WW2 Night Bomber Formations
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Bedfordshire
Posts: 243
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
WW2 Night Bomber Formations
Can anyone provide information (or link thereto) regarding the 'mechanics' of putting together large RAF night-bomber raids?
I've seen film of the silhouettes of other bombers photographed against a backdrop of fires on the ground and am intrigued to know what measures were in place to prevent fratricide caused by falling bombs.
I've seen film of the silhouettes of other bombers photographed against a backdrop of fires on the ground and am intrigued to know what measures were in place to prevent fratricide caused by falling bombs.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Lincs
Posts: 453
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Meadowbank,
The definitive resource concerning the evolution of Bomber Command tactics during WWII is 'The Strategic Air Offensive Against Germany, 1939-45' Volumes I-IV. This is the official history of the campaign completed over 15 years by Sir Charles Webster and Dr Noble Frankland.
For a more concise study, I'd recommend 'Bomber Command' by Max Hastings, any of Sir Martin Middlebrook's books on specific periods in the campaign, or 'The Bomber Command War Diaries: an Operational record Book 1939-45' by Middlebrook and Chris Everitt.
In essence the period up to early 1942 was chaotic with both sides limited by an absence of technology and RAF aircraft simply routed to their targets as they wished over a period that could extend for several hours. Faced with the increasing lethality of German defences facilitated by Kammhuber's 'Himmelbett' C2 system of radar guided searchlights and nightfighters, Harris introduced the bomber stream from March 42 which concentrated attacks and sought to overwhelm defences. Augmented by increasing use of EW, the Pathfinder Force and diversionary raids, the bomber stream was maintained throughout the remainder of the War.
Some attempts at vertical deconfliction were attempted but it was largely down to individual crews. Indeed, more experienced crews would regularly change altitudes to confuse Luftwaffe fighter controllers. Generally speaking the Lancasters and Halifax IIIs flew at the highest levels of around 18-22 000 ft with earlier Halifax variants and Stirlings only capable of maintaining much lower altitudes. Later, the Stirlings and older Halifaxes were withdrawn from the main force due to losses whilst a small number of 100 Group Fortresses and Liberators were tasked at higher altitudes for active ECM. meanwhile 'Master Bombers' (sometimes referred to as the Master of Ceremonies (MC)) mostly flying in Mosquitoes and Mustangs would fly at even lower levels over the target, sometimes down to rooftop height and direct and/or correct the aim of the main force as bombs dropped around them!!!!! Sir Leonard Cheshire was an example of one such MC. The one cardinal rule was to avoid flying across or against the bomber stream. Additionally, leaving the bomber stream would deny the protection from German GCI, radar laid AAA and nightfighters afforded by 'Window' (chaff) dropping.
In short then, night bomber crews employed the big sky theory to avoid bombs being dropped from above!!
Which reminds me, if the Land Army and Lumberjill girls can have a commemorative badge, when are the Bomber Command guys going to get a campaign medal?
Hope the above is of use,
Regards,
MM
The definitive resource concerning the evolution of Bomber Command tactics during WWII is 'The Strategic Air Offensive Against Germany, 1939-45' Volumes I-IV. This is the official history of the campaign completed over 15 years by Sir Charles Webster and Dr Noble Frankland.
For a more concise study, I'd recommend 'Bomber Command' by Max Hastings, any of Sir Martin Middlebrook's books on specific periods in the campaign, or 'The Bomber Command War Diaries: an Operational record Book 1939-45' by Middlebrook and Chris Everitt.
In essence the period up to early 1942 was chaotic with both sides limited by an absence of technology and RAF aircraft simply routed to their targets as they wished over a period that could extend for several hours. Faced with the increasing lethality of German defences facilitated by Kammhuber's 'Himmelbett' C2 system of radar guided searchlights and nightfighters, Harris introduced the bomber stream from March 42 which concentrated attacks and sought to overwhelm defences. Augmented by increasing use of EW, the Pathfinder Force and diversionary raids, the bomber stream was maintained throughout the remainder of the War.
