Bombing
Title
Bombing
Description
Highlights some of the issues causing lack of precision with bombing. Also mentions problems of weather meant USAAF results despite their bomb site was rarely better that the RAF. Mentions their most successful operation was dropping mines in the Kiel Canal for 500 feet.
Language
Format
One page printed document
Publisher
Rights
This content is available under a CC BY-NC 4.0 International license (Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0). It has been published ‘as is’ and may contain inaccuracies or culturally inappropriate references that do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the University of Lincoln or the International Bomber Command Centre. For more information, visit https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ and https://ibccdigitalarchive.lincoln.ac.uk/omeka/legal.
Contributor
Identifier
MPotterPL1878961-150914-19
Transcription
BOMBING
Bombing was far from a precision practice during the war. If the bomb sight was
aligned on the targets, speed, height and wind drift etc was taken out of the
equation there still remained many other problems.
Bomb bays could be very crowded at times, bombs so close together that if a tail fin
was bent it would impinge on its neighbour. When released this would cause a
deviation in the direction the bombs pointed, a small matter but after a fall of
16,000 ft would be quite a distance apart. Bomb mountings and fittings caused
problems also. Slight hang ups, tight or otherwise bad fittings, all caused the
bombs to spread out. Sometimes good, sometimes bad. Certainly, to bomb a small
target such as a bridge the USAAF found this negated the bomb sight that they so
much prized, their results being no better than the RAF. The European weather
caused them problems not encountered in the US and caused blanket bombing
instead of precision.
Precision was rare. Our most successful Op' was dropping 6 mines into the Kiel
Canal from 500 ft one at a time and at staggered time lapses. This was a very
dangerous height as all guns from both sides of the canal could fire at us without
fear of hitting one another. Then silhouetted against the sea for fighters with no
height to manoeuvre. Luck needed.
The exact height was necessary to ensure the mines did not break apart on impact
with the water.
Bombing was far from a precision practice during the war. If the bomb sight was
aligned on the targets, speed, height and wind drift etc was taken out of the
equation there still remained many other problems.
Bomb bays could be very crowded at times, bombs so close together that if a tail fin
was bent it would impinge on its neighbour. When released this would cause a
deviation in the direction the bombs pointed, a small matter but after a fall of
16,000 ft would be quite a distance apart. Bomb mountings and fittings caused
problems also. Slight hang ups, tight or otherwise bad fittings, all caused the
bombs to spread out. Sometimes good, sometimes bad. Certainly, to bomb a small
target such as a bridge the USAAF found this negated the bomb sight that they so
much prized, their results being no better than the RAF. The European weather
caused them problems not encountered in the US and caused blanket bombing
instead of precision.
Precision was rare. Our most successful Op' was dropping 6 mines into the Kiel
Canal from 500 ft one at a time and at staggered time lapses. This was a very
dangerous height as all guns from both sides of the canal could fire at us without
fear of hitting one another. Then silhouetted against the sea for fighters with no
height to manoeuvre. Luck needed.
The exact height was necessary to ensure the mines did not break apart on impact
with the water.
Collection
Citation
“Bombing,” IBCC Digital Archive, accessed July 22, 2024, https://ibccdigitalarchive.lincoln.ac.uk/omeka/collections/document/30895.
Item Relations
This item has no relations.