WWII : London V2 Rocket impacts sites Mapped

[Keith]

http://londonist.com/2009/01/london_v2_rocket_sitesmapped.php

great work

[Connaught Ranger]

Have they mapped the London "V1" sites yet?

http://i91.photobucket.com/albums/k310/blacksoldierblue/P1122101.jpg

Connaught Ranger.:)

[Britishhawk]

Wow they were pretty accurate, none landed over my side of london though :)

[Connaught Ranger]

Actually they were a more of a fire and forget weapon,

[mas-36]

Very interesting, thank for sharing!

Most people forget or simply do not know, but Paris was also the target of V-2 rockets.

A little story:
When my wife and I took spent our honeymoon in Paris in 2004, it was very late when we left a nice restaurant and we missed the last metro train past midnight, so we chose to walk to our hotel from Ile de Cite to the 14e arr. Several times along the way, we stopped for a rest and at one point, very near the Jardins de Luxembourg, and we came across a building which was covered with pockmarks, the facade of the old Ecole des Mineurs. A plaque on the exterior wall of that building stated that during both world wars, that location was deemed the unluckiest place in all of Paris. During WW 1, a shell from the "Paris Gun" landed there and killed scores of people. Then in WW 2, soon after the liberation of Paris in August 1944, a V-2 rocket struck the exact same spot killing over 70 people. There is a small upwards incline along the avenue, but a rather large and noticable depression in the street in front of the building can still be noticed.

[Ordie]

Looks like one hit Speaker's Corner not far from the US Embassy.

[Kilgor]

More lives were taken building them than those on the receiving end.

[Violet Fashion by Mindy]

More lives were taken building them than those on the receiving end.

That maybe true but the propaganda value alone.

[Bushranger]

I used to work past a site where a rocket had hit in Leytonstone east london on my way home, the houses were different to the rest in the street & small memorial stone for the dead.

[Bruisercruiser]

Wow, really interesting article. Great find.

[Kilgor]

That maybe true but the propaganda value alone.

True, but a terrorised population doesn't mean wining wars. There were pin prick attacks of terror value only and no strategic use. (considering the effort going into production). The real benefit was scooped up by the Allies And Soviets for future generations.

[Atlantic Friend]

Very interesting, thank for sharing!

Most people forget or simply do not know, but Paris was also the target of V-2 rockets.

Indeed ! So were Antwerp, IIRC, and Maisons-Alfort, near Paris.

[jamesp]

there's a street around the corner from here, which is all terraced housed except for a chunk in the middle which is made up of relatively new blocks of flats. interesting to see that it's because of a V2 which hit there on 1 november 1944, leaving 36 Dead. i walked past it earlier and you can see on the side of the house where the floors/rooms used to be on the building next door. also interesting that the local iceland supermarket is built on the site which saw the largest single V2 rocket death toll.

[KjääkAhopelto]

Aah, they hit Finland, the bastards!

http://londonist.com/attachments/Londonist/V2damage.jpg

[Kitsune]

True, but a terrorised population doesn't mean wining wars. There were pin prick attacks of terror value only and no strategic use. (considering the effort going into production).
Yes, but you could say the same about the British bombing attacks which were almost exclusively (with the one exception of Essen, if I recall it correctly) aimed at the civilian areas in the inner core of German cities. They were larger pin pricks for sure, killing hundreds of thousands of people, women and children included, and terrorised millions more, but in the end the war was not won through them, despite the enormous effort that Britain put into them. (And by the way, the V-Weapons were the direct answer to those, hence the V, meaning "Vergeltung" meaning retribution in German).
And don't complain that the attacks on Britain were too small. If Germany could have fully concentrated on bombing England instead of fighting the Sovietunion, those attacks would have been much, much larger.





The real benefit was scooped up by the Allies And Soviets for future generations. Absolutely. Later time American and Soviet ICBM's are the direct descendants of the V2, after all, and those make the destruction of cities so much easier.





(Sorry for being so cynical. Couldn't help it...)

[Old_Boy_Steve]

Bloody hell. There were a few that landed down in my old neck of the woods. Great posting Keith mate.

[Connaught Ranger]

Yes, but you could say the same about the British bombing attacks which were almost exclusively (with the one exception of Essen, if I recall it correctly) aimed at the civilian areas in the inner core of German cities. They were larger pin pricks for sure, killing hundreds of thousands of people, women and children included, and terrorised millions more, but in the end the war was not won through them, despite the enormous effort that Britain put into them. (And by the way, the V-Weapons were the direct answer to those, hence the V, meaning "Vergeltung" meaning retribution in German).
And don't complain that the attacks on Britain were too small. If Germany could have fully concentrated on bombing England instead of fighting the Sovietunion, those attacks would have been much, much larger.

