Were Mosquito bombers underutilised in WW2?

[wuzak]

There were a decent number of bomber Mosquito variants built during WW2, though a lot of them came later in the war.



Of the marks that were built during the war there were approximately 290 B.IVs, 400 B.XVIs, 245 B.XXs and 400 B.25s (Canadian production). That's 1335+ bombers.

Mosquitos were used in small daylight attacks from May 1942 to May 1943, before being switched to the pathfinder role for the heavies at night. Then Mosquitos were used to put on diversionary raids before evolving into the Light Night Strike Force, which put on its own raids, often not as diversions for other BC raids.

Do you think that bomber variants were underutilised during WW2?

[parsifal]

Short answer, is yes in my opinion. With a crew of two, and a survivability about twic that of a four engined type, and a bombload about 1/3 that of the bigger geavies, but a sortie rate per night about double, you can deliver 2/3 the bombload with a given strike, with 25% of the crew, and 200% the survivability. Your force structure is going to double at about 4x the rate it does for a smilar lancaster force. There are other spinoffs....for example the germans will not be able to tell fighter versions from bomber versions.

Cricisms have regularly been raised that Mosquitoes somehow could not mount high level raids, could not ndertake area bombing raids. I have found none of this to be true.

So my opinion is that the brits could have had a real game changer if they had concentrated on Mosquito production over the bigger 4 engined heavies

[wuzak]

Parsifal, would area bombing of cities been the best use of Mosquitos? Considering that they could potentially hit targets more accurately bombing from low level and/or during the day?

[pbfoot]

Parsifal, would area bombing of cities been the best use of Mosquitos? Considering that they could potentially hit targets more accurately bombing from low level and/or during the day?

area bombing in Mosquito , sounds really stupid it takes all the attributes of the DH98 and ruins them .

[parsifal]

Parsifal, would area bombing of cities been the best use of Mosquitos? Considering that they could potentially hit targets more accurately bombing from low level and/or during the day?

Im not sure if it was the best use, but it was certainly possible with an all Mosquito force.. mosquitoes were more adept at precision pinpoint bombing, so there is not as great a need for a Pointblank strategy. its possible (or do-able) but not as necessary.

[davebender]

Why do you think so?

I suspect a Lancaster level bomber @ 3,000 feet was just as accurate as a Mosquito level bomber @ 3,000 feet.

[wuzak]

Why do you think so?

I suspect a Lancaster level bomber @ 3,000 feet was just as accurate as a Mosquito level bomber @ 3,000 feet.

I suspect it is because the Mosquito was more manouevrable, and thus could make more precise corrections to course to better target the bombs. I also think that a Mosquito would be more likely to survive a bombing mission at 3000ft, be it day or night, than a Lancaster (or a B-17, for that matter).

Why 3000ft? Is that just a number for comparison purposes?

[parsifal]

Lnacs were used for precision bombing througout their careers, but the proportions of sories undertaken in daylight, at precision targetsincreased as the war drew to a close. Traditionally, it was the Mosquito that were given the task of precision raids. I suspect for three reasons. Firstly the airframe was a very pleasant and stable flyer, making its flight characteristics inherently accurate. It was capble of glide bombing which further increased its accuracy. lastly its high survivavbility would have increased the confidence of the crews to complete their missions rather than drop the bombload nervously and innaccurately Crew confidence was a BIG part of bombing accuracy. And the mosquito crews could approach that task with bucket loads of confidence.

[davebender]

That's more or less the minimum safe height if you don't want to get caught in your own bomb blast.

[stona]

Lancasters carried out precision raids with weapons that a Mosquito simply couldn't carry.
Someone will have to explain to me why the Mosquito would be inherently a more accurate weapon than the Lancaster which could carry a much larger load.
Cheers
Steve

[davebender]

Perhaps we should start by determining what bomb sight was used by each aircraft type.

[parsifal]

Lancasters carried out precision raids with weapons that a Mosquito simply couldn't carry.
Someone will have to explain to me why the Mosquito would be inherently a more accurate weapon than the Lancaster which could carry a much larger load.
Cheers
Steve

Both airframes were accurate delivery systems, but on balance my suspicion is that the Mosquirto was an inherently more accurate bomber. Mosquitoes could approach divebombing techniques more closely than the lanc. Moreover, because they were more survivable, the crews would not have felt as compelled to drop the bombload and get out of Dodge to the same extent as the poor old lanc crews. On the one hand one could argue that higher top speed would reduce accuracy for the mossie, but I had trainers that served in Vietnam (Americans) that stated that the number one impediment to bombing accuracy was flak followed by weather. Increasing speed decreases the volume of flak, and its efectiveness. Reduce the volume and effectiveness of the flak, reduce the ability of the enemy CAP to respond, and you create the conditions for a more accurate bomb run.

[davebender]

I suspect that 1960s bomb sights could compensate for high speed a lot better then WWII era bomb sights.

[parsifal]

I suspect that 1960s bomb sights could compensate for high speed a lot better then WWII era bomb sights.

Quite possibly, howeverr speed as an impediment to bombing accuracy is less of a problem than lack of speed in a high flak environment. Of the two issues in the accuracy equation speed has less impact than flak. Why can I say that? Because the RAF preferred to use Mosquitoes over Lancs for precision daylight raids over the lanc until the very end of the war.....and the Mossie delivered in that role far more effectively than any other allied bomber. its successes in precision attacks are generally accepted as outstanding.

[wuzak]

Perhaps we should start by determining what bomb sight was used by each aircraft type.

Looks like most Lancasters used British built MkXIV bomb sights, and Mosquitos used Americanbuilt MkXIV bomb sights (Speryy T1)

Although existing sources do not record when the Mk. XIV went into production in the UK, they do record that operational testing started in January 1942 and production examples started reaching squadrons in March. Its manufacture was done by small machine shops and instrument makers, and production was simply too slow to meet the demand. Between July and October, less than one hundred a month were being delivered. As the design was finalized, automated production was undertaken, and by mid-1943 900 a month were available. This was enough to equip the heavy bombers as they arrived from the production lines, and by late 1942 the Handley Page Halifax was being delivered with the sight head already installed.

To fill demand for other aircraft, and especially smaller ones like the de Havilland Mosquito, the Air Ministry started looking at US manufacturers to supply the bombsight. Frederic Blin Vose of Sperry Gyroscope expressed an interest in the design, and felt he could adapt the Mk. XIV to US production methods and have it in mass production rapidly.

Mark XIV bomb sight - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia