8th Air Force use of Mosquitoes

[Shortround6]

I don't know about the entire 8th Air Force, but the 303th bomb group, which flew both Schweinfurt raids, flew 15 bombing missions between the two raids. 7 of which were over Germany, if not as far in as Schweinfurt. In the 3 months after the second raid they flew another 21 bombing missions, 16 of which were against German targets. Again not as deep but western Germany was not getting a free pass for those months.

 

[mhuxt]

Don't know if this will work - 8th AF targets in Germany in 1943, by date, from Davis:

City Date Target Struck Sighting Atk Lost
Emden 1/27/1943 P/A Vis 2 0
Wilhelmshaven 1/27/1943 UB/Yards Vis 53 1
Hamm 2/1/1943 M/Y recalled
Emden 2/4/1943 I/A Vis 39 5
Hamm 2/14/1943 M/Y recalled
Wilhelmshaven 2/26/1943 UB/Yards Vis 64 7
Hamm 3/4/1943 M/Y Vis 16 5
Vegesack 3/18/1943 UB/Yards Vis 97 2
Wilhelmshaven 3/22/1943 UB/Yards Vis 84 3
Bremen/Borgward 4/17/1943 A/Icomp Vis 106 16
Kiel/Krupp 5/14/1943 UB/Yards Vis 126 8
Emden 5/15/1943 I/A Vis 59 1
Heligoland 5/15/1943 T/O Vis 76 5
Flensberg 5/19/1943 UB/Yards Vis 55 0
Kiel/Krupp 5/19/1943 UB/Yards Vis 103 6
Emden/Nordseewerke 5/21/1943 UB/Yards Vis 45 5
Wilhelmshaven 5/21/1943 UB/Yards Vis 77 7
Wilhelmshaven 5/21/1943 P/A Vis 1 0
Aurich 6/11/1943 T/O Vis 1 0
Cuxhaven 6/11/1943 P/A Vis 30 0
Jevres 6/11/1943 T/O Vis 1 0
Misc., Ge 6/11/1943 A/F Vis 17 0
Wilhelmshaven 6/11/1943 UB/Yards Vis 168 8
Wilhelmshaven 6/11/1943 P/A Vis 1 0
Bremen/Deschimag 6/13/1943 UB/Yards Vis 102 4
Kiel 6/13/1943 P/A Vis 16 3
Kiel/Deutsche 6/13/1943 UB/Yards Vis 44 19
Misc., Ge 6/13/1943 T/O Vis 9 0
Nordholz 6/13/1943 I/A Vis 11 0
Dortmund 6/22/1943 T/O Vis 1 0
Huls 6/22/1943 SynRub Vis 170 15
Huls 6/22/1943 YB-40s Vis 11 1
Vlieland 6/22/1943 T/O Vis 1 0
Juist Island 6/25/1943 Shipping Vis 18 3
Misc., Ge 6/25/1943 T/O Vis 143 15
Misc., Ge 6/25/1943 YB-40 Vis 4 0
Wangerooge Island 6/25/1943 Shipping Vis 2 0
Misc., Ge 7/17/1943 T/O Vis 29 1
Misc., Ge 7/17/1943 Shipping Vis 1 1
Rheine 7/17/1943 I/A Vis 4 0
Hamburg/Blohm Voss 7/25/1943 UB/Yards Vis 68 12
Heide 7/25/1943 M/Y Vis 14 3
Kiel/Deutsche 7/25/1943 UB/Yards Vis 67 3
Misc., Ge 7/25/1943 T/O Vis 50 0
Rerik/West 7/25/1943 A/F Vis 18 0
Bremerhaven 7/26/1943 I/A Vis 1 0
Hamburg/Howald 7/26/1943 UB/Yards Vis 54 2
Hannover/Gummiwerke 7/26/1943 Tires Vis 42 10
Hannover/Nordhafen 7/26/1943 Tires Vis 50 6
Hannover/Nordhafen 7/26/1943 YB-40 Vis 1 0
Langerooge 7/26/1943 Shipping Vis 16 0
Misc., Ge 7/26/1943 T/O Vis 2 0