I beg to differ, in my opinion the British & American bombing attacks on the Nazi War Effort, Factories and Rail heads, road network etc..etc.. many located in German cities played a very big role in helping to defeat Germany in WW2.

And the bombings were the Allied answer to the Luftwaffe bombing attacks on British towns and cities, while the Luftwaffe had numerical superiority, they thought nothing of bombing civil areas, and as we have seen this was part of their air campaign first practiced in Spain in the Spanish civil war and afterward inflicted on the towns and cities of Europe from Norway,Poland, Denmark, Holland Belgium, France, Greece, Russia (particular attention was paid to the Island of Malta by the Luftwaffe in WW2 as well) etc..etc.. and as there were no such thing as precision-guided munitions of course the German civilian population was going to suffer.

Connaught Ranger

[Violet Fashion by Mindy]

You obviously have not read anything by Speer have you. And as official records show, German war production actually increased during the worse of the bombing.

Both sides were equally bad. It's just that our side was morally in the right since we did not start the dam thing plus we also won.

It was the largest most destructive war in the history of mankind. Both sides need to hang themselves in shame over what transpired. If we do accept guilt, learn from this war then are we any better for being involved in it? All that will happen is that we will repeat the same mistakes again.

I pity our future generations for the things that we have done and for the appereance that it is ok to reign destruction from upon high and kill millions of people in the process.

[Kilgor]

You obviously have not read anything by Speer have you.

Politely, go back and read the book again.

And yes, I have my copy.

[Violet Fashion by Mindy]

I was not speaking to you. :)

I've read the book and a bunch of others and I still come to the conclusion that the combined bomber offensive whilst having a major impact on the war (destroying the Luftwaffe for example) it's intended effect of destroying the German war industry was negligible at best and it was not until Germany itself was invaded that production numbers plummeted.

[johanness]

...destroying the Luftwaffe for example

Not even destroying the Luftwaffe, as the biggest parts of the active Luftwaffe were fighting on the eastern front

[Kitsune]

@Connaught Ranger:


FYI, British bombs fell on Germany before German bombs fell on Britain, the British were also the first to bomb the other ones capital. In any case, the British bombing campaign was definitely not just the answer or the revenge for what the Germans did to them - they had plans to wins war through bombings long before WWII started.

There also was no clear-cut coherent "British & American bombing attacks on the Nazi War Effort, Factories and Rail heads, road network etc..etc.."
The British strategy decided very early in the war to concentrate on the bombing of cities at night. Since it was not possible to target industrial facilites, railroads or roads this way, the objective became the destruction of the inner core of the cities instead (known to be civilian settlement areas). General Harris strategy was actually quite clearly to kill and injure as many civilians as possible, the idea was that this should demoralise the population and cause Germany to fall apart from inside out. It were the Americans who, after joining the war effort tried to target industrial facilites and it is known that Harris was quite annoyed if bombers were used for those instead of his city bombing. Later the Americans did join the destruction of cities, though, the most notorious example being the case of Dresden near the end of the war.

As a result, countless civilians were killed, maimed or "dehoused" but, contrary to the expectations, there was no uprising nor were the Germans at any time near such a one because of the British area bombing campaign. Actually, had those bombs been used to target industrial facilities or the road network, they may have been of more use (although the attempt to cripple the German industry was not as succesful as hoped as well). It may have been the best choice, if the resources would have been used to strengthen the army forces. As it was, a considerable part of the British war effort (around a third) went into a unsuccessful terror bombing campaign directed against the civilian population - which also constituted a warcrime on a massive scale.

[LordKitchener]

Great post!

Interesting that none of the rockets hit anywhere near Parliament etc.


And don't complain that the attacks on Britain were too small. If Germany could have fully concentrated on bombing England instead of fighting the Sovietunion, those attacks would have been much, much larger.

Look, you tried your luck making war on civilised, peaceful nations and your population was held accountable. Let's not get into a moral debate here because you have no ammo.

[Indiana Jones]

Great post!

Interesting that none of the rockets hit anywhere near Parliament etc.



Look, you tried your luck making war on civilised, peaceful nations and your population was held accountable. Let's not get into a moral debate here because you have no ammo.
Who is that you precisely, if you do not mind me asking ?
Because I am under the impression that you are about to succumb to a rather fundamental epistemic mistake here.

