Battle Experience V's Sound Tactics

[Ruy Horta]

I've always regarded calling the Luftwaffe a tactical AF somewhat of a misnomer, certainly by 1939-41 standards.

[Juha]

Ruy
I’d say that it depends how one definite a strategic air force. To me a strategic air force is a force which can achieve strategic goals by its own actions. 1939 – 42/43 there was IMHO no truly strategic airforce anywhere. IMHO LW was never a good strategic AF. Early in the war it had first class navigational aids but lacked carrying power ie it could not carry enough bombs for truly decisive results. It also lacked good target intelligence. Which mean more than an ability to produce target maps. LW could sometimes made effective strategic attacks, for example the attack on Coventry and the attack on Bristol a/c factory at Filton by KG 55 in late Sept. 40 but it lacked ability or knowledge to strike repeatly and effectively to choosen targets to achieve decisive results. Generally IMHO LW’s strategic campaigns tended to be rather haphazard. So IMHO in 1939 – 42 LW was generally good in tactical operations but not so successful in pure strategic operations. Of course it was sometimes (in Norway and in Holland) effective terror weapon and if we think Douhet’s ideas that was one way to achieve a strategic goal. So one can say that in Holland LW achieved a strategic goal. In Norway the results were tactical. But if one thinks USAAF 9th AF in 44, IMHO LW was more like it than like the 8th in its destructive power and its reach.

Juha