Wesermunde 7/26/1943 T/O Vis 15 3
Wilhelmshaven 7/26/1943 T/O Vis 18 3
Alsleben 7/28/1943 T/O Vis 8 0
Beeststorzwagg 7/28/1943 T/O Vis 1 0
Kassel/Bettenhausen/Fieseler 7/28/1943 A/Icomp FW 190 Vis 47 7
Kassel/Bettenhausen/Fieseler 7/28/1943 YB-40 Vis 2 0
Oschersleben/AGO Flugzugwerke 7/28/1943 A/Iasy FW 190 Vis 28 15
Terschelling 7/28/1943 T/O Vis 6 0
Wetrup 7/28/1943 T/O Vis 2 0
Heligoland 7/29/1943 A/F Vis 32 2
Kiel 7/29/1943 YB-40 Vis 1 0
Kiel/Deutsche/Krupp 7/29/1943 UB/Yards Vis 48 2
Kiel/Kriegsmarine 7/29/1943 UB/Yards Vis 42 2
Misc., Ge 7/29/1943 T/O Vis 16 0
Warnemunde/Heinkel 7/29/1943 A/Iasy FW 190 Vis 54 4
Kassel 7/30/1943 I/A Vis 3 0
Kassel/Bettenhausen/Fieseler 7/30/1943 A/Icomp FW 190 Vis 94 6
Kassel/Waldau/Fieseler 7/30/1943 A/Iasy FW 190 Vis 37 6
Bochum/Vereinigte Stahl 8/12/1943 Steel Vis 117 23
Bonn 8/12/1943 I/A Vis 106 2
Misc., Ge 8/12/1943 T/O Vis 4 0
Recklinghausen 8/12/1943 T/O Vis 16 0
Frankfurt-am-Main 8/17/1943 I/A Vis 1 0
Heilbronn 8/17/1943 I/A Vis 1 0
Misc., Ge 8/17/1943 T/O Vis 4 0
Regensburg/Ober-Traubling 8/17/1943 A/Iasy Me 109 Vis 126 24
Schweinfurt/Kugelfisher 8/17/1943 Bearings Vis 54 9
Schweinfurt/VKF 1 8/17/1943 Bearings Vis 78 4
Schweinfurt/VKF 2 8/17/1943 Bearings Vis 51 23
Baden-Baden 9/6/1943 T/O Vis 8 0
Buhl 9/6/1943 T/O Vis 1 0
Karlsruhe 9/6/1943 I/A Vis 17 2
Misc., Ge 9/6/1943 T/O Vis 40 0
Offenburg 9/6/1943 M/Y Vis 51 13
Stuttgart 9/6/1943 I/A Vis 46 10
Wasselone 9/6/1943 T/O Vis 2 0
Hannover 9/22/1943 I/A Vis (N) 5 0
Mannheim 9/23/1943 I/A Vis (N) 4 0
Aurich 9/27/1943 T/O Vis 19 0
Emden 9/27/1943 I/A H2S 178 7
Esens 9/27/1943 I/A H2S 18 0
Hannover 9/27/1943 I/A Vis 4 0
Juist 9/27/1943 T/O Vis 2 0
Misc., Ge 9/27/1943 T/O Vis 21 0
Norden 9/27/1943 T/O Vis 2 0
Ochtelbur 9/27/1943 T/O Vis 2 0
Emden 10/2/1943 I/A H2S 339 2
Munich 10/2/1943 I/A Vis (N) 2 0
Frankfurt-am-Main 10/4/1943 M/Y Vis 37 3
Frankfurt-am-Main 10/4/1943 I/A Vis (N) 2 1
Frankfurt-am-Main/Heddern 10/4/1943 A/Icomp Vis 78 4
Saarbrucken/Sarreguemines 10/4/1943 T/O Vis 47 0
Saarlautern 10/4/1943 I/A Vis 67 2
Wiesbaden 10/4/1943 I/A Vis 16 1
Bremen 10/8/1943 P/A Vis 197 16
Bremen/Deutsche 10/8/1943 UB/Yards Vis 44 3
Bremen/Weser 10/8/1943 A/Icomp Fighter Vis 33 1
Meppen 10/8/1943 T/O Vis 3 0
Oldenburg 10/8/1943 I/A Vis 18 2
Vegesack 10/8/1943 UB/Yards Vis 43 5
Vegesack 10/8/1943 T/O Vis 19 3
Anklam 10/9/1943 A/Icomp FW 190 Vis 106 18
Danzig 10/9/1943 UB/Yards Vis 23 2
Marienburg 10/9/1943 A/Iasy FW 190 Vis 96 2
