Tactical Strikes of World War II

[FLYBOYJ]

Too many resources would have been expended to fly them to bomb low value targets.

And that's precisely why the A-20 was utilized. A twin engine light bomber that was fast, accurate and easy to maintain, it fit it's role perfectly and its apparent it accomplish it "above expectations."

 

[plan_D]

Thank you, Joe, for providing the first piece of extensive information on the US Ninth Air Force on this thread. I've been waiting for it from the start. If I were at home I could back up the usage of the Boston in 2nd TAF service. And I will do as soon as the oppurtunity arises, and I get home and research further into my books.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Thank you, Joe, for providing the first piece of extensive information on the US Ninth Air Force on this thread. I've been waiting for it from the start. If I were at home I could back up the usage of the Boston in 2nd TAF service. And I will do as soon as the oppurtunity arises, and I get home and research further into my books.

My pleasure! It seems the 409th and 410th BGs were sh*t hot and did their job extremely well. There seems to be no indication that the 9th AF command was dis-satisfied with the A-20s performance, even as they awaited the arrival of the A-26. I'd like to see 2nd TAF data on the A-20 (Boston) as it compares to the 9th AF....

 

[Hunter368]

Good information Joe

 

[syscom3]

Of all the bomb groups in the 9th and 12th AF''s, seems like the A20's were chosen to be converted faster than the other groups.

And of course, after WW2, the multi-engined light bomber concept dissapeared from the AF.

The P38's and P47's were inherintly better than the A20's as they were multi-role, could dive bomb for better accuracy and carried a fair sized payload.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Of all the bomb groups in the 9th and 12th AF''s, seems like the A20's were chosen to be converted faster than the other groups.

Becuase that was the plan from the get go....

And of course, after WW2, the multi-engined light bomber concept dissapeared from the AF.

Yes it did, along with other WW2 air combat doctrine that would no longer be valid in the jet age.

The P38's and P47's were inherintly better than the A20's as they were multi-role, could dive bomb for better accuracy and carried a fair sized payload.

But you have nothing to prove that with! I've already shown that the 410th BG was probably the most accurate BG in the whole ETO! Neither the P-47 or the P-38 accomplished their mission at night, had the capability of carrying extra radio, radar or navigation equipment without major modification and only the P-38 could offer the twin engine safety factor of its lay out but then again the A-20 had recips in lieu of in-line engines, an argument you brought up before about the Lanc and B-24!!! I also see you're skirting the issue, you once again CANNOT prove that anyone wasn't satisfied with the A-20 or that it was "underperforming."

 

[FLYBOYJ]

From Wikipedia....

"When DB-7 series production finally ended on September 20, 1944, a total of 7,098 had been built by Douglas and a further 380 by Boeing. It had an excellent reputation due to its high speed and good manoeuvrability, and ex-pilots often consider it their favorite aircraft of the War. Many consider its only weakness to be its limited range.

Some military historians consider it the third most important twin-engined aircraft of World War II, behind the Ju-88 and Mosquito. This is probably due to its extensive use by the Soviets, yet the DB-7 remains largely unknown."

UNDERPERFORMING?!?!?

 

[Glider]

Of all the bomb groups in the 9th and 12th AF''s, seems like the A20's were chosen to be converted faster than the other groups.

And of course, after WW2, the multi-engined light bomber concept dissapeared from the AF.

The P38's and P47's were inherintly better than the A20's as they were multi-role, could dive bomb for better accuracy and carried a fair sized payload.

The P38 and P47 were inherrently worse for the role undertaken by the Boston, in that they lacked the payload/range. They were different animals for different roles

 

[lesofprimus]

The 9thcould have converted those three A20 groups to B26's, or one of the fighter bombers AND BEEN EVEN MORE EFFECTIVE!

Well well, syscom finally admitted it!!!

Whoo Hoo!!!!!!!

By saying they could be even MORE effective, he's implying they WERE effective.... I knew u would finally come to ur senses sys....

 

[k9kiwi]

Just a little test for Syscom

Have alook at these 7th PRG target photos and decide which are Strategic and which would be Tactical targets.

v8th OPS S2 Intelligence Section: v7th PhotoRecon Gp, v14th Tac PhotoRecon Sqdn

Also note the size of the airfields, sure as heck not hard to crack a few of those out of service with 3 or 4, Dare I say it, ooohhhhh..

A-20's

 

[syscom3]

Those are CGI's arent they?

 

[k9kiwi]

At the top of the page it states

All graphics and images used at this website created for or from the game:

"B17 - Flying Fortress, The Mighty 8th"

It was worth a laugh.

 

[plan_D]

For Joe:

On 1 June, 1943, RAF 2 Group transferred from Bomber Command to Fighter Command. This group controlled all light and medium bombers in Great Britain. This effectively began the re-organisation that would create the 2nd Tactical Air Force. Commanded by Air-Vice Marshal Basil Embry, 2 Group contained ten squadrons of twin-engined bombers.

The order of battle on 1 June, 1943, was:

98 Sqdn. and 180 Sqdn. operating the Mitchell Mk.II from Foulsham.
320 (Dutch) Sqdn. operating the Mitchell Mk.II from Attlebridge.
226 Sqdn. re-equipping with Mitchell Mk.II at Swanton Morley.
88 Sqdn. operating Boston Mk.IIIA from Swanton Morley.
107 Sqdn. operating Boston Mk.IIIA from Great Massingham.
342 (Free French) Sqdn. operating Boston Mk.IIIA from Sculthorpe.
21 Sqdn. operating Ventura Mk.I from Oulton.
464 (RAAF) Sqdn. and 487 (RNZAF) Sqdn. operating Ventura Mk.I from Methwold.

