3 ms·
Great comment! After reading this, you may wonder: why didn't the armies try to bomb railroads to prevent reinforcement from being rushed to the front? It turns
by ninja3925 5y ago
Great comment! After reading this, you may wonder: why didn't the armies try to bomb railroads to prevent reinforcement from being rushed to the front? It turns out, they tried very hard but the technology was just too rudimentary. The French made a bombing units of Voisins bombers but they could only carry light payload (130lbs for the Voisin 3). The Brits got the Handley in 1916, which was bigger and quite successful (this doc has a ton of details on British bombing: https://www.airuniversity.af.edu/Portals/10/AUPress/Books/B_0068_WILLIAMS_BIPLANES_BOMBSIGHTS.pdf https://www.airuniversity.af.edu/Portals/10/AUPress/Books/B_...). If you squint hard enough, you can start seeing the emergence of patterns of WW2 warfare by the end of WW1. Fascinating.
- xyzzyz 5y agoAlso, rudimentary repairs of damaged/destroyed rails are relatively fast. Proper rail construction is slow, but if you’re just aiming at something that a train can just slowly pass through, and doesn’t need to last years, you can get away with much more.