Coesfeld 10/10/1943 I/A Vis 68 0
Dulmen 10/10/1943 I/A Vis 1 0
Munster 10/10/1943 M/Y Vis 138 30
Misc., Ge 10/14/1943 T/O Vis 1 0
Schweinfurt/Kugelfisher 10/14/1943 Bearings Vis 81 10
Schweinfurt/VKF 1 10/14/1943 Bearings Vis 61 35
Schweinfurt/VKF 2 10/14/1943 Bearings Vis 86 15
Duren 10/20/1943 I/A OBOE 97 6
Duren 10/20/1943 I/A OBOE failure - 2
Misc., Ge 10/20/1943 T/O Vis 16 0
Wilhelmshaven 11/3/1943 P/A H2X 539 7
Coesfeld 11/5/1943 I/A Vis 1 0
Gelsenkirchen 11/5/1943 M/Y Vis 232 5
Gelsenkirchen/Buer 11/5/1943 O/Sy Vis 49 2
Gelsenkirchen/Nordstern 11/5/1943 O/Sy Vis 47 1
Haltern 11/5/1943 T/O Vis 1 0
Munster 11/5/1943 M/Y Vis 106 3
Duren 11/7/1943 I/A OBOE 38 0
Renderath 11/7/1943 T/O Vis 20 0
Wesel 11/7/1943 I/A OBOE 54 0
Munster 11/11/1943 M/Y H2X 59 4
Rees 11/11/1943 I/A Oboe (N) 1 0
Emmerich 11/12/1943 I/A OBOE (N) 1 0
Bremen 11/13/1943 P/A H2X 117 16
Flensberg 11/13/1943 I/A Vis 6 0
Heligoland 11/13/1943 T/O Vis 8 0
Kiel 11/13/1943 I/A H2X 1 0
Misc., Ge 11/13/1943 T/O Vis 11 0
Misc., Ge 11/19/1943 T/O Vis 113 0
Bremen 11/26/1943 P/A H2X 422 25
Misc., Ge 11/26/1943 T/O Vis 16 0
Vegesack 11/26/1943 I/A Vis 2 0
Bremen 11/29/1943 P/A H2X 137 13
Emmerich 11/29/1943 I/A Vis 1 0
Emmerich 11/29/1943 I/A Vis (N) 1 0
Misc., Ge 11/29/1943 T/O Vis 15 0
Oldenburg 11/29/1943 I/A H2X 1 1
Solingen 11/30/1943 I/A H2S 79 3
Wermelskirchen 11/30/1943 T/O Vis 1 0
Misc., Ge 12/1/1943 T/O Vis 2 0
Rossbach 12/1/1943 T/O Vis 1 0
Siegburg 12/1/1943 I/A Vis 17 1
Solingen 12/1/1943 I/A H2X 261 23
Germany 12/2/1943 Leaflets Vis (NL) 4 0
Huls 12/2/1943 I/A Oboe (N) 1 0
Emden 12/11/1943 I/A Vis 523 17
Bremen 12/13/1943 P/A H2X 175 0
Hamburg 12/13/1943 P/A H2X 116 2
Kiel/Krupp 12/13/1943 UB/Yards H2X 353 3
Misc., Ge 12/13/1943 T/O Vis 5 0
Neumunster 12/13/1943 I/A Vis 1 0
Bremen 12/16/1943 P/A H2X 528 10
Germany 12/16/1943 Leaflets Vis (NL) 4 0
Heligoland 12/16/1943 T/O Vis 1 0
Misc., Ge 12/16/1943 T/O Vis 5 0
Wessermunde 12/16/1943 P/A Vis 1 0
Bremen 12/20/1943 P/A Vis 465 27
Misc., Ge 12/20/1943 T/O Vis 6 0
Oldenburg 12/20/1943 I/A Vis 1 0
Cologne 12/22/1943 I/A OBOE (N) 1 0
Cologne 12/22/1943 I/A Vis 1 0
Misc., Ge 12/22/1943 T/O Vis 22 0
Munster 12/22/1943 M/Y H2X 197 5
Osnabruck 12/22/1943 M/Y H2X 218 17
Rheine 12/22/1943 I/A Vis 1 0
Misc., Ge 12/27/1943 T/O Oboe (N) 1 0
Dusseldorf 12/29/1943 I/A OBOE (N) 1 0
Germany 12/29/1943 Leaflets Vis (NL) 6 0
Ludwigshafen/I. G. Farben 12/30/1943 O/Sy H2X 653 23
Misc., Ge 12/30/1943 T/O Vis 1 0
Saarbrucken 12/30/1943 I/A H2X 4 0

