Best Bomber

MP-Willow · Jun 18, 2004

David m Card, welcome aboard to this flying circus at times. I am a great fan of the B-24 and the Halifax They both flew in all theatures and were also able to be adapted for a lot of uses. Sadly the B-29 was by the proforance numbers the best, but with out the Liberator to help get the airfields it would have had a hard time.

I think that the Halifax is very mush under loved and overshadowed by the Lanc Also the Hali's did great for Coastal Comand!

the lancaster kicks ass · Jun 20, 2004

welcome aboard to this flying circus at times

you know me to well.......................

Lightning Guy · Jun 20, 2004

I'm going to take 'flying circus' as a compliment since that was what the Red Barron's unit was known as and was later applied to the team of Bong and Lynch in the Pacific.

David m Card · Jun 20, 2004

the lancaster kicks ass said:
welcome aboard to this flying circus at times

Click to expand...

you know me to well.......................

Thank-You MP-Willow it is nice to know that some one on this site reconizes a Halifax,very refreshing getting sick of hearing about lancs all the time!!!!!

the lancaster kicks ass · Jun 21, 2004

what was th point in quoting my last post there??

David m Card · Jun 21, 2004

the lancaster kicks ass said:
what was th point in quoting my last post there??

Sorry,was trying to quote MP-Willow,still getting used to using site. My point also being that there were other bombers in the war that also deserve reconition,The spanky Lanky has enough already.The pilots and crews of Hali's ,Whimpys,stirlings,hamps,were on the same damn airfeilds to!!!

David m Card · Jun 21, 2004

David m Card said:
the lancaster kicks ass said:

what was th point in quoting my last post there??

Click to expand...

Sorry,was trying to quote MP-Willow,still getting used to using site. My point also being that there were other bombers in the war that also deserve reconition,The spanky Lanky has enough already.The pilots and crews of Hali's ,Whimpys,stirlings,hamps,were on the same damn airfeilds to!!!

OH,and by the way your quote on engine power between a Hali and a Lank ,Bristol Hercules 1800hp lank 1280hp but i will do more research on the RR Merlins,all of my data is packed away till July(moveing).I am sure those little devils packed more punch.At least i would hope so,i mean with all there greatness and reconition and all!!!

Lightning Guy · Jun 21, 2004

The Merlins on the Lanc produced around 1,460hp depending on altitude. David, the Lanc gets the praise it did because of its numbers, its performance, and its impact. The Halifax was a good aircraft and the Wimpy was the best the RAF had to start the war with. I don't think the Stirling and Hampden should even be mentioned however.

David m Card · Jun 22, 2004

Lightning Guy said:
The Merlins on the Lanc produced around 1,460hp depending on altitude. David, the Lanc gets the praise it did because of its numbers, its performance, and its impact. The Halifax was a good aircraft and the Wimpy was the best the RAF had to start the war with. I don't think the Stirling and Hampden should even be mentioned however.

Thank-You sir i agree 100%!!! \/

the lancaster kicks ass · Jun 22, 2004

most merlins used on lancs (Mk.XX and XXII) produced 1,800+hp, and if you think the hurcules would have been better on the lancaster, have you heard of the Lancaster Mk.II, i wouldn't be supprised if you haven't, they were the same as the Mk.I but with hurkules engines, they gave a lesser ceiling, less range, less payload, they were only made because they were worried about a shortage of merlins, but their fears weren't recognised, so they went back to the Mk.III, esentually a Mk.I.....................

David m Card · Jun 22, 2004

the lancaster kicks ass said:
most merlins used on lancs (Mk.XX and XXII) produced 1,800+hp, and if you think the hurcules would have been better on the lancaster, have you heard of the Lancaster Mk.II, i wouldn't be supprised if you haven't, they were the same as the Mk.I but with hurkules engines, they gave a lesser ceiling, less range, less payload, they were only made because they were worried about a shortage of merlins, but their fears weren't recognised, so they went back to the Mk.III, esentually a Mk.I.....................

Hmm shortage of merlins,must be because they kept blowing up.Yes i have heard of the lank with herc's,just goes to show they belong on a HALIFAX!!!!! \/

MP-Willow · Jun 22, 2004

Lac I read of the Mk II it was an experiment that thankfully was not needed.

Hamptens were good for the little bit but by 1940 they were a lost cause. But did surve with Costal Comand and Trasport. The stirlings are never realy talked about that much. I think it was a program that needed ore development and one of the poor Short Brothers designs.

plan_D · Jun 22, 2004

Did he just have a swipe at the Merlin?

Lightning Guy · Jun 22, 2004

As I understand it, the only difference between the Mk.I and the Mk.III was that the Mk.III used Packard-built engines. That was the real reason the Mk.II wasn't needed. The Packard company and industrial might of America allowed the British an almost limitless supply of Merlins.

the lancaster kicks ass · Jun 23, 2004

Lac I read of the Mk II it was an experiment that thankfully was not needed.

not quite, they were more than a experiment, they made 303 of them and saw quite a bit of action, but they weren't as good as the merlins................

Yes i have heard of the lank with herc's,just goes to show they belong on a HALIFAX!!!!!

i take it you knew that merlins were used on some halibags too??

David m Card · Jun 23, 2004

the lancaster kicks ass said:
Lac I read of the Mk II it was an experiment that thankfully was not needed.

Click to expand...

not quite, they were more than a experiment, they made 303 of them and saw quite a bit of action, but they weren't as good as the merlins................

Yes i have heard of the lank with herc's,just goes to show they belong on a HALIFAX!!!!!

Click to expand...

i take it you knew that merlins were used on some halibags too??

Yes! MKI&MKII's Just Jokin with you.CHEERS

the lancaster kicks ass · Jun 24, 2004

ok................

MP-Willow · Jun 25, 2004

Stuff made in Aerica and Canada, let us not forget, must get to you in England, that is still a very tricky thing. The tonage lost in 1914 and 42 to the Fw-200 was mind blowing, over 300,000. Yes I was reading up on this interesting plane.

the lancaster kicks ass · Jun 25, 2004

but it was more for directing U-boats onto the convoys..................

Lightning Guy · Jun 25, 2004

That was its primary role. The Fw-200 wasn't suited to combat particularly well. It's bombload was rather small for a plane of its size and it wasn't as robust as one might expect a four-engined plane to be.

Best Bomber

Best Bomber of WWII?

Mosquito

Lancaster

B-24

B-29

B-17

B-25

Do-17

Ju-88

He 177

Other

Staff Sergeant

Major General

Master Sergeant

Airman

Major General

Airman

Airman

Master Sergeant

Airman

Major General

Airman

Staff Sergeant

Lieutenant Colonel

Master Sergeant

Major General

Airman

Major General

Staff Sergeant

Major General

Master Sergeant

Users who are viewing this thread

Similar threads