1941: Top 3 Allied Bombers

[Shortround6]

Yer-2 with M105R engines is almost a non-starter.

The 1941 version (and production stopped in Aug 1941 for this version) used a pair of 1050hp engines in a 11,300kg plane. We quickly run into one of those Russian aircraft problems in which the difference between empty weight and loaded weight are in conflict with listed bomb load and fuel load. Empty weight of the Prototype was 7070kg, empty weight of production version not given. gross weight of prototype 11,330kg, production version 11,300kg to 12,520kg. Max bomb load is 4,000kg. Put in 4 crewmen at 75kg each and at gross weight of 11,300kg you have no fuel, no oil, no ammo for defensive guns (even if the defensive guns were included in empty weight).
Plane was 'supposed' to hold up to 2000kg inside (no break down of types) and pair of 500kg bombs on external carriers. No explination of how you get to 4000kg.
Fuel tanks were supposed to hold 3950kg of fuel with the possibility of fitting an additional tank holding 659kg of fuel (no location given).
A range of 4100km is given with a 1000kg bomb load. Certainly not horrible for a 1941 bomber but not what some internet sites would have you believe.


Defensive guns of the 1941 version were one 7.62 in the nose, one manually aimed 12.7mm mg on top and 7.62 gun firing through a hatch in the bottom.

 

[tomo pauk]

Seems like the empty weight of the production Yer-2 was 7500 kg, take off weights being between 12570 and 14150 kg. Per this table (the '1941 *Er-2' model; table from Shavrov's book, translated in Spanish; can be translated): link.

 

[Vincenzo]

Shortround6 maybe you are not aware that the Merlin on Whitley and Wellington had 1030 hp a rated altitude, the Pegasus (on Wellington I) had under 1000 hp, the B-23 and B-26 had larger engine 12751500 but this is not w/o price (range).
On the weight data the link give to tomo pauk has similar data of me, i can add the internal 2000 kg bomb load was 4x500 kg (can not load 8x250 but ever 4 they used same racks, they can load also max 12x100kg) the max external load was 2000 kg on 2x1000 kg (or smaller go to 100 kg).
I'm aware that had one of badest defensive capability of its category, but in 1941 you want a radar aimed mg?

 

[Shortround6]

I am aware that the Merlin X engine had 1010hp at rated altitude, however rate altitude was about 4,000ft higher than the N-105P. Whitley also had a wing that was about 44% bigger than the Yer-2. Wellingtons wing, while not a lot bigger in area was of a higher aspect ratio. Both were slower planes than the Yer-2 but the Yer-2 wasn't fast enough to make much difference. It was only a bit faster than a Blenheim.
Problem for the Yer-2 was that the M-105 engines only gave about 1100hp for take-off which meant long take-off runs with large loads.

I am not sure the B-23 had that much shorter practical range. While it's engines only gave 1275hp at altitude they were good for 1600hp for take-off. Max range was over 4400km and it could fly 2258km with 1800kg of bombs.

I'm aware that had one of badest defensive capability of its category, but in 1941 you want a radar aimed mg?

Something between a hand aimed MG and a radar aimed MG would have been nice, I believe they were called power turrets

None of these bombers could really survive in daylight in enemy territory, the defensive guns just affected how bad the slaughter would be. Any of these bombers would need escorts in daylight (wither or not they actually got them in 1941) and would/should have been night bombers (goes for US B-25 and B-26 too.)

The Yer-2 may not have been a bad bomber but being in the top 3?

