Did the Germans have the Norden bombsight?

Fact is the factory was repeatedly attacked and the most damaging raid
of them was that by the RAF in March 1942 which destroyed 40% of the
factory

Details?

But the point is that 498 bombs out of 500 hitting the target is in fact
"pickle barrel" accuracy.

"Pickle barrel" accuracy was attainable and it was attained.

What is striking about all this is how hard some Brits will work to belittle
the honest achievements of others.

Walt

"WalterM140" wrote in message
...
Fact is the factory was repeatedly attacked and the most damaging raid
of them was that by the RAF in March 1942 which destroyed 40% of the
factory

Details?

But the point is that 498 bombs out of 500 hitting the target is in fact
"pickle barrel" accuracy.


The quotes was that 489 hit the target area, the definition of
the target area has not been defined

"Pickle barrel" accuracy was attainable and it was attained.

What is striking about all this is how hard some Brits will work to
belittle
the honest achievements of others.


I have never and will never belittle the efforts of the US
airmen who fought and died in WW2. I make a point of
paying my respects at the US War Cemetery in Cambridge
at least once a year.

You however seem unwilling to make the same allowance
for the efforts of the Commonwealt forces. There are
two ex bomber bases within 5 miles of my house.

Bassingbourn which was used by the USAAF and
Gransden Lodge from which RCAF aircraft flew.

Both played their part in final victory and young men
of both air forces flew their missions knowing their
chances of survival were poor.

They deserve better than your bile.

Keith

Fact is the factory was repeatedly attacked and the most damaging raid
of them was that by the RAF in March 1942 which destroyed 40% of the
factory


Details?


I'll ask again. Details?

Walt

"WalterM140" wrote in message
...
Fact is the factory was repeatedly attacked and the most damaging raid
of them was that by the RAF in March 1942 which destroyed 40% of the
factory


Details?


I'll ask again. Details?


From MOD Archives

Bomber Command launched its largest raid thus far of the war, in March 1942
against the large Renault factory at Boulogne-Billancourt, Paris, which was
an important source of trucks for the German military. Some 235 bombers
attacked, in an hitherto unprecedented concentration over the target - 121
per hour - which demonstrated that the risk of collision at night was lower
than feared, no accidents being suffered. The raid was a great success -
300 bombs fell directly on the factory, causing an estimated loss of
production of 2,300 trucks and destroyed 40% of the factory.

From Military History Online
Author Brian Grafton

March 3/4 saw the opening of the assault, with an attack on the Renault
works at Billancourt. This was the first major night raid on a non-German
town, and was undertaken only after much soul-searching by the Air Ministry.
It was a striking success, testing many new techniques and devices. The
bomber force was streamed; they bombed at relatively low level; they bombed
by the light of flares; they hit their target with almost the full weight of
available bombers (223 of 235 aircraft found their target). Losses were very
light (one Wellington was lost), and damage was evaluated as 'heavy'

Keith

"WalterM140" wrote in message
...
Fact is the factory was repeatedly attacked and the most damaging raid
of them was that by the RAF in March 1942 which destroyed 40% of the
factory


Details?


I'll ask again. Details?


From MOD Archives

Bomber Command launched its largest raid thus far of the war, in March 1942
against the large Renault factory at Boulogne-Billancourt, Paris, which was
an important source of trucks for the German military. Some 235 bombers
attacked, in an hitherto unprecedented concentration over the target - 121
per hour - which demonstrated that the risk of collision at night was lower
than feared, no accidents being suffered. The raid was a great success -
300 bombs fell directly on the factory, causing an estimated loss of
production of 2,300 trucks and destroyed 40% of the factory.

Well, that is clearly not the -most- successful attack as the 4/4/43 raid
deprived the Germans of over 3,000 lorries and 498 out of 500 bombs fell into
the factory area.

What you've also shown inadvertantly is that, given the accuracy over this
French target, defenses over German targets degraded RAF accuracy very badly
indeed.

The German night fighters in particular degraded RAF accuracy on many, in fact
most occasions, where they made an effective interception.

