunk any invasion fleet, even without air cover).

          Unlikely - without air-cover, even Stukas could sink warships.

          HMS Wryneck & HMS Diamond in the Battle of Greece [wikipedia.org]
          HMS Gloucester in the Battle of Crete [wikipedia.org].

          • (Score: 2) by PartTimeZombie on Monday April 29 2019, @08:01PM (1 child)

            by PartTimeZombie (4827) on Monday April 29 2019, @08:01PM (#836378)

            While that is true, the massive advantage the Royal Navy had would have doomed any German invasion to failure.

            There would have been losses for sure, but the Home Fleet was several times the strength of the German Navy, and warships can shoot Stukas down too.

            This bit from the Wikipedia article on Operation Sealion caught my eye:

            Admiral Karl Dönitz believed air superiority was not enough and admitted, "We possessed neither control of the air or the sea; nor were we in any position to gain it."

            It is a very interesting part of history however, and it is no surprise there are so many alternate history stories about the Nazis winning WWII.

            • (Score: 1) by pTamok on Tuesday April 30 2019, @01:59PM

              by pTamok (3042) on Tuesday April 30 2019, @01:59PM (#836679)

              Admiral Karl Dönitz was a very good warfighter, and I believe his opinion has weight. He was responsible for the North Atlantic submarine campaigns, which caused the loss of a lot of Allied shipping, to an extent that worried Churchill. Post-war analysis tends to the view that despite the apparent success of the submarine campaigns, they did not, in reality, come near to denying supplies to Britain, although at times it may have felt like it. Had the German submarine navy got the resources that Dönitz wanted early in the war, things might have been different.

              The alternate histories are interesting. Certainly, it is easy to identify strategic mistakes made by Hitler and his Field Marshals, but I believe that even if all the right decisions had been made by Hitler et. al. the war would not have been a foregone conclusion for the Germans. This Quora answer is interesting: Could Germany have won World War II if they did not attack the Soviet Union? [quora.com] because it focusses on the practical necessity of needing oil to run a war. Churchill was worried the submarine campaign in the Atlantic was disturbing the UK's oil supply from the USA. Hitler had a bigger problem - he had to conquer working oilfields to further the war. The German war-machine failed to do so.

      • (Score: 3, Interesting) by realDonaldTrump on Sunday April 28 2019, @11:05PM (11 children)

        by realDonaldTrump (6614) on Sunday April 28 2019, @11:05PM (#836072) Journal

        My father is German, right? Was German (RIP!). And born in a very wonderful place in Germany, the best part of Germany. So I have a great feeling for Germany. People don't know this, RADAR was invented, very proudly, in Germany. By a German known as Christian Hulsmeyer. But, he didn't call it RADAR, he called it Telemobiloskop. Try saying that one with your mouth. And obviously it failed very badly. Branding is one of the most important things, folks. It can make you, or break you. And it broke Christian. But, his magnificent German ingenuity is what truely saved Britain from becoming part of Europe. But sadly, only until 1973. So many guys -- and some ladies -- died, very bravely fighting that one. And then a very weak & ineffective leader signed it all away. So foolish. So very very foolish!!!!

        • (Score: 2, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday April 28 2019, @11:33PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Sunday April 28 2019, @11:33PM (#836081)

          Fartfignewton.

        • (Score: 2) by PinkyGigglebrain on Monday April 29 2019, @01:00AM (9 children)

          by PinkyGigglebrain (4458) on Monday April 29 2019, @01:00AM (#836107)

          Sorry to burst your bubble but RADAR was not invented by Germany.

          Nikola Tesla described it in 1917 [teslascience.org] and laid out the basic principles, the guys who made it work effectively decades later were working from his original concept and description.
           

          --
          "Beware those who would deny you Knowledge, For in their hearts they dream themselves your Master."
          • (Score: 4, Disagree) by realDonaldTrump on Monday April 29 2019, @01:50AM (3 children)

            by realDonaldTrump (6614) on Monday April 29 2019, @01:50AM (#836125) Journal

            Two guys. 1st. guy has an idea. Takes out the patent on it. Gives it a lousy name. BUILDS IT. Makes it work, starts a business selling it. Business doesn't do so great, he shuts that one down and starts another. Doing something totally different. And, his 2nd. business is very successful.

            2nd. guy comes along LONG AFTER all that happens. Describes how the idea could, possibly work. Gives it a snappy name, easy to remember, easy to say. And leaves the building of it to other folks -- even later. To your way of thinking, the 2nd. guy is the Inventor. Because, much easier to remember, right? It's great marketing and I already said marketing -- branding is one of the most important things. But, it's not inventing. Many people think like you. Many people. It's 100% wrong. But, knock yourself out!!!!

