Overall, who had the better bombing campaign of the Third Reich, USAAF or RAF?

[Soundbreaker Welch?]

Well, I was wondering this question and thought I would ask.

Both Air Forces developed their own techniques.

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Both the RAF and the USAAF did a great job however I have to go with the USAAF.

Several reasons:

1. Strategic Bombing is what is going to win a war not area bombing at night.

2. The USAAF had the ability to better do daytime strategic bombing.

Having said that the RAF did a great job as well and it was the combined effort of the RAF And the USAAF that helped win the war.

[Soundbreaker Welch?]

Rightly said.

I do now that in the early stages, the Eighth Air Force made little bombing gains for the loss of many men. For one, they often didn't destroy the targets well enough. Ploesti Raids, they thought they did great damage, but then they found out they didn't. Or at least, not enough to really shut it down. But it was brave of them fo' sure.


Adler, six years is a long time to be a Crewchief. whew. I can remember what I was doing back in 2000 and after, and it can seem like a long time, but it certainly wasn't as engaging as that.

In 2000, did you have any inkling you would be fighting a war in 3 years?

[plan_D]

The USAAF used more aircraft for equal or less damage generally; so they weren't as effective per plane than the RAF. But overall the USAAF would have done more damage, it dropped more tonnage.

In any case, they were partners not competitors. And the USAAF offensive would have been useless without the RAF keeping it up at night - and the true is same vice versa.

[Konigstiger205]

USAAF...even an idiot would realize that...lots of planes...excellent bombers...

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

In 2000, did you have any inkling you would be fighting a war in 3 years?

Absolutely not but you train for it and are ready to do your job.

[Wildcat]

In any case, they were partners not competitors. And the USAAF offensive would have been useless without the RAF keeping it up at night - and the true is same vice versa.

Couldn't agree more, without one it would've been alot tougher for the other.

[drgondog]

The USAAF used more aircraft for equal or less damage generally; so they weren't as effective per plane than the RAF. But overall the USAAF would have done more damage, it dropped more tonnage.

In any case, they were partners not competitors. And the USAAF offensive would have been useless without the RAF keeping it up at night - and the true is same vice versa.

I've often wondered how much MORE damage to critical industries would have occurred if the RAF shifted most of their ops to daylight from D-Day forward.

Harris seemed suprised that his forces did well post D-Day striking rail and other transportation and logistics centers in France during daylight ops but only dedicated a small percentage of the force. The RAF had an excellent bombsight and their radar bombing was better than USAAF.

By that time German industry had shifted priority to day fighters - there were close to enough fighters to cover RAF in addition to USAAF for medium penetrations to Kassel area, etc and perhaps killed LW faster by doubling the strikes?

RAF probably would have had less attrition in daylight from that point forward also.

All speculation but interesting to contemplate

[timshatz]

In terms of sheer mayhem, I'd give it to the RAF. They all but erased German Cities from the map. So much so that after the war, the inhabitants that were left had to figure out how to rebuild the city from scratch.

In terms of obtaining their objectives, the RAF again but by not as much of a lead. They went after cities and they destroyed cities. They knew what they wanted back in 1941 and by 1945, they were very good at what they did.

The USAAF really didn't know what it was doing until the later part of the war. While the RAF had the strategy worked out by 1941 (and continued to improve the tactics througout the war), the USAAF didn't get around to targeting the oil and communications whole heartedly until 1944. Also, they never really went after the powergrid, which would've stopped Germany in it's tracks.

Not dissing the USAAF, just the RAF knew what it wanted to do, how it was going to do it and it knew it earlier. Made them more effective in the long run.

[mosquitoman]

Ideally, precision bombing would have been the most effective method but the precision wasn't there (forget about 617 Squadron- they were the best of the best). Razing cities to the ground meant that something big got damaged although "morale" as a target was completely useless.

[syscom3]

The USSBS stated the long duration night raids did more damage than the short duration daylight attacks.

More time bombing a target meant more time for fires to burn out of control.

[Erich]

the combination was needed both night and day to bomb the Reich 24 - 7
end of story, neither was worse or better, it taxed the German populace the LW in all branches, and the Nazi fool hierarchy to it's limits and absolutely was crucial to the demise of the evil regime for all fronts that it was engaged.

[Aussie1001]

Hey everyone..... ive been gone for a while..... anyone notice
one hell of a storm hit us nearly lost our roof... lost power for 61 hours and had to pull about 50 branches from trees off the road and one huge bluegum off our driveway....
anyway agree with enrich seems to be the most sensible..... not meant to offend.....
Just a little footnote... Have heard from several sources that the mozzie could carry the same bombload as a B17.... 4000 Lbs

[plan_D]

The Mosquito could carry the same payload as the B-17 if the B-17 had a long mission and the Mosquito had a short one. If I remember correctly the B-17 could carry 17,600 lbs on a very short mission.

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Just a little footnote... Have heard from several sources that the mozzie could carry the same bombload as a B17.... 4000 Lbs

The B-17 could carry way more than 4000lb of bombs. I believe the usual was about 6000lb.

As pD put the Mossie could carry the same as a B-17 over short missions.