How The RAF Defeated The Nazis In History's Greatest Air Battle | Battle of Britain 

Bomber command aircrew were betrayed by Churchill at the end of the war.

If anything inspires me, it's the sound of his voice.

Yup it should give you goosebumps does justice to the monster he is...ntg more than a fat old racist war criminal

Whatever his other faults (according to our modern sensibilities) the one thing nobody can take from him is his ability to spin a good speech to inspire. In that regard, he's arguably one of the finest orators of the 20th century.

Mussolini's speeches are impressive as well!

explain how the battle of Britain was a turning point? And what kind of technology do you mean? Germans had radar In those days. The spirit of resistance is also due to propaganda keep that in mind.

Hitler being unable to break Britain in operation sea lion directly lead to Hitlers invasion of the Soviet Union in operation Barbosa. The Battle of Britain was also the first major defeat of the Germans in the war and showed that the Germans could be beaten and put an unbreakable will and belief in the British people that victory would be achieved, and that Britain would never fall to Nazi Germany. Hitlers invasion of the Soviet Union followed operation sea lion (due to knowing Britain could not launch a counter offensive until 1942 in mainland Europe at the earliest but could not invade Britain let alone take her like the rest so turned his attention east) Hitler making this error, the biggest of his life *InvadingRUSSIA* also gave the British vital time to mobalize, and strengthen there military while boosting morale. BTW dont know if you are aware but the Germans may have had have radar in the Battle of Britain (1939-1940), but they had no idea how effective it was when applied to ones defense and anticipation. Which is why they would find themselves outnumbering the RAF 5 to 1 and 4 to 1 and getting mauled in the main. The British could see the Germans soon as they were approaching the French coast, the Germans werent aware the British could see them and the formation before they were in the channel😂If that makes sense. This is mainly because the Germans mainly used a ground radar system known as FREYA which was way less effective than the system the Airborne radar the British deployed especially for defensive combat. @@Hooibeest2D

In addition to radar, they were able to decipher the encrypted German messages which they considered inviolable-this too is technology.

@@flyinghigh2724No your out of your depth! Try some research! USSR was Hitlers ideological war!

During WWII, the Luftwaffe was primarily designed to support the Blitzkrieg, i.e. to protect armoured vehicles and troops from enemy aircraft and to carry out ground attacks. Faced with Great Britain, protected by the English Channel and the Royal Navy, the Germans tried to conduct a strategic air campaign using totally unsuitable aircraft (such as the "Stukas"), which enabled Great Britain to thwart the Germans' plans. This was the main reason for the German defeat in the Battle of Britain.

And the battle for the Netherlands. Decimated their paratroops and shot down at least 170 fighter planes.

The exploits of French and non-British allied pilots in 1940 are all too often forgotten, alas. I can't imagine what would have happened if the Germans had suffered fewer losses in May-June 1940...

Too often forgotten? Never seemingly not mentioned would be more accurate. You can even see the nationalities of all the pilots on Wikipeadea. @@MarquisVincentBissetdeGramont

@@MarquisVincentBissetdeGramont "The exploits of French and non-British allied pilots in 1940 are all too often forgotten," No they're not. But you have to remember that over 80% of Fighter command pilots during the BoB were of BRITISH birth.

@@walterkronkitesleftshoe6684 My comment mainly concerns the aerial combats in May-June 1940 on the Western Front (many foreign pilots also fought during the Battle of Britain).

Really, I find that Dan Snow is utterly devoid of his father's gravitas.

@@grahamcook9289 In what way does Dan Snow illustrate that he is devoid of gravitas.

@@Petal4822 Because he is nothing more than secondary school history teacher with a famous father. He has nothing new to add, no insights or perspectives. He will say and do anything for a bit of filthy lucre. He debases himself, the subject and his famous name.

Wars are one from the air! The RN could not save Singapore let alone GB!

@@JohnSmith-ei2pz Please explain how the Kreigsmarine with its 2 light cruisers, 5 destroyers and 7 torpedo boats was going to prevent the RN Home fleet from wiping out any German STUPID enough to attempt a channel crossing at 2 knots in a TOWED canal barge? Minefields? The British NIGHTLY cleared away german minefields with their 150 coastal minesweepers AND their squadron of Wellington DWI aerial magnetic minesweepers. Together they were so effective that coastal convoys were still sailing through the Dover Straits at night, right the way through the battle of Britain. The Luftwaffe? Is that the same Luftwaffe that it was promised would prevent the BEF from being rescued from the Dunkirk pocket? How did that go? Oh yes.... 338,000 Allied troops evacuated with relatively light losses to the British & French navies.

I'm amazed at how young a lot of the soldiers/airmen/sailors were during the war. Even senior officers were sometimes shockingly young. I guess you grow up quick when circumstances demand it. Either that or you end up a footnote.

"Greatest generation" who sold their Empire to the Americans for pennies on the dollar just to have their great grandchildren forced to live with foreign migrants.

All 18 yr olds should receive military training today. Society would benefit greatly instead of falling apart and becoming emotionally frail.

@@bandit6272 I worked for a company in London in the 1970s, one of the directors of the company, a lovely man, was a Lancaster Pilot in the war, he flew missions over Germany, he was 19 years old. 19 years old. i stared at him barely able to take my eyes off of him, when he told us, he asked me if i was ok, i could barely speak to him i was so moved. He said it was nothing, it needed doing, he said, "i had to help the country out". 19. We were so lucky to have people like him.

