Emmanuel Gustin wrote:

Bombardments with high explosives killed far fewer people;
the common estimate was about one death per ton of bombs.
(About 2,000 tons of incendiaries were dropped in the Tokyo
raid.) No doubt in part because HE was used more against
factories or military installations, while firebombs were used
against dense population concentrations, but also because the
firestorms set up by intense firebombing amplified the scale
of the destruction many times.

Can't remember where I'd read some of the methodologies for
bombing during WWII. Perhaps Art could elucidate if he sees
this.

Someone mentioned that on some raids in Germany, bombers dropped
a range of bombs over several different "waves" of attacking
aircraft.

One wave would drop high explosive to destroy buildings. Later
waves might have more anti-personnel oriented weaponry to kill
the firemen fighting the fires, while delayed HE might be designed
to sink deeper into the ground before exploding, thus rupturing
gas and water lines, for more devastating effect.

I doubt this was done for every major attack on a city. Certainly
Art's sort of bombing was more tactical against bridges and railroads.

But what about the B-17/B-24 and Lanc guys? Were they very regularly
doing this sort of thing?

Today we would regard this as "barbaric" and too directed towards
"innocent civilians". But back then, "tough luck"! You're with
"them" and you pay.

A very different mind set than today.


SMH