Best bomber for this scenerio

[kitplane01]

The goal is very large mass daylight bomber formations over a well defended target with fighter opposition. There fighters escorting you to/from the target, but not an unlimited supply. The target is 1,600 miles round trip. You can have any bomber such that
- At least 100 were built
- At least 100 in operation by June 1944
- No B-29s

Goals
- 8,000,000 lbs of bomber per raid.
- Cost matters.
- Bomb load matters too. In fact, $$$$/lb-of-bomb-delivered is an interesting metric
- Survivability matters
- Defense matters

Things that don't matter
- Accuracy (if it can hit a large city in daylight, that's good enough)
- Availability (as long as at least 100 exist, we will arrange things to make more)
- Nationality (Want something designed in Thailand. OK (and weird, since there were no Thai bombers))
- Size (If you think this is best done by two thousand Mosquitos or a thousand Liberators, that's OK)

 

[swampyankee]

B-32. It was built to the same spec as the B-29, so it has the range (2400 "normal" and 3800 max, according to Joe Baugher).

Avro Lincoln, which looks like (Wikipedia; yes, I know) it could carry about 14,000 lb over an 800 mile radius.

 

[kitplane01]

B-32. It was built to the same spec as the B-29, so it has the range (2400 "normal" and 3800 max, according to Joe Baugher).

Avro Lincoln, which looks like (Wikipedia; yes, I know) it could carry about 14,000 lb over an 800 mile radius.

I see I might not have been clear. I've edited the question to be more clear.

The B-32 was introduced in 1945, so it's excluded. Nor were there 100 Avro Lincoln's in operation by June '44.

 

[Freebird]

8 million pounds is 4,000 tons.
That's a thousand bomber raid carrying 4 tons each, or 2,000 bombers of 2 tons each .

Daylight raid excludes basically all British bombers except the Mosquito.
Ditto the fragile Japanese bombers.
Range excludes Mosquito and Ju88.
Pe-8 had the range and 5.5 ton payload, but lacking rear and.ventral turret would be vulnerable.

Strongly opposed daylight mission of 1,600 round trip in 1944 = B-17G

 

[kitplane01]

I'm not saying you're wrong (if I knew the right answer I wouldn't have asked).

I think you just picked the bomber that has the lowest cost/gun, and highest cost/bomb_load.

Advantages:
Maximizes defensive because firepower more bombers in the fleet, and each bomber has the most guns
Disadvantages
Costs more to build the fleet because more bombers needed
More accidental losses because more airplanes flying

 

[Freebird]

Disadvantages
Costs more to build the fleet because more bombers needed
More accidental losses because more airplanes flying

Not too many good choices, with your range and payload in daylight

It would be about 1,350 B-17 bombers carrying 3 tons each.
You'd need about 2,000 Liberators carrying 2 tons each
You've excluded the B-25, B-26, A-26, Ju88, Do217 Mosquito with your range requirements
P108 would work, you'd need a 1000 of them, but more vulnerable defensively

You could fly about 370 Lancasters each carrying 22,000lbs (11 ton "Earthquake" bomb), but the British plane only has 6 x .303 guns, vs 13 of the heavier 50 cal in the B-17G.
Avro Lincoln would be better than the Lanc, but not in service until 1945.

 

[kitplane01]

I wonder if I have a mistaken opinion. I thought the Liberator carried more than a B-17?????

 

[kitplane01]

8 million pounds is 4,000 tons.
That's a thousand bomber raid carrying 4 tons each, or 2,000 bombers of 2 tons each .

Daylight raid excludes basically all British bombers except the Mosquito.
Ditto the fragile Japanese bombers.
Range excludes Mosquito and Ju88.
Pe-8 had the range and 5.5 ton payload, but lacking rear and.ventral turret would be vulnerable.

Strongly opposed daylight mission of 1,600 round trip in 1944 = B-17G

Not too many good choices, with your range and payload in daylight

What's a more reasonable range? London-Berlin and back is 1,200 miles as the crow flies. Alexandria Egypt to Sofia Bulgaria and back is right at 1,600, as is Tunisia to Austria.

 

[Freebird]

I wonder if I have a mistaken opinion. I thought the Liberator carried more than a B-17?????

I think I miscalculated
I think at a range of 800 miles it carries 5,000 lb, so 1,600 Liberators needed.
I'm assuming the B-17 carried 6,000 lb over that distance, but one of the American experts could correct me if I'm wrong

 

[Freebird]

What's a more reasonable range? London-Berlin and back is 1,200 miles as the crow flies. Alexandria Egypt to Sofia Bulgaria and back is right at 1,600, as is Tunisia to Austria.

1,200 would be better

Do217 = 1,350 mile range, decent payload
Mosquito = 1,300 mile range, 2 ton payload but faster, so harder to intercept

 

[kitplane01]

Not too many good choices, with your range and payload in daylight

You've excluded the B-25, B-26, A-26, Ju88, Do217 Mosquito with your range requirements

What's a more reasonable range? London-Berlin and back is

1,200 would be better

Do217 = 1,350 mile range, decent payload
Mosquito = 1,300 mile range, 2 ton payload but faster, so harder to intercept

O.K. So what's your answer at 1,200 miles round trip? 4,000 Mosquitos or 1,000 heavy bombers (and if so, which)

 

[buffnut453]

xYou could fly about 370 Lancasters each carrying 22,000lbs (11 ton "Earthquake" bomb), but the British plane only has 6 x .303 guns, vs 13 of the heavier 50 cal in the B-17G.

Lanc had 8.guns not 6 but still not well defended compared to the B-17G.

