A-Bombing Germany

[the lancaster kicks ass]

once again, lack of time forbids me to get the book, but has anyone seen the B-24 that had the same engines as the B-29??............

 

[cheddar cheese]

nope, but id like to

 

[Gemhorse]

As far as I know, the B-50 fitted in somewhere between the B-29 and the B-52...The B-29 had Wright R-3350's...As far as the Lancaster went, it wasn't designed [ at any stage ] to carry an A-Bomb, nor were it's latter variants ; the Lancastrian, the York, both of which were essentially transport aircraft, nor the Lincoln or the Shackleton. - However, the designs for the Lincoln were laid down in 1943 [B14/43] and first flew in June 1944. - It was capable of 35.000 ft ceiling, with Merlin 68's or 85's, and with longer span wing with a higher aspect ratio, a lengthened fuselage and new nose, a modified bomb bay and strengthened landing gear....They were in service until 1955, when the V-Bomber program started, the first UK Nuke-Bombers. - Essentially though, the Lincoln was simply just a modified Lancaster, and with different engines could maintain a ' Nuclear Altitude'...The Lancaster still, IMHO, could've, if required, handle an A-Bomb...The reason the Brits didn't rush around to build a Nuke-bomber before the 'V series', was probably post-Japan, they didn't see a requirement, not until the Cold War anyway...the last Lancasters remained in service [ with Canada ] until 1964, which really is a testament to their popularity....We shall have to differ in our opinions on this, gentlemen, because I'm adamant that the Lancaster could've done-it, but I do concede the B-29 was a great aircraft, teething-troubles and all and certainly did sterling service both as a conventional nuke bomber....

 

[Lightning Guy]

The Lancaster and/or the bomb probably could have been modified to make it happen. The B-29 would have required fewer modifications, could have been made ready sooner, and would have been the plane used.

 

[the lancaster kicks ass]

We shall have to differ in our opinions on this, gentlemen, because I'm adamant that the Lancaster could've done-it, but I do concede the B-29 was a great aircraft, teething-troubles and all and certainly did sterling service both as a conventional nuke bomber....

i can see we're not going to win this, so i shall agree with this statement, the lanc could have done it, but the favourite choice (i stil haven't said it would, as we don't know that) would be the B-29...................

 

[brad]

an honest one that isnt obsessed with his country and tries to be fair to everyone.

im the opiset

 

[the lancaster kicks ass]

you tell 'em brad...................

 

[cheddar cheese]

so brad is a dishonest englishman who is obsessed with england and hates everyone

 

[the lancaster kicks ass]

i see you've failed to read my other post??

 

[cheddar cheese]

yes, you've succumbed see, youve managed to gain some wisdom by becoming 14, youve learned how to accept defeat, well done grasshopper

 

[the lancaster kicks ass]

grasshopper

??

his name's Gemhorse...............

 

[Gemhorse]

Thankyou Lanc, and LG, they were both very fine aircraft, the Lancaster a misfit as the Manchester [the engine idea was good, but not successful] but it went on to do work far beyond it's original design, and the supreme WWII Bomber, the B-29, which layed terrific waste to Japan, both conventionally and as the First Nuclear Bomber, and lead-on to establishing Strategic Bombers as a major weapon...B.52's have proved to be fearsome bombers....

 

[the lancaster kicks ass]

B-36s would have been amazing if they were ever used..................

 

[Lightning Guy]

I have read that the B-36 was actually able to out maneuver contemporary fighters at altitude because of its extremely large wing. It was all the smaller fighters could do to generate enough lift to maintain flight in that rarified air.

 

[cheddar cheese]

wow, i would never have thought that.

 

[the lancaster kicks ass]

i'm trying to get up my picture of a B-36 with a fighter on it's underside, but it isn't working, i'll keep trying.................

 

[cheddar cheese]

you know to put it on a post?

 

[cls12vg30]

Do you mean that tiny little parasite fighter that they tried to put in the B-36's bomb bay? It was an interesting concept. But the B36 carried something like sixteen defensive 20mm cannons! I don't know that it needed its own defensive fighter.

Yeah the "aluminum clouds" arrived too late for WWII, but they were the first purpose-built nuclear bombers. It's mind-boggling how big they were...and all those engines..."six turning and four burning".

 

[the lancaster kicks ass]

the fighter isn't mounted in the bomb bay, it's on a solid arm slung underneath the bomber............

 

[Lightning Guy]

And by that time the guns had been removed from the B-36. By the time the B-36 entered service, the emphasis was on dropping nukes which is done by single planes rather than formations. Single planes have ZERO chance in a gun battle so the US yanked them off. And I've have mentioned before the B-36 could outmaneuver many fighters at altitude.