If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
History Channel
"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message m... ŽiŠardo wrote: No, that's not totally incorrect. When the weather was good B-17s delivered their bombs very accurately for that period. But when it came to the crunch? Don't forget that the initial Dresden raid was supposed to have been flown by the Americans but they cried off because of bad weather, so the RAF stepped into the gap and played the lead role. American "precision" bombing in that same campaign also saw the Americans bomb Prague by mistake, although I don't know how accurately they did that. It certainly upset the Russians, who were in residence by that time! Essentially the Norden bomb sight worked only in clear skies - not an everyday thing in continental Europe, unlike California where it was developed. That's what I said. But did you also say that there were MORE days of bad weather, overcast in the European theatre than there were days of good/clear weather? No I don't see thgat anywhere. How about the bombing of Prague when the USAAF was AIMING at Dresden. How about the bombing of several Swiss cities when AIMING at targets (supposedly) in Germany? Also, to quote: "The trouble was, precision was another Norden myth. From 20,000 feet, 2/3 of American bombs fell 1/5 of a mile or more from their targets -- even with the best of bombsights. Which was very good compared to RAF night bombing accuracy. |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
History Channel
"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message m... ŽiŠardo wrote: No, that's not totally incorrect. When the weather was good B-17s delivered their bombs very accurately for that period. But when it came to the crunch? Don't forget that the initial Dresden raid was supposed to have been flown by the Americans but they cried off because of bad weather, so the RAF stepped into the gap and played the lead role. American "precision" bombing in that same campaign also saw the Americans bomb Prague by mistake, although I don't know how accurately they did that. It certainly upset the Russians, who were in residence by that time! Essentially the Norden bomb sight worked only in clear skies - not an everyday thing in continental Europe, unlike California where it was developed. That's what I said. Also, to quote: "The trouble was, precision was another Norden myth. From 20,000 feet, 2/3 of American bombs fell 1/5 of a mile or more from their targets -- even with the best of bombsights. Which was very good compared to RAF night bombing accuracy. RAF accuracy was as good if not better than that of the USAAF if the target was vivible. Did the USAAF precisely hit any target such as the TIRPITZ, the Dortmund Ems canal, the Saumur Tunnel, various Gestapo buildings, the Antheor Viaduct, Amiens Prison? No! I have never heard of any! |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
History Channel
"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message m... ŽiŠardo wrote: Not at all. If their bomb sights were useless because of local weather conditions their accuracy was as good/bad as that of the RAF, as the USAAF's H2X radar was somewhat imprecise. Right. When the weather was poor USAAF bombing accuracy was similar to the RAF, when the weather was good it was significantly better than the RAF. You really haven't read the information below have you? The United States Strategic Bombing Survey http://www.anesi.com/ussbs02.htm#eaocar The U. S. Army Air Forces entered the European war with the firm view that specific industries and services were the most promising targets in the enemy economy, and they believed that if these targets were to be hit accurately, the attacks had to be made in daylight. A word needs to be said on the problem of accuracy in attack. Before the war, the U. S. Army Air Forces had advanced bombing techniques to their highest level of development and had trained a limited number of crews to a high degree of precision in bombing under target range conditions, thus leading to the expressions "pin point" and "pickle barrel" bombing. However, it was not possible to approach such standards of accuracy under battle conditions imposed over Europe. Many limiting factors intervened; target obscuration by clouds, fog, smoke screens and industrial haze; enemy fighter opposition which necessitated defensive bombing formations, thus restricting freedom of maneuver; antiaircraft artillery defenses, demanding minimum time exposure of the attacking force in order to keep losses down; and finally, time limitations imposed on combat crew training after the war began. It was considered that enemy opposition made formation flying and formation attack a necessary tactical and technical procedure. **Bombing patterns resulted -- only a portion of which could fall on small precision targets.** The rest spilled over on adjacent plants, or built-up areas, or in open fields. Accuracy ranged from poor to excellent.