            • (Score: 4, Funny) by kazzie on Monday April 29 2019, @08:55AM

              by kazzie (5309) Subscriber Badge on Monday April 29 2019, @08:55AM (#836213)

              Hm... are you the first guy or the second guy?

            • (Score: 2) by PinkyGigglebrain on Monday April 29 2019, @05:05PM (1 child)

              by PinkyGigglebrain (4458) on Monday April 29 2019, @05:05PM (#836302)

              Another poster linked to an article about Hulsmeyer.

              I was incorrect in my statement about N. Tesla having prior claim and retract my challenge to your comment.

              Please accept my apologies.

              --
              "Beware those who would deny you Knowledge, For in their hearts they dream themselves your Master."
              • (Score: 2) by realDonaldTrump on Monday April 29 2019, @06:13PM

                by realDonaldTrump (6614) on Monday April 29 2019, @06:13PM (#836334) Journal

                That's O.K. That's O.K. And, thank you. Because your Link has so many things I can tell folks. When I show them my fabulous Tesla Model S!!

          • (Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 29 2019, @04:05AM

            by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 29 2019, @04:05AM (#836161)

            Actually, there was a science fiction description six years earlier, in Hugo Gernsback's "Ralph 124C41+".

          • (Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 29 2019, @08:35AM (3 children)

            by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 29 2019, @08:35AM (#836211)

            "Giving the name Telemobiloskop (Telemobiloscope) to the system, he made a patent application on 21 November 1903" - source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_Hülsmeyer [wikipedia.org]

            • (Score: 2) by PinkyGigglebrain on Monday April 29 2019, @05:00PM

              by PinkyGigglebrain (4458) on Monday April 29 2019, @05:00PM (#836300)

              Thanks for the correction :)

              --
              "Beware those who would deny you Knowledge, For in their hearts they dream themselves your Master."
            • (Score: 2) by realDonaldTrump on Monday April 29 2019, @06:17PM

              by realDonaldTrump (6614) on Monday April 29 2019, @06:17PM (#836337) Journal

              WikiLeaks, I love WikiLeaks. I have learned so much from WikiLeaks. A real treasure trove. Thank you, Anomalous Coward. And, thank you Julian Assange!!!!

            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 29 2019, @08:54PM

              by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 29 2019, @08:54PM (#836391)

              In 1903 and 1904, however, a German engineer, Christian Hulsmeyer, learned that by using a spark-gap transmitter and coherer-equipped receiver, he could detect echoes from barges passing along the Rhine River. Convinced that such a phenomenon could be employed to detect ships in fog or at night, he developed and patented the idea in both Germany (patent 165,546, issued April 30, 1904) and England (patent 25,608, issued November 1904). The equipment he built was too crude to interest private industry or the German Navy, and it played no role in stimulating later developments, but his work does indicate the general awareness that radio waves could be reflected and that those reflections could perhaps be put to use.

              A general revival of interest in higher frequencies occurred among radio researchers in World War I, due to the potential of using them for secret point-to-point communications. This interest, fueled by the enthusiasm of radio amateurs, continued to grow after the War. Wave reflection soon became a subject of discussion once again. Marconi himself, in an address to a joint meeting of the American Institute of Electrical Engineers and the Institute of Radio Engineers in 1922, stressed the importance of short-wave research and, almost incidentally, pointed to one possible use of the reflective property:

              As was first shown by Hertz, electric waves can be completely reflected
              by conducting bodies. In some of my tests I have noticed the effects of
              reflection and deflection of these waves by metallic objects miles away.

              It seems to me that it should be possible to design apparatus by means
              of which a ship could radiate or project a divergent beam of these rays
              in any desired direction, which rays, if coming across a metallic object,
              such as another steamer or ship, would be reflected back to a receiver
              screened from the local transmitter on the sending ship, and thereby
              immediately reveal the presence and bearing of the other ship in fog or thick weather.

              One further great advantage of such an arrangement would be that it
              would be able to give warning of the presence and bearing of ships,
              even should these ships be unprovided with any kind of radio.

              These remarks were published in August 1922-a month before the experiments of Taylor and Young. Whether they were aware of Marconi's suggestions, however, is unclear.

  • (Score: 2, Offtopic) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday April 28 2019, @09:55PM (12 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday April 28 2019, @09:55PM (#836056)

    "We are quite in danger of sending highly trained and highly intelligent young men out into the world with tables of erroneous numbers under their arms, and with a dense fog in the place where their brains ought to be. In this century, of course, they will be working on guided missiles and advising the medical profession on the control of disease, and there is no limit to the extent to which they could impede every sort of national effort."

