Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Remember adler though it was great pressure being bombed around the clock imagine it nailed by the Yanks in the daytime and by the Pomes at night time. It would have been hell to be in berlin at the time...
Imagine the RAF quitting night bombing in early 1944, join the 8th and 15th and 12th, concentrating on all strategic targets including Dusseldorf, Koln, Munster - inside the radius of P-47s while USSAF going deep with Mustangs and Lightnings - and expanding their (escorted RAF heavies) radius as more Mustangs and P-38s came into theatre and RAF Mustangs joined.
In one stroke the twin engine fighters lose their effectiveness (both day and night) and even more pressure is put on daytime German pilots to fly multiple sorties a day trying to take on twice the bomber count - and worthwhile targets get pounded more efficiently.
THAT would have been the real nightmare...
I believe Syscom is correct the CEP was about the same between Bomber Command and the USAAC except the RAF was dropping a much larger load per aircraft . Now imagine if you had tied the Lanc instead of the Fort and Lib with the 51 that would have been the combo
I just think its unfair to directly compare BoB with BoG, both were very different battles with very different conditions variables.
The RAF attacked and fought at night because it did not have the equipment to fight in the day. Everyone knows that. But they never went back to Strategic Day bombing.
They never developed a long range fighter to go deep into Germany and destroy the LW. The US produced three (P38, P47, P51). The effectiveness of each of them varied, but they all fought over the enemy's airbases. That makes the air superiority fighters. Not interceptors as is found in the RAF and LW. Both airforces created aircraft that were point inteceptors or local defense fighters.
For an Airforce to be considered great in WW2, it had to have the ability to both bomb and dogfight effectively over the enemy's bases by day as well as destroy strategic targets.
The LW tried it and failed in 1940, switching to night bombing. Same with the RAF. Only the USAF/USAAF managed to do it by day to the point of Air Supremecy.
The attrition of pilots and skilled aircrews was perhaps the most
important factor in the destruction of the Luftrvaffe as an effective fighting force.
The rise in the attrition rate for pilots resulted in a steady reduction in the skills and
experience of those flying German aircraft . While the losses among the fighter
pilots may have been somewhat heavier than for other
categories, they undoubtedly reflected what was happening throughout the force
structure . The increasing attrition of pilots forced the Germans to curtail training programs to fill empty combat cockpits . As a result, new pilots with less skill than
their predecessors were lost at a faster rate. The increasing losses, in turn, forced
the training establishments to produce pilots even more rapidly. Once they had
begun this vicious cycle, the Germans found no escape . One of the surest indicators
of the declining skill of German pilots after the 1940 air battles was the rising level
of noncombat losses. By the first half of 1943,
they had reached the point where the fighter force suffered as many losses due to
noncombat causes as it did to the efforts of its opponents . Thereafter, the percentage
of noncombat losses began to drop. The probable cause of this was due less to an
awakening on the part of the Luftwaffe to the need for better flying safety than to the
probability that Allied flyers, in their overwhelming numbers, were shooting down
German pilots before they could crash their aircraft .
By the beginning of 1942, the Germans had lost the equivalent of two entire air
forces . The result was that the Germans had to curtail their training programs to
meet the demands of the front for new pilots . By January 1942, of the pilots
available for duty in the fighter force, only 60 percent were fully operational, while
the number in the bomber force was down to 47 percent. For the
remainder of the war, the percentage of fully operational fighter and bomber pilots
available, with few exceptions, remained below, and at many times substantially
below, the 70 percent level. Further exacerbating this situation was the fact that the
Germans were forced to lower their standards for a fully operational pilot as the war
continued . There was, one must note, no decisive moment in this decline in
expertise. Rather as Winston Churchill has suggested in another context, the
Luftwaffe had entered the descent from 1940 "incontinently, fecklessly. . . . It is a
fine broad stairway at the beginning but after a bit the carpet ends . A little further
on, there are only flagstones ; and a little further on, these break beneath your
feet . The graph for the number of training hours for new pilots clearly reflected
such a course. In the period through the late summer of 1942,
German pilots were receiving at least as many training hours as their opponents in
the RAF. By 1943, that statistic had begun a gradual shift against the Germans until
the last half of the year when Luftwaffe pilots were receiving barely one-half of the
training hours given to enemy pilots . In terms of flying training in operational
aircraft, the disparity had become even more pronounced: one-third of the RAF
total and one-fifth of the American total . But those Luftwaffe pilots who had
survived the attrition of the first air battles of the war had little difficulty defeating
new Allied pilots no matter how many training hours the latter had flown. In fact,
the ratio of kills-to-sorties climbed as those Luftwaffe pilots who survived built up
experience. However, few German pilots survived the attrition
of the first war years, and thus the Luftwaffe became, in fact, two distinct forces: the
few great aces-the Hartmans, Galands, and Waldmans-and the great mass of
pilots who faced great difficulty in landing their aircraft, much less surviving
combat.
No actually the need was there. They wouldn't have needed to jump to Nighttime sorties if they had had the long range escorts. Therefore there was a need for them.
Ho do you type that much man ???
But nobody had an effective long range fighter at the time. The Luftwaffe had the 110 which proved itself incapable, the Japanese were still working on the Zero which got in to service a year later, but lacked vital equipment by European standards.
Actually, I think the night bombing was more effective than the day bombing, as the RAF spent hours bombing their target, allowing fires to take hold.
Rather than quibble over the phrase 'effective', are we talking about destruction of German industry or cities?
Speer comments about the former, stating that Daylight Strategic Bombing was the ultimate force destroying German Industry and particularly the Oil Industry and more feared than RAF city busting campaign.
It is also true that the RAF moved a significant percentage of ops in late 1944 and 1945 to daylight bombing with excellent effectiveness - and probably had a better bombsight than the Norden..they did a very good job on those missions
The USSBS did mention this as a key to the better effectiveness of the RAF as compared to the AAF.
Syscom - I have a copy of that report and could not find reference to the concept of RAF "being more effective" - can you direct me to the page? It would clearly make more sense to bomb cities over time and space with big loads of incindieries and that certainly was the strategy for B-29 ops also - but a poor choice for targets inside a 200x500 foot structure? -
I'm talking about decentralized German industry - not inner city shops like Tokyo and Nagoya.
And then, the nightbombing does force the LW to divert significant resources to fight at night.