One Picture Tells a Whole Sad Story

[ZuZu]

I got this picture somewhere in the forum- it's been posted before. Weirdly epic.

 

[MauldinFan]

Yep, ten men normally in a 4-engine bomber.
That's why the 8th AF had the highest loss ratio of officers in the entire war (and I've read a higher number of KIA than the entire USMC for the duration of the war).
I was at a 303rd BG reunion in the 1990s with my living history group, and I'll never forget the photo one vet showed us. It was his bombardier class photo when they got their wings. He noted what happened to each on the back, and by the 1950s, he confirmed he was only one to survive the war out of a class of over 40 men!

 

[Smithy]

Yep, ten men normally in a 4-engine bomber.
That's why the 8th AF had the highest loss ratio of officers in the entire war

Talking of bomber crew losses, whilst the 8th AF had a terrible loss rate, RAF's Bomber Command loss rate was actually much worse. I've posted this before in the BC thread but it bears repeating as many don't know that flying in Bomber Command was the most dangerous flying job in the war.

You had more chance of surviving as an infantryman on the Western Front in the trenches during WWI than you did flying in Bomber Command. The casualty level is almost unthinkable...

If you took 100 men who served in Bomber Command as aircrew:

• 55 would be killed on operations or would die as a result of wounds
• 3 would be injured (in varying levels of severity) on operations or active service
• 12 would be taken prisoner of war (some of those wounded)
• 2 would be shot down and evade capture
• and only 27 would survive a tour of operations

 

[John Lever]

Then they got no medals

 

[Smithy]

Then they got no medals

It was a disgrace that they didn't get one until 2013 John, a time when a large chunk of them had passed away.

One of the hardest and most dangerous jobs of the war and they didn't receive the recognition and gratitude that they should have.

 

[ZuZu]

Talking of bomber crew losses, whilst the 8th AF had a terrible loss rate, RAF's Bomber Command loss rate was actually much worse. I've posted this before in the BC thread but it bears repeating as many don't know that flying in Bomber Command was the most dangerous flying job in the war.

You had more chance of surviving as an infantryman on the Western Front in the trenches during WWI than you did flying in Bomber Command. The casualty level is almost unthinkable...

If you took 100 men who served in Bomber Command as aircrew:

• 55 would be killed on operations or would die as a result of wounds
• 3 would be injured (in varying levels of severity) on operations or active service
• 12 would be taken prisoner of war (some of those wounded)
• 2 would be shot down and evade capture
• and only 27 would survive a tour of operations

In this respect their story (Bomber Command's) was similar to that of German Landser or Japanese soldiers. Implacable, unswerving, incredibly brave in the service of crazed fanatical leaders. All for destruction and terror.

 

[ZuZu]

It was a disgrace that they didn't get one until 2013 John, a time when a large chunk of them had passed away.

One of the hardest and most dangerous jobs of the war and they didn't receive the recognition and gratitude that they should have.

Recognition for the men who actually flew. Like German submarine crews or Allied Merchant Mariners, an incredibly dangerous job. As far as what they actually accomplished I'm not sure...

 

[Smithy]

Recognition for the men who actually flew. Like German submarine crews or Allied Merchant Mariners, an incredibly dangerous job. As far as what they actually accomplished I'm not sure...

My paternal grandfather was RN and Royal Merchant Navy and he had respect for the German submariners, not for what they were fighting for but the conditions that they were fighting in and against.

Actually in WWI his RN ship was sunk by a German U-boat when he was quite a young lad.

 

[ZuZu]

I have nothing but awe for many participants in WW2 if for nothing else the bravery they showed.

 

[Smithy]

I have nothing but awe for many participants in WW2 if for nothing else the bravery they showed.

You want to look at the bravery people needed in WWI Jeff, and especially those that had anything to do with flying.

Flying then was very new and inherently tremendously dangerous, and that was just the act of flying. Once you added the extra facet of combat to it it reached a level of danger that was utterly ridiculous.

 

[ZuZu]

You want to look at the bravery people needed in WWI Jeff, and especially those that had anything to do with flying.

Flying then was very new and inherently tremendously dangerous, and that was just the act of flying. Once you added the extra facet of combat to it it reached a level of danger that was utterly ridiculous.

Yes- and then we go back in time to 18th century wars. trained to stand in formation in front of cannons...

 

[MauldinFan]

Yes- and then we go back in time to 18th century wars. trained to stand in formation in front of cannons...

I once took part in a Symposium on Napoleonic times, I was there to talk about muzzleloading artillery as I grew up crewing cannon.
I asked a historian about formations and asked how they could easily find people to stand there.
He said he'd given it a lot of thought and said strong adherence to tradition and duty coupled with a normal lifespan for a normal infantryman back then was 40 if they were lucky, so he thought people simply resigned themselves to their fate. If you gotta die young, he mused, why not have everyone you know speak of how you died bravely on the battlefield?