Did the Germans have the Norden bombsight?

"Eunometic" wrote in message
m...

1 Gyro stabalising the aim point to help the bombadier during run up
while the aircraft was being jostelled and manoevered.

The gyro stabilized the entire airplane along a track, once engaged.

2 Continiously computing the aim point on the basis of aircraft
manoevers and speed changes. (Essentaily the what the Stuvi did I
suspect)

All that is necessary to intercept a track along which one wishes to bomb.

3 Providing a target tracking system that attempted to track the
target on the basis of airspeed and altitude above ground. By then
providing servo motors adjusted by the bombadier or pilot to adjust
for the drift from the target the wind drift rate could be calculated
by integration on a ball integrator and the correction applied to the
continously computed aim point.

The airplane automation was actually quite new and the PDI was an INS
display for the many years until standalone PDIs were eliminated through the
use of instrument transfer relays.

4 Corrective manoevers would then be applied either by the bombadier
by signaling with a paddle to the pilot or direct via the autopilot.
(I think Art Kramer mentions that the manual method was mostly used)

The gyro will only hold the airplane on track for a short period and a human
had to fly a heading to intercept the correct track.

Peter Twydell wrote:


Does anybody know where these pickle barrels came from? Were they Lend
Lease? AFAIK we didn't make pickle barrels in the UK at that time, and
I'm not sure if we do now. You can't get the wood, you know (according
to Henry Crun).


Could there have been some linguistic confusion years ago with the WWI
German helmet, the Pickelhaube? Perhaps Billy Mitchell said he wanted to
be able to drop a bomb on a Pickelhaube, and was misquoted.

Well, I wooden know 'bout no pickle barrels but we sure gotta
lotta pork barrels in our Capitol
--

-Gord.

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

"Emmanuel Gustin" wrote in message
...
"Jim Doyle" wrote in message
news
Not being able to read German - could someone please explain the
principal
workings of the gunsight in the first diagram? (The two concentric
circles
and cross as rear sight, with vane-looking gizmo as foresight - attached
to
the MG15).

Vane sights. In a flexible gun position, gunners must take into
account not only 'lead' on the target but also relative wind.
If the gun is aimed perpendicular to the direction of flight the
bullet will have, relative to the air, a sideways as well as
a forward velocity component, so drag will caused it to fall
behind the line of sight. The size of the effect depends on the
angle and on the speed of the aircraft the gunner is sitting in.

Hence the spring-loaded vane sight. If the gun is pointing aft,
the bead is in line with the barrel. If the gun is pointed sideways,
the vane will be pushed at by the air current, and the bead will
move in the opposite direction, indicating the correction angle.
The larger the rotation of the gun or the speed of the aircraft,
the larger the movement of the bead. A lot of ingenuity went
into the design of such sights during WWI and afterwards, until
most people standardised on reflector sights.

Lead, of course, must still be judged by the gunner from the
distance and the relative speed of the two aircraft, using the
deflection rings.

The Germans continued to use such sights longer than others,
it seems -- but they made relatively little use of gun turrets.
IIRC one US bomber group also used them on the waist gun
positions of B-17s, with good results.

Cheers for that, it all makes sense!

I guess though - no matter what sight adjustments you make - having a sharp,
skilled and determined gunner is what makes the difference. I don't imagine
that in combat you'd be crouched over you gun and squinting through the
sights hoping the drift's correct when the enemy's bearing down on you,
cannons blazing!

Jim Doyle


--
Emmanuel Gustin
Emmanuel dot Gustin @t skynet dot be
Flying Guns Books and Site: http://users.skynet.be/Emmanuel.Gustin/

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

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

In article , Jim
Doyle writes

"Emmanuel Gustin" wrote in message
...
"Jim Doyle" wrote in message
news
SNIP of lots

The Germans continued to use such sights longer than others,
it seems -- but they made relatively little use of gun turrets.
IIRC one US bomber group also used them on the waist gun
positions of B-17s, with good results.

Cheers for that, it all makes sense!

I guess though - no matter what sight adjustments you make - having a sharp,
skilled and determined gunner is what makes the difference. I don't imagine
that in combat you'd be crouched over you gun and squinting through the
sights hoping the drift's correct when the enemy's bearing down on you,
cannons blazing!

Jim Doyle

Or even being mindful of your training:

'Short bursts, aimed with appropriate deflection, at threatening targets
within range. Conserve your ammunition."

Cheers,

Dave
--
Dave Eadsforth

"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