Best Bomber of WW2 (continued)

[Nonskimmer]

To say the least!

 

[KraziKanuK]

the 2cd pic - a/c that took a direct flak hit in the wing

Stevonvitch II a B-24L 44-49710 of the 779thBD/464thBG 15th AF

 

[GT]

It is a draw between B-17 or Lancaster.

Cheers
GT

 

[Anonymous]

Liberator was as told before week in the wing.

Cheers
GT

The Liberator was "weak in the wings" comapred to the B-17. Compared to the Lancaster, it was probably about equal. The Lancaster was no B-17 either when it came to surviving damage.

=S=

Lunatic

 

[the lancaster kicks ass]

no compared to a B-17 she couldn't take that much damage, but she could take quite a bit..........

 

[Anonymous]

no compared to a B-17 she couldn't take that much damage, but she could take quite a bit..........

Probably less than the B-24 though. Where the B-24 carried armor and redundant structure... the Lanc carried bombs.

=S=

Lunatic

 

[evangilder]

Nice shot, GT! I have been through that airplane several times. That one is based in Mesa Arizona at the CAF chapter there. It is on Falcon Field. For you Brits, Falcon Field was used to train RAF pilots during the war.

 

[the lancaster kicks ass]

yes it proberly could take less damage than the B-24, but it also carried more bombs, to me, that makes a better bomber............

 

[Anonymous]

yes it proberly could take less damage than the B-24, but it also carried more bombs, to me, that makes a better bomber............

Well, that's good for a night bomber. In daylight ops, durability is important too.

It's a series of tradeoffs - no doubt about that! But you really cannot say that a bigger bombload on a more fragile airframe is "better", or the other way around either. They're just different.

=S=

Lunatic

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

yes it proberly could take less damage than the B-24, but it also carried more bombs, to me, that makes a better bomber............

You say this only because you would be bombing at night. If you were bombing during the day I would take a B-17 anyday. You forget Lanc during the day you had to contend with more FLAK and more fighters. What you would you rather be sitting on then explosive bombs or armor to keep shrapenel from flying up your ass?

 

[the lancaster kicks ass]

can i just point out here the lanc made 0ver 40,000 daylight raids, she could bomb by day as well as night.........

 

[Anonymous]

Um, the Lancaster made 40,000 daylight sorties - big difference.

Most of these were at the very end of the war when there was little Luftwaffe' opposition, or into Northern France or Italy where at least temporary air supremancy could be obtained earlier in the war.

=S=

Lunatic

 

[DAVIDICUS]

DerAdlerIstGelandet said, "What you would you rather be sitting on then explosive bombs or armor to keep shrapenel from flying up your ass?"

I always thought that Lanc quite fancies things flying up his ass. The Lancaster would be his obvious choice.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

OUCH that would hurt.

 

[the lancaster kicks ass]

an interestong experience though...........

and i was simply pointing out that the lancaster did bomb by day as well, contrary to popular belief...........

 

[MP-Willow]

GT, the B-24 was created for range and that wing, thin Mr. Davis had a great vision for the design. the wing worked and the aircraft was used for everything the air core and Navey could come up with.

I am a little sad for this heavy Lancaster bashing even though I am not a great fan

 

[cheddar cheese]

DerAdlerIstGelandet said, "What you would you rather be sitting on then explosive bombs or armor to keep shrapenel from flying up your ass?"

I always thought that Lanc quite fancies things flying up his ass. The Lancaster would be his obvious choice.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Welcome back CC, I hope for you sake you left your GF satisfied.

 

[the lancaster kicks ass]

turns out it was because he fried his modem............

 

[cheddar cheese]

Which may be related