 

[Milosh]

303rd Bomb Group (H) - Molesworth, England

Lists all the mission flown by the 303 BG.

 

[davebender]

I agree. However we are talking about the American 8th Air Force, not RAF Bomber Command.

The USA had two good medium bombers (B25, B26) and two good light bombers (A20, A26). If 8th Air Force switches to medium or light bombers those are the aircraft the Mosquito will be compared to in the flight competition.

 

[Milosh]

The A-26 didn't fly its first mission in the ETO til 6 September 1944.

 

[plan_D]

The Mosquito could not be used for that level of bombardment simply because by allowing it to become a formation bomber it loses all of its advantages and would be destroyed in droves. The U.S. method of operating medium and light bombers still would not suit the Mosquito, it was a hit and run raider and for the amount of explosive required to be delivered on target they would require many Mosquitos that would be put at great risk. The bomb loads and capability is irrelevant; if you bomb in formation they're flying slow and vulnerable, if you scatter them to appear over the target at certain times then after the first few the Germans are waiting. For the way the U.S. operated the B-25s and B-26s the Mosquito was still not viable for pretty much the same reasons.

 

[Jabberwocky]

I agree. However we are talking about the American 8th Air Force, not RAF Bomber Command.

The USA had two good medium bombers (B25, B26) and two good light bombers (A20, A26). If 8th Air Force switches to medium or light bombers those are the aircraft the Mosquito will be compared to in the flight competition.

The USAAF was loathe to put B-26s over Germany. ETO Marauder losses were very low, in fact their loss rates were the lowest of any US bomber aircraft. However, their initial forays into heavily defended European airspace were disastrous - on one mission to the Netherlands in 1943, the entire bomber force was lost. As a result, the were switched to operations over France, with heavy escort.

In the Med, B-26 loss rates were much worse than B-25 loss rates.

The 8th didn't use B-25s - it didn't fit their mission profiles.

The A-20/B-25/B-26 give you the worst of both worlds. They dont have the same amount of defensive firepower as the B-24/B-17 - nor do they operate at the same high altitudes. Likewise, they don't have the speed of the Mosquito.

