Holocaust- Bomb The Tracks?

[BFritz21]

(10-14-2019, 09:25 AM)michaelsean Wrote: Well if this isn't a case of "I didn't get the answers I wanted" I don't know what is.

I asked for logical answers and thorough answers, not the same answers over-and-over than can be refuted.

(10-14-2019, 10:02 AM)bengalfan74 Wrote: Brad do you even know how many bombing missions were considered largely ineffective at strategic high level bombing of German and Japanese factories that had acres and acres under roof ? A bunch !

Now you're talking hitting RR tracks that are nowhere near the size of a large scale aircraft factory. You think a couple B17's could just tear up miles of track ? Every bomb is a direct hit from 25,000 feet ?

Look up how many planes attacked the Japanese Carriers at Midway then how many hits they got. Granted a moving target but still an aircraft carrier !

Take the P47 Thunderbolt in a tactical bombing role. I forget exactly but the % of hits they got on German Armor is like 10% or something, perhaps even less ?

Just as an example its roughly 930 miles from Paris France to Auschwitz Poland. Here's the max range of the P47:


The Republic P-47 Thunderbolt was a World War II era fighter aircraft produced by the United States from 1941 through 1945. Its primary armament was eight .50-caliber machine guns and in the fighter-bomber ground-attack role it could carry five-inch rockets or a bomb load of 2,500 pounds. Wikipedia


Top speed: 433 mph
Wingspan: 41′ 0″
Weight: 10,000 lbs
Range: 801.6 mi
Engine type: Pratt & Whitney R-2800 Double Wasp
Variants: Republic XP-72
Did you know: With over 15,600 aircraft manufactured, more Thunderbolts were built than any other fighter. warbirdsnews.com


800 hundred miles, late in the war they increased the range but still.


Again it sounds good on paper, yes just bomb the tracks. In practice it's not anywhere near as easy as you portray. 

All of those targets also had a lot of planes defending them.  There were hundreds of miles of tracks.  We didn't need to let them know that we were even attacking the tracks, much-less a specific spot.  You think it's going to be easy to take planes off where they are already attacking or defending and say "quick, so guard these tracks"?

They also wouldn't need to fly as high, making it easier to bomb the tracks. 

(10-14-2019, 10:04 AM)michaelsean Wrote: He wasn't avoiding the question.  He's asking what would have been accomplished by denying them the use of the tracks if that were even possible.  

The inability of them too ship mass numbers of Jews to their deaths at camps.

(10-14-2019, 11:18 AM)fredtoast Wrote: If you don't believe anyone here then just Google the question.

Lots of people out there pointing out the lack of range of bombers and resources needed to try and cut off the camps.

Also discussion about how the west lacked any "hard evidence" of the mass murders.  Ariel recon photos of the death camps did not sho any signs of a "mass extinction".  Just think about this.  If the allies had ANY uncontroverted evidence of the activities of the death camps they would have used it as propaganda throughout the war. 

It's pretty well known that the US turned a blind eye to it all.

What else could happen to the mass numbers of Jews (and others) heading to the camps?

It also became well-known in 1941 (some day 42) what was going on, and the mass number of murders happened after that.