​@@Johnsgotti95but you've lost the real war Take a look out your windows as I am.....

A melting pot of nationalities trying to preserve the free world in Europe - and revenge for Poland, Czechoslovakia, Belgium and France.

@@normynorm2945 Oh give it a rest you 🤡

Ha ha Thought Americans won battle of Britain Well that's what an American said to me Showed him the stats

Yes. Let it be known, the Battle of Britain was won by both the British and MANY HONOURABLE fighters that CHOSE to join in.

Your dad was a very brave man.

@daneelolivaw602, Thank you for your kind words, but Da didn’t consider himself brave. He came home with crippling survivor’s guilt & PTSD; his nightmares woke me up in the middle of the night throughout my childhood. War, even for the best of reasons - stopping fascist imperialism was certainly that - is a horrible thing which does terrible damage to the lives of those who survive it as well as destroying the lives of those who don’t.

@@robina.gardner2970 My father was not old enough to join the Army in WW2, but my Grandfather was a soldier in the British Army, in the Highland Light Infantry, and although this was a Scottish Regiment, my Grandad was a cockney boy from London, He fought right through the War, some of it with the British 8th Army, (The Desert Rats) including El-Alamein, in North Africa, and then up through Italy. When i started work at Fifteen years old, one of my bosses was a Lancaster Bomber Pilot in the War, he was just nineteen years old, I have a friend, who's dad was one of the first troops to Liberate the Belsen Concentration Camp, he too was just Nineteen years old, both of these men, and my Grandad, much like your dad, did not consider themselves as brave. I do. I have nothing but the greatest respect and admiration for them all. Thank you for your reply.

@@daneelolivaw602 I also have the utmost respect for anyone who volunteers to fight against imperialism &/or authoritarianism, & even more respect for those who volunteer for a fight which is not directly theirs. The imperialist ambitions of people (using that term quite loosely) like Putin & Xi frankly terrify me. If anyone whom you mentioned is still living, please convey to them my respect & deepest thanks for their service.

He wasn't called Art something? Was he? I've read about him fighting in Malta and was also from California and thanks from this side of the pond

Churchill said, "By being so long in the lowest form (at Harrow School) i gained an immense advantage over the cleverer boys. They all went on to learn Latin and Greek and splendid things like that. But i was taught English, Thus i got into my bones the essential structure of the British sentence, which is a noble thing". I think a lot of people are thankful for those extra English lessons.

their line of defense was a vast global empower the plundered resources of countries of different continents.

@@Gingerphile00 cry about it

@@Gingerphile00 Repeating the same thing does not make it true. Explain how a vast empire would protect the beaches of Hastings, Eastbourne and Pevensey from Nazi invasion. I am genuinely curious.

@@Gingerphile00 I am sure your indoctrinators would be proud of you.

@@Gingerphile00Too many children are taught by lefties! Who pays for your council house, immigrants?

South Africa should have remained neutral, like Ireland.

what are you babbling about? churchill would have just fled to canada and continued the war using the rest of british empire to mobilise resources against europe. the british empire would have bombed britian itself into ruble. the commonwealth forces and the americans would have still invaded africa and the war in russia would have still resulted in a stalemate with germany still struggling due to its oil shortages while the soviets had plenty of their own.

@@Gingerphile00 America would have had no interest in invading Africa, why would they? With Britain out of the picture, they would just have to do business with the new European superpower. Don't forget there was a significant part of the US population that was of German decent. Also they would still have had to deal with Japan.

@@Gingerphile00 Clearly you have never read any detailed history of the second world war. You also haven't read any number of the excellent biographies on Churchill by those that worked with him and knew him. Your freedom to speak ill of those who gave you your freedom is the sign of a poor education and poor intellect.

Fortunately, the Germans could not win against Great Britain, not least because the English Channel (and the Royal Navy) made Blitzkrieg impossible.

@@Gingerphile00 My word Josh, your level of nonsense knows utterly NO bounds !!! Indeed Churchill, the UK govt and the Royal Navy did all have plans to evacuate to Canada if Britain fell, but WHERE do you get the nonsense that "the british empire would have bombed britain itself into rub(b)le"? Please tell me what large bombers did the British Commonwelath possess and which airbases would they be flying from in order to pound Britain into rubble? As for a nazi / soviet stalemate, rest assured that Stalin & his cronies would have been eating their borscht with a wooden spoon sitting in a cave in Mongolia by 1943 if it hadn't been for the UK still holding out against nazism in western Europe.

No RAF fighter pilot wanted a Hurricane when Me109s were around. They all knew the superiority of the Spitfire.

That's one word for them.

Fantastically distracting and annoying

@@timganotis7875 Totally agree. And unnecessary too.

@@stephengraham5099 It is a video and not a podcast. Visuals for me were well done. But, as you said, to each their own.

Archive footage was shown under Churchill's words.

We remember ALL the pilots, from all around the world, EQUALLY. We will remember THEM.

Could I, as a Polish woman, ask you for a favor? If it won't get you in trouble, could you light a candle at this memorial on your way to work?

This is why it isn't now.

They were very irritating, and why do they have to use frequency modulation ( I think that is what it's called) for Wing Commander Neil's contribution at 14.20.

I agree, I wanted to look at the images of London, not irritating graphics.

Waterloo was a German victory.

More Brit hating nonsense eh, Nick? What you're saying is a nazi pilot who was thoroughly TROUNCED during the battle of Britain said that they weren't trounced. The Germans failure to knock Britain out of WW2 in 1940/41 was PIVOTAL.... don't try to paint it any other way, sonny.

@@walterkronkitesleftshoe6684 The Battle of Britain was irrelevant as Hitler never intended to invade the UK. As soon as Stalin broke the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact on 28 June 1940 the OKW started preparing for Barbarossa. We should have helped the anti-Communist side.

@@MarkHarrison733 More BS Mark. Fuhrer Directive No. 16 proves you're talking as much BS as you ALWAYS do.

@@walterkronkitesleftshoe6684 The directive was a deliberate bluff.

@@Jeremy-y1t The idea of a "bluff" is that you make it known to the recipient otherwise how can you bluff them? Hitler's directive no.16 in particular was sent from his mountain retreat, "The Berghof" on 16th July 1940 to OKW "Armed forces High Command" using the "Lorenz" encyphering device sent over secure land lines. As the British decryption efforts had not yet broken into the Lorenz encyption network in 1940, how exactly were the British supposed to know the contents of Hitler Directive No.16? The conclusion is that it wasn't "a bluff", but Hitler's decree to his armed forces high command to prepare for an invasion of the UK. Also was the Luftwaffe's loss of over 1700 aircraft together with most of their highly trained, prewar "Experten" aircrews during the battle of Britain also a "bluff"?

Jeremarkyjames. Hitler says you're talking bullsh!t. "The Fuhrer And Supreme Commander Of The Armed Forces. The Fuhrer's Headquarters. 16th July, 1940. 7 copies Directive No. 16 -- On Preparations For A Landing Operation Against England Since England, in spite of her hopeless military situation, shows no signs of being ready to come to an understanding, I have decided to prepare a landing operation against England, and, if necessary, to carry it out. The aim of this operation will be to eliminate the English homeland as a base for the prosecution of the war against Germany and, if necessary, to occupy it completely." But as we both know the first phase of the operation, that being the battle of Britain, was smashed, meaning the rest of the plan fell into ruin. The operation had been stopped in its first phase. What would be described in common parlance as "A resounding British victory".

@@walterkronkitesleftshoe6684 That directive was a deliberate bluff while the Axis prepared for Barbarossa. The Battle of Britain was a draw.

@@Jeremy-y1t Your lies do not rewrite history.

@@walkergarya We should have allied with Germany against the only threat.

@@Jeremy-y1t No shyte for brains, for all of Stalin's faults, he did not invade most of Europe. Hitler was a total asshole and needed to be defeated.

A bygone age and irrelevent in todays wars!

@@JohnSmith-ei2pz Irrelevant? Oh you mean because your heroes got their arses well and truly kicked ? As for Irrelevent It was Britain alone in 1940-41 that SAVED Europe from 1000 years of nazi tyranny. THAT'S how relevent the BoB was.

@@JohnSmith-ei2pzWhat’s that got to do with the Battle of Britain?

@@JohnSmith-ei2pz There’s a "Third World” war in progress now ~ and ‘The West’ is losing it too! "The Anglo-sphere is committing mass suicide". quote from ~ Victor Davis Hanson - Hoover Institution 04/09/2021

@stevebowman421 That story reminds me of one my dad told us about My father was a 14 year old boy during the Battle of Britain, they lived by the Oval Cricket Ground, a German Pilot was shot down and he landed in the Oval, my dad said there were hundreds of people running down the streets towards the Oval (and there are about six street converging at the ground) carrying anything they could use as a weapon, he said the poor sod must have been crapping himself, luckily for him the Police got to him first.

Churchill was a traitor.

Eh? I'm pretty sure there's about 57 million of actually.

@@martinputt6421 John Cleese confirmed the truth about England.

Possibly a bit of propaganda for morale purposes?

It had silly 0.303 m/guns pathetic!

@@JohnSmith-ei2pz Ask the +1500 Luftwaffe aircraft shot down in summer 1940 if they though 8 x .303s were "pathetic".

@@walterkronkitesleftshoe6684Hearsay does not work! The RAF were well known for their bs kill rate! Just like the Luftwaffe!

@@JohnSmith-ei2pz No the figure of 1500 luftwaffe aircraft is from LUFTWAFFE records... if you include all the Luftwaffe aircraft lost during the battle due to accidnets and other causes it's over 1733 destroyed & 643 damaged. As for the comparison of RAF and Luftwaffe aircraft armaments. The Me109E had.... 2x 7.92mm MG17s above the engine each with 1000 rounds of ammo. The MG17 had a rate of fire of 1200rpm which gave 50 seconds of fire. 2x 20mm MG FF cannon in the wings with just 60 rounds of ammo each. The MG FF even with its relatively low rate of fire of 540rpm gave just over SIX SECONDS of potent but low density fire. So after those 6 seconds of fire the 109E had 44 seconds of relatively ineffective 2 x 7.92mm MG fire left, effectively making the average Me 109E a one (or sometimes two) punch wonder. The RAF fighter's 16 seconds of EIGHT .303 Brownings each firing 300 rounds at 1150rpm looks a LOT less anaemic when viewed like that. With regards to dogfighting the nazi's MG FF itself was far from an ideal weapon. As well as its low rate of fire, it's low muzzle velocity meant that when used in a "turning battle" or at high angles of deflection it was an incredibly difficult weapon to achieve hits with. It was best employed in "Boom and Zoom" tactics, where a diving 109 would fall on an unsuspecting British fighter and shred it before it had time to react.... Experienced 109 pilots were loath to get into a "turning fight" with a Spitfire or Hurricane. In defence of the 8 x .303s of the British fighters and their lack of outright destructive power, one RAF pilot (either Al Deere or Adolph Malan, I can't remember) voiced the opinion of many RAF pilots when they was recorded as saying they preferred to send a German bomber back to France, riddled with bullet holes, both engines smoking with its aircrew dead and dying rather than shooting it down outright.

Jajaja Yeah... Jajaja

More complicated than that . Also 145 Poles, 127 New Zealanders, 112 Canadians, 88 Czechoslovaks, 10 Irish, 32 Australians, 28 Belgians, 25 South Africans, 13 French, 9 Americans, 3 Southern Rhodesians and individuals from Jamaica, Barbados and Newfoundland.

​@@julianshepherd2038more straightforward than that.. The Germans didn't want to really invade Britain. They were natural allies. They dedicated 9/10 of their resources to the defeat of Soviet Union and the evil of bolshevism. Britain got a lucky break.

​@@athelstan927What a stupid comment... blocked.

@@athelstan927Operation Sealion was the planned Invasion of Britain, Operation Barbarossa was the planned invasion of Russia. One took place after the other one, they wasn’t running simultaneously

But the RAF did a much better job of pulling back experienced pilots to pass on what they knew to new pilots in the training programs, and were able to replace the losses they suffered. Losses for the Germans were much higher, and the Germans did not have a sufficient training program to stem these losses. Over the course of the daylight component of the Battle the operational combat strength of the Luftwaffe went from around 2,400 down to around 1,600. Over the same period the operational strength of RAF fighter command went from around 650 to around 700.

​@@iansneddon2956RAF OTU training was severely truncated in 1940 and replacement pilots very under trained, especially in gunnery and their SA practically undeveloped.

@@bobsakamanos4469 But the rate of losses for the Germans remained much higher than the losses for RAF Fighter Command. With the Luftwaffe forces having been in combat operations for going on 4 months and suffering greater losses, their morale was dropping and they had their own replacement issues. The RAF never got as bad as the level of "training" the new Luftwaffe pilots were receiving in 1944 into 1945. I recall that the non-combat losses for the Luftwaffe spiked up to a peak in 1944 and then fell. With no increase in training it appears that German pilots who would have been crashing their aircraft at some point were not surviving combat long enough to get to that.

@@iansneddon2956 it's all relative. The loss of young lads due to lack of training is the main point and I always will detest governments that continue to cause that due to military underfunding and feeding their friends at the trough.

@@bobsakamanos4469 Completely agree with this sentiment. Allied (USA and UK) training hours increased by later in the war (the word "increase" seems like an understatement here). But the needs in the early war years to grow forces meant deficiencies in training, doctrine and numbers in forces that were scrambling to catch up. Germany's greatest advantage was the head start in re-armament. The massive investment in the size, training and equipment of the US military is essential to avoid being in this situation. If you wait until you need a military to start building it you end up with governments carrying out the "appeasement" of the late 1930s which only served to encourage the Nazis to go further. Yet how many NATO members have failed to meet the modest 2% spending target. Corruption has always been a factor in government and the military has never been exempt from this. Those young lads paid the price for their Government's and the British public's unwillingness (and to some extent inability) to re-arm in the face of German rearmament. How would the Battle of Britain have gone if the 2,400 operational combat aircraft the Germans sent against UK in July 1940 were met by a force of 1,500 operational modern fighter aircraft instead of the actual 650 which included some obsolete aircraft? The Chamberlain government's investment in the RAF from before the war was essential to Britain holding out and winning the battle, but how much easier it would have been if that 1939 spending had started in 1937 or earlier?

Please provide us with the details of the luftwaffe air assaults on Canberra, Ottawa, Delhi and Wellington? Or how the Wehrmacht stood poised to launch its invasion of the Indian sub continent? Or how the Kriegsmarine attempted to strangle "the British Empire" out of the war by enforcing a u-boat blockade of Australia and New Zealand? Oh news just coming in...... NONE OF THOSE THINGS HAPPENED because the ONLY nation facing ALL of those threats between July 1940 and April 1941 was the United Kingdom ALONE.

Britain as an island was on it's own the British as a people weren't! Nobody has ever ignored or trivialised any of the other nationalities who took part! I suggest you watch the movie 'The Battle of Britain' that was made in the late 1960s and then come back!

Noone said we did it alone but the vast majority were british and we are proud of that. We are thankfull to the over 500 that fought alongside us.

I don't know about you, but the absence of nazi death camps in the Cotswolds, Pennines & Scottish Highlands seems a worthwhile legacy of their courage and resolve.

Yes they cannot even stop dingies today!

