On 8 July 2014 05:33, David C Brown wrote: > There was also a psychological problem in that the crews wanted to be shu= t > of their bombs and off back home as quickly as possible. So there was a > tendency to drop the bombs slightly short of the aiming point. Then the > following bomber would drop just short of the previous pattern and so on. > This was called creep-back and was eventually mitigated to some extent b= y > dropping the initial markers well beyond the target. > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creepback It's always interesting how much revisionist material surfaces when such things get discussed Revisionist is not necessarily wrong (or right) just different than prior thought, for whatever reason. All sources are agreed that creep back was very much a matter of fact. Attributing it more than any one thing to fear in the face of mere death and dismemberment is not writ so large in the earlier books. Max Hastings, (cited in the above text as one of two referees) is usually excellent value, but certainly revisionist. [Some of Hastings material is very illuminating and offers plausible alternatives to currently 'received truth'. His "... Churchill as WarLord" provides an immensely different perspective of much of Churchill's doings and the material goes a long way towards explaining numerous otherwise puzzling classical accounts. Good brief summary here http://www.amazon.co.uk/Finest-Years-Churchill-Warlord-1940-45/dp/000726368= 6 Creep back can be explained in other terms than mere will to live. On a bomb run the bomb aimer was king - and with the earlier bomb sights the craft had to fly straight and level for an excruciatingly long period of time - and usually did, if it survived. Short of the pilot breaking off engagement early or nudging the bomb aimer and hurrying him up, or flying corkscrews on approach, the whole craft was committed to the actions of the man on the bomb site until he pressed the release. His personal pecadillos would certainly influence the point and time of release, but any number of available accounts from other crew members, written without intending to address this particular point, make it clear that most bomb aimers, during the critical period when the craft had to be held straight and level come what may, were for these brief infinitely long minutes, hewn from adamantine and utterly oblivious to anything other than getting it as right as possible. That that was often 5 miles off is just too bad. It's amazing how much damage the 5 and 10 ton blockbuster bombs managed to do to underground U-Boat and V2 sites under 10's of feet of concrete, if they were dropped an average of 5 miles off target. [Actually hitting the Dortmund Canal was another matter :-). ] Related only: My uncle's pathfinder Lancaster was outbound from Berlin about 70 miles to the WNW when a night fighter intervened. (When he was released at the end of the war his log book was returned to him - it contained a note explaining what had happened to the aircraft. At the time AFAIK he did not know what happened.) He was in a position where survival was unlikely and was pinned in the spinning aircraft and knew death was inevitable. He came to hanging under his opened chute. One of the other survivors (according to accounts I have since read) came to on the ground with no recollection of jumping. Russell --=20 http://www.piclist.com/techref/piclist PIC/SX FAQ & list archive View/change your membership options at http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist .