Avro Antelope

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

"Darling, I have something to confess"


"Im having an affair."

"You bastard! Who with?"

"Fifi. I met her at the airshow. Im sorry but your 34DD just cant compare with 4x Wright Cyclone 3350 Radial Engines and tricycle undercarriage, far more fun to fly too."


Interesting aircraft. The Lancaster was a useful plane, although it was relegated to night bombing because it was aging. It couldn't really defend itself that well against German fighters. The B-29 Superfortress could. Therefore these bombers both played a very useful role. Incidently bare metal on an operational plane is just suicidal as the paint from what I have heard slows the round down and minimizes damage to some extent. A lot of planes were destroyed apparently from bare metal on metal sparks at the end of WW2. The sparks from the hit metal could hit those oxygen tanks and blow the plane skyhigh.
The Lancaster, aging?

The Lancaster wasn't RELEGATED to Night Role, it was sent to night role because the RAF lacked any long range escort fighters. Look what was happening to the US 8th AF without effective long range escort fighters.
Just to reinforce plan_D's point, the Lanc wasnt made a night bomber because it had poor armament...it was DESIGNED with night bombing in mind, so didnt need as many guns as the US heavies! No RAF heavy was ever employed on regular daylight work, because the RAF didnt carry out daylight strategic bombing as part of it's offensive operations.
Furthermore, it was in fact a newer a/c than either the B-17 or B-24 - the oldest RAF heavy was the Stirling, which was out of service by mid-war - the age of the a/c had nothing to do with it's role.
what do you mean lancs didn't bomb by day!! :shock:

lancasters carried out thousands of daylight raids in late 44/45!!

and yes the RAF learned with the whimpy that bombing by day was suicide, and so any bomer post-wellington was designed as a night bomber, hence the lact of armourment, but if you think that

HealzDevo said:
The Lancaster was a useful plane

you are very much underestimating the lancaster, she was one of the deciding factors in the war OVER Europe..........

HealzDevo said:
It couldn't really defend itself that well against German fighters

it had enough to scare off allot of fighters, fact is, no plane can be invincible, you will always have to face losses, but if you think that pure weight of guns will save you from a fighter, look at the B-17, she was packed with guns, still easy meat..........

The B-29 Superfortress could

oh yes?? you have combat records of the B-29 flying missions against germany where she came up against german fighters?? because i would very much like to see them.....

the B-29 never flew missions against german fighter opposition, as such you cannot cloaim that she could defend herself, the only missions she flew were against poor fighter opposition by day and almost non existant opposition by night over japan........
I'm sure Lanc will either confirm or refute this but didn't the Lanc drop a larger tonnage of bombs in Europe than any other single bomber?

Users who are viewing this thread