    Fisher, R N (1958). "The Nature of Probability" . Centennial Review. 2: 261–274.

    Fisher warned them, they didn't listen. The US didn't either. Now charlatans pervade all academic, medical, and military research. The only hope is that the "enemy" is even worse off than you.

    • (Score: 0, Offtopic) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday April 28 2019, @10:08PM (11 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday April 28 2019, @10:08PM (#836059)

      Not sure how this is could be offtopic. The story is about nerd applying their understanding when there are real world rewards and punishments.

      Western academia et al have been free running outside this for many decades now, basically surviving off the US military pillaging oil rich regions of the world. For example, try to win a war with the same approach that leads you to cling to "dark matter" theories despite all the evidence otherwise.

      • (Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday April 28 2019, @11:54PM (8 children)

        by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Sunday April 28 2019, @11:54PM (#836088) Journal

        despite all the evidence otherwise

        Such as? It's worth keeping in mind, for example, that MOND, the primary rival to dark matter, is of the same sort of theory. It attempts to explain observation without having any other support for the theory than this discrepancy. At least, with dark matter theory one knows that there is some dark matter, just not enough known dark matter at present to explain things.

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 29 2019, @12:06AM (7 children)

          by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 29 2019, @12:06AM (#836092)

          Such as for over a century the only evidence for dark matter is that GR predictions the wrong thing.

          Try pushing that when your friends and family are getting blown up over and over as you are "surprised" over and over at every new observation. Meanwhile MOND predicts the right thing. You will either start working on finding an explanation for why MOND works or get executed/assassinated by pissed off people.

          • (Score: 1) by khallow on Monday April 29 2019, @12:50AM (6 children)

            by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Monday April 29 2019, @12:50AM (#836104) Journal

            Such as for over a century the only evidence for dark matter is that GR predictions the wrong thing.

            Which is pretty good evidence when you think about it. They also have gravity lensing and actual observation of dark matter.

            • (Score: -1, Offtopic) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 29 2019, @01:18AM

              by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 29 2019, @01:18AM (#836111)

              khallow, I do kind of like your posts. Please prep just a tiny bit for a grand minimum at least scenario.

            • (Score: 2) by Gaaark on Monday April 29 2019, @03:00AM (4 children)

              by Gaaark (41) on Monday April 29 2019, @03:00AM (#836143) Journal

              How about wide binaries: dark matter predicts they should not rotate amongst themselves and should 'fly apart'. Meanwhile, QI eliminates the need for dark matter completely as well as solving why wide binaries exist.

              Neither dark matter NOR Mond can solve wide binaries...unless of course they come up with ANOTHER 'newly imagined' property for dark matter.

              --
              --- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. I have always been here. ---Gaaark 2.0 --
              • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 29 2019, @03:15AM

                by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 29 2019, @03:15AM (#836145)

                unless of course they come up with ANOTHER 'newly imagined' property for dark matter.

                Such as? (I need to publish)

              • (Score: 1) by khallow on Monday April 29 2019, @04:07AM (2 children)

                by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Monday April 29 2019, @04:07AM (#836162) Journal

                How about wide binaries: dark matter predicts they should not rotate amongst themselves and should 'fly apart'.

                And? Have we observed these for thousands of years to determine that they indeed don't fly apart (that is, aren't binary systems)? Rather we observed them for a short time and concluded that it must have always been that way. And that's the basic problem. Just because two stars are relatively near one another with similar velocities doesn't make them a binary system. We know of scenarios where this can happen, such as throwing a third star out of a three star system or several stars being created in a interstellar dust cloud.

                Neither dark matter NOR Mond can solve wide binaries...unless of course they come up with ANOTHER 'newly imagined' property for dark matter.

                Or the observations and our suppositions are in error. The key problem is that this is supposedly a subtle effect. Hence, it is precisely where wishful thinking and error in measure most strongly can manifest.

                • (Score: 2) by Gaaark on Monday April 29 2019, @10:16AM (1 child)

                  by Gaaark (41) on Monday April 29 2019, @10:16AM (#836218) Journal

                  Have we observed ANYTHING for thousands of years? TRULY measured, calculated, observed? No.

                  That is what models are for.

                  "Hence, it is precisely where wishful thinking and error in measure most strongly can manifest."
                  YES! Dark matter is an error of wishful thinking: SAVE GR at ALL costs... except it is wrong and wide binaries prove it.

