Nice footage. Two questions: what were they using as navigational aids--beam riding? And were they still low enough over the targets to be out of flak hazard?

Those are Douglas A-20 bombers of the Lorraine Bomber Group. This variant was called Boston but they were more often known as Havoc, and they were huge killers in WWII.

This clip obviously shows a mission from Britain into France. The Lorraine group moved to France after D-Day, so I'm guessing that this footage is about 1943.

Fascinating clip, A.L., thanks. NM: Wouldn't "navigational aids" for bombing missions in 1943 been mainly visual: i.e. set a course via maps and compass, then rely (especially for a low-altitude daylight raid like this clip pictures) on sighting landmarks or following roads/railroads to arrive at target?

I have always thought (corrections welcomed) that radio-aided navigational aids in the WWII era (though existent) were too inaccurate/cumbersome to be of much use in actual warfare: and also required a strong signal: unlikely in a occupied country where radio ownership/possession was (to say the least) discouraged
.

Jay: If that was just a cross-channel raid they could have been using RDF or beacons on the British side.

The reason I asked about nav aids is that accurate pilotage over land at 50 or 100 feet off the deck and 230 knots (or maybe more) is very hard. For me, at least.

Edit: Seaplanes and amphibs will fly hundreds of miles at 200 ft, buit they're covering hundreds of miles and have plenty of time to make corrections. These guys weren't/didn't.

The A-20's crew included a navigator, who had a pencil for a navigational aid. I imagine the lead navigators got to be very good at recognizing landmarks in NE France. Anyway, the range of these planes was short, so it's not like you had to go to Schweinfurt or something.

I respectfully stand by both my questions. I'll try to find out if there are any A-20 navigators still alive to ask.

Sadly, Charles passed away several years ago and that wasn't one of the questions I thought to ask.

A.L.

AL: Well, it sure looks like quite a hayride. :)

Another factor relating to this clip: if these were Free French airmen on this raid: would they not have probably asked around to try to find at least one pilot or navigator familiar with the target area to act as squadron lead?

And as for your second question: it looks (from the clip, anyway) like the bombers cruised in to their targets at fairly low (roof-skimming) altitudes; but from the films, it looks like they had to climb slightly higher (?? c500 ft??) to release their loads. Which would make sense if they were concerned about evading/avoiding AA fire.

While this documentary clip has obviously been edited, it's still a great glimpse into air-war history: and, yes: quite a hairy ride in a noisy and primitive (by today's standards) airplane on a dangerous mission guided mainly by eyesight and good luck.

Small point: A "hayride" (what I called it) is a ride in a hay wagon; I used that as a figure of speech given how low they were flying. It's a hairy ride (what you called it) when you do it at 200+ knots. :)

Yes, if they didn't get a little farther above ground on target they would have likely damaged their aircraft with their own ordnance, assuming it was high explosive.

Is this a clip your grandfather kept/had shot for himself or was it a part of a newsreel he later recovered?

It was from something the family in France (his daughters) found.

A.L.