German defenses degraded RAF accuracy in a way that there is no parallel for
on the USAAF side. In some instances of almost fanatic resistance by the
Germans, some of the most accurate bombing of the war was still done by USAAF
units.

Two instances:

"Over 900
bombers were detailed and 886 actually dispatched over the Essex coast
for
plants in the Leipzig area; although the two leading combat wings
attacked
an FW 190 repair depot at Zwickau in the same area which, apart from
its own
importance, served to mislead the enemy as to the chief
objectives...Soon
after the leading bombers of the 3rd Division had turned north-east
after a
south-easterly thrust across Belgium, they were met by an estimated
200
enemy interceptors. Spaatz was correct in his speculation that the
Luftwaffe
would rise to meet strikes against oil plants, although at this point
the
enemy could not have known the bombers' ultimate destination. From
12.25
hrs. for 35 minutes, the two composite 4th wing formations headed for
Zwickau experienced determined oppostion. Mass saturation tactics were
pressed so close that at least one rammed a B-17. From this ordeal the
4th
emerged in some disorder. Colonel Vandevanter flying with his 385th
Group in
the lead, ordered the formation to reduce speed so that others could
reform;
this undoubtedly added to the good bombing later achieved-- the 385th
managed to place 97% of their bombs within 2,000 ft of the aiming
point.
Four times the 4th Wing was attacked on the mission, losing 11
Fortresses, 7
from the 447th group.
The 3rd division's 45th and 13th wings attacked the Brux oil plant
leaving
it burning and inoperative, while Liberators of 2nd Division achieved
similar results at Zeitz and Bohlen; great damage too, was inflicted
at
Merseburg and Lutzendorf by the 1st Division."

--"The Mighty Eighth" p. 141-42 by Roger Freeman

"Lt. Col Ross Milton, formerly of Polebrook and now of the 91st, was
allergic
to tough rides. It seemed every time he led the Wing, he would
ineveitably
wind up in the front position, whether the mission was so laid out or
not, and
the mission would meet violent opposition. Oschersleben was no
exception.
Leading the combat wing formation, he found himself in front and, for
the most
part, without fighter escort almost throughout the trip. Over an hour
before
reaching the target, the Wing was jumped by a large number of Jerry
fighters.
The lead aircraft was badly hit. An engine was lost, several cannon
shells
exploded in the cockpit, and Col Milton and Captain Everett, the
pilot, were
both painfully wounded. The Wing nevertheless ploughed through and
bombed the
target, although 13 aircraft were lost in the attack. The 91st
Group's bombs
went astray due to structural damage in the lead ship which affected
the
mounting of the bombsight, but the 381st's bombs fell true and
straight on the
MPI, and these bombs and those of the wings that followed did a
complete
demolition job on an important aircraft factory."

-"Mighty Eighth War Diary" pp. 165-66


Walt

Walt

Walt

In message , WalterM140
writes

Soon
after the leading bombers of the 3rd Division had turned north-east
after a
south-easterly thrust across Belgium, they were met by an estimated
200
enemy interceptors. Spaatz was correct in his speculation that the
Luftwaffe
would rise to meet strikes against oil plants, although at this point
the
enemy could not have known the bombers' ultimate destination.

Isn't this sentence self-contradicting?

Mike
--
M.J.Powell

Spaatz was correct in his speculation that the
Luftwaffe
would rise to meet strikes against oil plants, although at this point
the
enemy could not have known the bombers' ultimate destination.

Isn't this sentence self-contradicting?

It was a strike on an oil plant. The Germans did rise to meet it.

I'd say that once the bombers reached a certain point, the Germans knew an
important raid was in the offing. They had to respond. Don't forget that the
Germans also increased the number of flak guns around the oil facilities in
this time frame. There was no doubt that the Germans would fight for the oil
plants. They had by this time pretty much stopped opposing strikes against
France.

Walt

The quotes was that 489 hit the target area, the definition of
the target area has not been defined

I posted it, after all. The quote was clearly 498, not 489, as if that
mattered.

"Pickle barrel" accuracy was attainable and it was attained.