                  --
                  --- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. I have always been here. ---Gaaark 2.0 --
                  • (Score: 1) by khallow on Monday April 29 2019, @08:54PM

                    by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Monday April 29 2019, @08:54PM (#836392) Journal

                    That is what models are for.

                    Unfortunately, that doesn't rule out models like dark matter because you are supposing the would-be evidence against such based on a model that may be wrong.

      • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Pslytely Psycho on Monday April 29 2019, @12:50AM (1 child)

        by Pslytely Psycho (1218) on Monday April 29 2019, @12:50AM (#836105)

        "Not sure how this is could be offtopic."

        Perhaps because the conspiracy theory has nothing to due with the topic at hand?

        --
        Alex Jones lawyer inspires new TV series: CSI Moron Division.
        • (Score: -1, Offtopic) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 29 2019, @01:21AM

          by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 29 2019, @01:21AM (#836114)

          Pslytely Psycho, I do *not* kind of like your posts. Please prep just a tiny bit for a grand minimum at least scenario.

  • (Score: 4, Interesting) by Whoever on Monday April 29 2019, @12:30AM (2 children)

    by Whoever (4524) on Monday April 29 2019, @12:30AM (#836101) Journal

    This part of WWII is generally known as the "Battle of the Beams" and googling that will pull up a lot of information on the subject.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 29 2019, @12:31AM (1 child)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 29 2019, @12:31AM (#836102)

    Dang,.. so sad.

    • (Score: 2) by kazzie on Monday April 29 2019, @08:58AM

      by kazzie (5309) Subscriber Badge on Monday April 29 2019, @08:58AM (#836214)

      Don't worry. Scotland, Wales and Ireland will be fine!

  • (Score: 4, Funny) by jimbrooking on Monday April 29 2019, @02:17AM

    by jimbrooking (3465) Subscriber Badge on Monday April 29 2019, @02:17AM (#836135)

    That'll finish the job!

  • (Score: 4, Interesting) by sjames on Monday April 29 2019, @03:20AM (5 children)

    by sjames (2882) on Monday April 29 2019, @03:20AM (#836146) Journal

    Then radio waves helped save Britain when they deployed RADAR stations on the coast to track incoming bombers. Interestingly they also launched a disinformation campaign that extreme amounts of carrots were giving pilots and lookouts better night vision as a cover so Germany wouldn't look too hard at how they were actually spotting the bombers.

    The belief in carrots improving vision persists to this day.

    • (Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 29 2019, @04:09AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 29 2019, @04:09AM (#836164)
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 29 2019, @10:08AM (3 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 29 2019, @10:08AM (#836217)

      I was taught growing up "an apple a day keeps the doctor away" but now we know that apples contain arsenic and cyanide so eating as few as 3 can be lethal.

      • (Score: 2) by kazzie on Monday April 29 2019, @01:10PM

        by kazzie (5309) Subscriber Badge on Monday April 29 2019, @01:10PM (#836242)

        Bad news for cider drinkers, then.

      • (Score: 3, Informative) by pTamok on Monday April 29 2019, @03:30PM (1 child)

        by pTamok (3042) on Monday April 29 2019, @03:30PM (#836277)

        Apples don't contain cyanide.

        The apple seeds contain a chemical named amygdalin [wikipedia.org] which, when metabolized, produces cyanide. The amount produced is small enough that normal healthy human liver function can deal with it with absolutely no problems at all: the liver's job, in part, is to convert toxic chemicals into less harmful ones that can be excreted.

        Here's Snopes on it: Snopes: Are Apple Seeds Poisonous? [snopes.com]

        Apple seeds are well protected and usually to pass through the gut without damage. In order to release the amygdalin, you need to chew on the seeds, which you are unlikely to do much of, as the woody outer layer doesn't taste good.

        More details on how many seeds you may need to eat to produce noticeable harm here: Medical News Today: Are apple seeds poisonous? (Cookies pushed) [medicalnewstoday.com]. tl;dr - an adult would need to thoroughly chew and swallow roughly 150 seeds to experience adverse symptoms.

        • (Score: 2) by Osamabobama on Monday April 29 2019, @06:56PM

          by Osamabobama (5842) on Monday April 29 2019, @06:56PM (#836350)

          Does anybody else remember the GI Joe cartoon where they had to stop a blob that was growing out of control and eating everything in its path? They managed to poison it by shooting it full of apples from a nearby orchard. Apparently, the blob couldn't metabolize the amygdalin (pretty sure they glossed over the details), so it died and everyone was saved.

          I think the show was entirely written as a vehicle to use the trivia that apple seeds are poisonous.

          --
          Appended to the end of comments you post. Max: 120 chars.
(1)