Small B17 bomb bay and bomb load

[RodM]

Hi Ruy,


I tend to agree and although one can look back with hindsight and state that if this or that was done differently then the war may have ended sooner, in a way the supporters of strategic bombing were, in part, theoretically right for although they did not have the means to deliver a quick and decisive knockout blow in Europe, the advent of the atomic bomb, in the hands of only one side or another, made such a decisive blow by air power alone possible....(with all the horrible consequences).

Cheers

Rod

[Ruy Horta]

Sure Rod, I agree completely.

Although the advent of ICBMs and perhaps more importantly SLICBMs, have again changed the role of strategic air warfare. The last decades have seen a clear shift towards the tactical role of aircraft, but there is of course an overlap into the strategic (especially since the capability of a modern fighter(-bomber) is greatly enhanced).

Personally I see today's tactical role of aircraft as good proof that aircraft are often best used in support of battlefield (not only direct support), instead of waging a separate war.

Shortly after WW2 - still being parrotted today - the Luftwaffe was criticized because they failed to put up a strategic air arm, or failed to understand the importance of air power in a strategic role, yet it seems that their idea of operational air war was more balanced (especially if circumstances dictate the choices you can make).

The keyword may be flexible versus doctrinal use of air power.