Lightning Guy
Master Sergeant
- 2,511
- Apr 29, 2004
MP is right, the second atomic weapon was dropped from Box Car and not The Great Artist as some sources reported.
Best Bomber
- Thread starter horseUSA
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
- Status
the lancaster kicks ass
Major General
- 19,937
- Dec 20, 2003
and we've established that the lancaster could carry an atomic weapon, but we won't go into that again...................
GermansRGeniuses
Tech Sergeant
It was actually "Bock's Car". 
the lancaster kicks ass
Major General
- 19,937
- Dec 20, 2003
i can never remember the name of the second atomic bomber, gotta remember it this time.................
johnny
Airman
I suppose it would depend which theatre of the war u were talking about.
In 1939/1940 it would probably be the HE111 or the Wellington.Later in the war there were only 2 bombers in europe worth talking about namely the B17 and the Lancaster.In the pacific the B17 seemed to fail badly, but the B29 succeeded.
The best daylight bomber would have to be the B17 and night bomber the Lancaster.
In 1939/1940 it would probably be the HE111 or the Wellington.Later in the war there were only 2 bombers in europe worth talking about namely the B17 and the Lancaster.In the pacific the B17 seemed to fail badly, but the B29 succeeded.
The best daylight bomber would have to be the B17 and night bomber the Lancaster.
johnny
Airman
What about the poor devils who had to bomb in a Fairy Battle?the lancaster kicks ass said:
Lightning Guy
Master Sergeant
- 2,511
- Apr 29, 2004
I think we have reached the decision that we are discussing the best bomber in any arena at any time. Based purely off of technology or ability, it would have to be the B-29. Nothing else in service came close to it.
the lancaster kicks ass
Major General
- 19,937
- Dec 20, 2003
i came to an agreement with CC t'other day that i'd admit to the B-29 being the best bomber of the war so long as he admited that ther lanc was no.2 and no.1 in europe and at night...............
cheddar cheese
Major General
you didnt say at night at the time...but ill agree to that too.
Lightning Guy
Master Sergeant
- 2,511
- Apr 29, 2004
I won't agree to the Lanc being number one in Europe. Probably number one at night, but I prefer the American bombers.
the lancaster kicks ass
Major General
- 19,937
- Dec 20, 2003
what because of their huge payload...............
Lightning Guy
Master Sergeant
- 2,511
- Apr 29, 2004
Because of their accuracy.
cheddar cheese
Major General
apart from the B-29, im not really into bombers at all. i prefer heavy fighters and interceptors
the lancaster kicks ass
Major General
- 19,937
- Dec 20, 2003
that's true, he thinks anything with two engines and isn't a P-38 is a He-111.............
cheddar cheese
Major General
thats so not true, where did you get that from? the 111 is the easiest twin engined plane to remember apart from the P-38
the 111 is the easiest twin engined plane to remember apart from the P-38
A
Anonymous
Guest
B-29 hands down.
Its fast sustainable cruise of 342 mph would make it almost impossible for prop fighters to intercept, especially at 30,000 feet.
The Lancaster is a close 2nd, and carried similar bombloads, but with a top speed of almost 100 mph slower, and a service ceiling almost 10,000 feet lower, it was much more vulnerable. And its round trip range of 2500 miles is about 1000 miles less than that of the B-29A. Finally, the 8 x .303 guns in 3 manned turrets of the Lancaster cannot compare with the 10 x .50's in 4 computer assist remote turrets (using a computing gunsight and fire select system) plus 2 x .50's in the tail. The B-29 had the best defensive armament setup of any bomber in WWII by a large margin.
=S=
Lunatic
Its fast sustainable cruise of 342 mph would make it almost impossible for prop fighters to intercept, especially at 30,000 feet.
The Lancaster is a close 2nd, and carried similar bombloads, but with a top speed of almost 100 mph slower, and a service ceiling almost 10,000 feet lower, it was much more vulnerable. And its round trip range of 2500 miles is about 1000 miles less than that of the B-29A. Finally, the 8 x .303 guns in 3 manned turrets of the Lancaster cannot compare with the 10 x .50's in 4 computer assist remote turrets (using a computing gunsight and fire select system) plus 2 x .50's in the tail. The B-29 had the best defensive armament setup of any bomber in WWII by a large margin.
=S=
Lunatic
cheddar cheese
Major General
The Piaggio P.108 Bombardiere had a similar gun arrangement 4 years earlier...
A
Anonymous
Guest
cheddar cheese said:
It was the first bomber with remotely controlled gun turrets, but that is hardly the same. The key to the B-29 gunnery system was the analog computer and computing gunsites. The gunner entered the wingspan of the enemy fighter (most were very similar), put the pipper on the target, he twisted a grip to keep the recticle sized to the wings, and he fired. The computer used the changing position of the pipper and the changing size of the recticle and calculated the necessary lead, and up to 3 of the 4 remote turrets would fire at that target at once. It was a deadly gun system not matched by any other country in WWII. The B-17 chin gun used the same technology, but only for the one turret. The A-26 had a simplifed version for its two turrets.
The P.108 had the external remote turrets, which was quite innovative. But these were still manually aimed, not assisted by an analog computer and computing gunsights like on the B-29.
=S=
Lunatic
cheddar cheese
Major General
But this was 4 years earlier and by a country which had far less resources...I think the P.108 could have been the best bomber of the war had it been further developed and not seen as a joke by the Germans.
the lancaster kicks ass
Major General
- 19,937
- Dec 20, 2003
dude that's a load of steaming shit............
- Status