[LordKitchener]

Who is that you precisely, if you do not mind me asking ?
Because I am under the impression that you are about to succumb to a rather fundamental epistemic mistake here.

Have I broken a rule here? I meant the Nazis who were elected by the German people.

The other (German) poster was trying to defend V2 attacks.

Let's not de-rail this thread though.

[oldsoak]

@Connaught Ranger:


FYI, British bombs fell on Germany before German bombs fell on Britain, the British were also the first to bomb the other ones capital. In any case, the British bombing campaign was definitely not just the answer or the revenge for what the Germans did to them - they had plans to wins war through bombings long before WWII started.

.

Erm no. The British raid on Berlin was because the Luftwaffe had dropped bombs on London ( in fairness the Luftwaffe pilots in question were not authorised to do so and were very nearly courtmartialed ) .

[Kitsune]

@Lord Kitchener:

I don't know how civilised and peaceful Britain really was, if one considers its behaviour in the war. If one considers your statement of holding the "population accountable" one could even ask how civilised it is today. Otherwise it is perhaps worth noting that one nation against which Germany fought (and with which Britain allied itself quite readily) was the Sovietunion - the one under Josef Stalin at that - and this state was neither terribly civilised or peaceful.

As far as me having no moral ammo, well it is true that Germany committed great many crimes during this war, many of which are completely inexcusable. But it bugs me that warcrimes of the Germans are gleefully pointed out, whereas mass killings of civilians by the Western allies are so easily and readily waved away, belittled or justified. Now, after more than sixty years have passed, it would be really time that you British stop being to be so terribly proud of having destroyed Dresden.

[Indiana Jones]

Have I broken a rule here? I meant the Nazis who were elected by the German people.



Let's not de-rail this thread though.
You have not broken any rule as far as I am aware. I am not a moderator anyways.
Further, you will find that at least some on this site condone the (mainly deliberate) killings of German and Japanese civilians during the second world war and to my knowledge such statements are not reprimanded.

The other (German) poster was trying to defend V2 attacks.No he did not. At least not so far. On the basis that civilian populations "are to be held accountable", you are yourself hardly in a position to condemn them, though.
Cheers, IJ.

[Kitsune]

@oldsoak:

Frankly, do you really think it likely that the British authorities honestly believed that this incident was some kind of nightime raid en miniature on London after the Luftwaffe had had left the British capital alone for months?

[LordKitchener]

Now, after more than sixty years have passed, it would be really time that you British stop being to be so terribly proud of having destroyed Dresden.

Nobody took pleasure in the collateral damage that occurred in taming the Nazi aggressors when they retreated to their lair but let's not forget the Germans blitzed London first.

This was an impressive feat of German engineering though at the time.

[LordKitchener]

On the basis that civilian populations "are to be held accountable", you are yourself hardly in a position to condemn them, though.
Cheers, IJ.

All I would say is that a substantial part of the German people elected the Nazis and worked for/aided the war effort. Just because they were not dressed in military fatigues doesn't make them 'innocent'.

As I mentioned, don't forget the Blitz - I can assure you that the bombing of Dresden is not a revered subject in Allied countries.

But we are past that now and should be looking for a united Europe in face of the new global threats.

[Connaught Ranger]

@Connaught Ranger:


FYI, British bombs fell on Germany before German bombs fell on Britain, the British were also the first to bomb the other ones capital. In any case, the British bombing campaign was definitely not just the answer or the revenge for what the Germans did to them - they had plans to wins war through bombings long before WWII started.

There also was no clear-cut coherent "British & American bombing attacks on the Nazi War Effort, Factories and Rail heads, road network etc..etc.."
The British strategy decided very early in the war to concentrate on the bombing of cities at night. Since it was not possible to target industrial facilites, railroads or roads this way, the objective became the destruction of the inner core of the cities instead (known to be civilian settlement areas). General Harris strategy was actually quite clearly to kill and injure as many civilians as possible, the idea was that this should demoralise the population and cause Germany to fall apart from inside out. It were the Americans who, after joining the war effort tried to target industrial facilites and it is known that Harris was quite annoyed if bombers were used for those instead of his city bombing. Later the Americans did join the destruction of cities, though, the most notorious example being the case of Dresden near the end of the war.

As a result, countless civilians were killed, maimed or "dehoused" but, contrary to the expectations, there was no uprising nor were the Germans at any time near such a one because of the British area bombing campaign. Actually, had those bombs been used to target industrial facilities or the road network, they may have been of more use (although the attempt to cripple the German industry was not as succesful as hoped as well). It may have been the best choice, if the resources would have been used to strengthen the army forces. As it was, a considerable part of the British war effort (around a third) went into a unsuccessful terror bombing campaign directed against the civilian population - which also constituted a warcrime on a massive scale.

