B-17 vs. He-177 vs. Lancaster

[AL Schlageter]

The first air raid occurred on the night of 21 st January 1944 when 227 bombers were involved. They used "Dueppel", which was the German equivalent of our "Window". These were strips of metal foil designed to confuse radar defences. Then a repeat raid was made during the latter part of the same night. Some of the returning Luftwaffe bombers had been refuelled and these were joined by other bombers. In this second raid a total of 220 bombers took part. London had been the target of both raids but only 44 incidents in the London area were logged. The bombs fell mostly in Sussex, Kent and Essex.

Glider, do these 44 incidents mean bombs dropped from 44 bombers out of the total of 447 bombers taking part or just the 220 taking part in the second raid for it does say London had been the target of both raids?

Not that it makes much difference, it is still bad. Do you know what caused the breakdown in the much heralded superior German system we hear about of placing bombers over the target?

More raids occurred in February and caused little damage, apart from a raid on 18/19 th of that month. About 200 German bombers dropped 140 tons of bombs in the London area on that night.

That averages ~2800lb per bomber. We see claims the He177 could carry ~11,000lb of bombs and the Ju88 and He 111 could carry ~5500lb of bombs.

B-17s and B-24s averaged around 5000lb and the Halifax and Lancaster averaged around 10,000lb, yet were capable of carrying heavier loads.

The Germans had assembled a total of 524 bombers

During that five month period the Luftwaffe lost 330 bombers.

That is some attrition rate, 63% of the force the LW started with.

 

[Kurfürst]

However the German forces (all of them incl Bomb carrying 190's) had heavy losses.

By what standard? The worst losses I can see per raid is about a dozen aircraft lost. That`s hardly 'heavy'.

I also found this

I was intrigued by Alan Smith's reference to "The Steinbock Operation", in his
"Museum Jottings"
Most people think of the "Blitz" as that period from September 1940 to May
1941. However during 1943 deciphered Enigma messages alerted the British
authorities that the Luftwaffe was planning a major new bombing offensive.
This was to become known as the "Mini Blitz".
The Germans had assembled a total of 524 bombers, including 46 of the new
HE 177 Greif four engined heavy bomber that were to attack Britain for the
first time.
The first air raid occurred on the night of 21 st January 1944 when 227 bombers
were involved. They used "Dueppel", which was the German equivalent of our
"Window". These were strips of metal foil designed to confuse radar defences.
Then a repeat raid was made during the latter part of the same night. Some of the returning Luftwaffe bombers had been refuelled and these were joined by other bombers. In this second raid a total of 220 bombers took part.
London had been the target of both raids but only 44 incidents in the London
area were logged. The bombs fell mostly in Sussex, Kent and Essex. The
Luftwaffe admitted losing 25 aircraft on the two raids. British sources claimed
18 fell victim to the lethal De Havilland Mosquito night fighters. Most or all of
the remaining 9 bombers were downed by antiaircraft flak. A further 18
bombers were destroyed in noncombat accidents, including mishandling,
navigation errors or crashes at dimly lit bases.
More raids occurred in February and caused little damage, apart from a raid on
18/19 th of that month. About 200 German bombers dropped 140 tons of bombs in the London area on that night.
Further attacks continued in March and Hull and Bristol were also targeted. In
May Weymouth, Torquay and Falmouth received attention from Operation
Steinbock before the offensive was abandoned.

Air raid casualties in Britain totalled 1556 killed and 2916 seriously injured. During that five month period the Luftwaffe lost 330 bombers. For every 5 citizens killed, the Germans lost 1 bomber and four trained aircrew either killed or captured. It had been a costly failure.

This is actually stems back to a WW2 being a study ordered by Churchill and which I believe he quoted in his WW2 book. I wouldn`t put much faith in it`s accuracy, but it`s another one of those thing quoted enthusiastically ever since.

The point was that the He177 only had to go to London, around 20 miles behind the Allied Lines with no navigational problems, but the Allies went hundreds of miles behind the German lines with loads of of navigational problems. ...

Notice the 220 bombers trying to bomb London 20 miles behind the coast and only 44 seem to have got through, not good.