 

[Erich]

indeed German fighter pilots had a healthy respect for the "stinger" on the end that single .50cal when and as said not often seen B-26's in the air over Europe. the B-26 had been used on night duties but also suffered to single/twin engine LW attacks

Remember the diabolical day of 23 December 1944 when the Sturmgruppe of JG 3 attacked the rear of two B-26 groups and tore them to shreds ..........

 

[gjs238]

Did the US light medium bombers lack turbochargers?

 

[davebender]

Alternate history is about what could have happened if decisions and resource allocations were different. The massive new Willow Run bomber plant will be producing 500 aircraft per month by the end of 1943. In this scenerio it might be producing light or medium bombers ILO B-24s. Perhaps even an American version of the British Mosquito light bomber.

It all depends on which aircraft wins the U.S. Army Air Force competition.

 

[wuzak]

The Mosquito could not be used for that level of bombardment simply because by allowing it to become a formation bomber it loses all of its advantages and would be destroyed in droves. The U.S. method of operating medium and light bombers still would not suit the Mosquito, it was a hit and run raider and for the amount of explosive required to be delivered on target they would require many Mosquitos that would be put at great risk. The bomb loads and capability is irrelevant; if you bomb in formation they're flying slow and vulnerable, if you scatter them to appear over the target at certain times then after the first few the Germans are waiting. For the way the U.S. operated the B-25s and B-26s the Mosquito was still not viable for pretty much the same reasons.

There is no way that anyone would consider using the Mosquito in the exact same way as a B-17. Or a B-25/B-26 for that matter. The whole point of those formations was to maximise the effect of the defensive armament - which the Mosquito, of course, lacked.

The same formations that gave the extra defence also precluded the method of gaining the best accuracy. To get the best accuracy each bomber had to bomb individually, which meant a long, straight and steady flight to the target - one by one. The 8th AF had that tactic early on in their shallow penetrations into France, but they dropped it because it was too costly. Not from fighters, but from flak. Instead, LeMay came up with the system of using a master bomber who would use the Norden bomb sight to aim his bombs, after which the rest of the formation would bomb on his cue. Thus the accuracy was very dependent on the size of the formation - which in the case of the 8th AF could be miles long and wide.

Bombs on target is the key point. In the first Schweinfurt mission some 250 or so B-17s made it to the target and dropped their bombs - about 5000lb each. There were only 80 bomb hits on the actual target. I'm sure you wouldn't need 250 Mosquitoes to get 80 hits on target.

Waiting? The Germans could see the B-17s forming up over England, which could take hours, on radar. On the Schweinfurt mission, for example, the Luftwaffe was waiting on the bombers' way into the target. They had twin engined bombers flying above the formation, and bombed the bombers! When they had used their fuel and ammo they went back to base, rearmed, refueled, probably had a pie and then went for a piss, got back in and were waiting for the B-17s on their way back to England.

The key to using the Mosquitoes is, I believe, to time the attacks so that the defenders are on the ground refuelling, to get them out of position, or to force them to split their resources - ie instead of sending up all available fighters for one wave, they would hold back some for the next wave.

 

[wuzak]

Did the US light medium bombers lack turbochargers?

No, none of them were.

The B-25 had the R-2600, which I believe rarely, if ever, was used with turbochargers. And I think it had a single stage two speed supercharger.

The A-20 also used R-2600s, and apparently some early ones were fitted with turbos. But most stuck with the two speed single stage supercharger.

The B-26 was fitted with R-2800s with a single stage two speed supercharger.

The A-26 was also fitted with R-2800s with a single stage two speed supercharger.

 

[Glider]

indeed German fighter pilots had a healthy respect for the "stinger" on the end that single .50cal when and as said not often seen B-26's in the air over Europe. the B-26 had been used on night duties but also suffered to single/twin engine LW attacks

Remember the diabolical day of 23 December 1944 when the Sturmgruppe of JG 3 attacked the rear of two B-26 groups and tore them to shreds ..........

