Operation Steinbock question

[Nick Beale]

Originally Posted by Kutscha

[b]What do the number of bombers and their losses on other fronts have to do with the Baby Blitz?

They demonstrate that in 1944 the Luftwaffe lacked the means to sustain a large force of bombers on any front for long. Contemporaneous strengths and losses on other fronts also demonstrate that losses over England could not readily be made good from elsewhere.

Originally Posted by Kurfürst

Steinbock has been occasionally as some sort of a decimation of the LW bomber force, yet looking at the loss statistics, and the rate of montly losses in the previous years, such statements cannot be justified.

As you`ve pointed out, the raids were of typically rather small scale.

Well yes, so why were they not bigger (even adding up all the sorties on every front on any given night)? I would say because the Luftwaffe, the training organisation and the industry behind them were incapable of achieving more. If Steinbock didn't hurt the force, then it's still a fact that over Normandy the nightly effort was seldom more than 100 sorties.

Finally: Brian refers to "going through the lists." Which ones, Brian - you haven't found the Gen.Qu. 1944 loss lists have you? (I know … too much to hope for, but I can dream!)