Results 1 to 2 of 2

Thread: Historically accurate bomber formations?

  1. #1
    Student Pilot
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Posts
    8
    Post Thanks / Like
    Total Downloaded
    113.86 MB

    Historically accurate bomber formations?

    Gents,

    I understand there are certain limitations to the what the FMB allows, but I got curious about something that I hope the knowledgeable folks here could enlighten me on, if just for pure education and curiosity.

    I know the German fighters used the more flexible Finger-Four formation. I know the Brits, for the most part, stuck with their Vic formation though out the battle.

    I had trouble finding clear information on the historically used formation for various German bombers. (Although you can find everything you'd ever want to know about American combat-box formations. In unbelievable detail.)


    It appears Stuka generally used Vic (Kette)
    Like:
    https://external-preview.redd.it/_TU...=webp&b18cec5a

    I've seen other diagrams of that looked like just a single column of Kette in line astern.
    Either, both accurate?


    What about JU-88?
    BF-110?
    What were the historical formations for these in transit to target?

    I've seen some photos and diagrams of HE-111 formations that looked something like this:

    Is this historically accurate? Did it have a name? Just HE-111?
    Or is that just a mis representation of what should be a formation of kette?

    Thanks in advance,
    CptTrips

  2. #2
    Ace 1lokos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    5,323
    Post Thanks / Like
    Total Downloaded
    1.04 GB

    Re: Historically accurate bomber formations?


Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •