Path: news.nzbot.com!not-for-mail
From: Miloch <Miloch_member@newsguy.com>
Newsgroups: alt.binaries.pictures.aviation
Subject: Re: Bachem Ba 349
Date: 31 Oct 2018 17:44:53 -0700
Organization: NewsGuy.com
Lines: 35
Message-ID: <prdia502cni@drn.newsguy.com>
References: <prcac30jie@drn.newsguy.com> <XnsA98CB6845F79noemailattnet@216.166.97.131> <nvektdpievmd3hbhvhu3v1dfj65h1anpki@4ax.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: p4c8d350175afe53a7a23240db80d7dc7e3c5c70d27450c65.newsdawg.com
User-Agent: Direct Read News 5.60
X-Received-Bytes: 1673
X-Received-Body-CRC: 253503009
Xref: news.nzbot.com alt.binaries.pictures.aviation:9133
In article <nvektdpievmd3hbhvhu3v1dfj65h1anpki@4ax.com>, Stormin' Norman says...
>
>On Wed, 31 Oct 2018 18:01:28 -0500, Mitchell Holman
><noemail@verizont.net> wrote:
>
>>A very complicated process to shoot
>>down just one bomber, esp at a time when
>>every mission contained hundreds of bombers.
>
>That raises an interesting question. On average, I wonder what the
>bomber kill rate was for traditional German fighters when the allied
>bombers had long range escorts all the way to Berlin?
>
>I also wonder if flak from the German 88's imposed a greater toll on
>the bombers than the German fighters?
>
>
>
...according to this webpage...German fighters...
From
https://www.quora.com/How-effective-was-the-German-88-as-an-anti-aircraft-weapon
"A single gun had only a remote chance of hitting or damaging an Allied bomber.
But many guns were used increasing the chances of a hit or damage.
"Numerous bombers were damaged and some brought down. Numerous crew injured or
killed. But the greater losses were to German fighters
*
|
|