4 ms·
Contemporary accounts suggest that it was an almost intentional ignorance. People were addicted to the idea that heavy-bombers were strategically useful in Euro
by jarvist 8y ago
Contemporary accounts suggest that it was an almost intentional ignorance. People were addicted to the idea that heavy-bombers were strategically useful in Europe (when they just flattened civilian parts of cities, all the manufacturing was hardened); and that valiant gunners were doing something useful for their comrades (when data showed that stripping out the turrets + guns + gunners, and flying higher and faster would decrease losses).
Freeman Dyson complains that operational-research was intentionally nobbled in bomber-command, even after great successes had been shown in the navy + coastal command:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kLBBI8Wnrfk&index=38&list=PLVV0r6CmEsFzDA6mtmKQEgWfcIu49J4nN https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kLBBI8Wnrfk&index=38&list=PL...
- ansible 8y agoAnd the technology just wasn't up to snuff either. The Norden bombsight was a technological marvel. An analog computer to figure out when to drop bombs based on speed, height, wind direction, etc. It worked fine in optimal conditions. But during wartime it wasn't that accurate in practice.
- coredog64 8y agoI would argue that the primary value of the Norden was as propaganda. The Allies could pretend they were executing surgical bomb strikes rather than just indiscriminately bombing.
- jabl 8y ago> and that valiant gunners were doing something useful for their comrades (when data showed that stripping out the turrets + guns + gunners, and flying higher and faster would decrease losses). For the British, in particular, the (unarmed) Mosquito bomber loss rate was one tenth of the Lancaster loss rate, needed 2 crew instead of 7, cost about 1/4'th of a Lancaster, and carried about 1/3 of the bomb load.
- lutorm 8y agoWhat was the range of the Mosquito compared to the Lancaster?
- jabl 8y agoWikipedia claims the bomber version of the Mosquito had a range of 2400 km with 1800 kg bomb load (good enough for Berlin and back), whereas the Lancaster had a range of 4073 km with an admittedly massive bomb load of 6400 kg. So no, the Mosquito was not a replacement for all missions the Lancaster was capable of, but for many it probably would have been a better choice.