Best Bomber of WW2 (continued)

[cheddar cheese]

That would have made more sense to me.

 

[the lancaster kicks ass]

but 6x20mm in the nose of a komet is gonna be a bit of a squeeze.......

 

[cheddar cheese]

Yeah, the plane is small enough as it is really.

 

[16KJV11]

6x20mm in the Komet's nose? What kind of drugs are y'all on? I'm from Bammy, I can say that.

 

[16KJV11]

The Germans should have made large quantities of JU 290's and blitzed England and New York with them! Had they had air to air refueling and a few good aircraft carriers to carry fighter escorts, it could have been a chilling reality!

 

[Glider]

sorry to go back to my last post but the top turret was the most useful in DAYLIGHT. Most nightfighters came from underneath for all three of my reasons not just the first.
Anyway if your that concerned just drop the front turret and put a gun underneath. Weight would be less, crew the same and guns better proportioned.

One question probably for Yank. Does anyone know the loss ratio for the Lanc compared to the Halifax III a plane I admit to having a soft spot for. I know that overall Halifax's had a higher loss ratio but the III was a big improvement and I am trying to find out how it compared.

Any ideas welcome

 

[16KJV11]

I have tried unsuccessfully to locate specific British aircraft losses during WWII. Maybe someone can enlighten me as to where to find these stats. I understand that the Lanc was a superior a/c though.

 

[Glider]

The Lanc certainly had a better range / bombload but as for the rest, I am not so sure which is why I am asking.

 

[cheddar cheese]

The Germans should have made large quantities of JU 290's and blitzed England and New York with them! Had they had air to air refueling and a few good aircraft carriers to carry fighter escorts, it could have been a chilling reality!

Or Heinkel should have been allowed to make the 277

 

[plan_D]

Air-to-air re-fueling? You'll be lucky if you're talking 1940-'45. It was only really developed in the 50s and 60s.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Air-to-air re-fueling? You'll be lucky if you're talking 1940-'45. It was only really developed in the 50s and 60s.

Although experimented with in the 1920s, the air refueling concept was revitilized in the post war years when it was realized how thirsty the early jets were. Here's a great site on this stuff:

http://www.centennialofflight.gov/essay/Evolution_of_Technology/refueling/Tech22.htm

 

[plan_D]

I didn't know when it was first tested, so I covered my back by saying developed. Great site, I never knew it was that old.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

I didn't know when it was first tested, so I covered my back by saying developed.

God you're crafty

 

[evangilder]

Wasn't one of the first refuelings done with a plane called "question mark"?

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Yep, Doolittle, Spaatz and MacCready I think

 

[evangilder]

Sounds about right. Those gusy did some amazing things for their day. Real guts there.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Sounds about right. Those gusy did some amazing things for their day. Real guts there.

Yep - and look at their careers! Amazing!

 

[cheddar cheese]

During WW2 in-flight refuelling was experimented on with a P-38, but the USAAF discarded the idea because they thought it was impractical.

 

[16KJV11]

That sounds about like the US military of old. Remember Gen. Billy Mitchell?

 

[DAVIDICUS]

16KJV11,

I like your signatiure saying.