Taken from the "Fuhrer Directive no. 13" Issued 2 days before the start of "Operation Dynamo" (better known as the Dunkirk Evacuation). "The task of our Air Force will be to break all enemy resistance on the part of the surrounded forces, TO PREVENT THE ESCAPE OF THE ENGLISH FORCES ACROSS THE CHANNEL, and to protect the southern flank of Army Group A." How did that work out for Goering's overconfident Luftwaffe then? Let me think..... 338,000 troops removed from the Dunkirk pocket with relatively light losses to the British and French Navies in the tight confines of the Channel at its narrowest point. Don't overestimate the Luftwaffe's anti-ship capabilities. It took until 1942 for the Luftwaffe to gain the ability to air launch a torpedo, and inspite of the Mediterranean sea being SURROUNDED by Axis airfields and packed with RN capital ships, the largest ship axis air forces sank during the WHOLE of WW2 was an RN light cruiser. Rest assured the RN was just ITCHING for the Wehrmacht to dip a toe in the Channel.

Britain was denying half of the world its freedom in 1940.

Aircraft we are not talking woodwork!

Yes we STILL honour the 595 NON British pilots (who supported the +2400 BRITISH pilots), flying British planes and directed by a pioneering BRITISH command and control system.

Don't be so sure about that.

Yeah a lot of people still believe that radar was secret or only the allies had it. Every developed military used radar in some extent, but the Brits had by far the best integrated air defence network in the world.

The radar stations were part of the scramble to build up RAF Fighter Command from 1938-1940. It was an effort championed by Neville Chamberlain with the construction of the stations already underway when Chamberlain went to Munich. (BTW, Chamberlain was advised by the senior-most British military leaders that Britain would lose a war with Germany in 1938 and that even delaying such a war by six months would make a huge difference. So he was following the advice of his military when he capitulated at Munich. He came home, waved a paper, said something about peace, and continued re-arming.)

Churchill was a traitor.

@MarkHarrison733 how so? By inspiring his people during the deadliest war and loving his country?

@@Rebelrouser1776 He was bribed to destroy Europe and the British Empire by Strakosch, just as he had been bribed by Cassel during World War I. The British Empire was on the wrong side in both conflicts.

@@Rebelrouser1776 Don;t react to this delusional nazi fanboi. He's completely "hatstand" and out of touch with reality.

@@walterkronkitesleftshoe6684 Churchill himself openly confirmed receiving bribes from Cassel and Strakosch. See why Israel bombed British civilians during World War II.

But not only was Chamberlain favouring the RAF, but particularly RAF Fighter Command with the chain of radar stations and related infrastructure as well as expanded training programs to produce large numbers of pilots. Considering how the Battle of Britain played out, Chamberlain was not wrong. Churchill made some great speeches but the Battle of Britain was won by Chamberlain's RAF.

@@iansneddon2956indeed, an umbrella - overcome with joy, his reaction on the phone when told of fighter victory. His first flight to meet Hitler, Sept 15 - more famous two years later

Quote *Park’s leadership, and his men’s bravery,* *denied the Luftwaffe air superiority.* *After* *the war when the Nazi’s most senior army* *commander, Field Marshal von Rundstedt,* *was asked* *which Battle he regarded as* *most decisive* *he replied* *"The Battle* *of* *Britain"* All Nations Together - A Battle of Britain resource.

Said after losing 1700 aircraft in 3 months..... the previously all conquering Luftwaffe gets its arse PUBLICLY kicked and tries to laugh it off.... Hahahahaha

@@walterkronkitesleftshoe6684 Not to mention the first German defeat.

@@walterkronkitesleftshoe6684 The numbers make it clear, the operational combat strength of the Luftwaffe went from around 2,400 down to around 1,600. Meanwhile the operational strength of RAF fighter command went from around 650 to around 700. The Luftwaffe broke themselves against a brick wall of British resilience.

@@walterkronkitesleftshoe6684 Hitler never intended to invade the UK, and as soon as Stalin broke the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact on 28 June 1940 the OKW started preparing for Barbarossa. We should have allied with Germany against the only threat.

The USSR won World War II.

The Red Army defeated the Axis.

@@Jeremy-y1t Who supplied the red army with military weapons and equipment?

@@Petal4822 The USSR made its own.

@@Petal4822 Most Lend-Lease for the USSR did not arrive until late 1943. The Red Army had already won World War II at the Battle of Moscow in 1941.

I assume you're referring to the navigational error by the Heinkel which dropped its bombs over south London on 23rd August 1940.... what about the REPEATED luftwaffe raids against RAF FIghter Command sector stations such as Biggin Hill, Kenley, Hornchurch & Northolt, which had been taking place for the previous two weeks, and ALL of which were within the boundary of Greater London, and during those attacks HUNDREDS of innocent British civilians had been killed and wounded by "collateral damage". The bombs mistakenly dropped on south London on the 23rd were simply the "final straw".

I only need to provide a SINGLE piece of verifiable information to prove my point. What better than the order issued by none other the Adolf Hitler himself? Below I've "copy and pasted" the preamble to Hitler's "Fuhrerbefehl No. 16" (Fuhrer Directive 16) issued from the "Berghof" (Hitler's "holiday home" in Bavaria) on 16th July 1940 to the German armed forces high command (OKW). The directive was transmitted over secure landlines encrypted in what the Germans believed was an unbreakable code, showing that it was NOT for the digest of the British and simply designed to initmidate them into coming to the surrender table, but was a true indication of Hitler's intent. "The Fuhrer And Supreme Commander Of The Armed Forces. The Fuhrer's Headquarters. 16th July, 1940. 7 copies Directive No. 16 -- On Preparations For A Landing Operation Against England Since England, in spite of her hopeless military situation, shows no signs of being ready to come to an understanding, I have decided to prepare a landing operation against England, and, if necessary, to carry it out. The aim of this operation will be to eliminate the English homeland as a base for the prosecution of the war against Germany and, if necessary, to occupy it completely." But as we both know the first phase of the operation, that being the battle of Britain, was smashed, meaning the rest of the plan was academic. The operation had been stopped in its first phase. What would be described in common parlance as "A resounding British victory".