The Ventura was deemed unfit for front-line service and an early re-equipment was planned. 464 (RAAF) and 487 (RNZAF) squadrons moved to Sculthorpe in July where they re-equipped with the Mosquito FB.VI.
While the Boston IIIA carried less of a payload (often 1,000 lbs, maximum 2,000 lbs), the faster speed and improved handling over the Mitchell made it more useful as an attack aircraft.

10 June, 1943, 107 squadron send twelve Bostons to Gosnay power station in Belgium. Considerable damage was achieved with no loss to the raiding Bostons.

8 August, 1943, 2 Group sent forty Bostons from 88, 107 and 342 (Free French) squadrons to attack naval stores at Rennes. The raid was deemed a success. Although 88 and 107 squadrons both lost a Boston to FlaK when leaving the target area. While two more crash landed in Britain after suffering FlaK damage.

16 August, 1943, 2 Group Bostons went out for another low-level attack. 88, 107 and 342 (Free French) squadrons sent out thirty-seven Bostons between them to attack armament and steel works at Denain, France. Sweeping in low the Bostons reported complete success in destruction of their target. This was confirmed by a Film Production Unit Mosquito that followed the raid.
JG 2 and JG 26 attacked the raiders as they left the target area. One Boston was seen hit a high-tension electricity cable pylon and crash, while another was seen to hit a tree while trying to evade. Four others were brought down, for a total of six Bostons failing to return. FlaK was believed to be the cause, however JG 2 claimed four Bostons and 11./JG 26 claimed another two. The latter claims were made at 30 feet!

27 August, 1943, 107 squadron send six Bostons to attack Gosnay power station. Over target F/O Allison's Boston is hit by FlaK, on the way out this plane collided with F/O Rankin's plane causing both to crash near Lilliers. Another Boston (Pilot: F/O W.W Locke - KIA) failed to return after Fw 190s attacked the formation.

I'll try and find some pilot accounts, I have all three volumes on 2nd TAF so I might get something. 88 and 342 (Free French) operated the Boston IIIA and IV right until the end of the war.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Great info D! From what I have found it seems the A-20 had the best safety record in the ETO for twin engine aircraft until late in the war when the B-26 overtook her after having its share of problems. It seems the A-20s would come in low and fast with limited numbers, taking out the specific target(s). It seems the RAF and USAAF used the same tactics when deploying them.

 

[lesofprimus]

Yea Joe, the A-20 tactics are right on the money.... We sure are proving that the A-20 wasnt useless, and that it accomplished its job effectively, accuratly and safely....

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Yea Joe, the A-20 tactics are right on the money.... We sure are proving that the A-20 wasnt useless, and that it accomplished its job effectively, accuratly and safely....

YEP!! As I posted earlier, 9th AF A-20s flew several night missions in Feb 1945, using B-26's as flare planes, an A-26 for target marking, and the A-20s to bomb the objectives. And this aircraft was supposed to be underperforming?? HA!

 

[plan_D]

The major point was the 107 squadron raids on Gosnay power station. The first raid of twelve planes must have achieved something near complete destruction. Because they didn't need to return for two months, and when they returned it was only with six planes. The power station was obviously not fully running again but the RAF wanted to keep it out of action.

I haven't been keeping a keen eye out but I haven't found any other sortie to Gosnay power station.

I have a few raids on a power station in Langebrugge, it seems like it was a tough target. Because it was raided by Mitchells and Bostons on several occasions, very close together. I'll get the details together for that one.

 

[k9kiwi]

Tactical strikes by Mosquitos.

As Described by Eileen Younghusband, a WAAF RADAR Filter Officer.

However, the excitement of the work we were doing made up for a lot. The days were divided into four watches with two of us on each, working together with two WAAF sergeants. As the sightings from the RADAR units came in, we plotted the information and had to calculate and extrapolate the trajectory of the rocket's path back to its launching sight. Speed was of the essence. We had to do it in less than five minutes. The mark 4 rockets were launched from mobile launch pads, two at a time. From the moment of launch, it took only ten minutes before the launch vehicles were ready to move off to another location. This allowed us up to 5 minutes to work out the estimated launch site and have it analysed. We didn't have the luxury of calculators, let alone computers - only pencils and paper and slide rules. The information was passed on to the Mosquito aircraft. They were equipped with torpedo type bombs and patrolled in sections constantly over the likely launch areas in NE Holland. Given the possible location, they were able to target and destroy the launchers.

Not all the RADAR information or our calculations were completely accurate but the operation was a great success. By the end of the following March most of the launching vehicles had been destroyed and there were no replacements. Hitler's forces had many more warheads available but no more vehicles to launch them.

From
The Wartime Memories Project- The Women's Auxilliary Air Force, WAAF

So Tactical strikes apparently have their place.

 

[Glider]

Syscom. Is this a good time to remind you of accusing us who used slide rules for serious work of Fudging the results!!!

Excellent quote K9kiwi

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

I also see you're skirting the issue, you once again CANNOT prove that anyone wasn't satisfied with the A-20 or that it was "underperforming."

FBJ Thanks for the info. It will do no good, because he has been skirting the issue from the beginning. I gave up after the 1st or 2nd page to try and argue with him.