Originally posted by MajIssue
The Norden bombsite had compensation for windage incorperated...
Click
here for an in-depth look at the Norden and its operation. As you can see, it was an extremely complicated piece of kit, and one that is steeped in as much folklore as the P-51D, for example, with respect to its actual contribution to the air war over Europe. The Norden didn't compensate for wind automatically. Rather, it was the human input into the device that allowed the assembled mass of slide rules and manual computational devices to give the bombardier a chance to hit a point target on the ground. Human input that had to be made in a huge formation, over a heavily defended target, in swarms of fighters, and sometimes poor weather. Furthermore, the autopilot that was slaved to the sight was a pure one axis autopilot. The Norden required groundspeed to be put in (by the bombardier through the sight) and the pilot was required to maintain this speed and altitude throughout the run, again in a massive, turbulent formation, over a heavily defended target, (you get the idea). While in training in the states, B-17 crews were capable of hitting within a very tight tolerance against a point target at altitudes in the range of 12,000 feet (source is "Tail End Charlies"). In combat, having 30% of the bombs dropped within a fairly broad tolerance of the
aimpoint was considered a successful mission, even though the target may have only sustained meager damage requiring follow-on missions. Obviously the USAAF was much more realistic about the limitations of the Norden in combat. There is much thought among historians that the massive amounts of propaganda distributed about the "top secret" Norden bombsite was an attempt to prove that "precision" bombing was being conducted by the USAAF and not the "terrorism" used by the Germans at Guernica or during the Battle of Britain, or the bombing raids of Nanking by the Japanese that were so loudly trumpeted by the U.S. Press when drawing favorable comparisons between Allied and Axis bomber tactics.
I don't mean to have this sound combative or condescending, but don't even think that the calibration that we have even brushes the surface of what it took in real life to operate the Norden effectively. Its merely a representation used by HTC to give us enough of a taste to replicate the WWII experience, much like the "dumbed down" cockpit tasks of all the aircraft, fighters and bombers, in the game.
I flew a lot of high-altitude bomber missions in this game when I first started, because learning how to fly fighters well was an exercise in frustration. And, I can tell you that hitting a strat well from 28,000 feet is pretty simple if you have the patience to do so. On most maps, there are plenty of strats to hit that don't present easy access to 163's or 262's--choose wisely. Its one thing to go after a HQ and something entirely different to go after a fuel refinery.
Furthermore, the bomber guys have been stockpiling bomber perks for as long as they've been playing, so at least for a few weeks or so, B-29's would be relatively cheap.
Regardless, the B-29 should be added, albeit after at least another dozen more applicable aircraft are added.