@@walterkronkitesleftshoe6684 The Battle of Britain was a draw. The directive was a delibertae ruse while the Axis prepared for Barbarossa.

@@Jeremy-y1t Nope. You are attempting, and failing, to rewrite history.

@@Jeremy-y1t Jeremy you silly boy.... "a draw"? I ask you !!! The German's declared intention? "to eliminate the English homeland as a base for the prosecution of the war against Germany and, if necessary, to occupy it completely" The Result? The Luftwaffe lose 1700 aircraft together with most of their highly trained aircrews, and 2 years later Britain was flattening Germany city by city. I think its self evident that the Germans COMPLETELY failed to "eliminate the English homeland as a base for the prosecution of the war against Germany". I suggest you go get some aloe vera for your little burned wehraboo ass.

@@walterkronkitesleftshoe6684 Hitler never intended to invade the UK. As soon as Stalin broke the pact in June 1940 the OKW started preparing for Barbarossa. Britain was already bombing German cities and towns from 11 May 1940, long before the Battle of Britain began.

I know right? he only had THE WORLDS LARGEST OCEANIC EMPIRE at his command

@@Gingerphile00 Virtually NONE of which was involved in the defence of Britain in 1940-41.

The RAF won by maintaining its strength while the Luftwaffe dwindled. The Luftwaffe started with around 2,400 operational combat aircraft against the ~650 operational fighters of RAF Fighter Command The Luftwaffe ended with around 1,600 operational combat aircraft against the ~700 operational fighters of RAF Fighter Command The Luftwaffe broke itself against a wall of British resilience.

No it wasn't Jeremarkyjames. The nazis set out to "eliminate the English homeland as a base for the prosecution of the war against Germany and, if necessary, to occupy it completely." They failed COMPLETELY in that task and in the process squandered 1700 of their aircraft together with their highly trained aircrews for nothing.

@@walterkronkitesleftshoe6684 Hitler never intended to invade the UK. As soon as Stalin broke the pact in June 1940 the OKW started preparing for Barbarossa. We should have allied with Germany against the only threat.

@@walterkronkitesleftshoe6684 Britain and France destroyed themselves and their empires by siding with Communism in 1939.

@@walterkronkitesleftshoe6684 The UK lost 1700 aeroplanes.

@@Jeremy-y1t RAF Fighter Command ended the Battle of Britain with more and better fighters than they started with, better tactics and more experience aircrew. The Luftwaffe lost a large number of aircraft and crew that German production was NOT keeping up with. By EVERY measure, the RAF won the Battle of Britain.

The RAF and British armed forces are now more interested if you're gay or in some other "minority".

@@walterkronkitesleftshoe6684 That is the legacy of Churchill's treason.

@@MarkHarrison733 Cuckoo !!! Cuckoo !!!

@@walterkronkitesleftshoe6684 Churchill made Europe Communist and non-European.

@@MarkHarrison733 Cuckoo !!! Cuckoo !!! Cuckoo !!!

Simplistic to the point of incorrectness.

The Luftwaffe started the battle with around 2,400 operational combat aircraft against RAF Figther Command's operational strength of around 650. A little into August 1940, the Luftwaffe switched to attacking RAF ground targets with their strength of ~2,200 vs the RAF's ~750 Four weeks later the Luftwaffe with their strength of around 1,700 switched to attacking cities while the RAF strength was down to around 720 Weeks later, around the end of daylight Luftwaffe attacks, the ~1,600 operational strength of the Luftwaffe was faced with the ~700 operational strength of RAF Fighter Command Seems it would have been worse for the Germans if they kept going after the air fields and other RAF ground targets. Would they have stopped before they got to the point where around 500 German fighters and 700 German bombers were up against around 750-800 RAF fighters?

@@iansneddon2956 Ya I have been trying to dive off into the numbers more...But the sources very pretty wildly. I have even read that the RAF had way more fighter a/c then the Luff..Shruggs.

@@MrLobstermeat Well, by the end of the Battle they certainly did. The Luftwaffe was maintaining an appearance of strength by having their pilots fly 3-4 sorties per day. This was wearing out men and equipment, and the increased sorties were resulting in increased losses. RAF flight schools were turning out around 300 new pilots per month, however, and this number was growing from September 1940 as graduates from the schools in Canada started to arrive. The Luftwaffe never came close to matching the RAF training program so their losses were never fully replaced. German losses were higher, losing around 2,000 aircraft while RAF Fighter Command lost just over 1,200. Also, as the British were outproducing Germany in aircraft by almost 2:1 in 1940, lost planes were not as much a problem as lost pilots. But flying mostly over friendly territory meant pilots bailing out and parachuting to safety. Only around 540 RAF fighter pilots were killed during the battle. Meanwhile nearly all Luftwaffe aircrew that were shot down were lost (killed or captured). From the numbers, it appears that the RAF lost more fighter planes than the Luftwaffe did, but lost fewer fighter pilots - so the effect on British operational strength was not as much as for the Germans as the battle progressed. And with many more replacement pilots arriving the RAF was growing while the Luftwaffe was rapidly shrinking.

