1940: the best bomber in service?

[tomo pauk]

Hello,
1940 saw some major displays of air power, bombers playing major roles. What type should be regarded as the best? The planes in service are to be taken into account, with 2 or more engines, all around the world. Bomb load over distance, speed, protection, gun armament are the main categories here.

 

[drgondog]

B-17 has to be in the mix

 

[michaelmaltby]

Likewise, Wellington.

 

[Vincenzo]

i add to B-17 and Wellington the He 111

 

[buffnut453]

The B-17 was only barely in service in 1940 and certainly wasn't combat capable. Personally, I'd go with the Ju-88 - it was truly superb and, IMHO, the best bomber in the world in 1940.

 

[davebender]

I agree. Ju-88 was very capable by 1940 standards.

 

[Vincenzo]

B-17 was in service also in 39. and why not combat capable? also w/o SS and armour is combat capable many bombers had not in 1940

 

[FLYBOYJ]

The JU-88 was a capable bomber but in 1940 I think I'd rather be over London in a B-17B or C if given a choice. BTW, the B-17B first flew in 1939, the B-17C first flew in mid 1940. "Combat capable" by 1939 standards or 1944 standards?

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

In 1940, I think I would have to go with the Ju 88. Only because of its versatility.

Still there a lot of others though that one could argue for.

 

[buffnut453]

There were a whopping 10 B-17Bs in USAAF service by March 1940, the next order for 517 aircraft only being issued in July of that year. As to the combat readiness of the B-17, I would point out the RAF's experience with the Fortress MkI (equivalent to the B-17C) was pretty negative, with combat highlighting the need for much greater defensive firepower. Given that the C-variant didn't enter service until late 1940 I think my comment about the combat readiness of the B-17 in 1940 is valid, and that the Ju-88 was a much better candidate as the best bomber of that timeframe.

 

[Readie]

Maybe not the 'best' but, one could argue the one of most versatile and longest serving bombers..the Wellington.

Vickers Wellington - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Cheers
John

 

[Vincenzo]

the B-17 available to end 1940 were
13 B-17
1 B-17A
39 B-17B (delivery completed in march)
18 B-17C (delivery completed in november)

2 B-17 were loss for accident in 1940 (12/11 and 18/12), a few were used as test planes.
the B-17 and 17B had 5 .30 mg the C had 4 .50 and 1 .30., the 88 had 4 .30.

Imho the 111H is a best bomber of 88A, specifically of the original A-1. The 111 is more versatile as level bomber (example can load 250 kg bombs internally)

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Wiki comparison

B-17C
Armament: One .30-cal. and six .50-cal. machine guns and 4,800 lbs. of bombs
Engines: Four Wright R-1820-65 turbo-supercharged radials of 1,200 hp each
Maximum speed: 323 mph at 25,000 ft.
Cruising speed: 227 mph
Service ceiling: 37,000 ft.
Range: 3,400 miles (maximum ferry range)
Span: 103 ft. 9 in.
Length: 67 ft. 11 in.
Height: 15 ft. 5 in.
Weight: 48,500 lbs. gross weight (actual - normal load)


Junkers Ju 88A-1

Crew 4
Engine (Type) 2: Junkers Jumo 211B/G3, 2: Junkers Jumo 211 B4
Cylinders Inverted V 123, V 124
Cooling Liquid
HP 1,200 each
Propeller blades 3 each
Fuel capacity
Dimensions
Span 59' 11"3, 60' 3"4
18.26 m
Length 47' 1"4, 47' 2"3
8.43 m
Height 15' 11"3, 17' 5"4
4.85 m
Wing area
Weight
Empty
Loaded 22,840 lb
Maximum load
Performance
Speed
Speed @ 18,050' 280 mph4
Cruising speed
Climb
Service ceiling 28,250'
Range 1,056 miles
Armament 3: MG4
Bombs (internal and external) 3,960 lb4

 

[tomo pauk]

There were a whopping 10 B-17Bs in USAAF service by March 1940, the next order for 517 aircraft only being issued in July of that year. As to the combat readiness of the B-17, I would point out the RAF's experience with the Fortress MkI (equivalent to the B-17C) was pretty negative, with combat highlighting the need for much greater defensive firepower. Given that the C-variant didn't enter service until late 1940 I think my comment about the combat readiness of the B-17 in 1940 is valid, and that the Ju-88 was a much better candidate as the best bomber of that timeframe.

RAF was flying Fortresses from mid 1941 on, so whatever their experiences were, that does not seem to have bearing here? Was there any interceptor capable to reliably catch it in 1940?

 

[Shortround6]

I would put forth the Whitley. Not many bombers could hit Genoa Italy from England.

In 1940 there were very few 4 engine bombers. The available B-17s have been gone over (and the early ones had 5-6 .30 cal guns, later refitted) and any other 4 engine bombers were even fewer in number (except for the Russian leftover TB-3s). First British 4 engine bombers reach the squadrons at the end of the year but don't fly first combat missions until 1941.

Most engines in 1940 were about 1200hp give or take a bit. SO you have about 2400hp hp for the bomber,( Italian tri-motors were under 900hp each). You could either have schnell bomber or you could have a load carrier, not both.

 

[Milosh]

Didn't the early B-17s received by the British, get assigned to less hazardous duties because they weren't combat ready?

 

[nuuumannn]

Regardless of which individual aircraft was the best, the Luftwaffe had the most accurate, with the use of radio navigation/bombing aids years before the RAF/USAAF and with the most combat experience by the end of that year, most likely the best bomber force in 1940. Thankfully for the rest of the world, the LW was let down by inadequate reconnaissance and a nincompoop at the top. Although I do agree about the Ju 88.

 

[tomo pauk]

In 1940, was the Ju-88 better than He-111?

Didn't the early B-17s received by the British, get assigned to less hazardous duties because they weren't combat ready?

By second half of 1941, early B-17s they were not up to standard. Again, we need to compare them with what was available in 1940.

 

[buffnut453]

RAF was flying Fortresses from mid 1941 on, so whatever their experiences were, that does not seem to have bearing here? Was there any interceptor capable to reliably catch it in 1940?

That's precisely my point. People are saying the B-17 was combat ready in 1940 and hence should be considered the best bomber in that year. I'm saying that even in 1941 the B-17 still had significant flaws from a combat effectiveness standpoint and so it can't have been the best bomber in 1940. And there weren't huge differences between mid/late 1940 fighters and early/mid 1941 fighters so, given the performance of the Fortress in RAF service, the answer to your second question has to be "Yes".

 

[FLYBOYJ]

That's precisely my point. People are saying the B-17 was combat ready in 1940 and hence should be considered the best bomber in that year. I'm saying that even in 1941 the B-17 still had significant flaws from a combat effectiveness standpoint and so it can't have been the best bomber in 1940.

And what were those flaws when compared to say the JU.88 A-1, Wellington or He.111? Armor plate? Self sealing tanks? Compare what those early WW2 bombers had that made them "combat effective" with early B-17s....