Given that fighter escort is available in this scenario, why is the Lanc not a viable candidate? The later variant Mosquitos would also be decent options with a 4000lb bomb load and fighter escort. Either option offers more throw weight per airframe/crew than a B-17.

Selection of the best aircraft may come down to the type of Target. B-17s or Lancs would be good for a large area target while Mossies would be better to deliver lots of explosive I to a smaller area.

 

[wuzak]

The goal is very large mass daylight bomber formations over a well defended target with fighter opposition. There fighters escorting you to/from the target, but not an unlimited supply. The target is 1,600 miles round trip. You can have any bomber such that
- At least 100 were built
- At least 100 in operation by June 1944
- No B-29s

Goals
- 8,000,000 lbs of bomber per raid.
- Cost matters.
- Bomb load matters too. In fact, $$$$/lb-of-bomb-delivered is an interesting metric
- Survivability matters
- Defense matters

Things that don't matter
- Accuracy (if it can hit a large city in daylight, that's good enough)
- Availability (as long as at least 100 exist, we will arrange things to make more)
- Nationality (Want something designed in Thailand. OK (and weird, since there were no Thai bombers))
- Size (If you think this is best done by two thousand Mosquitos or a thousand Liberators, that's OK)

It is interesting that you specify that accuracy doesn't matter.

More accurate bombers will require fewer aircraft/smaller bomb load to achieve the same effect.

The type of target also affects the type of bomb to be used, which may also limit the aircraft available for the job.

For instance, the B-17 could only carry the US 4,000lb bomb externally, which would drastically reduce its range. On the other hand, the Mosquito was limited to 2,000lb for such ranges if only 500lb or 1,000lb bombs were to be used.

And how many incendiaries do you want?

 

[wuzak]

Does it matter how long the raid takes?

Could you, for instance, have 200 bombers in groups of 50 bombing then returning to base for more bombs and a fresh crew to go again? Because you could, possibly, achieve that with Mosquitoes.

And why daylight? The Lancaster can carry 12,000lb the distance you require and hi a target the size of a large city with the navigational aids available in 1944.

 

[kitplane01]

It is interesting that you specify that accuracy doesn't matter.

More accurate bombers will require fewer aircraft/smaller bomb load to achieve the same effect.

The type of target also affects the type of bomb to be used, which may also limit the aircraft available for the job.

For instance, the B-17 could only carry the US 4,000lb bomb externally, which would drastically reduce its range. On the other hand, the Mosquito was limited to 2,000lb for such ranges if only 500lb or 1,000lb bombs were to be used.

And how many incendiaries do you want?

My vision was just city destruction. But as has been just learned by me, I wonder if city destruction and daytime raids is a reasonable combination. Can a thousand-bomber raid find a city if GEE and other electronic aids are interfered with the enemy?

 

[wuzak]

My vision was just city destruction. But as has been just learned by me, I wonder if city destruction and daytime raids is a reasonable combination. Can a thousand-bomber raid find a city if GEE and other electronic aids are interfered with the enemy?

The enemy wasn't able to interfere with the equipment, as far as I know, historically.

In any case, Pathfinders would often drop their bombs on dead reckoning when their equipment (Gee-H, Oboe or H2S) failed.

 

[Dimlee]

Pe-8 had the range and 5.5 ton payload, but lacking rear and.ventral turret would be vulnerable.

Pe-8 had a tail turret (12.7mm UBT or 20mm SHVAK) and two turrets (7.62mm) in engine gondolas. But it was not available in the numbers required by this scenario. We need 1000 serviceable Pe-8 and only with the latest M-82 engines to make this trip with bomb load 3500-4000 kg... A task impossible for VVS and for the Soviet industry.

 

[nuuumannn]

Selection of the best aircraft may come down to the type of Target. B-17s or Lancs would be good for a large area target while Mossies would be better to deliver lots of explosive I to a smaller area.

Yes, agreed. The original question is a bit loaded, to say the least. A simple answer could be a combination of daylight and night raids on the same city by two different air forces, which is going to provide a larger number of bombers delivering a greater amount of ordnance over a greater amount of time, giving the city's emergency services something of a headache, not to mention the city's military defences a work out.

Staggering the offensives across a larger amount of time, rather than attempting to attack it in one day's sorties is definitely better strategically. Continuous day after day raids, and/or day and night raids over succcessive days or even intermittent days is going to yield better results and greater destruction. As I've said before, launching a strategic campaign of area bombing requires sustainability by a large numerical force to be truly effective.

 

[kitplane01]

Staggering the offensives across a larger amount of time, rather than attempting to attack it in one day's sorties is definitely better strategically. Continuous day after day raids, and/or day and night raids over succcessive days or even intermittent days is going to yield better results and greater destruction.

I was rather sure this is wrong (or maybe I misunderstand).

Overloading the defense seems much better than the opposite.

If I send a 1,000 bomber raid, I'll get attacked by every flak gun and fighter on my path. On the other hand, if I send a 500 bomber raid twice on separate days, I'll get attacked by every fighter and flak gun twice, while having half the defense against fighters each time.

 

[nuuumannn]

If I send a 1,000 bomber raid, I'll get attacked by every flak gun and fighter on my path. On the other hand, if I send a 500 bomber raid twice on separate days, I'll get attacked by every fighter and flak gun twice, while having half the defense against fighters each time.

Why would you only send 500 bombers when you have far more available? I suspect you're not getting the point. Send all of the bombers all the time, or what's available to you through serviceability and losses etc, and continue to do so. Send all on the first day, then continue overnight and send the same the next day. The secret to strategic bombing of any target (not just cities) is maximum destruction, and you can do that whichever way you choose, but just stipulating one day's operation is limiting your potential.