For 2 weeks PRIOR to the "lost bomber" the luftwaffe had been hammering RAF Fighter Command sector airfields around London such as Kenley, Biggin Hill, Northolt and Hornchurch, (ALL within the boundary of "Greater London" within which Hitler had specifically banned luftwaffe bombing) and HUNDREDS of innocent British civilians had ALREADY been killed or wounded as "collateral damage" during these attacks...... BEFORE the navigational error of the Heinkel that jettisoned its bombs over south London.

Britain was never alone.

@@Jeremy-y1t Mark, we are not interested in your Hitler hero worship.

@@walkergarya Britain was occupying half of the world in 1939-45.

@@Jeremy-y1t That has NOTHING to do with the British victory in the Battle of Britain.

@@walkergarya The battle was a draw.

There wouldn't have been a Battle of the Atlantic if the Battle of Britain was lost.

@@Smoshy16Not sure how the RAF could br defeated when only a small propotion of available fighters were stationed in southern England,protection of the industrial midlands and north was the main priority.

@@terryoneil6209 Where do you get the "only a small propotion of available fighters were stationed in southern England" nonsense from? RAF Fighter Command 11 Group covering Kent / Surrey / Sussex commanded 27 fighter squadrons (out of a total of 64 RAF fighter squadrons or 42% of Fighter Command's TOTAL force). These facts are easily searchable on the internet, try looking details up instead of making up complete nonsense and trying to pass it off as "fact".

@@walterkronkitesleftshoe6684 I am not going to argue numbers in what was a fluid conflict, but the main point I was making is that the RAF could not loose. infact they only had to avoid defeat until October, the RAF had more available fighters at the end of the conflict than in July,with fighter production increasing only a shortage of pilots was becoming a short term concern.Dowding in his book has no mention of any BoB just a page and half to what he refers to the ''summer air battles over southern England'' Battles of little significance and no stratigic importance.

@@terryoneil6209 I know you're not "going to argue numbers"... instead you just make them up to justify the nonsense of your argument. So what that Dowding never assigned the name "the battle of Britain"? The summer air battles that were the prelude to German invasion plans happened. End of. As for your "Battles of little significance and no stratigic importance" I only need to provide a SINGLE piece of verifiable information to prove my point. What better than the order issued by none other the Adolf Hitler himself? Below I've "copy and pasted" the preamble to Hitler "Fuhrerbefehl No. 16" (Fuhrer Directive 16) issued from the Reichchancellery on 16th July 1940 to the German armed forces high command (OKW). The directive was transmitted in what the Germans believed was an unbreakable code, showing that it was NOT for the digest of the British and simply designed to initmidate them into coming to the surrender table, but was a true indication of Hitler's intent. "The Fuhrer And Supreme Commander Of The Armed Forces. The Fuhrer's Headquarters. 16th July, 1940. 7 copies Directive No. 16 -- On Preparations For A Landing Operation Against England Since England, in spite of her hopeless military situation, shows no signs of being ready to come to an understanding, I have decided to prepare a landing operation against England, and, if necessary, to carry it out. The aim of this operation will be to eliminate the English homeland as a base for the prosecution of the war against Germany and, if necessary, to occupy it completely." But as we both know the first phase of the operation, that being the battle of Britain, was smashed, meaning the rest of the plan was academic. The operation had been stopped in its first phase. What would be described in common parlance as "A resounding British victory". Lets then look at what would have happened if the United Kingdom, as the LAST power then opposing nazism in the world, had instead chosen to surrender, there would have been: NO D-Day and war in the Meditteranean to draw sizeable wehrmacht resources from the war on the Eastern Front. NO strategic bombing of German cities and war industries. NO interdiction of German global sea trade by the Royal Navy. NO massive supply of weapons and war materiel from the west to the USSR, once their former allies nazi Germany had turned on them. NO utterly crucial strategic intelligence courtesy of Britain's (not Poland's before you say it) "ULTRA" program. With the result that the USSR would have collapsed somewhere in 1942/43, leaving the nazis in control of the whole of Europe, where their extermination camps would STILL be operating on European soil today, and the US would have been left isolated between a nazi dominated Europe and a Japanese dominated Asia. And nowadays all we seem to get are clueless, ignorant modern day commenters such as yourself pissing over those sacrifices and effort. No wonder the ongoing constant flow of lefty insults and ingratitude towards the UK leads some British people to think we should have saved our own citizen's lives, economy and empire and instead left the nazis to it, and let them carry on raping and murdering their European conquests.

The Luftwaffe having the SHORTEST military heritage of the three German armed forces, and therefore possessing no centuries old Prussian martial traditions was THE most "nazified" force of the German Wehrmacht. Being a member of the nazi party was NO handicap to a serving member of the Luftwaffe, and would quite likely open a few career path "doorways".

@@walterkronkitesleftshoe6684 See why Churchill praised Nazism as late as November 1938, and supported eugenics.

They were carrying out the orders of the Nazi party. There's no real separation.

Looking at pictures of Luftwaffe planes. There's this weird X on their tails but the arms are bent. Those freedom X's?

Britain is an island nation. What you're saying is akin to "As I man I am human, but as a person I am not". P.S Britain WAS alone between July 1940 and April 1941.

@@walterkronkitesleftshoe6684 Easter 1941 Germany suffered its first defeat in battle. It was at Tobruk, North Africa. It was the 9th Australian Division that gave germany its first defeat in battle.