** When visual conditions were favorable and flak defenses were not intense, bombing results were at their best. Unfortunately, the major portion of bombing operations over Germany had to be conducted under weather and battle conditions that restricted bombing technique, and accuracy suffered accordingly. Conventionally the air forces designated as "the target area" a circle having a radius of 1000 feet around the aiming point of attack. While accuracy improved during the war, Survey studies show that, in the over-all, only about 20% of the bombs aimed at precision targets fell within this target area. A peak accuracy of 70% was reached for the month of February 1945. These are important facts for the reader to keep in mind, especially when considering the tonnages of bombs delivered by the air forces. Of necessity a far larger tonnage was carried than hit German installations. |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
History Channel
"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message m... ŽiŠardo wrote: Not at all. If their bomb sights were useless because of local weather conditions their accuracy was as good/bad as that of the RAF, as the USAAF's H2X radar was somewhat imprecise. Right. When the weather was poor USAAF bombing accuracy was similar to the RAF, when the weather was good it was significantly better than the RAF. From the USAAF Air War Plans Division A-WPD/1 The A-WPD/1 Committee calculated the possibilities of hitting the plants, in daylight, using the Norden bombsight, balancing a number of factors to produce an 'accuracy probability". Their first calculations indicated that to hit a target 100 ft. sq. from 20,000 ft. would take a mission by 220 bombers, and when all the other elements were factored in-flak,fighters, weather, whatever-the resources required to achieve a 95% chance of destroying such a precision target amounted to either 30 bomb-group missions or a single mission by 1,100 aircraft-which hardly sounds like precision bombing at all. |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
History Channel
Robert Sveinson wrote:
How about the bombing of Prague when the USAAF was AIMING at Dresden. How about the bombing of several Swiss cities when AIMING at targets (supposedly) in Germany? You've confused target identification/navigation with bombing accuracy. |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
History Channel
Robert Sveinson wrote:
RAF accuracy was as good if not better than that of the USAAF if the target was vivible. Did the USAAF precisely hit any target such as the TIRPITZ, the Dortmund Ems canal, the Saumur Tunnel, various Gestapo buildings, the Antheor Viaduct, Amiens Prison? Yes. No! I have never heard of any! That you haven't heard of any does not mean it didn't occur, it means you're ignorant. |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
History Channel
Robert Sveinson wrote:
You really haven't read the information below have you? Yes, I have. Do you know who was on the survey? The United States Strategic Bombing Survey http://www.anesi.com/ussbs02.htm#eaocar The U. S. Army Air Forces entered the European war with the firm view that specific industries and services were the most promising targets in the enemy economy, and they believed that if these targets were to be hit accurately, the attacks had to be made in daylight. A word needs to be said on the problem of accuracy in attack. Before the war, the U. S. Army Air Forces had advanced bombing techniques to their highest level of development and had trained a limited number of crews to a high degree of precision in bombing under target range conditions, thus leading to the expressions "pin point" and "pickle barrel" bombing. However, it was not possible to approach such standards of accuracy under battle conditions imposed over Europe. Many limiting factors intervened; target obscuration by clouds, fog, smoke screens and industrial haze; enemy fighter opposition which necessitated defensive bombing formations, thus restricting freedom of maneuver; antiaircraft artillery defenses, demanding minimum time exposure of the attacking force in order to keep losses down; and finally, time limitations imposed on combat crew training after the war began. It was considered that enemy opposition made formation flying and formation attack a necessary tactical and technical procedure. **Bombing patterns resulted -- only a portion of which could fall on small precision targets.** The rest spilled over on adjacent plants, or built-up areas, or in open fields. Accuracy ranged from poor to excellent.** When visual conditions were favorable and flak defenses were not intense, bombing results were at their best. Unfortunately, the major portion of bombing operations over Germany had to be conducted under weather and battle conditions that restricted bombing technique, and accuracy suffered accordingly. Conventionally the air forces designated as "the target area" a circle having a radius of 1000 feet around the aiming point of attack. While accuracy improved during the war, Survey studies show that, in the over-all, only about 20% of the bombs aimed at precision targets fell within this target area. A peak accuracy of 70% was reached for the month of February 1945. These are important facts for the reader to keep in mind, especially when considering the tonnages of bombs delivered by the air forces. Of necessity a far larger tonnage was carried than hit German installations. |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