 

[Vincenzo]

on the turrets the use of to aim give me a different idea of your phrase, the turret in '41 however were manually aimed, you can had a power for move the turret but is ever the gunner that aim.
Yer-2 is in the top 3 in its category: medium, there are 6 bomber in the category, one is a not starter, the B-18.
compare the Yer-2 with the other 2 US bombers
internal bomb load all thre are similar difference under 10%
external bomb load afaik the US bombers had not this capability
guns: Yer-2 had 7.62 guns in nose and hatch e a 12.7 in the dorsal turret, the B-23 had a 7.62 weapon in nose, dorsal and hatch and a 12.7 in the tail, the B-26 had 7.62 guns in the nose and in the hatch, a 12.7 in the tail and a 2-12,7 turret dorsal
speed B-26 is the fastest, they had different rated altiude so the advantage is on 10-20% range, the advantage of B-23 on the Yer-2 is low under 5%. this are on the max speed but probably the order is the same also in cruise speeds
range Yer-2 4100 km with 1000 kg, B-23 2253 with 1814 kg, 4426 ferry, B-26 1609 with 1361 kg, 3541 max (fuel in bomb bay)
this were main performance i see for my choice i'm aware there are many others, i knewn the need of lung runs for take off of Yer, the trouble for the high wing load of B-26, i don't remember nothing on B-23 (but were 38 so in not easy read some on they).

 

[Conslaw]

Way back in post #22 Timppa picked these three planes (one in each category:

SBD-3
Boston III
Short Stirling.

I think the SBD-3 doesn't get its due as a top-3 bomber of 1941. The SBD-3 was the plane that turned the tide in the Pacific, bombing with excellent accuracy in the Coral Sea, Midway and in the battles off Guadalcanal. There wasn't a more accurate bomber in Allied service in 1941.

The Boston III, being the first version with R-2600 engines is an excellent choice.

I would replace the Short Stirling with the B-17C-D. I think the failings of the early Fortresses were due more to misuse of the plane than to inherent unfitness. The pre-E model Fortresses not only were faster than the later ones, but they had a longer range, and they were used to good effect by the Coastal Command. Given the relative lack of gunpower, the early forts should have either been used for night bombing only or with fighter escort. Since every heavy bomber of 1941 had the same problem, the B-17 shouldn't be knocked down for insufficient defensive guns.

 

[Shortround6]

Something to be considered when looking at the Early B-17s. They just weren't a late model without turrets.

They had a MUCH lower bomb load and a MUCH lower gross weight. This means even with the lighter defensive armament they had a lower fuel and bomb load combination.

empty weight of a B-17C was 30900lbs, Empty weight of a B-17G was 32720lbs.
Gross weight of a 17C with 1700 gals gas and a 2000lb bomb load was 46367lbs. Over load was not to exceed 47500lbs
Gross weight of 17G was 55,000 pounds normal loaded, 72,000 pounds maximum. "Normal" fuel was 2520 gals. Max overload could hit 72,000lbs but 60-65,000lbs was much more common.

The extra weight can tell you were some of the speed went.

Some performance date for early models: file:///C:/Users/Steve/Downloads/B-17C%20Performance.pdf

 

[pbehn]

Seems that all in all allied bombers in 1941 were in a "least worst" scenario I would say B17, B24 and Manchester, not because they were up to much in 1941 but they became good bombers. By night or day the allies didnt have the means to hit anything much in 1941 so pay load and range mean little.

 

[nuuumannn]

Seems that all in all allied bombers in 1941 were in a "least worst" scenario

In hindsight maybe and in comparison to later bombers, but in 1941? What foreign options were there? Compare Whitley, Wellington, Stirling etc with He 111, SM-79, Mitsubishi G3M, Tupolev SB-2, Do 17 etc. Only the British bombers had power operated turrets, which was later to be recognised as essential for bomber defence, the British bombers had relatively long range with useable bomb load and could carry very large loads across shorter distances. Contemporarily, bombers like the Whitley and Wellington were the best in the world at the time. The likes of the B-24, B-17 etc were only at the very beginning of their production and did not have the virtues demonstrated from 1942 on and were available in paltry numbers only. American combat experience was limited to British use of their equipment and the US had a few lessons to learn yet. Comparing the Axis bombers of 1941, we have the likes of Ju 88, Do 217E and Mitsubishi G4M among the best, but only the Do 217 can carry a similar load to the Wellington or Whitley and not as much as the Stirling. Ju 88 of course fastest, but again, poor defensive armament.

Boston III doesn't come into it until 1942; only available in one SAAF squadron in very late 1941 - see earlier in the thread.