Best Bomber of WW2 -- #3

syscom3 · Dec 23, 2005

in exactily the same way there is no evidence as to the lanc's "ineffectiveness" in the PTO

The B24 flew night missions in both the ETO and PTO with no problem. But the Lanc didnt fly in the PTO with its unique operationsal problems, so you just cant say if it works in the ETO, it will work just as well in the PTO

fact is, yank navigators had much less experience at night, where it's allot different to the day, plus the british had allot of electronic aids

Just a matter of training and experience. Nothing US navigators couldnt handle.

Note - you just mentioned the Lanc navigators using electronic aids. I wonder how well they could handle bombing at night in the PTO with NO navaids.

FLYBOYJ · Dec 23, 2005

syscom3 said:
in exactily the same way there is no evidence as to the lanc's "ineffectiveness" in the PTO

Click to expand...

The B24 flew night missions in both the ETO and PTO with no problem. But the Lanc didnt fly in the PTO with its unique operationsal problems, so you just cant say if it works in the ETO, it will work just as well in the PTO

fact is, yank navigators had much less experience at night, where it's allot different to the day, plus the british had allot of electronic aids

Click to expand...

Just a matter of training and experience. Nothing US navigators couldnt handle.

Note - you just mentioned the Lanc navigators using electronic aids. I wonder how well they could handle bombing at night in the PTO with NO navaids.

With the exception of nav radar (which was later carried in US bombers), the navigation aids equipping both aircraft were basically the same. Low frequency DF was the main tool combined with other types of LF homing beacons, but for the most part they were all very similar.

Believe it or not sometimes its actually easier to navigate at night, especially a night with a full or partial moon, many geographical features are enhanced, and least to say if someone forgot to turn out their lights or if a pathfinder aircraft drops a bunch of flares and lights up a target.

The "Naviguessers" primary form of navigation was Dead Reckoning and Pilotage which meant for the most part electronic aids were secondary, when necessary, they even used the trusty ole sextant. WW2 bomber navigation was primarily done with a visual aid, either from the ground or using stars - when radar was used be rest assured the Navigusser was sweating.....

DaveB.inVa · Dec 23, 2005

size of family/no. of marks- lanc wins

I dont know about that... the B-24 was used just for about anything and everything. That sorta stuff happens when you have so many of them. I can find about 30 variants of the B-24. Sure some of them are similar but again a B.I and B.III Lancaster are greatly similar as are many other variants.

Also wasnt the Lancaster able to be fitted with dual controls? On the side of the control column there is a plate that can be removed and a second column attached. Ive seen this somewhere before but dont remember where and when it was used though.

FLYBOYJ · Dec 23, 2005

DaveB.inVa said:
size of family/no. of marks- lanc wins

Click to expand...

Also wasnt the Lancaster able to be fitted with dual controls? On the side of the control column there is a plate that can be removed and a second column attached. Ive seen this somewhere before but dont remember where and when it was used though.

For the most part they weren't but it wouldn't surprise me if there were a provision to easilly add a second set of controls...

Nonskimmer · Dec 23, 2005

Here's an interesting bit.

http://www.raafawa.org.au/wa/museum/lanc/history.htm

"A total of 30 Lancaster squadrons were to be flown from Europe to the Far East between August and November 1945, to raid the Japanese mainland from bases in Eastern India and Okinawa.

Their aircraft, designated F.E. (Far East) Lancasters. had modifications which Included more powerful Rolls Royce Merlin 24 engines of 1640 h.p.; Nash and Thompson rear turrets with two 0.5 Inch Browning machine guns instead of the earlier four .303 Brownings; a Martin dorsal turret with two more 0.5's and an additional 1800 litre fuel tank in the rear of the bomb bay.

With a typical 3,200 kg bomb load, this extended the aircraft's range from 4,200 to 5,300 kilometres. Special lifeboat-dropping Lancasters would be available for rescue operations on long oversea raids. Other Tiger Force Lancasters were designated to carry Grand Slam and the almost equally destructive 5,300 kg Tallboy bombs over shorter ranges against special targets, or to operate in tactical close-support roles with the British / Indian Army In Burma."

syscom3 · Dec 23, 2005

Too bad it wasnt available in 1943/1944.

KraziKanuK · Dec 23, 2005

The flying Canadian Lanc in Hamilton has dual controls.

Nonskimmer · Dec 23, 2005

I didn't know that. Hmmm.

the lancaster kicks ass · Dec 24, 2005

The Lanc did not fly a single combat mission against Japanese targets in the Dutch East Indies, New Guinie, Solomon Islands nor the small atolls in the SW Pacific. I am not aware of it flying many missions in the CBI area either

no, but that doesn't mean they didn't operate in that area, and information about them being reddied for that area has been given.............

You were quoting statistics that were in effect, mixing apples and oranges. Loss rates should be compared to the Lanc flying during the day vs the B24 and the B24 flying at night vs the Lanc

well in that case we shouldn't compare the top speeds of the Me-262 against prop driven fighters (for example), it's unfair as it's apples and oranges

Are you saying a squadron or two couldnt have been spared?

the logistics required for this wouldn't be worth it, and no, there weren't just two squadrons lying around doing nothing

And how many were being wasted on maritime patrol missions when they should have been on bombing missions.

Approximately? none. they were used for maritime patrol after the war

Quote:
size of family/no. of marks- lanc wins

irrelevant.

not quite no one will develop a bad plane much, the better the plane, the more variants, the more planes it will spawn...........

how was the manoeuvrability with two engines shot out and only one pilot to fly the plane?

fine, on numerous test flights at full military spec with only a pilot and co-pilot, when they shut down two engines on the same side the pilots reported no difficulties in keeping the aircraft straight and level, why, how was the B-24s? oh yeah that's right, a couple of hit in the B-24s wing and it'd break off

Youre right. Since there are no statistics of the Lancs usage in the PTO, the B24 wins hands down

does anyone else here agree with that?

