Technology
The Myth and Reality of Norden Bombsight During World War II
The Myth and Reality of Norden Bombsight During World War II
It is a common misconception that the Norden bombsight was the only and most effective piece of equipment for precision bombing during World War II. In reality, the Norden's effectiveness was largely exaggerated, and the myth persists to this day. This article dispels the myth and explores the reality of Norden bombsight and the true capabilities of other equipment used in precision bombing during the war.
Introduction to the Norden Bombsight
The Norden Bombsight, often touted as an unparalleled instrument, played a significant role in the propaganda efforts of the United States during World War II. Yet, its accuracy and effectiveness were often overstated, and alternative systems proved to be more reliable and practical.
Overhyped Promise and Political Lobbying
Norden's president claimed that the bombsight could hit a 15-foot square from 30,000 feet, an achievement that was at least a factor of 1000 too optimistic. This exaggeration served a propaganda necessity: it was politically expedient to claim that equipment and aircraft were superior, thereby fostering morale and justifying the risks to bombing crews. The myth persisted due to relentless political lobbying and the need to maintain high morale among the troops.
The Reality of Precision Bombing
Several studies show that below 15% of Eighth Air Force bombs fell within 1000 feet of the target. The average error for 500-pound bombs dropped in Europe was as high as 1673 feet, revealing the shortcomings of the Norden Bombsight. The real precision bombing missions, however, were carried out by the British 617 Squadron, which used the SABS (Stabilized Automatic Bomb Sight) to target critical infrastructure such as the Tirpitz, railway tunnels, submarines pens, viaducts, and bridges.
Alternative Systems and Their Superiority
There were other contenders for the precision bombing role, such as the Sperry bombsight and the British Mark XIV. These systems were operationally easier to use and more accurate than the Norden. The Sperry system required only 10 seconds of stabilization, while the Norden needed nearly 9 minutes in a straight, level flight with a stabilizing gyroscope.
Operational Success and British Efforts
The Sperry and British Mark XIV systems proved to be more reliable in actual combat situations. The British Mark XIV was already being built in the USA under contract and delivered acceptable accuracy even when the plane was in a shallow dive or climb. The British 617 Squadron, equipped with the SABS, was highly successful in its precision bombing missions, demonstrating the real capabilities that were often overshadowed by the mythical Norden.
Conclusion
The Norden Bombsight's reputation for precision and effectiveness during World War II has been widely exaggerated. Alternative systems, such as the Sperry, British Mark XIV, and SABS, demonstrated superior capabilities and reliability. The true capabilities of precision bombing were often underutilized or misunderstood due to political and propaganda efforts. This article aims to shed light on the reality of precision bombing during World War II, underscoring the importance of accurate historical records and acknowledgments.