B-17, B-24, or Lancaster

[Florian_at]

hello all,
I am part of a film crew, doing a documentation about bombings in WW2. We are looking for footage of a B-17 or a B-24. We thought that it should be possible to film a few sequences from a flight simulator, but we lack the experience to determine which simulator would be best. It's all about looking good, perfect graphics, beautiful models, perfect clouds, dropping bombs, sun and lens flare effects...
Maybe you could suggest a few titles?
Regards

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Sorry I can not help you, but there are a few gamers around here that might be able to and there are even a few gamer threads here.

 

[Glider]

I hate to say this but any simulator could do what you want and am suprised that you have to ask. A more likely question is where to go for the programming. Any manufacturer would be more than happy to help.

 

[lancasterman]

for punishment and being able to return it would be the B17 but best all around bomber is the lancaster it out carried and outclassed all other bombers of the time. The B17 and B24 could not match it in bomb carrying ability

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

While I agree with you that between the B-17, B-24, and Lancaster the Lancaster was the best, but you are wrong in saying that the Lancaster outclassed the B-29. The Lancaster was not even in the same boat as the B-29.

 

[plan_D]

The Lancaster was the best in it's class, but the B-29 made a new class; the "Super-Heavy" bomber which was above and beyond the Lancaster in every aspect.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Exactly

 

[Gnomey]

Agreed.

 

[Nonskimmer]

Another friend for lanc. "lanc II".

 

[mosquitoman]

Agreed, the Hally drew second with the B-24 in the heavy class IMO

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Another friend for lanc. "lanc II".

I am sure they will get along very well.

 

[Nonskimmer]

Yeah, I can see it now:

- "The British Lanc's better than the Canadian one!"

- "Is not!"

- "Is too!"

- "Is not!"

- "Is too!"

- "You're a moron!"

- "Well you're stupid!"

- "Go to hell!"

- "You first!"

- "I'm gonna kill you! AAAARRRRRGGGHHH!!!"





Well, maybe not quite that bad.
That'd be kinda funny though.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Oh yeah I live on a farm!

Oh yeah me too!

Lets go shave sheep together!

Yeah!!!!

 

[Nonskimmer]

Oh Jesus!

 

[pbfoot]

and don't forget about the wand exchange

 

[mosquitoman]

What? Who's got the biggest Tallboy?

 

[Erich]

this may sit quite wrong with out English and Canadian friends but JG 7 vets have said that when they did encounter the Lancs on several 1945 day light missions they were easier to blow away than US bomber types .....

3cm is 3cm, anything it touches starts a fire or is torn apart ..... HEI "M"

 

[pbfoot]

this may sit quite wrong with out English and Canadian friends but JG 7 vets have said that when they did encounter the Lancs on several 1945 day light missions they were easier to blow away than US bomber types .....

3cm is 3cm, anything it touches starts a fire or is torn apart ..... HEI "M"

makes sense to me

 

[plan_D]

I find that easy to understand. The Lancaster's defensive armament and armour was inferior to the B-24 and B-17. JG 7 must have thought it a turkey shoot against the Lancaster, but they maybe didn't realise that inside the belly of their target was more than twice as much ordance than the American counter-parts.

 

[lancasterman]

Cant really compare the b29 to the lancaster as it was built after the b17 and 24 and lanc and had major leaps in technology.

Erich is correct I spoke with many war vets and they said once the germans went to upward firing cannon there was no chace of not being shot down. stupid really that if they had fitted her with a belly turret operationally, they might have not been the losses incurred.