Avro Antelope

[the lancaster kicks ass]

the RAF didnt carry out daylight strategic bombing as part of it's offensive operations

CC, Bomb taxi did say they didn't bomb by day.............

And I don't have very extensive sources on the B-17, but the source I do have (the data I believe alder posted), states that the B-17 dropped 640,036 tons of bombs, however it does not give a time frame, this could include pre-war, and it does not give location, some of this tonnage could have been dropped over the pacific. This tonnage was dropped over 291,508 sorties (same source), so by my reckoning this is an average of 2.92 tons carried per sortie, and as far as I know the USAAF didn't use many, if any, incendiaries and no mines............

In comparison the lancaster dropped 604,612 tons of bombs, all over Europe, all during wartime. Now whilst yes, this figure is lower than that of the B-17, the lancaster also carried an amazing 51,513,105 incendiaries!! and when you consider the RAF's smallest incendiary weighed 4lbs, we're looking at atleast annother 95,559 tons, in incendiaries, however as there were bigger incenduries this figure will actually be higher. the current totally for the lanc now stands at 700,171 tons, already higher than the tally for the B-17 (and all other bombers in Europe). Then (yes there's more) the lancaster also laid over 12,000 sea mines, and we can assume the bulk of these were 1,850 lb parachute mines, so this is annother 9,910 tons, bringing the total up to 710,081 tons! whilst this is not all bombs, it is all offensive weapons loads, so the lancaster did carry a greater tonnage than the B-17, it simply wasn't all bombs.

And if we take the lancaster's final tonnage figure, and bear in mind the lanc made 156,308 operational sorties, the lanc carried, on average, 4.5 tons per sortie, however due to my calculations using the minimum figures, the actual number would be higher........

So to conclude, not only did the lancaster carry more tonnage per sortie than any other plane in Europe, the lanc carried, when all offensive stores are taken into account, more tonnage than any other plane over Europe...........

And as a side note, the lanc also carried a further 6,684 tons of food to starving dutch people during operation manna of May 1945..........

and again, post war, the lancaster carried a further 74,000 now ex-prisoners of war back to Britain...........

 

[cheddar cheese]

The Lancaster did? Wouldnt it make more sense if the York was taking them back?

 

[BombTaxi]

There were very few Yorks (or other dedicated long-range transports) in RAF service at wars end, hence using the heavies as transports.

I wasnt trying to imply that Lancs didnt bomb at night... I know that they did. However, I was trying to point out (to Healz) that the flaws he percieves in the LAnc were due to the a/c being designed for a primary role of night-time area bombing...because that was the primary activity of Bomber Command's heavy bomber groups 8)

 

[evangilder]

Lanc, I am not sure about incendiaries with the B-17. The tonnage and sortie figure I am pretty sure is for the duration of the US involvement in the war, in all theaters. I have seen that number in numerous boosk and they all say that those numbers were "during the war".

B-17s were also used in Operation Mana. Heavies from the allies were used for both that and repatriating POWs. So they were useful in peacetime as well.

Do you know if the Lanc was used in any firefighting roles postwar? I would think with its payload capability, it would have been a good water dropper.

 

[plan_D]

I have to say, that was probably the most extensive, well thought-out and informative post that lanc has ever done!

 

[mosquitoman]

Well it is his specialist subject

 

[Nonskimmer]

Do you know if the Lanc was used in any firefighting roles postwar? I would think with its payload capability, it would have been a good water dropper.

At least one was, though I have no idea how long it served in that role or how successful it was.

"...One, KB-976, was purchased by an individual who modified it for use as a water bomber... "

(Quote from: www.lancastermuseum.ca The section entitled "The Canadian Lancasters")

 

[mosquitoman]

Thst was probably the only reason that Lanc survived to be on display today

 

[evangilder]

Thanks. I was curious as alot of American WWII bombers became water droppers that survive today. Like what happened with the Lanc in Canada, MM. The C-46 at our museum was a malathion sprayer for awhile as well.

 

[the lancaster kicks ass]

I have to say, that was probably the most extensive, well thought-out and informative post that lanc has ever done

cheers, i'm rather proud of it myself.........