What is striking about all this is how hard some Brits will work to
belittle
the honest achievements of others.



I have never and will never belittle the efforts of the US
airmen who fought and died in WW2. I make a point of
paying my respects at the US War Cemetery in Cambridge
at least once a year.

I go down to the military cemetary in Chattanooga. There are mostly dead from
the Civil War, but there are a number of WWII dead there as well.

You however seem unwilling to make the same allowance
for the efforts of the Commonwealt forces. There are
two ex bomber bases within 5 miles of my house.

I grew up right outside the national battlefield at Chickamauga.

Bassingbourn which was used by the USAAF and
Gransden Lodge from which RCAF aircraft flew.

Yes, the 91st Bomb Group was stationed at Bassingbourn. More B-17's failed to
return to Bassingbourn than from any other station -- 420, IIRC.

Both played their part in final victory and young men
of both air forces flew their missions knowing their
chances of survival were poor.

But now the "pickle barrel" accuracy they set for a goal is belittled and made
fun of by the people they helped to save.


They deserve better than your bile.


The history of Bomber Command has benefited by a smoke screen of propaganda and
wishful thinking for 60 years.

I think that is why some seem so determined to belittle the honest
accomplishments of others.

Walt

Both played their part in final victory and young men
of both air forces flew their missions knowing their
chances of survival were poor.

But now the "pickle barrel" accuracy they set for a goal is belittled and made
fun of by the people they helped to save.

The "pickle barrel" claim originated with propagandists of the Norden
Company and the War Department, not the brave men who flew the
missions.

The U.S. Strategic Bombing Survey was quite critical of the
effectiveness of strategic bombing. This in no way reflects on the
courage and sacrifice of the men who flew the missions.

vince norris

The "pickle barrel" claim originated with propagandists of the Norden
Company and the War Department, not the brave men who flew the
missions.

It was the standard the crews trained toward. Pickle barrels were common
sights in the grocery stores of the day. In fact, I have the impression they
were larger than regular barrels.

It proved pretty rare to achieve that sort of accuracy in Europe. But if you
don't set a goal, you surely can't do very well.

We know that the USAAF had to abandon the idea of bombing only in visual
conditions. There were too few days when this was possible to justify the very
expensive bomber force nor was it possible to hurt the Germans badly enough.

It proved very difficult to make accurate attacks with blind bombing methods.
In "Half a WIng, Three Engines, and a Prayer" the author relates a mission
that had a German target as primary. That target was obscured. A Belgian air
field was selected as a target of opportunity. The group made a couple of runs
on that target that weren't within the norm. Ultimately, the group broup their
bombs back to Molesworth. At the debrief the group commander said: "Next
time, leave those bombs in Germany!"

And I think that over time it became acceptable to think that any bomb that hit
Germany was a good bomb. That proved not to be the case.

The U.S. Strategic Bombing Survey was quite critical of the
effectiveness of strategic bombing. This in no way reflects on the
courage and sacrifice of the men who flew the missions.

As Art Kramer likes to point out, the US Strategic Bombing Survey authors had
an ax to grind. Their objectivity is somewhat suspect. But obviously, as the
Germans held out until the very end and given the tremendous cost in blood and
treasure, obviously the bombing was a big disappointment.

There was a lot of disagreememt on what to bomb and a general inability to get
enough bombs on decisive targets. The Germans also expended great effort to
repair what damage was done.

The targets that the Americans chose early on, specifically aircraft factories
and ball bearing plants, proved pretty resilient to damage. The USAAF also
early on flew a lot of raids to help suppress the U-Boats. Saint Nazaire was
"flak city" well before the first US bomber went to Germany. The US effort
also suffered from poor leadership in the form of Eaker and Hunter (the fighter
commander). Once they were replaced, things immediately improved dramatically.
Of course having a big infusion of new bomb groups and Mustang equipped groups
didn't hurt either. The Americans also determined to hit oil targets, which was
the one big success of the bombing. The RAF helped on this, but Harris was
reluctant to act, and adamant that this was a waste, when it was the one target
system that could collapse the German economy.

Walt