Best bomber for this scenerio

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


I think maybe we agree.

Suppose you can only send each bomber and crew twice a week (and that seems high) due to maintenance, crew rest, training, planning, weather, etc.

If I have 1,000 bombers, I send them 1,000 on Monday and 1,000 on Thursday. I don't send 500 on Monday, 500 on Tuesday, 500 on Wednesday and 500 on Thursday.

BTW, I thought if you sent all your bombers as often as you can, you would attrit your bomber force to a less useful and more easily defeatable size. Especially in 1943, maybe not in 1945.
 
If you sent staggered waves of bombers to the target with alternating routes, yes the defenses will be alert, but will have to adjust each time, causing delays in reaction. Also, the intercepting pilots will be worn down by constantly having to scramble and get into an intercept pattern and just being on high alert on the ground means no real rest.
 
kitplane01 said:
BTW, I thought if you sent all your bombers as often as you can, you would attrit your bomber force to a less useful and more easily defeatable size. Especially in 1943, maybe not in 1945.
Click to expand...

That's what strategic planning and risk management is about. Making sure that squadrons have the logistical support they need to have as many serviceable bombers available, that the bombers have the best navigation aids to find their way to the target around known flak and interceptor hotspots, to make sure they have adequate fighter escort to and from the target area and to make sure the crews get plenty of rest between each sortie.

This is again why having one air force concentrating on daylight operations and another on night operations makes sense. Round the clock bombing exacts a heavy toll on the defenders.
 
Last edited:
nuuumannn said:
When it comes to utilising what might have been available within the WW2 timeframe, the answer to these questions is no and yes. Why limit your potential?
Click to expand...
There were also "Feinting" missions which distracted the enemy into believing a certain target was the bomber's destination and their interceptor resources were thrown against it leaving the actual target undefended for the main body of bombers.
 
For the sake of argument, let's use something like the B-32.

Have your 1,000 bombers divided into a day team, with full defensive armament, and a night team, with all the defensive guns except the one dorsal turret and the tail turret (vs two dorsal, one ventral, nose, and tail) removed (reducing the crew from 10 to 7); the removal of the turrets would probably save 1500 lb for the turrets, plus 1000 lb for the ammunition and 750 for the crew -- you've just upped the usable bomb load by over 3,000 lb). Make sure to include chaff and other electronic counter-measures, up-to-date navigation aids, and maybe devote a few of the bombers specifically to annoy the fighter airfields and radar stations.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

A
Best WW2 Seafire vs. best A6M Zero
Replies
9
Views
1K
Shortround6
S
A
Best Axis four engined bomber?
Replies
9
Views
2K
dedalos
D
Best piston engine(s) for fighters of 1945?
5 6 7
Replies
130
Views
12K
spicmart
S
XB-24J prototype bomber
Replies
18
Views
1K
GrauGeist
Best "general purpose" prop fighter also capable of best high altitude performance
2
Replies
31
Views
3K
PAT303
P
Menu
Log in
Register