Shortround6
Major General
Hits were more like 2% for average pilots.
There is evidence of studies done by ground observers and gun camera film of British pilots in training opening fire on towed target sleeves at distances 3 to 4 times the range they were instructed to open fire at. 900-1200 yds instead of 300yds. Obviously any hits at those ranges were total accidents. The British had not spent a lot of time/effort on air to air gunnery training before the war and indeed there were several schemes and an awful of money spent on ways to get around training pilots in air to air shooting. The schemes for zero aim off shooting and the turret fighter craze. Also the 1939/early 40 spread patterns for the wing guns. Higher ups simply thought that you couldn't train pilots to deal with the closing speeds and brief firing opportunities of high speed flight.
Some pilots and squadron commanders may have thought this was rubbish and done what they could to plan around it but with that attitude being the official stance for the end of the 30s actual gunnery (air to air) firing was a tiny fraction of the pilots training.
Other air forces may have had different priorities and it depends on which squadrons and commanders you are talking about.
For the USN commander Thach had spent a number of his 10-12 years of service as an airman as a gunnery instructor and when posted to a squadron as a commander he spent as much time as possible instructing his squadron in air to air gunnery, other squadron commanders might not have been as diligent or had the experience to train their squadrons as well.
Just about every nation did a poor job of training replacement pilots. Both German and British replacements in the BoB not haveing spent enough time in operational fighters let alone spent any real time in gunnery training (it is not learned in an afternoon.)
British gunnery and bombing training during the 30s was often at annual (or at best semi annual) "camps" where the squadron/s left their home base/s and went to a base near the gunnery ranges for 1-2 weeks. They often went a year without firing guns.
Please note this is no reflection on the pilots involved. If you are not given the training or opportunity to practice then the development of skills needed are only going to show up in a tiny percentage of the pilots who have, for some reason, an innate ability of understanding of the problem/s involved.
The indictment is of the system/administrators rather than the pilots themselves. Given adequate training there is no reason to believe the British pilots were any worse than any other pilots.
There is evidence of studies done by ground observers and gun camera film of British pilots in training opening fire on towed target sleeves at distances 3 to 4 times the range they were instructed to open fire at. 900-1200 yds instead of 300yds. Obviously any hits at those ranges were total accidents. The British had not spent a lot of time/effort on air to air gunnery training before the war and indeed there were several schemes and an awful of money spent on ways to get around training pilots in air to air shooting. The schemes for zero aim off shooting and the turret fighter craze. Also the 1939/early 40 spread patterns for the wing guns. Higher ups simply thought that you couldn't train pilots to deal with the closing speeds and brief firing opportunities of high speed flight.
Some pilots and squadron commanders may have thought this was rubbish and done what they could to plan around it but with that attitude being the official stance for the end of the 30s actual gunnery (air to air) firing was a tiny fraction of the pilots training.
Other air forces may have had different priorities and it depends on which squadrons and commanders you are talking about.
For the USN commander Thach had spent a number of his 10-12 years of service as an airman as a gunnery instructor and when posted to a squadron as a commander he spent as much time as possible instructing his squadron in air to air gunnery, other squadron commanders might not have been as diligent or had the experience to train their squadrons as well.
Just about every nation did a poor job of training replacement pilots. Both German and British replacements in the BoB not haveing spent enough time in operational fighters let alone spent any real time in gunnery training (it is not learned in an afternoon.)
British gunnery and bombing training during the 30s was often at annual (or at best semi annual) "camps" where the squadron/s left their home base/s and went to a base near the gunnery ranges for 1-2 weeks. They often went a year without firing guns.
Please note this is no reflection on the pilots involved. If you are not given the training or opportunity to practice then the development of skills needed are only going to show up in a tiny percentage of the pilots who have, for some reason, an innate ability of understanding of the problem/s involved.
The indictment is of the system/administrators rather than the pilots themselves. Given adequate training there is no reason to believe the British pilots were any worse than any other pilots.
