The Second World War.

[provinnn]

Originally Posted by SanteeFats

Ahh but Palo can reach far beyond where he resides.

in the anonymity network we trust

[SanteeFats]

Today marks the 70 anniversary of VE day. Thanks to all who served and especially those that died or were wounded. They are few now but deserve the appellation of the Greatest Generation.

[palo5]

Russia and many other countries celebrate Victory Day on 5.9

There is a big military parade in Moscow tomorrow, more than twice as big as normal. It's the 70. anniversary. Not many of the original warriors survive, and it is right that we honor them... and the 27 million of their Comrades and citizens who did not survive

[scoundrel]

Originally Posted by palo5

Russia and many other countries celebrate Victory Day on 5.9

There is a big military parade in Moscow tomorrow, more than twice as big as normal. It's the 70. anniversary. Not many of the original warriors survive, and it is right that we honor them... and the 27 million of their Comrades and citizens who did not survive

Is there a particular logic or reason why Russia and previously the USSR takes/took 9th May as the official VE Day? There were various individual stop dates depending on which bit of the European war you happened to be in. In and around Prague and much of Bohemia and Moravia, the present day Czech Republic, some unlucky people on both sides were fighting each other fiercely as late as May 12th 1945.

[palo5]

Originally Posted by scoundrel

Is there a particular logic or reason why Russia and previously the USSR takes/took 9th May as the official VE Day?

Yes, Germany first signed surrender on May 7, but the Soviet General had no authority to sign the agreement. So they signed again in Berlin on May 8, but it was so late in Berlin that it was already May 9 in Moscow. There is a time difference

That's why May 9 is Victory Day

[otiscleotus]

Three articles on the surrender and the late fighting in and around Prague. I didn't try to post the finished joined pages as they're file size gets to be above the imagebam limit.

[tygrkhat40]

Originally Posted by palo5

Yes, Germany first signed surrender on May 7, but the Soviet General had no authority to sign the agreement. So they signed again in Berlin on May 8, but it was so late in Berlin that it was already May 9 in Moscow. There is a time difference

That's why May 9 is Victory Day

There was also something about the document signed in France. It wasn't the exact, meticulously negotiated surrender document that should have been signed. Stalin wanted the official document signed, so the ceremony was repeated in Berlin. IIRC, Stalin wasn't too upset with the Soviet officer who signed in Rhiems.

[palo5]

Originally Posted by tygrkhat40

There was also something about the document signed in France. It wasn't the exact, meticulously negotiated surrender document that should have been signed. Stalin wanted the official document signed, so the ceremony was repeated in Berlin. IIRC, Stalin wasn't too upset with the Soviet officer who signed in Rhiems.

Stalin had two objections to Reims. One was that the Western High Command was represented, but the Soviet High Command was not, and Stalin insisted that a Stavka member be present. The other was that the surrender must be signed in the place where the violence came from. So it was that Reims was a "preliminary agreement", and the final surrender took place in Berlin with the Western and Soviet High Commands represented

I don't know about problems with the surrender document. Unconditional surrender meant there was nothing for Germany to negotiate, and the document itself looks simple enough

[Dr Cro]

Originally Posted by sydney1

The only major disadvantage with the Hurricane was that the fuel-tank was positioned directly behind the pilot! So consequently a lot pilots, especially British pilots suffered horrific burns even if they survived shooting/crashings, etc. Hence the fact that soon the British were at the fore-front of Plastic and reconstructive surgery.

The fuel tank was not positioned behind the Pilot, rather there were 2 fuel tanks positioned in the wing roots. Due to the construction of the wing root fuselage there was nothing separating the pilot from the fuel tanks. Subsequently if a tank was hit, catching fire, the draft from the slipstream would carry flame directly into the cockpit, not much fun for pilots.
The only single engine fighter that comes to mind with a fuel tank behind the pilot was the P-51 Mustang, I stand to be corrected on this, which could cause problems to pilots in combat when full. It was found that it was best that this tank be at least half full when going into combat

[Dr Cro]

Further to my previous post, some versions of Spitfire reecce aircraft carried a fuel tank behind the pilot to enable very long range photographic missions over Europe but not for combat