Optimist. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Butt_Report:

“Of those aircraft recorded as attacking their target, only one in three got within 5 mi (8.0 km).”

https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/education/worldwar2/thea... has data for later years. It got better, but stayed bad.

https://www.airforcemag.com/article/1008daylight/:

“Bombing accuracy was terrible. The average circular error in 1943 was 1,200 feet, meaning that only 16 percent of the bombs fell within 1,000 feet of the aiming point”

I agree. Hence the scale of the bombings in WW2. But the camp operated multiple years. Maybe there was a price to pay but in the long run, maybe it would have been worth taking a chance. We will never now, it’s a maybe game.

We're Monday morning quarterbacking, but I wonder if destroying the railroad lines into the camps would've been effective. Less chance for a missed bomb to kill camp prisoners, lots of opportunity to hit the tracks.

I think the same trains or tracks that carried prisoners carried the (paltry) food for the camps, so I guess it's a trolley problem still.

Destroying rail lines is even harder and generally temporary. They're fairly easily repaired within a few days, given material and labor.