wrote in message
news
On Fri, 18 Jun 2004 08:40:18 -0500, "Bill Denton"
wrote:
PS, the Germans had no need for something as complicated as the Norden
bombsight because they did not bomb from great heights nor did they
posses a heavy bomber. Their bombers were for the most part, medium
battlefield support aircraft and dive bombers.

This may have been how they started out, but it wasn't how
they came to be used. The only reason that Germany didn't
produce heavy 4 engined bombers was their thought that it
was more beneficial to produce twice the number of twin
engined ones, the limiting factor at the time being engines.

Oh, just a quick reference, the inaccuracy of the bombing
was detailed in the Butt report of August 1941.
http://www.militaryhistoryonline.com...uttreport.aspx
The report was criticised at the time for potentially lowering
morale within Bomber Command, but it turned out to be what
was needed. As well as switching to area bombardment, new
ways were found to increase bomb accuracy, and some great
technological achievents came about.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/war/wwt...mbers_02.shtml

Another quote from:
http://modena.intergate.ca/business/boport/cbctv/

Bomber Command's attacks, initially a mere nuisance, became what Hitler's
armaments minister, Albert Speer, called "the greatest battle that we lost."
On May 15, 1940, 93 bombers set out for the Krupp works at Essen. In a later
asssessment it was calculated that the proportion of bombs that actually it
the vast factories was 3 percent. In contrast, in a massive attack by 705
"heavies" on July 25, 1943, marked by Oboe-equipped Pathfinders, the
proportion was assessed at 96 percent.



Paul