View Single Post
Old 15th Apr 2019, 19:47
  #27 (permalink)  
Onceapilot
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 1,744
I think a lot of peoples opinions can ignore the reality. The concept that the enemy could always up his game to meet the difficulties in shooting down better bombers and defeating countermeasures was regularly spouted by the knuckle-draggers that infected various levels of Allied technical intelligence in WW2. Reginald Victor Jones CH, CB, CBE, FRS, FRSE, LLD pointed out many of the gross errors in scientific tactics that were made, including the criminally delayed introduction of Window tactics on the pathetic assertion, by some, that the Germans would develop countermeasures and also use Window against the Allies and lose the effectiveness, which they did, but with very limited effect! But that false assertion cost thousands of Allied aircrew lives in the months of the Bombing offensive when Window was withheld. Likewise, to assert that the Germans had no need to counter the Mosquito bombing contribution is crass. The use of Nitrous-Oxide powerboosting illustrates the difficulties that the enemy faced in engaging fast and high flying bombers. The Mosquito itself, in nightfighter form used Nitrous oxide power boosting for the same purpose, to increase the speed advantage of the interceptor . The simple fact is, that Airborne Interception becomes exponentially more difficult as the speed advantage of the interceptor is reduced. For every single mph that the Allied bombers could increase their speed, ANY interceptor faces a lower chance of a successful intercept and it increases the time/distance taken for intercepts of otherwise similar geometry to occur, makes no difference if the nightfighter is an Me262, the faster bomber is less likely to be intercepted than a slower bomber. Rolling, your last sentence is also incorrect.

OAP
Onceapilot is offline