Or all the planes would have to converge on the same spot of sky at point of release.
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Or all the planes would have to converge on the same spot of sky at point of release.There is a philosophical problem with bomb sights. If the sight worked perfectly and the bombs had perfect ballistics/aerodynamics they would all contribute to making one single large hole at the same point.
At night over a blacked out continent or with 100% cloud cover, bombing the right country was the first issue, before even discussing regions and cities.
I have regularly flown over Europe with it completely blanketed with cloud, without navigation aids you are frequently no better off by day than by night. Pollution or "industrial haze" was a bigger problem then, since towns were burning coal they were covered in a cloud of smoke on still days.Heck, it was a problem in the daytime. Rudely, the Germans had disabled all the aids to navigation. Dropping from 25000 ft to check road signs wasn't particularly safe or effective.
Heck, it was a problem in the daytime. Rudely, the Germans had disabled all the aids to navigation. Dropping from 25000 ft to check road signs wasn't particularly safe or effective.
As a philosophical exercise you may have a point. However, in practice, the individual AC could not occupy the same location at the drop point, therefore, even if the drop was ideal for all AC, a certain variation due to their separation would produce a shotgun pattern. The other real world variables would contribute to the distance between bomb clusters from a single formation. The US developed formations that required only 2 planes, lead and deputy lead, to actually carry Norden sights. Those experienced crews would aim and the rest of the formation would drop when they did. The formations would tighten up their 3 dimensional squadron elements entrail between the IP (initial point ) and the AP (aiming point). This produced a pattern of bomb clusters close to those of the lead crew, walking through the target... in theory.There is a philosophical problem with bomb sights. If the sight worked perfectly and the bombs had perfect ballistics/aerodynamics they would all contribute to making one single large hole at the same point.
It's interesting that the Norden Bombsight was kept out of British hands for most of the War, even American aircraft that were fitted with it (like the B-17, B-24 etc) had it stripped out before being delivered to the British. This is despite a personal plea from Neville Chamberlain to Roosevelt at the begining of the war. It was not until November 1944 that the RAF was leant some, along with an experienced American bombardier (Captain Stroud USAAF) and a representative of the Norden company (Mr Mitchell). They were tested by the RAF Bombing Development Unit at Newmarket using Mosquito XX KB268 (the sights provided were the M series). The results were not good - The official RAF report used the phrase "shocking inaccuracy". It was inferior in every way to the British SABS sight and the trials were cut short. - The file in British records is AIR14/875 - A short precy was published in the Air Britain "Aeromilitaria" magazine Issue 130 Summer 2007 in the "Out of the Archives" column.We read so much about the Norden Bomb sight. What bomb sights were used in British planes like the Wellington, Halifax, and Lancaster?
They were tested by the RAF Bombing Development Unit at Newmarket using Mosquito XX KB268 (the sights provided were the M series). The results were not good - The official RAF report used the phrase "shocking inaccuracy". It was inferior in every way to the British SABS sight and the trials were cut short.
The high precision attacks on the submarine pens and on the Tirpitz used the later bombsights. I believe this was the SABS. In the early years, and for area bombing, the RAF used the Course Setting Bomb Sight Mk VII for slow aircraft and the Mk IX for faster aircraft. There was also a later Mk X, which was not widely used, before the introduction of the Mk XIV - which was a whole new development.Funny how "we" read different things. I read about the RAF sinking the Tirpitz and holing submarine pens before I read about the Norden bomb sight.
Possibly. A spy had provided nearly a full set of plans for the Norden bombsight to Germany before US entry into WWIIWasn't the German Lofte bombsight based on the 'pickle in a barrel' Norden?
Wasn't the German Lofte bombsight based on the 'pickle in a barrel' Norden?
In spite of the security precautions, the entire Norden system had been passed to the Germans before the war started. A member of the German Duquesne Spy Ring, Herman W. Lang, who had been employed by the Carl L. Norden Corporation (manufacturers of the Norden bombsight), was able to provide vital details of the new bombsight to the Abwehr. During a visit to Germany in 1938, Lang conferred with German military authorities (Oberst Nikolaus Ritter of the Abwehr) and reconstructed sketches and plans of the confidential materials from memory.
Interesting to note, that even in the post war period, with access to the Norden and the SABS, the RAF decided to stick with the Mk.XIV on the V Bomber program