History Channel
"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
m... Robert Sveinson wrote: RAF accuracy was as good if not better than that of the USAAF if the target was vivible. Did the USAAF precisely hit any target such as the TIRPITZ, the Dortmund Ems canal, the Saumur Tunnel, various Gestapo buildings, the Antheor Viaduct, Amiens Prison? Yes. No! I have never heard of any! That you haven't heard of any does not mean it didn't occur, it means you're ignorant. Then -- with respect -- it seems your place to provide enlightenment. If Robert Sveinson is ignorant because he has not heard of "any" USAAF achievements of precision strikes, one bomb per aircraft, in the ETO then this implies that there were several such strikes. And your calling him "ignorant" suggests you know of at least two of them. Where, and when did they occur? |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
History Channel
"Mitchell Holman" wrote in message ... "Robert Sveinson" wrote in news:7Gm%j.31$%g5.8 @newsfe13.lga: "GC" wrote in message ... My question on the B17's probably related to the fact the program totally ignored the Dams,the Tirpitz,etc all involving a touch of precision Yes the so called pundits with the most resources to get A message out to the public are the ones ignoring the facts, but it is also the consumers of these so called facts who want their fables fed to them by spoon rather than consulting reputable historians who are at fault as well. There was that fairey tale about U-571 which claimed that the US Navy intercepted secret signals from a U-Boat, decyphered the signals and using these spectacular results sent a force and captured said U-Boat. A true work of fiction, however people who saw this fairey tale asked me in all seriousness whether I had heard about this heroic episode of the anti submarine war. For military movie fiction you can't "The Sound Barrier" showing the British being the first to achieve supersonic flight. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0044446/ I am surprised that you could find that one what with the extensive air brushing out of any British accomplishments. I assume that you are stating that the British did nothing in the attempts to fly faster than the speed of sound. No surprise there. Air brush away! |
#40
|
|||
|
|||
History Channel
"Robert Sveinson" wrote in news:euI%j.98$t07.25
@newsfe22.lga: "Mitchell Holman" wrote in message ... "Robert Sveinson" wrote in news:7Gm%j.31$%g5.8 @newsfe13.lga: "GC" wrote in message ... My question on the B17's probably related to the fact the program totally ignored the Dams,the Tirpitz,etc all involving a touch of precision Yes the so called pundits with the most resources to get A message out to the public are the ones ignoring the facts, but it is also the consumers of these so called facts who want their fables fed to them by spoon rather than consulting reputable historians who are at fault as well. There was that fairey tale about U-571 which claimed that the US Navy intercepted secret signals from a U-Boat, decyphered the signals and using these spectacular results sent a force and captured said U-Boat. A true work of fiction, however people who saw this fairey tale asked me in all seriousness whether I had heard about this heroic episode of the anti submarine war. For military movie fiction you can't "The Sound Barrier" showing the British being the first to achieve supersonic flight. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0044446/ I am surprised that you could find that one what with the extensive air brushing out of any British accomplishments. I assume that you are stating that the British did nothing in the attempts to fly faster than the speed of sound. No surprise there. Air brush away! No, just that British complaints about the inaccuracy of "U-571" need to take into account their country's own loose treatment of history. And then there is British director David Leans' "Bridge Over The River Kwai", which credited the British for an action that in fact Americans accomplished......... |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Battle 360 on HIstory Channel | miket6065 | Aviation Photos | 0 | February 17th 08 06:15 PM |
Battle 360 on History Channel | miket6065 | Naval Aviation | 0 | February 17th 08 06:14 PM |
Spitfire Ace on History channel | keepitrunning | Home Built | 0 | January 1st 06 04:57 PM |
Ed Rasimus-Saw You On The History Channel | [email protected] | Military Aviation | 1 | June 15th 04 05:50 PM |
History Channel | Rosspilot | Piloting | 6 | July 26th 03 03:02 AM |