The bomber doctrine that assumed no effective defence

The discussion describes the extreme assumptions behind interwar bomber doctrine, including mass chemical or biological attacks on cities. Douhet and later advocates treated the bomber's offensive reach as if no effective countermeasure or offset would emerge. This was both an ethical catastrophe in the making and a poor guide to procurement. Heavy investment in multi-engine bombers competed with single-engine fighters, including aircraft needed by fleets. Radar, improved interceptors, and more powerful engines eventually undermined claims that bombers would always get through. Payload figures also concealed severe range penalties. Heavy bomber units became logistically immobile once their airfields, maintenance, fuel, and supply systems had been established.