That is most defintely a He 111.  Very famous picture.

That's why I never trust school textbooks.  Aircraft were capable of carrying RADAR sets, however the aircraft required special adjustments to do so.  You could not simply slap a RADAR set into a Spitfire.  Entire aircraft were built to accomadate RADAR (P-61).  In most cases, it was usually only used for night figheters, as the equipment was so cumbersome.  To my knowledge, all/most strtegic ordnance in World War II was dropped with bombsights.

Also note the text box "One plane-load of bombs...".  A quick run through CFS3 will prove that wrong.  However, an entire wing, or pehaps even a formation, now that's a different story.

I think I recognise that text book from a few years back.  Notice later on, in the quick blurb it provides on the BoB, it credits RADAR as the pivotal factor.  In most discussions here, it's been roughly boiled down to the fact the Luftwaffe switched it's attention to bombing the populace, rather than finishing off the RAF.

The book obviously oversimplifies technology THEN, with technology NOW.  Even then, "collateral damage", or undesired damage/casualties is practically unavoidable even with precision bombing, if the target is located within a non-military populated area.

"..the only way to win the game is not to play at all.."

Hmm didn't know about the radar system Hangar. Did the allies use these to precision bomb too?

The germans seemed so advanced, swept wing fighters, Radar bombing, next thing you know BMW is tring to build a Flying sauser.

oops spoke too soon
http://tanks45.tripod.com/Jets45/Histories/BMW-Fv1/BMW-V1.htm

Quote:


yeah like the inca mumy in the beggining. I ussually don't have dreams, but I swear I had a nighmare about that thing... its creepy!

Quote:

Yes. The British had concentrated on defensive RADAR which was developed just in time for the BoB. After lagging behind in radio navigation they developed their own system. This gives a brief explanation of GEE & OBOE I mentioned. http://histru.bournemouth.ac.uk/Oral_History/Talking_About_Technology/radar_rese...
These systems worked well enough but in wartime were subject to jamming or interference. Another more accurate system was code-named H2S. This involved signals being transmitted from the aircraft. One problem with this being that these signals could be used by the enemy to track the aircraft. As with any top-secret equipment it was not used as early as it might have been for fear of it falling into enemy hands. It was used successfully on D-Day. I've recently been re-reading a very interesting book entitled "Most Secret War" by R.V Jones (the man who bent the beams). This gives the history behind these & other secret developments during WWII, including the Enigma codebreakers at Bletchley Park. http://www.naval-military-press.com/books/details/2574.htm

Quote:

I have to agree with you there Jim. Makes me wonder who chooses the history books these days.

When I referred to revisionist history I meant a pro-German slant.  Your illustration also has a clear anti-war slant.

It is true that bombers in 1944 had less accuracy than those of today.  No one would dispute that.

It is untrue, however, that WW2 bombing was so innacurate that civilian centers could not be distinguished from industrial sites.

Luftwaffe pilots and bombardiers were professional soldiers, not Nazi murderers.  As I stated in an earlier post, you would have to see what the bombardier saw in order to make a decision.  There was, however, an overwhelming political pressure (firing squad) on bombardiers to drop their loads.

Imagine you are an RAF pilot/bombardier in a Lancaster bomber.  You have flown for 10 hours at 30,000 feet in a freezing, unpressurized cockpit.  Are you going to go home without dropping your load on anything?

Now let's add the fact that Germans (and Allies, it's standard procedure) intentionally placed factories in residential areas.  Makes your decision a little tougher, doesn't it?

If you can think for yourself I suggest you go to your library and get a copy of David Irving's "Destruction of Dresden".  Irving is a Nazi sympathizer and the politics are all screwed up (we were the bad guys for bombing Dresden) but if you can see through the BS you will get a great technical picture of an actual bombing event.

Or just watch Slaughterhouse Five - not as technical but a good movie.

Quote:


Nice! you'd be surpirsed how many people think the Luftwaffe are the same thing as the "SS". These kids think "Germans --> Bad" but never actually care to really learn more about them. And then theres the Crazy kids who run around with the "iron cross" thinking its something else then it really is. Man we live in a messed up country

Quote:



Thanks I'll add it to my wishlist, I love to see both sides of the story.

First I gotta finish reading "Ideas and Opinions" by Einstein (Good stuff) then I gotta read "Mein Kampf" by Adolph hitler. Most people find that kindof strange!


edit:
Quote:


Hmm quick search on amazon and im confuzed already

Paperback Destruction of Dresden by Irving (dont even say his last name) no picture, no description and you have to buy it through a resseler $4
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0345230329/qid=1094878646/sr=8-2/r... hm guess they don't want someone to buy it?

Paperback The Destruction of Dresden (Morley war classics)
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0705700305/ref=ed_oe_p/103-2753162...
same as above exept only one resseler and .... $65  bucks, wow they really don't want you to buy it

Guess its not a good book, still havent gotten it yet but I'll probably still get it. as to Das Kapital by Karl Marx I heard its boring but i'll probably still buy it.

Man too many books to read not enough time... I'll get there.... eventually