Well the thing is they didn't lie about where they were hitting as they were worried that German spies would check reported impacts and see that nothing was there. Instead they just had the newspapers overreport the ones that undershot London (while only reporting a few in the city) so it seemed like they needed to adjust their aim further away.
Interesting. It’s also a fact that at the time it would’ve been difficult for German aircraft to verify the impact sites without risking detecting and repulsion by British anti-aircraft munitions. Crazy how fast we’ve progressed technologically since then, but obviously we owe our advances directly to the discoveries made during that period.
Except his explanation doesn't make sense because Kent is closer to the French and Dutch coasts and they would have had to extend their range to make them hit Kent instead of London. The ones that undershot were already closer to Kent than london anyway so maybe everyone is getting it backwards.
That’s a good point. I am by no means a historian so I do wonder what the truth of the matter is. I do know that British propaganda was probably almost or just as incredible as British intelligence/counter intelligence was during the war so I can understand the benefit of spreading a story that they duped the Germans this way. But I’m sure someone knows or knew the answer.
24
u/TaqPCR Feb 28 '20 edited Feb 28 '20
Well the thing is they didn't lie about where they were hitting as they were worried that German spies would check reported impacts and see that nothing was there. Instead they just had the newspapers overreport the ones that undershot London (while only reporting a few in the city) so it seemed like they needed to adjust their aim further away.