Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
the lancaster kicks ass said:yeah but like i said the mossie was used to some extent as a strateigic bomber.........
the lancaster kicks ass said:but she often supported lancs dropping cookies........
the lancaster kicks ass said:the pathfinders didn't really drop cookies, they dropped cookies sometimes in the same role as the lanc, sometimes as a diversion.......
the lancaster kicks ass said:....., with overload fuel tanks in the bomb bay (or in the fusilage as were sometimes carried) she could comfortably manage as 3,200 mile round trip with fuel for an emergency, with a payload between 4,000 and 2,000lbs at 20,000ft (the charts only gave the data for 20,000ft), and that includes the fuel used on the climb...........
syscom3 said:They needed two pilots due the mission being 15 hours long, plus three distinct weather fronts were encountered where both pilots had to be at the controls. In addition, a few of the bombers were intercepted by Japanese fighters and luckily drove them off with their .50 cals.
Simulations show that the Lancs would have had a higher loss rate if they encountered the same conditions.
KraziKanuK said:Just shows how good Lanc pilots were and how easy it was to fly a Lanc. If the Brits thought the Lanc needed a 2cd pilot, he would have been added.
syscom3 said:Japanese pilot quality throughout 1943 was still pretty good.
syscom3 said:"Tiger" force Lancs were in mid 1945 not in 1943. But it didnt matter at that time as the B32's could have been deployed which were probably better than the Lanc
My simulation comment was sure to attract attention
syscom3 said:Japanese records indicate that the FEAF claims in 1942 and 1943 were exagerated to a considerable degree.
Plus, many of the Japanese loss's (that did occur) happened towards the very end of 1943 and early 1944 with the big air battles over eastern New Guinie and Rabaul.
And look at their scores during that period, the IJA and IJN was nothing more than a nuisance at that point...syscom3 said:The IJA and IJN had squadrons stationed in the Dutch East Indies well into 1944. Their role was primarily to intercept US and Aussie bombers operating in that region. One thing I noticed in reading about the IJA/IJN pilots is the more experience they had, the higher the probability they would end up staying alive....just like the German pilots.
True but many Kamikazes were drawn from training ranks by then...syscom3 said:Of course quite a few ended up being wasted in the Kamikazi's, but that wasnt untill late 1944.
Far and few as history played out...syscom3 said:Those Japanese pilots who were left behind in the Dutch East Indies, tended to be experienced. And on the occasion that they could get a fighter in the air, they performed well.
A few? Look up FEAFs B-24 losses, they were next to nothing when compared to the European theater, mainly becuase the Japanese didn't have the planes to throw up against the bombers....syscom3 said:In the book "Morotai", the author related on how he was prevented from going on a solo mission from the PI over to Vietnam (in early 1945), as the IJA forces there were equiped with Ki-84's (I think it was that) and the pilots were good. He was told either he goes in a squadron, or not at all. It ended up a good idea as a group that did go over there that day did lose a few B24's to intercepting fighters. Makes you wonder how the Lanc would have held up?
And what happened to the experienced pilots at Midway?syscom3 said:My whole point to this is, the allied fighters ended up getting many of the verifiable kills against inexperienced pilots.
syscom3 said:The ones they didnt get were quite experienced. And when they were in the air with a capable fighter, they could be deadly opponants.
Show me - if thing were so exagerated why did they (the Japanese) loose control over the skies over Rabual, Guadalcanal, and New Guinea which ultimately led them getting kicked out of the Philippines. Even if you split the stats posted in half, the Japanese losses were devastating.
Far and few as history played out...
A few? Look up FEAFs B-24 losses, they were next to nothing when compared to the European theater, mainly becuase the Japanese didn't have the planes to throw up against the bombers....
My wife's grandfather was in the 30th BG 819th BS - I read their history, from 1943 to 1945 you could almost count on two hands their losses to enemy fighters. During that time they bombed their way from Kwajalein to Siapan....
And what happened to the experienced pilots at Midway? .
syscom3 said:My question is if the B24's were just barely able to defend themselves against Japanese fighters, how could a Lanc with inferior defensive firepower do the same?
syscom3 said:My simulation comment was sure to attract attention
Look at the chart above - the worst loss of heavy bombers in a single month was 24?!? - Over Europe that was a great month!!!