Yes, the date is 1944, and both sides are doing active jamming. The bomber units were pulled from the Mediterrenian, and for most of them, this was their first mission over England, which kinda explains why they did have troubles finding their targets at first. The results improved however, wheater was bad for about a week which limited attacks to FW190/Me 410 nuisance raids, and some Gruppen had went back to Italy due to the Anzio landings.

On 29 January, however 'a 285 strong raid was mounted, starting a major fire in the Surrey Commercial Docks' [Beale].

4/5 Feburary, another raid was mounted, which 'failed to achive concentration but costing 15 aircraft' (whatever that means).

Things went little better with the next operation, but on 18/19 and 20/21 February, the 200 bombers dispatched each night caused damage assessed by the British authorities as the worst since 1941 : a total of over 400 dead, over 1000 fires started and widespread damage to the rail network.

etc. I am not going to quote the whole book, but it would appear to me Steinbock has been highly propagandized as something completely ridiculus and sad, by the Churchill goverment for his own political ends, and this found it`s way to history books as well. On several raids, serious damage was done, on others, the targets were not found or were completely missed. This again is not much different from the record of Bomber Command over Germany at the same time, some raids failed, other succeeded. Nurnberg on the 30/31 March was a complete failure, with 106 bombers lost with 545 aircrews, whereas Nurnberg itself suffered insignificant damage (something a dozen casulties IIRC - most bombers couldn`t find it appearantly). Point is, single bad examples can be easily find and than enthaustically quoted. They don`t quite tell the whole story, or a typical story.

Anyway, I don`t think discussing a complex operation such as Steinbock would tell a great deal about the qualities bombers that participated in them.

Nick Beale however has an interesting bit about the He 177, however, which I will quote below :

'..Although the He 177 had a troubled development history and has received a bad press from the historians, prisoners from these particular machines spoke highly of them. High altitude performance was good, with speeds of 600-650 km/h 'easily attained'; the He 177 A-3 was rated 'more manouverable than any other GAF bomber' and :

' Both crews are most enthusiastic about the engines, which appear to function smoothly and efficiently over incredibly long journeys. The disengaging [to save fuel] and re-engagings of motors now takes place without any risk of fire, a tendency known to have rife when the motors first used.'

I would say with the bomb capacity of 7 tons, remote controlled defensive turrets and it`s tail cannon it was an impressive piece of machinery.

PS : Flameboy still trying...

 

[AL Schlageter]

30/31 March 1944

This would normally have been the moon stand-down period for the Main Force, but a raid to the distant target of Nuremberg was planned on the basis of an early forecast that there would be protective high cloud on the outward route, when the moon would be up, but that the target area would be clear for ground-marked bombing. A Meteorological Flight Mosquito carried out a reconnaissance and reported that the protective cloud was unlikely to be present and that there could be cloud over the target, but the raid was not cancelled.

795 aircraft were dispatched - 572 Lancasters, 214 Halifaxes and 9 Mosquitos. The German controller ignored all the diversions and assembled his fighters at 2 radio beacons which happened to be astride the route to Nuremberg. The first fighters appeared just before the bombers reached the Belgian border and a fierce battle in the moonlight lasted for the next hour. 82 bombers were lost on the outward route and near the target. The action was much reduced on the return flight, when most of the German fighters had to land, but 95 bombers were lost in all - 64 Lancasters and 31 Halifaxes, 11.9 per cent of the force dispatched. It was the biggest Bomber Command loss of the war.

Most of the returning crews reported that they had bombed Nuremberg but subsequent research showed that approximately 120 aircraft had bombed Schweinfurt, 50 miles north-west of Nuremberg. This mistake was a result of badly forecast winds causing navigational difficulties. 2 Pathfinder aircraft dropped markers at Schweinfurt. Much of the bombing in the Schweinfurt area fell outside the town and only 2 people were killed in that area. The main raid at Nuremberg was a failure. The city was covered by thick cloud and a fierce cross-wind which developed on the final approach to the target caused many of the Pathfinder aircraft to mark too far to the east. A 10-mile-long creepback also developed into the countryside north of Nuremberg. Both Pathfinders and Main Force aircraft were under heavy fighter attack throughout the raid. Little damage was caused in Nuremberg.

