"Ed Rasimus" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 2 Feb 2004 21:08:04 -0000, "Jim Doyle"
wrote:

Couldn't they find a better/safer way to take out bridges? Loss rates
like
that must've been very hard to sustain. Did they soften-up the AA with
fighter strafes, or would that give the game away too easily?

Jim D


Bridges are among the most difficult targets for manual bombing. They
are narrow, usually in a constricted area, always heavily defended.
Art's experience in WW II is typical of the very same things we
experienced in Vietnam. The Bac Giang and Bac Ninh bridges on the NE
railroad out of Hanoi claimed a lot of airplanes and the Dragon Jaw
bridge at Thanh Hoa is the stuff of legends.

The major contribution of the Azon guided bomb during WWII was its use
against bridges in the CBI theater; ISTR reading where they were used to
drop some 27 bridges in that region during the last year of the war. It
still took some 500 (IIRC) total Azons to do that, however. I believe B-24's
were the aircraft conducting that particular campaign.

Brooks


The Doumer Bridge raids in '67 and again in '72 were similarly
hazardous.

The only thing that has changed the equation is the advent of, first,
LGB and now GPS weapons with stand-off capability.

Defense suppression is a rewarding job, but it ain't no puss game.

"Soften up the AA with fighter strafes".... First rule is never duel
with a gun bigger than your own.


Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)
"When Thunder Rolled"
Smithsonian Institution Press
ISBN #1-58834-103-8