Quote:
Originally Posted by Franek Grabowski
Nick, the point is it was not. As I have noted before, most air forces of 1930s had fighter bombers, but this was discontinued for a very short period due to too small bombload and need of highest performance to intercept enemy aircraft. RAF 'reverted' to fighter bombers in 1941.
The only revolutionary thing with Me 262 was that it was jet in series, but actually it had no influence on tactics.
|
If we are sticking to the thread, then I agree that the 262 had no radical effect on tactics. It just happened to be a fighter-bomber with jet engines, and hence more survivable because of its speed.
However, I'm not sure that pre-war airforces had fighter-bombers, in the sense that the term has been used since 1940/41. Many fighters could carry bombs, as a secondary role for no obvious purpose, but the dedicated fighter-bomber replaced the dedicated light bomber and/or the dedicated assault aircraft. The aircraft used in this role were often not seen as suitable for the true fighter role. Often this was mainly due to obsolescence in the pure role, but not always. Is a Jaguar a fighter? A Su 7 Fitter? Not really. Was a Typhoon - more arguable, that one. But the pilots flying these aircraft in WW2 did not have training as a fighter pilot, but in the fighter-bombing role. To get back to the Luftwaffe, this could be seen in the quality of the Schlachtflieger in late-war Fw.190s.