Talk:RAF Advanced Air Striking Force

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
WikiProject Aviation (Rated B-class)
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of the Aviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
Checklist icon
 
 
WikiProject Military history (Rated B-Class)
MILHIST This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality assessment scale.

Landing grounds[edit]

The inability (or unwillingness) of the ground forces to protect the Advanced Air Striking Force's landing grounds was the primary reason why RAF fighter cover had to be withdrawn back over the Channel to the UK. This, due to the limited range of the Hurricane and Spitfire, had an immediate impact on the air war, not the least of which was limiting the air cover available for the subsequent Operation Dynamo. The result of this loss of its landing grounds was the RAF deciding that it couldn't rely on anyone else to defends its airfields, and led to the forming of the RAF Regiment. Ian Dunster (talk) 22:35, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Fighter cover for the BEF was provided by the Air Component of the BEF, and the 3 fighter squadrons of the AASF seem to have been the last British combat units to leave France. Perhaps the solution is to generate an article on the Air Component of the BEF and make the comment there Rjccumbria (talk) 00:20, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
The RAF units were forced to abandon some French airfields early because there were no ground troops to defend them or hold off advancing German forces and thereby give the aircraft time to evacuate the airfield when it eventually became necessary, i.e., when it had become obvious it was eventually going to be overrun. This meant that airfields might receive no warning about advancing German troops until they were almost at the perimeter. So the RAF abandoned the airfields earlier than it otherwise would have, it being safer than possibly being caught with their aircraft on the ground. That was the reasoning behind the later RAF Regiment, they were meant to defend the airfields long enough for the airworthy aircraft to be evacuated should they be in danger of being overrun. It also meant that operations could be continued from the airfields for longer, as the airfield could depend on the Regiment to remain with them until the last minute, and not be called away by someone else for what they considered to be other 'more important' duties. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.4.57.101 (talk) 19:54, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Rewrite and expansion[edit]

I've put my rewrite on despite it being unfinshed as I'm too busy at the moment and don't want people to make redundant amendments to the old text. I'll finish it when I get a minute. Apols Keith-264 (talk) 15:08, 5 October 2018 (UTC)

Recent edits[edit]

@MPS1992: Thanks for taking an interest. ;O) Keith-264 (talk) 23:01, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

If we're not going to strike the Ruhr now, when are we going to do it? MPS1992 (talk) 23:34, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
:O) You might find Baughen's next volume RAF On the Offensive: The Rebirth of Tactical Air Power 1940–1941 (2018) rather grimly amusing. Keith-264 (talk) 07:58, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
The losses figures are inconsistent because the new material from Baughen contradicts some older sources and I haven't go round to reconciling them. Work keeps getting in the way. Keith-264 (talk) 08:01, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
A few more paragraphs for you to read from another Baughen volume. Regards Keith-264 (talk) 17:29, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Disputed edits[edit]

@MPS1992: With all due respect, [1] isn't WP:own. Keith-264 (talk) 08:09, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

Recent edits[edit]

@GraemeLeggett: Double-checked the 40lb bomb and it's definitely an anti-personnel weapon. Regards Keith-264 (talk) 21:52, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

The only 40lb bomb I'm aware of (from a US Naval bomb disposal publication) is the "40-lb GP" (Mk I to IV) hence why I made the change. Do your sources give the official name of the bomb used by the Battles; there's definitely room on wikipedia for a list of British bombs in the war and it would be a good addition to capture the obscure types as well as the fan favourites like Tallboy. GraemeLeggett (talk) 12:15, 12 February 2020 (UTC)
I know, it comes from Baughen but I haven't found corroboration either. There's a disamb page [2] for aerial bombs but it isn't complete. Keith-264 (talk) 15:07, 12 February 2020 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:RAF_Advanced_Air_Striking_Force&oldid=940438681"