But the Lanc didnt fly in the PTO with its unique operationsal problems, so you just cant say if it works in the ETO, it will work just as well in the PTO

at no point have I explicitly said that's what I think, however you cannot say the opposite why, because we don't know!

Just a matter of training and experience. Nothing US navigators couldnt handle

I never said they couldn't but getting experience took time, allot of it..........

I wonder how well they could handle bombing at night in the PTO with NO navaids.

that's like saying how would she fly without wings you can't just take away an aircraft's advantage in order to make things equal in an argument, if they're equal no one's gonna win anyway

so you're seriously saying that the fact that the lanc had better

payload
manoeuvrability
cruising speed
payload to range
versatility (I can assure you the lanc does win this by a large margin, start a separate thread for it if you wish )
total tonnage
tonnage per sortie
tonnage per aircraft lost

means absolutely nothing?

And yes both the flying lancs have dual controls installed, they're far too valuable not to!

Gemhorse · Dec 24, 2005

Great pics Lanc -

In short, I feel, from all I've read of Bomber Command's history, the Lancaster would've contributed greatly to Japan's defeat if it had served in the PTO....
While I have great respect also for the Liberator, particuarly in the Maritime role, the Lancaster was the most manoevrable bomber of it's size, considering THAT was it's primary defence, it's 4-6 .303's blazing from rear and dorsal turrets to hit or frustrate NF attacks being secondary....
In daylight raids, if it had Mustang escort [another inline-engined aircraft of great success], and .5's and ball turret, that would have clinched it......
Also, it proved extremely durable against flak and fighter damage......
It was revered by it's crews, and the design went on to become the Lincoln and finally the Shackleton, a great maritime aircraft......

May I also take this oppurtunity to wish you ALL a safe and happy Festive Season and great New Year..........

Gemhorse

the lancaster kicks ass · Dec 24, 2005

thanks, seasons greatings to you too!

FLYBOYJ · Dec 24, 2005

Greatr pics Lanc, happy hollidays gemhorse
A thought.....Are those photos from a FLYING Lancaster or one that was being flown just a few years ago? A guess but it may be possible that the CAA may of mandated a second set of controls and an additional pilot for civilian operation.....Just a thought

Nonskimmer · Dec 24, 2005

Likely. None of the operational marks in RCAF service that I've been able to find info on had dual controls.
Still not sure about the AR variant though.

KraziKanuK · Dec 24, 2005

FLYBOYJ said:
Greatr pics Lanc, happy hollidays gemhorse
A thought.....Are those photos from a FLYING Lancaster or one that was being flown just a few years ago? A guess but it may be possible that the CAA may of mandated a second set of controls and an additional pilot for civilian operation.....Just a thought

Yes.

The best pilot, 9 'motors', no copilot, and comes tonight.

Nonskimmer · Dec 24, 2005

The only true Top Gun.

(Source unknown. Received via e-mail.)

cheddar cheese · Dec 24, 2005

Aha, so now we know why Iceman is called Iceman...

the lancaster kicks ass · Dec 24, 2005

FLYBOYJ said:
Greatr pics Lanc, happy hollidays gemhorse
A thought.....Are those photos from a FLYING Lancaster or one that was being flown just a few years ago? A guess but it may be possible that the CAA may of mandated a second set of controls and an additional pilot for civilian operation.....Just a thought

i'm not quite sure what you mean? these are current(ish) pics of the only two flying lancs left??

FLYBOYJ · Dec 24, 2005

the lancaster kicks ass said:
FLYBOYJ said:

Greatr pics Lanc, happy hollidays gemhorse
A thought.....Are those photos from a FLYING Lancaster or one that was being flown just a few years ago? A guess but it may be possible that the CAA may of mandated a second set of controls and an additional pilot for civilian operation.....Just a thought

Click to expand...

i'm not quite sure what you mean? these are current(ish) pics of the only two flying lancs left??

Your CAA (The FAA here in the states) has to authorize the operation of these aircraft. In the US they carry a registration as "Experimental Exhibition," over in the UK you may have something similar operating under the European "JAA" (Joint Aviation Authority). Many times the FAA (or CAA/ JAA in your part of the world) may impose certain restriction on these aircraft and it's very possible they (the UK CAA or JAA) mandated a second pilot, considering the aircraft is considered a "large aircraft" which is actually determined by weight, 12,500 pounds (FAA and JAA). Additionally I would guess as these aircraft are not flown that often pilot proficiency might be an issue so the installation of dual control always ensures that one pilot might be "checking out" another pilot to fly the aircraft.

the lancaster kicks ass · Dec 24, 2005

ah, well i can't speak for the canadian lanc but the RAF operated lanc i believe they installed the second set of controlls volentarily due to the immense value of the aircraft

now that sys aint here, who here agrees that the lancaster is a better bomber overall than the B-24? maybe if there's anough people agreeing with me he'll give up and we can finally move on............

syscom3 · Dec 24, 2005

I like to give thought to your comments before answering back, so yes I am here, I am contemplating my response, and if anything, youre making an even better case for the B24 being better.

Keep posting.

Best Bomber of WW2 -- #3

Pacific Historian

"THE GREAT GAZOO"

Airman 1st Class

"THE GREAT GAZOO"

Captain

Pacific Historian

Banned

Captain

Major General

Attachments

Senior Airman

Major General

"THE GREAT GAZOO"

Captain

Banned

Captain

Attachments

Major General

Major General

"THE GREAT GAZOO"

Major General

Pacific Historian

Users who are viewing this thread

Similar threads