Another load of revisionist history rewriting:roll:

A. the British did not have the bomber force early in the war to carry out raids on the same scale as the Nazis.

B. Early "raids" against the Germans in the "Phony War" were to drop propaganda leaflets, many of the bombers never came back, being picked off by the Luftwaffe fighter squadrons.

C. It was decided to send the bombers at night because the losses inflicted in daytime were to high for the RAF to sustain.

D. Throwing up the "war crimes and poor German civilians in Dresden" card is old news, none of the alleged war crimes were ever or could ever be substantiated, but, a typical history revisionist trick.

E. I and many others believe in the fact that Nazi Germany got everything it deserved in WW2, they started something they could not finish, however Russia and the Allies did finish them. Thankfully the British had such men as Harris to take the fight to the heart of the Reich.

Connaught Ranger:)

[Kilgor]

I was not speaking to you. :)

I've read the book and a bunch of others and I still come to the conclusion that the combined bomber offensive whilst having a major impact on the war (destroying the Luftwaffe for example) it's intended effect of destroying the German war industry was negligible at best and it was not until Germany itself was invaded that production numbers plummeted.

He does express may frustrations due to allied bombing, especially in petrolum production.

The fact is bombing devstated german production in the final year of the war.


@Connaught Ranger:

As a result, countless civilians were killed, maimed or "dehoused" but, contrary to the expectations, there was no uprising nor were the Germans at any time near such a one because of the British area bombing campaign. Actually, had those bombs been used to target industrial facilities or the road network, they may have been of more use (although the attempt to cripple the German industry was not as succesful as hoped as well). It may have been the best choice, if the resources would have been used to strengthen the army forces. As it was, a considerable part of the British war effort (around a third) went into a unsuccessful terror bombing campaign directed against the civilian population - which also constituted a warcrime on a massive scale.

"Dehousing" or killing factory workers was unfortunately accepted in the "total war" environment of the day. And yes it was effective.


Not even destroying the Luftwaffe, as the biggest parts of the active Luftwaffe were fighting on the eastern front

You must be confused with the army.

The 80% of the luftwaffe was based on the western front.

[Dean1962]

They missed one. One hit St. Paul's Cathedral, but did not explode. It went in through the dome and landed in the middle of the cathedral. For quite a while, nobody did anything, as they were afraid that it would explode, and if it had, it would have completely destroyed the cathedral, which is a 17th century masterpiece. After a while, they brought in a crane, lifted it out of the hole it had made, and carted it out though the north door.

At least, that's what the tour guide told me when I was there last May.

[Cornerstone]

I did'nt realize there were so many

[HGfed]

thanks for the link! I had no idea so many were launched.

[Connaught Ranger]

They missed one. One hit St. Paul's Cathedral, but did not explode. It went in through the dome and landed in the middle of the cathedral. For quite a while, nobody did anything, as they were afraid that it would explode, and if it had, it would have completely destroyed the cathedral, which is a 17th century masterpiece. After a while, they brought in a crane, lifted it out of the hole it had made, and carted it out though the north door.

At least, that's what the tour guide told me when I was there last May.

I believe that's whats known as an Urban Myth.:)

[LordKitchener]

I believe that's whats known as an Urban Myth.:)

It doesn't sound like a V2 hit it but it was bombed on numerous occassions...



According to the BBC:

During the Blitz in September 1940 raiders dropped a landmine which lodged beneath the south-west tower of St Paul's. As Winston Churchill had declared that 'the cathedral must be preserved at all costs' every effort possible was made to save it. It took two demolition engineers three days to dig out (a feat which won them the George Cross) and when it was detonated on Hackney Marshes it made a crater 100 feet across.

In December the same year the dome caught fire during a raid and the Cathedral fire watch quickly dealt with it. Another incendiary burnt through the roof and fell inside where it could be smothered safely.


http://londonfirejournal.blogspot.com/2005/07/world-war-ii.html

[Connaught Ranger]

It doesn't sound like a V2 hit it but it was bombed on numerous occassions...
http://londonfirejournal.blogspot.com/2005/07/world-war-ii.html

Oh I agree it was damaged, just that it never was hit by a dud V2
the weight of a V2 would have buried the thing very deep in the ground.

Connaught Ranger.:)

[johanness]

You must be confused with the army.

The 80% of the luftwaffe was based on the western front.

@ Kilgor

From which time 80% of the Luftwaffe was based on the western front?