[Milsurplus] Milsurplus Digest, Vol 172, Issue 3

Wed Aug 1 22:23:29 EDT 2018

The Gladwell video was pretty interesting and of course more were queued up
that I watched....

I think this is the chemical plan that Gladwell references:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leuna_works

" On clear days, only 29% of the bombs aimed at Leuna landed inside the
plant gates; on radar raids the number dropped to 5.1%. "

Is 29% representative of all bombing results,  only representative of
targets as heavily defended as Leuna?

Obviously, there's a ton of material on-line about this (and every other
conceivable topic).....

I found this article on WW 2 Daylight Precision Bombing in Air Force
magazine to be well written with a fair assessment of the topic:

http://www.airforcemag.com/MagazineArchive/Pages/2008/October%202008/1008daylight.aspx

" The planners were not misled by pickle barrel assumptions. According to
data from training and practice bombing, a heavy bomber at 20,000 feet had
a 1.2 percent probability of hitting a 100-foot-square target. About 220
bombers would be required for 90 percent probability of destroying the
target. AWPD-1 forecast a need for 251 combat groups to carry out the plan.
"

" Postwar analysis found that accuracy had been about the same in Europe
and Asia for day visual and radar precision bombing. Eighth Air Force in
Great Britain put 31.8 percent of its bombs within 1,000 feet of the aim
point from an average altitude of 21,000 feet. Fifteenth Air Force in Italy
averaged 30.78 percent of its bombs within 1,000 feet from 20,500 feet. In
the Asia and the Pacific, Twentieth Air Force—45.5 percent of whose sorties
were daylight precision despite the emphasis on area bombing in the last
months of the war—put 31 percent of its bombs within 1,000 feet of the aim
point, although the bombing altitudes were on average 4,500 feet lower than
for Eighth Air Force. "

73 Mark K3MSB

On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 9:13 PM, Bob kb8tq <kb8tq at n1k.org> wrote:

> Hi
>
> Running through the various early contracts for the Norden, it’s tough to
> find one that was over a million dollars.
> That makes the $1.5B “to develop” cost a bit tough to believe.
>
> Bob
>
> On Aug 1, 2018, at 7:35 PM, Jeff Kruth via Milsurplus <
> milsurplus at mailman.qth.net> wrote:
>
> To reply to Mssr. Stinson: Yes, all true. The video by Gladwell is quite
> good, I truly enjoyed his manner of presentation and he is a good
> researcher & speaker (engaging). He does not slam the Norden, just explain
> the times, practices and results. I learned a LOT and recommend it to all.
> It is worth a view, if only to pick up little tidbits like about the fussy
> Swiss engineer Carl Norden who became an American and was a devout
> Christian. He invented the bombsight to save lives by allowing discriminate
> precision bombing. It cost $1.5 Billion to develop in 1940 timeframe(!!),
> think of cost in todays dollars $15 Billion ?? It was used to drop a weapon
> of mass destruction that cost $3 Billion to develop (the A-bomb). I tell
> you, you guys would like the you-tube, its only like 15 minutes or so  long.
>
> Gladwell says that the Norden was a precision, Swiss designed, analog
> computer that required manual target acquisition and proper, on the spot,
> programming. He points out that not all the men trained to operate it had
> the same skill level in combat.
>
> YMMV
> 73, Jeff Kruth, WA3ZKR
>
> In a message dated 8/1/2018 3:14:26 PM Eastern Standard Time,
> milsurplus-request at mailman.qth.net writes:
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Wed, 1 Aug 2018 14:06:45 -0500
> From: "David Stinson" <arc5 at ix.netcom.com>
> To: "'List Milsurplus'" <milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>
> Subject: [Milsurplus] Norden Bomb Sight
> Message-ID: <[email protected]>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> You know, mechanical computers on battleships were pretty good at
> delivering a 14-inch-diameter shell miles on-target, under way and in seas.
> When considering the low on-target rate for bombing using the Norden Sight,
> one wonders how much could be attributed to design limitations and how much
> to 18-20-year-old, lightly-trained flight crews, scared out of their wits
> (as any sane person would be), who just wanted to unload the bombs and get
> the heck out of there. Not bad-talking the flight crews- I have no right to
> ?cast shade? on these men. Just trying to understand.___________________
> ___________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net <Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/milsurplus/attachments/20180801/62db1b9b/attachment.html>