|
Re: VIIIUSAAF and BC failures at the Wesel bridges.
In general terms, bridges were too small for stategic bomber aiming methods available in 1945, and too big for the weapons carried by tactical aircraft (like 2 TAF). Any bridges destroyed by air attack in the Second World War, by any air force, were more a result of luck than skill. (Just my opinion.)
It wasn't until "smart weapons" were introduced in the Viet Nam war that bridges could reliably be rendered useless by aircraft bombing. Even then, several missions would be required before the bridge was beyond quick repair.
Added in edit: This doesn't mean that missions against bridges were without merit. Bridges are a natural choke point for transportation, resulting in a concentration of other meaningful targets on and around the bridges. Also, any opportunity to bring the enemy's anti-air resources to a concentrated battle, like attacking a high value target, increases the effectiveness of your finite air resources in engaging, wearing down, and destroying enemy resources.
|