49 Halifaxes minelaying in the Heligoland area, 13 Mosquitos to night-fighter airfields, 34 Mosquitos on diversions to Aachen, Cologne and Kassel, 5 RCM sorties, 19 Serrate patrols. No aircraft lost.

3 Oboe Mosquitos to Oberhausen (where 23 Germans waiting to go into a public shelter were killed by a bomb) and 1 Mosquito to Dortmund, 6 Stirlings minelaying off Texel and Le Havre. 17 aircraft on Resistance operations, 8 OTU sorties. 1 Halifax shot down dropping Resistance agents over Belgium.

Total effort for the night: 950 sorties, 96 aircraft (10.1 per cent) lost.

RAF History - Bomber Command 60th Anniversary

Lets looks at RAF BC for the same time as the The Steinbock Operation Jan-Apr 1944

29,355 night sorties
1010 missing
123 crashed

A loss rate of 3.44% and with the crashed loss added in, 3.85%.
http://www.lancaster-archive.com/bc-Stats1.htm#1944


Knickebein, X-Gerät and Y-Gerät were like the British "GEE-H" navigation/bombing system. The LW even used 'pathfinders' to indicate the target. Sounds like an excuse that some bombers came from the Med and had trouble finding their target(s).

The Jan 21 raid was a disaster for the Luftwaffe, and only 32 tons of bombs of the 282 dropped fell on London that night. Peltz had just 144 operational aircraft left by May 1944 when the raids ceased.

Certainly looks like Steinbock was a disaster for the LW.

 

[Kurfürst]

Peltz`s bombers were simply deployed elsewhere, as occured numerous times during Steinbock. Mostly they went to the Mediterranean, KG 40`s He 177s amongst them.

Keep trying. You`ll only get yourself banned, like your previous logins on this board.

 

[B-17engineer]

Thanks HoHun

 

[lesofprimus]

Keep trying. You`ll only get yourself banned, like your previous logins on this board.

U are going to have to back that up Kurfurst... I IP searched him, and the 4 IP addys that come up for him are for him and only him... Making accusations like that will get ur ass banned from here....

Stop being a crybaby pus*y and stick to the facts...

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Yeah what other logins has he had, I cant find any either.

 

[Glider]

I only know what I found but taking the points one at a time.

Navigation
The reason proposed for the poor performance by Kurfur't, that it was due to jamming and the crews being newly drawn from other areas doesn't hold up. From the French Coast at altitude you can easily see the Thames Estury. How difficult can it be to follow the Thames and find London, a distance of 20 miles from the coast?

Accuracy of the report
I don't know where or when this was first produced but what matters is how accurate is it. A blanket statement of 'I wouldn't trust it' is useless without some effort being spent to look into it.
I have continued to look into it and the results are very similar and I will end this posting with another example. Kurfurst, you have access to a lot of data, what evidence have you that its inaccurate?
Germany and the Second World War - Google Book Search
Pages 416-418 are those relating to this topic. The whole book look like its worth a read with plenty of references.

Effects of the Raid
29th January - 285 planes to start one major fire, not exactly the gutting of the centre of London.
4th - 5th February failed to achieve concentration and 15 aircraft lost. This would equal bombs scattered and 15 aircraft lost.
Later February did do better without question but the raids were much smaller and no longer a serious threat. By mid April only 50 tons of bombs fell on London in one night and the raids were over.

 

[Glider]

PS If Kurfurst is referring to me, I am not aware of being banned here or anywhere else either.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Dont worry about it Glider. He is not referring to you.

As Dan said, this will have to be backed up, because that is a serious accusation.

 

[Glider]

Glider, do these 44 incidents mean bombs dropped from 44 bombers out of the total of 447 bombers taking part or just the 220 taking part in the second raid for it does say London had been the target of both raids?

Not that it makes much difference, it is still bad. Do you know what caused the breakdown in the much heralded superior German system we hear about of placing bombers over the target?