I have sometimes wondered about that day. I know its something that we will never know but the tactics of the RAF and USAAF when attacked were very different. The USAAF tended to stick together and slug it out, the RAF 2TAF with their B25 and Boston the rule was for the aircraft being targeted to evade. Combat trials showed that a corkscrewing bomber made for a very difficult target which in turn bought precious time for the escort to arrive.

Clearly both have their advantages and disadvantages and its quite possible they would cancel each other out, but with the heavily loaded Sturmgruppe aircraft, evading may have been the better option.

Any thoughts would be welcome

 

[Jabberwocky]

Alternate history is about what could have happened if decisions and resource allocations were different. The massive new Willow Run bomber plant will be producing 500 aircraft per month by the end of 1943. In this scenerio it might be producing light or medium bombers ILO B-24s. Perhaps even an American version of the British Mosquito light bomber.

It all depends on which aircraft wins the U.S. Army Air Force competition.

Which AAF competition? The B-24 contract was given to Consolidated without a fly-off. Consolidated though it could build a better bomber than the B-17, and the AAF agreed. Both North American and Martin were awarded aircraft contracts following the B-26 vs B-25 fly-off.

You'd need a RADICALLY different timeline if you want to get the A-26 into production earlier.

Design of the A-26 doesn't start until Jan 1941 - when the AAF proposed a better light bomber than the A-20 be developed - the prototype flying in July 1942 and the first service aircraft rolling off the line in Sep 1943. The 500th production example is not completed until Nov 1944.

That's 3 3/4 years from design to the 500th production aircraft - about the same time as it took for the B-24.

 

[davebender]

You'd need a RADICALLY different timeline if you want to get the A-26 into production earlier.

I agree.

The B-24 originated from a 1938 U.S. Army Air Corps request for Consolidated to produce B-17s. This was modified during 1939 to allow Consolidated to produce their own heavy bomber design. Meanwhile Ford began construction of the Willow Run aircraft plant during 1941. Willow Run first production was during October 1942.

In this scenerio I think the point of departure would be no later then 1940, before construction of the Willow Run bomber plant begins. Mosquito prototype first flight was during November 1940. Barely in time to participate in the U.S. Army Air Corps flight competition. Frankly I don't think the original Mosquito prototype stands much of a chance compared to the A-20 light bomber which was already in production.

 

[wuzak]

Frankly I don't think the original Mosquito prototype stands much of a chance compared to the A-20 light bomber which was already in production.

In what way?

 

[Mustang nut]

Didnt the US military stipulate the defensive armament on their bombers before any flight competition? Was the concept of an unarmed bomber ever considered in the USA?

 

[davebender]

Was the concept of an unarmed bomber ever considered in the USA?

If the U.S. Army Air Corps is considering the Mosquito then the answer is yes for this alternate history.

Like most new aircraft designs, Mosquito prototypes had significant problems which required at least a year to fix. Meanwhile A-20s were already in production and in combat (with the French Air Force). So I cannot imagine the Mosquito being produced ILO the A-20.

Most likely the Mosquito light bomber would be considered ILO the late war A-26. If selected for production the U.S. built Mosquito might be powered by Allison V-1710s as that engine performed well at low altitude (i.e. where light bombers operate).

 

[gjs238]

If the U.S. Army Air Corps is considering the Mosquito then the answer is yes for this alternate history.

Like most new aircraft designs, Mosquito prototypes had significant problems which required at least a year to fix. Meanwhile A-20s were already in production and in combat (with the French Air Force). So I cannot imagine the Mosquito being produced ILO the A-20.

Most likely the Mosquito light bomber would be considered ILO the late war A-26. If selected for production the U.S. built Mosquito might be powered by Allison V-1710s as that engine performed well at low altitude (i.e. where light bombers operate).

Ah, but in this alternate history perhaps light medium bombers wouldn't be limited to low/lower altitudes.

 

[gjs238]

P-38's were used to bomb Ploesti.
Were they ever used elsewhere in such a role?