Some attempts at vertical deconfliction were attempted but it was largely down to individual crews. Indeed, more experienced crews would regularly change altitudes to confuse Luftwaffe fighter controllers. Generally speaking the Lancasters and Halifax IIIs flew at the highest levels of around 18-22 000 ft with earlier Halifax variants and Stirlings only capable of maintaining much lower altitudes. Later, the Stirlings and older Halifaxes were withdrawn from the main force due to losses whilst a small number of 100 Group Fortresses and Liberators were tasked at higher altitudes for active ECM. meanwhile 'Master Bombers' (sometimes referred to as the Master of Ceremonies (MC)) mostly flying in Mosquitoes and Mustangs would fly at even lower levels over the target, sometimes down to rooftop height and direct and/or correct the aim of the main force as bombs dropped around them!!!!! Sir Leonard Cheshire was an example of one such MC. The one cardinal rule was to avoid flying across or against the bomber stream. Additionally, leaving the bomber stream would deny the protection from German GCI, radar laid AAA and nightfighters afforded by 'Window' (chaff) dropping.
In short then, night bomber crews employed the big sky theory to avoid bombs being dropped from above!!
Which reminds me, if the Land Army and Lumberjill girls can have a commemorative badge, when are the Bomber Command guys going to get a campaign medal?
Hope the above is of use,
Regards,
MM
Walter, are you sure that it wasn't little green men with weird radio's controlling the direction that the bombs went in, ensuring they missed friendly aircraft. Apparently 75% of bombing raids on France were not necessary, just blooming good sport.
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: LFBO
Posts: 96
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I just found this - but it's not the story I remember!
http://carol_fus.tripod.com/raf_hero_jrobertson.html
http://carol_fus.tripod.com/raf_hero_jrobertson.html
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: england
Age: 61
Posts: 322
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
for the mechanics and results(for the raf AND german civilians) you must read 'INFERNO' by keith lowe. released last year and just about the best non technical account of the 'battle of hamburg'. pretty harrowing but a great read all the same!!!
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
From a different forum I saw a question about altitudes and pressure settings.
I then contacted a Lanc Nav.
While the heights quoted 18-22 were no doubt ideal it was not always that high.
He remembers bombing as low as 12000ft. Essentially below cloud. It would also confuse if the fighters were trying to intercept the stream but were 10000ft two high.
There is another book I am reading I'll try and see wht he says.
I then contacted a Lanc Nav.
While the heights quoted 18-22 were no doubt ideal it was not always that high.
He remembers bombing as low as 12000ft. Essentially below cloud. It would also confuse if the fighters were trying to intercept the stream but were 10000ft two high.
There is another book I am reading I'll try and see wht he says.
In Max Hastings Bomber Command when the first 'Thousand Bomber Raid' was briefed on Cologne ,the crews were told that 'no more than two aircraft would collide over the target area', ( as computed by Bomber Command Boffins) some bright spark asked if they knew which two!!
The crews would intially climb for height over base, then meet @ a pre -arranged height and point, always climbing for height. It could take a fully loaded Lanc an hour or more to get to 20,000 feet, by which time they could be over the enemy coast.
Different groups would be assigned heights, according to weight and aircraft type etc.. It was not unkown for aircraft to let bombs go over the sea in order to gain more height.
Over the target it wasnt unusual for aircraft to be 'showered' with incendiaries as there were literally thousands of them being dropped. Cases of aircraft being hit by bombs were not unusual and as we have seen on here, returned home to tell the tale!
Aicraft being hit by exploding bombs were rarer due to the arming fuse not being fully armed on its intial descent. There were often stories of aircraft being bought down by others which had received a direct hit from Flak.
Bomber Command crews believed that 'Scarecrow Flares' were used ( in a kind of Psychological Warfare), that were ment to resemble a fully laden aircraft blowing up! In essence, this is what it was , as there was no evidence of the Germans using such a device.
As a rule the Bomber Stream ment safety , although Nightfighters got into 'the Stream' on occasions. Some pilots such as Micky Martin would fly at low level to the target, gain height to bomb, then back down to low level home.
The crews would intially climb for height over base, then meet @ a pre -arranged height and point, always climbing for height. It could take a fully loaded Lanc an hour or more to get to 20,000 feet, by which time they could be over the enemy coast.
Different groups would be assigned heights, according to weight and aircraft type etc.. It was not unkown for aircraft to let bombs go over the sea in order to gain more height.
Over the target it wasnt unusual for aircraft to be 'showered' with incendiaries as there were literally thousands of them being dropped. Cases of aircraft being hit by bombs were not unusual and as we have seen on here, returned home to tell the tale!
Aicraft being hit by exploding bombs were rarer due to the arming fuse not being fully armed on its intial descent. There were often stories of aircraft being bought down by others which had received a direct hit from Flak.
Bomber Command crews believed that 'Scarecrow Flares' were used ( in a kind of Psychological Warfare), that were ment to resemble a fully laden aircraft blowing up! In essence, this is what it was , as there was no evidence of the Germans using such a device.
