Best Bomber

• Aug 13, 2004

• #341

L

Lightning Guy

Master Sergeant

2,511

4

Apr 29, 2004

MP is right, the second atomic weapon was dropped from Box Car and not The Great Artist as some sources reported.

 

• Aug 14, 2004

• #342

the lancaster kicks ass

Major General

19,937

17

Dec 20, 2003

and we've established that the lancaster could carry an atomic weapon, but we won't go into that again...................

 

• Aug 14, 2004

• #343

GermansRGeniuses

Tech Sergeant

2,031

4

Dec 26, 2003

www.barryboys.co.uk

It was actually "Bock's Car".

 

• Aug 14, 2004

• #344

the lancaster kicks ass

Major General

19,937

17

Dec 20, 2003

i can never remember the name of the second atomic bomber, gotta remember it this time.................

 

• Sep 21, 2004

• #345

johnny

Airman

82

0

Sep 21, 2004

Johannesburg

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.

 

• Sep 21, 2004

• #346

johnny

Airman

82

0

Sep 21, 2004

Johannesburg

the lancaster kicks ass said:

the best american one at least

Click to expand...

What about the poor devils who had to bomb in a Fairy Battle?

 

• Sep 21, 2004

• #347

L

Lightning Guy

Master Sergeant

2,511

4

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.

 

• Sep 21, 2004

• #348

the lancaster kicks ass

Major General

19,937

17

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...............

 

• Sep 21, 2004

• #349

cheddar cheese

Major General

20,265

21

Jan 9, 2004

WSM, England

you didnt say at night at the time...but ill agree to that too.

 

• Sep 21, 2004

• #350

L

Lightning Guy

Master Sergeant

2,511

4

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.

 

• Sep 22, 2004

• #351

the lancaster kicks ass

Major General

19,937

17

Dec 20, 2003

what because of their huge payload...............

 

• Sep 22, 2004

• #352

L

Lightning Guy

Master Sergeant

2,511

4

Apr 29, 2004

Because of their accuracy.

 

• Sep 22, 2004

• #353

cheddar cheese

Major General

20,265

21

Jan 9, 2004

WSM, England

apart from the B-29, im not really into bombers at all. i prefer heavy fighters and interceptors

 

• Sep 24, 2004

• #354

the lancaster kicks ass

Major General

19,937

17

Dec 20, 2003

that's true, he thinks anything with two engines and isn't a P-38 is a He-111.............

 

• Sep 24, 2004

• #355

cheddar cheese

Major General

20,265

21

Jan 9, 2004

WSM, England

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

 

• Nov 23, 2004

• #356

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

 

• Nov 23, 2004

• #357

cheddar cheese

Major General

20,265

21

Jan 9, 2004

WSM, England

The Piaggio P.108 Bombardiere had a similar gun arrangement 4 years earlier...

 

• Nov 24, 2004

• #358

A

Anonymous

Guest

cheddar cheese said:

The Piaggio P.108 Bombardiere had a similar gun arrangement 4 years earlier...

Click to expand...

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

 

• Nov 24, 2004

• #359

cheddar cheese

Major General

20,265

21

Jan 9, 2004

WSM, England

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.

 

• Nov 24, 2004

• #360

the lancaster kicks ass

Major General

19,937

17

Dec 20, 2003

dude that's a load of steaming shit............