General Discussions
This is the place to discuss general issues related to the U-boat war or the war at sea in WWII.
Bombing survey
Posted by:
SuperKraut
()
Date: July 04, 2001 01:26PM
<HTML>The Allied Bombing Survey was a flawed study in that it only looked at production. It failed to consider misallocation of resources and potential production and German inefficiencies in war production. Remember Germany did not go on to a full war economy until late in 1943, before that there was considerable civilian production. Many consumer items which were eliminated from British production in 1940 were still made in Germany in 1943. It is no surprise that German war production peaked in 1944, but that had little to do with bombing. It would have been a lot higher without bombing.
The misallocation of resources to fight the RAF was significant. Thousands of heavy AA guns were needed in the west, which could have been used as AT guns in the east. The Luftwaffe spent major resources on building thousands of night fighters, training the crews and installing the (UHF) Radar and control infrastructure. Much of the bomb damage had to be repaired, which chewed up significant building resources. The bottom line is that the British bombing campaign did more indirect damage through chaos, disruption and misallocated resources than it did direct damage to production facilities.
British losses varied between 3 and 8% of attacking aircraft depending on the month and were obviously not high enough to discourage the campaign. Incidentally it was the absence of German microwave Radar which kept the losses so low. With microwave Radar, the British losses would have been in excess of 20%.
Regards,
SuperKraut</HTML>
The misallocation of resources to fight the RAF was significant. Thousands of heavy AA guns were needed in the west, which could have been used as AT guns in the east. The Luftwaffe spent major resources on building thousands of night fighters, training the crews and installing the (UHF) Radar and control infrastructure. Much of the bomb damage had to be repaired, which chewed up significant building resources. The bottom line is that the British bombing campaign did more indirect damage through chaos, disruption and misallocated resources than it did direct damage to production facilities.
British losses varied between 3 and 8% of attacking aircraft depending on the month and were obviously not high enough to discourage the campaign. Incidentally it was the absence of German microwave Radar which kept the losses so low. With microwave Radar, the British losses would have been in excess of 20%.
Regards,
SuperKraut</HTML>
Subject | Written By | Posted |
---|---|---|
Was RAF OKM\'s secret weapon? | Gavin | 06/30/2001 10:27AM |
RE: Was RAF OKM\\\'s secret weapon? | Rainer Kolbicz | 06/30/2001 10:19PM |
RE: Was RAF OKM\\\\\\\'s secret weapon? | Tim | 06/30/2001 11:19PM |
RE: Was RAF OKM\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s secret weapon? | Torlef | 07/01/2001 05:44AM |
RE: Was RAF OKMs secret weapon? | Rainer Kolbicz | 07/01/2001 07:35PM |
German Radar | SuperKraut | 07/01/2001 09:13PM |
Cavity magnetron | SuperKraut | 07/01/2001 09:16AM |
RE: Cavity magnetron | kurt | 07/02/2001 02:55PM |
RE: Cavity magnetron | SuperKraut | 07/02/2001 08:59PM |
RE: Was RAF OKM\\\\\\\'s secret weapon? | gavin | 07/03/2001 08:07AM |
Countermeasures | SuperKraut | 07/03/2001 09:32AM |
RE: Countermeasures | gavin | 07/04/2001 08:31AM |
Bombing survey | SuperKraut | 07/04/2001 01:26PM |
RE: Bombing survey | Dietzsch | 07/04/2001 02:58PM |
Night fighters | SuperKraut | 07/04/2001 09:01PM |
RE: Night fighters | Walter M. | 07/04/2001 09:32PM |
RE: Night fighters | SuperKraut | 07/05/2001 06:20AM |
RE: Night fighters | Walter M. | 07/05/2001 09:47AM |