Re: Operation Steinbock question
 

Thanks Juha.

The numbers you posted are slightly higher than what Adam posted. Could that number include those a/c written off?

Re: Operation Steinbock question
 

Hello Kutscha
Adam's figure are to enemy action, maybe Wakefield's numbers incl also operational losses. I have now very busy, so I probably will have time to check Wakefield's article during the weekend at earliest.

Juha

Re: Operation Steinbock question
 

From what info. I have between Jan.21st and May 31st 1944 attacks on the UK were made on 52 nights with a total of some 4700 sorties by the Luftwaffe giving a potential to drop 8000T (approx) on the UK. During attacks on London, Bristol, Hull, Portsmouth, Plymouth,Torquay, Falmouth plus Intruder/Recon missions and during transfer flights prior to raids some 335 a/c were lost ( based mainly on NVM's where there was injury/loss of crews reported, other aircraft losses happened where the crew were safe see Ulf Balkes KG 2 history which illustrates this). By aircraft type at least the following are recorded 165 Ju 88's, 60 Ju188's, 42 Do217's, 21 He 177's, 20 Fw190's, 24 Me410's plus 2 recon. Bf109's and 1 Bf109 desertion in the period. These losses caused the Luftwaffe to lose some 1100 aircrew either killed,wounded or POW with at least another 100 injured in crashes on the Continent against some 1600 people killed in the UK,
In the period Jan.21st to Mar.25th. against a potential to have dropped approx. 3500 T. of bombs on the UK it was estimated that 1885 T. landed in this country with only 760T landing in the London area which was the main target in this period. Up untill the raid on Feb.18/19th the RAF assessment was that the bombing was poor with better results for the rest of February but falling off again after this. Raids on Brisol and Hull were judged as failures ( see PRO file WO199/912 )
I guess these figures show what people have to suffer in war when 760 T. of bombs to London in a two month period is looked on as failing, I hope this is of help and my sums are right,

Regards

Brian Bines

Re: Operation Steinbock question
 

1 out of every 2 bombs did not hit the right country. Only one in five hit a target the size of London. One aircraft lost for every 2 ton of bombs that did hit London, plus whatever accuracy was obtained on the other missions. That's close to one aircraft lost for every two sorties on target.

Whatever the sufferings of Londoners, or indeed Bristolians and others, that's not a successful bombing campaign.

Re: Operation Steinbock question
 

Dr Alfred Price in Blitz on Britain (Ian Allan, 1977, p170) says during the first 5 months of 1944 air raid casualties in Britain totalled 1,556 killed and 2,916 seriously wounded. More than half of these resulted from five concentrated attacks on London commencing with that of 18 Feb.
Losses amounted to more than 300 aircraft, about 60% of the number available at the beginning of the operation.
The Luftwaffe, he states, lost approximately one bomber and four trained crewman for every five British civilians killed on the ground.

BC

Re: Operation Steinbock question
 

The more general question is hv ALL strategic bombings failed ???
Put apart the moral question, it seems..

Rémi

Re: Operation Steinbock question
 

Define failure. The Strategic Bombing Survey of Germany concluded that it had been a success. It is difficult to argue with the success of the B-29 against Japan.

If the criteria is the defeat of a nation by strategic bombing alone, then the answer is that it has never been tried. Wisely, I feel. It is argued that the retreat of the Serbian forces from Kosovo with no direct action other than aerial attack proved the principle. Others disagree, but then there will always be disagreements over such involved matters.

Re: Operation Steinbock question
 

Try to get hold of a recent paperback "The Wages of Destruction" by Adam Tooze. It's about the economy of the Third Reich and includes an interesting discussion of the impact of Allied bombing.

Re: Operation Steinbock question
 

THks Nik for the hint try to get this one,

Graham when I wrote my message I think about the Serbian case, Serbia hv to lay down when International.com , read the USA, decide to put them dow, any mean they use they fail, Concerning Germany nd Japan man could think that when they decided, or forced to be defensive they hv lost the war nd by far no strategic war hv been engaged against them at that time.

"nation by strategic bombing alone, then the answer is that it has never been tried"
England tried nd failed nd without the back-up of the US this strategy to invest considerable assets in the bombers could hv been the only way to loose the War for U.K..

Remi

Re: Operation Steinbock question
 

Two things need to be considered.

Firstly, those 300+ plus bombers appearantly include aircraft lost in the accidents/non-enemy related causes, and one has to wonder what a bomber crashing on takeoff at France and becoming a write-off would mean 4 lost bomber crews in each and every case, like it would be if the bomber would be lost over England. I belive Price is actually quoting some Churchillian paper from the given wartime period, actually, estimates on enemy losses, with a bit of a political spin on it. It would be most interesting to see the actual figures.

Secondly, it would appear the targets included a good deal of other things than just civillians - Londond docks for example, and major seaports - so a bizarre comparison of dead civvies vs. dead aircrews is odd, and simplifies things as well.

The '60% lost' figure is also nice, save for it appears to be a smokescreen for the fact that overall, the losses were not particularly heavy by any standard - we`re speaking of a period of five months here, which works out to 60 bombers lost per month, of which about 40-50 lost per month to enemy action over Britain. That`s considerably less than the losses suffered between July-October 1940, and quite miniscule compared to the big picture. Bomber Command lost as many, or even twice as many during single raids over Germany, rather than a month..

If my Excell tables on German bombers (ie. Kampfgeschwadern only) losses are correct (I think there are some small glithces, but the number is apprx. good, certainly not less), it shows for example 191 bombers lost to enemy action, 148 to non-enemy action, and 169 were written off to overhauls and repairs. 508 in a single month to all causes, and yet the bomber force alltogether stood at some 2200 aircraft by the end of January.

From Jan-May, the figures are ~881 enemy, ~700 n-e, ~1063 to Überholung, total ~2644. It would also appear that some 150 bombers were transferred from bomber units to others during the period.