@@Neil-yg5gm While the Australians besieged at Tobruk made a world famous defence under the Schoolteacher Leslie Morshead, It WASN'T the German's "first defeat". The 1900 aircraft they lost in their failed attempt to subdue the British isles and the RAF boot that was inserted up their arseholes at that time takes that accolade.

@@walterkronkitesleftshoe6684 ""While the Australians besieged at Tobruk made a world famous defence "" World famous? Nobody knows that Australia took part in WW2. I should have said it that Tobruk was the Germans ARMY. first defeat in WW2

@@Neil-yg5gm Well here am I, a ordinary retired fireman from Liverpool UK who just responded with some knowledge of the tenacious defence of the Australians? What more do you want? I clearly remember watching a documentary on the very subject here in the UK last year. Episode 9 of "Narrow Escapes of WW2" "Morshead holds Tobruk". Rest assured the WHOLE of WW2 history is slowly being removed from public consciousness... its up to individuals (and maybe the parents of younger kids) to find their own information as today's state "ejukashun sistims" are now more interested in telling kids that men and women and women are men and teaching advanced fellatio techniques to 6 year olds.

@@dalj4362 read the title of this video. If numbers matter to you then the polish did far better when comparing a pilot,s success rate at shooting down the enemy. Maybe you prefer to forget the others that fought in this battle.. Recently the RAF have bent over backwards to change history. Dunkirk is a good example. The only aircraft shot down near those beaches belonged to the Royal Navy, The nearest RAF aircraft was shot down near Calais. It is time the fighter command stopped trying to steal the glory of others and people may start taking them seriously. The real RAF heroes are not even spoken about

Does this include the Royal Navy pilots?

I thought I'd create a simple "visual aid" in order to assist people learning about the history of the battle of Britain. There is much ongoing debate about the nationalities and proportions of RAF fighter pilots who took part in the battle, with occasionally a furtive aspect which attempts to portray the battle as a victory of "mostly Foreign pilots". Below is an accurate graphical representation of the proportion of pilot nationalities serving within RAF Fighter Command during the summer of 1940. Each flag is roughly equivalent to 30 pilots, The numbers after each nation are the actual number of pilots from that country, and the approximate percentage of RAF Fighter Command's establishment in the summer of 1940 that they represented. 🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧 UK (2342) (80%) 🇵🇱🇵🇱🇵🇱🇵🇱🇵🇱 Poland (145) (5%) 🇳🇿🇳🇿🇳🇿🇳🇿 New Zealand (127) (4%) 🇨🇦🇨🇦🇨🇦🇨🇦 Canada (112) (4%) (1940 flag emoji not available) 🇨🇿🇨🇿🇨🇿 Czechoslovakia (88) (3%) 🇦🇺 Australia (32) (1%) 🇧🇪 Belgium (28) (1%) 🇿🇦 S. Africa (25) (1%) (1940 flag emoji not available) 🇺🇳 Other nations (France (13), R o Ireland (10), USA (9), Rhodesia (3), Newfoundland (1), Jamaica (1), Barbados (1)) (1%) (And just to preempt any wandering idiot lefty "Identity warriors" from protesting about "The lack of credit given to the black pilots who fought in the battle of Britain"... the pilots from South Africa, Rhodesia & the Caribbean were all of white descent).

@@walterkronkitesleftshoe6684 once again, this portrays that all the UK pilots were RAF. They weren't The RAF have been using propaganda recently to take glory they do not deserve. Tell the truth as they have done some incredible things. There is no need to try and alter hhistory. Sadly, the true heroes of the RAF are never mentioned.

@@BikersDoItSittingDown It was after all a force of 80% British pilots, flying British designed and built aircraft and directed by a world leading British radar command and control system, ably supported by a minority of commonwealth pilots and refugee foreign pilots.

The Polish and French air forces BOTH had full tanks as they attempted to defend their home airspace... Why do you think they were wiped out and the RAF wasn't?

@@walterkronkitesleftshoe6684Because there are very few petrol depots in the English Channel.

RAF feared the lack of performance in the Hurricanes & directed Hurricanes to have boost increased to 12 lbs. Hurri pilots used it often, which increased fuel burn by 40% and burnt out engines quickly. Endurance was severely reduced.

It's NOT "us" handing everything away, but the corporate globalist puppets how have been insinuated into our once democratic parliament. If it was upto the British citizen... we'd be pushing the inflatables OFF the beaches.

It wasnt a draw though

Hahahaha.... what nonsense. Luftwaffe loses nearly 2000 aircraft, most with their prewar "experten" air crews. Compared to the 900 RAF losses, with more than half of the RAF's downed pilots returning to duty. What was the purpose of the luftwaffe attacks? To destroy the RAF as a precursor to the German invasion of Britain. The result? The Luftwaffe seriously weakened..... RAF Fighter Command ends the battle with more aircraft than when it started, and the German navy was TOO frightened to even dip a toe in the English channel. Did the Luftwaffe succeed in its assigned mission? Not even CLOSE to succeeding. End result? Nazi Germany has its arse handed to it by the British. I suggest you watch this clip to illustrate what a "draw" it was. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-ZmInkxbvlCs.html

@@walterkronkitesleftshoe6684 Hitler never intended to invade the UK, and as soon as Stalin broke the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact on 28 June 1940 the OKW started preparing for Barbarossa. We should have allied with Germany against the only threat.