As a rule the Bomber Stream ment safety , although Nightfighters got into 'the Stream' on occasions. Some pilots such as Micky Martin would fly at low level to the target, gain height to bomb, then back down to low level home.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Lincs
Posts: 453
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The scarecrow shells rumour originated from the use of upward firing 'Schräge Musik' (Jazz Music) cannons in Luftwaffe nightfighters. These didn't use tracer bullets as attacks were carried out at close range and very few bombers attacked in this method survived.
As a result, crews returning from ops did not report seeing the tracer fire which characterised engagements by Luftwaffe fighters using their forward firing weapons. It was therefore assumed that the explosions were simply pyrotechnic shells fired to give the impression of exploding bombers, or to intimidate aircrew; hence 'Scarecrows'.
German records proved that no such shells were employed and it is now generally accepted that scarecrows were indeed mostly bombers exploding after having been engaged at short range from below. Luftwaffe statistics suggest that over 80% of RAF bombers dispatched during the 1943-44 Berlin campaign were killed by Schräge Musik.
Regards,
MM
As a result, crews returning from ops did not report seeing the tracer fire which characterised engagements by Luftwaffe fighters using their forward firing weapons. It was therefore assumed that the explosions were simply pyrotechnic shells fired to give the impression of exploding bombers, or to intimidate aircrew; hence 'Scarecrows'.
German records proved that no such shells were employed and it is now generally accepted that scarecrows were indeed mostly bombers exploding after having been engaged at short range from below. Luftwaffe statistics suggest that over 80% of RAF bombers dispatched during the 1943-44 Berlin campaign were killed by Schräge Musik.
Regards,
MM
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Colditz young offenders centre
Posts: 220
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Schräge Musik...I do not believe I had ever heard of the upward firing guns from Luftwaffe until the last few years.
(a bear of little brain)
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: 51 10 03.70N 2 58 37.15W
Age: 75
Posts: 273
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I remember many years ago reading a book about Bomber Command* where it described a briefing for of the first of the mass raids where they were trying to 'compact' the stream, for a shorter time over the target. After the briefing was over there was concern amongst the crews about the dangers of collision with so many aircraft in such a small piece of air and a question was asked about it. The reply was something like "Ah, yes. The boffins have been looking at this and have assured us that, statistically, there should be only one collision. And we have also been informed that that will be between two Tiger Moths, somewhere near Lowestoft".
(* Title and authors name lost long ago to the mists of time).
(* Title and authors name lost long ago to the mists of time).
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Hertfordshire
Age: 70
Posts: 292
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I understand the Luftwaffe did actually use flares in order to light up the bombers.
From what I've read the aircrews kept a very good look out for other aircraft, in particular the air gunners and the bomb aimer once his deed was done.
In the book RAF Bomber Stories edited by Martin W Bowman, there are decsriptions of a collision, and two bombs on other aircraft incidents with pictures.
From what I've read the aircrews kept a very good look out for other aircraft, in particular the air gunners and the bomb aimer once his deed was done.
In the book RAF Bomber Stories edited by Martin W Bowman, there are decsriptions of a collision, and two bombs on other aircraft incidents with pictures.
My brain is turning to mush. When the subject came up it niggled me that I had read something somewhere. Here it is:
http://www.technologyreview.com/prin....aspx?id=17724
The great Dr Dyson answers all questions. There are two parts to this story, the link to Part II being in the footnote.
http://www.technologyreview.com/prin....aspx?id=17724
The great Dr Dyson answers all questions. There are two parts to this story, the link to Part II being in the footnote.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Lincs
Posts: 453
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hipper,
Luftwaffe He-177, Do-217 and Ju-88 bombers in particular were used to drop flares over the bomber stream. This was a tactic employed to particularly help the Wilde Sau single engined night fighters who lacked radar.
Additionally, the Flak batteries fired false flares to mimic Pathfinder route and target marking although they struggled to accurately replicate several of the colours employed.
Regards,
MM
Luftwaffe He-177, Do-217 and Ju-88 bombers in particular were used to drop flares over the bomber stream. This was a tactic employed to particularly help the Wilde Sau single engined night fighters who lacked radar.
Additionally, the Flak batteries fired false flares to mimic Pathfinder route and target marking although they struggled to accurately replicate several of the colours employed.
Regards,
MM
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: england
Age: 61
Posts: 322
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i remember a conversation with a rear gunner many years ago , he told me they always tried to fly under the cloud cover as on moonlit nights it was easier for nightfighters to spot them against to cloud backdrop. he also said that sometimes they were so low he could smell the smoke and scorched flesh