I took it to be 44 for the night i.e. 10% of the bomber force

I know the weather wasn't good and the Germans were limited in the number of pathfinders that they had. Jamming probably did play a part in it, but as I said the distances were small and the Thames is a big arrow pointing at the heart of London.

That averages ~2800lb per bomber. We see claims the He177 could carry ~11,000lb of bombs and the Ju88 and He 111 could carry ~5500lb of bombs.

B-17s and B-24s averaged around 5000lb and the Halifax and Lancaster averaged around 10,000lb, yet were capable of carrying heavier loads.

The He177 was able to carry close to is maximum load for these raids but the other aircraft didn't. Its worth remembering that FW190's carring bombs were used in the attack so this alone would have reduced the average load by a fair margin.

That is some attrition rate, 63% of the force the LW started with.

Definately a huge loss considering that the actual number of raids doesn't seem to have been that many.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

B-17s and B-24s averaged around 5000lb and the Halifax and Lancaster averaged around 10,000lb, yet were capable of carrying heavier loads.

If I recall correctly the average bomb load for a Lancaster was 8,000lb. At 10,000 lb and above its range was restricted quite a bit.

 

[Kurfürst]

I guess Mr. AL Schlageter`s IP will still show a Canadian one... KraziKanuk..? Same style, feuding the same people : me, Hohun, Crumpp..

You have to wonder why he claims to be from the US on this board... to be from Germany on my board... to be from Gloucester on Axishistory board.

More in PM not to pollute the thread with matters about a troll. Crumpp probably knows too as well who he is, we just don`t bother with his baits too much.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Al and Kurfürst - you are both being sent PMs - I suggest you answer them.

 

[AL Schlageter]

If I recall correctly the average bomb load for a Lancaster was 8,000lb. At 10,000 lb and above its range was restricted quite a bit.

Range with standard fuel load and 10,000lb of bombs was 1040miles.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Range with standard fuel load and 10,000lb of bombs was 1040miles.

KK - you're an idiot - it seems you moved to Ottawa - I hope you get hit by a bus while going into your favorite gay bar.

Kurfürst - disregard my message unless another mod PMs you.

 

[Kurfürst]

Adler already PMd me, and I responded. Well that kinda sorts out the mystery isn`t it...?

Let`s forget about this troll, and let`s get back to the subject, shall we?

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Adler already PMd me, and I responded. Well that kinda sorts out the mystery isn`t it...?

Let`s forget about this troll, and let`s get back to the subject, shall we?

Right on!

 

[Juha]

I'm surprised
Kurfürst is giving a rozy picture on LW plane.
Now max LEVEL speed of He 177 A-3 was 480km/h
7 t bombload was for nahbomber ie for short range ops only, for Mittelbomber max bombload was 4t.
Some A-3s were still lost because of engine fires but that was not usual.
"remote controlled defensive turrets" I'm aware only one remote controlled defensive turret in He 177, the forward upper, Kurfürst can you advise were the other remote controlled defensive turret(s) were?

Juha

 

[Kurfürst]

Juha, can you give a source about that 480 km/h speed claim, and what range would be 'short range ops only'?

Ie. the Nähbomber configuration meant 7 tons of bombs and 8800 liters (out of 12 660 l) of fuel carried ie. some 2/3s of the maximum fuel capacity. Maximum range was listed as 5500 km, so your so-called 'short range' would be 3500-3800 km I believe. Perhaps less like 3200 km? Still, to put it into perspective, it`s double the range of the Lancaster and with 50% higher bombload, on a bomber that is something like 100 km/h faster and much better armed.

As for rozy picture, I can`t help if my views don`t fit into your conceptions, nor do I care if you feel offended when the qualities of He 177 are mentioned; I realize that your have that kind of hostile attitude for people not properly 'trashing' German equipment, the same attitude as in that arty thread where you even went and accused some of us with symphaties to Nazi ideology just for not sharing your anglophil preferences in artylerry, IIIRC. Are going to do the same here, too? If so, consider yourself ignored in advance.