Night bombers interception in Western Europe in 1944

What sort of problems faced a defender in attempting to intercept and
shoot down night bombers in 1944?

I am interested both over Germany and Britain.

--
Logically we attempt to devise reasons for our irrational behaviour.

Observations of Bernard - No 62

What sort of problems faced a defender in attempting to intercept and
shoot down night bombers in 1944?

Not having enough aviation fuel was a big problem late in 1944. Earlier, the
Germans had a pretty good handle on it, as the 3/30/44 raid to Nuremburg
showed.

They nightfighters whacked at least 80 Brit bombers, total lost that night
94-96.

The British had to suspend their night ops over Germany. That's not well known
because they were put onto invasion targets in the same time frame. The Germans
also forced the USAAF to suspend its deep raids for a time also.

In July, 1944 a JU-88 lost its way and accidentally landed in England. It had
the full suite of radars. Oops. That helped the Brits quite a bit.

The British never tumbled onto the fact that their bombers were often shredded
by the German schregemusik (sp), the upward firing guns of the night fighters.
They only found out about this after the war.

Hitler largely refused to allow German night fighters to operate over England.
This was one of his misguided "brain waves"; he also didn't see the point of
shooting down bombers where the people couldn't see them. The few times this
happened any way, the Germans had good succcess.

As an aside, a high scoring Luftwaffe NJG ace, whose plane had received no
damage in many months, was killed in his first combat with B-24's. The Germans
are clear that the USAAF hurt them much worse than the RAF did, although many
Brits are still hyper-defensive about that.

Walt

"WalterM140" wrote in message
...
What sort of problems faced a defender in attempting to intercept and
shoot down night bombers in 1944?

Not having enough aviation fuel was a big problem late in 1944. Earlier,
the
Germans had a pretty good handle on it, as the 3/30/44 raid to Nuremburg
showed.

They nightfighters whacked at least 80 Brit bombers, total lost that
night
94-96.

The British had to suspend their night ops over Germany. That's not well
known
because they were put onto invasion targets in the same time frame. The
Germans
also forced the USAAF to suspend its deep raids for a time also.

In July, 1944 a JU-88 lost its way and accidentally landed in England. It
had
the full suite of radars. Oops. That helped the Brits quite a bit.

The British never tumbled onto the fact that their bombers were often
shredded
by the German schregemusik (sp), the upward firing guns of the night
fighters.
They only found out about this after the war.

Hitler largely refused to allow German night fighters to operate over
England.
This was one of his misguided "brain waves"; he also didn't see the point
of
shooting down bombers where the people couldn't see them. The few times
this
happened any way, the Germans had good succcess.

As an aside, a high scoring Luftwaffe NJG ace, whose plane had received no
damage in many months, was killed in his first combat with B-24's. The
Germans
are clear that the USAAF hurt them much worse than the RAF did, although
many
Brits are still hyper-defensive about that.

Walt
Not sure why they would be *hyper defensive* One would expect the number of
kills during daylight raids would be higher than during night raids also the
fact that the US bombers had much heavier firepower than the RAF.

BMC

The British never tumbled onto the fact that their bombers were often
shredded
by the German schregemusik (sp), the upward firing guns of the night
fighters.
They only found out about this after the war.

Hmmm. After the Invasion and the LW bases were overrun in the Low Countries
and France, there were plenty of examples of SM among the junkwaffe that
littered the continent. Dozens of bombers had limped home in the preceeding
months with damage that clearly indicated the angle of the attack - the Brits
had figured it out, but there was no equitable method of countering SM-equipped
fighters, other than preaching against "fire watching" and hammering home the
need for increased vigilance on the part of the gunners.

v/r
Gordon
====(A+C====
USN SAR

Its always better to lose -an- engine, not -the- engine.

In article ,
nt says...



The British never tumbled onto the fact that their bombers were often
shredded
by the German schregemusik (sp), the upward firing guns of the night
fighters.
They only found out about this after the war.

Hmmm. After the Invasion and the LW bases were overrun in the Low Countries
and France, there were plenty of examples of SM among the junkwaffe that
littered the continent. Dozens of bombers had limped home in the preceeding
months with damage that clearly indicated the angle of the attack - the Brits
had figured it out, but there was no equitable method of countering
SM-equipped
fighters, other than preaching against "fire watching" and hammering home the
need for increased vigilance on the part of the gunners.

Or prehaps to greater effect, reinstalling the belly turrets they had removed
as "un-needed".

Joel

Bernardz wrote:

What sort of problems faced a defender in attempting to intercept and
shoot down night bombers in 1944?

I am interested both over Germany and Britain.

--

Get a copy of the book "NightFighter" by Rawlings.
Excellent read....

In article , WalterM140
writes

As an aside, a high scoring Luftwaffe NJG ace, whose plane had received no
damage in many months, was killed in his first combat with B-24's. The Germans
are clear that the USAAF hurt them much worse than the RAF did, although many
Brits are still hyper-defensive about that.

Omigod, are you opening that can of worms again? That topic was done to
death here weeks ago.

All we need is some dickhead to suggest that GWB was a failed
nightfighter pilot and we can all shoot ourselves to put us out of our
misery.
--
Peter

Ying tong iddle-i po!

Or prehaps to greater effect, reinstalling the belly turrets they had removed

as "un-needed".


Butcher Harris wouldn't have agreed to the drop in tonnage carried in exchange
for the saved lives of a few thousand Bomber Command heroes - they had
discussions on re-installing the turrets and it was flatly denied.

v/r
Gordon
====(A+C====
USN SAR

Its always better to lose -an- engine, not -the- engine.

I am interested both over Germany and Britain.

--

Get a copy of the book "NightFighter" by Rawlings.
Excellent read....


Before he died at a relatively early age, Jimmy Rawnsley sat down and had a
beer with many nightfighter airmen - several guys featured in his classic book
remarked that they didn't realize that they were being "interviewed" for it.
His former squadronmates report that they felt he told their story accurately.
There are several books with the title "Nightfighter" - John Rawlings did a
good one, but Jimmy Rawnsley's is better.

v/r
Gordon
====(A+C====
USN SAR

Its always better to lose -an- engine, not -the- engine.

Not sure why they would be *hyper defensive* One would expect the number of
kills during daylight raids would be higher than during night raids also the
fact that the US bombers had much heavier firepower than the RAF.




The Brits are hyper-defensive about the effect on target. The German war
machine was not significantly hindered by the British Area Campaign. The
Germans expended much fewer resources to defend than the Brits did to atttack.
And until the Americans destroyed the Luftwaffe, the Germans were handing the
Brits their ass.

It also impinges on Bomber Harris, the head of Bomber Command. He has a good
reputation when he was in fact grossly incompetent.

Walt