I had to vote Mosquito overall, but I have a few runners up worth mentioning.
Everybody had different criteria for 'light', 'medium' and 'heavy' bomber. I think for the US it had in part to do with altitude.
My criteria for a light bomber is (somewhat arbitrarily) something that carries about the same amount of bombs as a fighter bomber to a range not much greater than a fighter bomber can fly. These are kind of useless unless they are super accurate or deadly (i.e. dive bombers or torpedo bombers) or have a good survival rate, though with a navigator they could also be useful as pathfinders. A medium bomber is a plane that can carry more than a typical fighter bomber (often about 2,000 lbs) and carry it a bit further than most fighter bombers can fly (say close to 1,000 miles nominal range). A heavy bomber is something that carries a lot of bombs a very long distance (say closer to 2,000 miles) - to me there's only a few of those: B-29, Lancaster, B-17, B-24, Hallifax etc.
My criteria for what makes a good bomber is different from most. Most people seem to believe whichever bomber could carry the heaviest load of TNT to the target area and drop it somewhere in the vicinity was the best. To me what makes a good bomber is destroying their target at a fairly high rate, i.e. not 1 or 2% of the time but 30 or 40% of the time (per raid, lets say). And mostly returning to base intact, as in, the majority of the squadron makes it back.
So by those criteria, the Mosquito is by far the best bomber. It could fly a long distance, with a moderate bomb load, quite often hit the target and usually fly back. That is a good bomber.
To me also, there were two criteria in WW2 which made a bomber survivable. One was speed and / or altitude, the other was guns (and armor etc.). Speed was better because it meant the bomber could do it's job without fighter escort. The heavy guns etc. only worked with a fighter escort. This was readily apparent not just with heavy bombers over Germany but also medium and light bombers (and some heavy) over the MTO and light and medium bombers over the Pacific (US heavy bombers could just about operate with impunity in the PTO, but they didn't do much damage until the second half of the war when the B-29s arrived).
Runners up early war (1939-1942)
For the early war, I like the A-20C, the Kawasaki Ki-48, the Nakajima Ki-49, the Martin 167 and 187, the Ju 88, the LeO 451, and the Pe-2
The A-20C was very fast for the early war, around 330 mph, with a high cruising speed. Small bomb load but with their good handling they could be used in fairly accurate low level attacks. Tended to make it back to base especially if flying with escorts or at night. They were useful for the Americans, the British, and the Russians, both over land and in a Maritime context.
The K-48, which looked almost exactly like a Hampden, was also quite fast, 314 mph, had armor unlike most Japanese bombers, had excellent handling, and very good range (1,500 miles). Very small bomb load of 1700 lbs / 800 kg and lightly armed, and it just seemed not to be made in very large numbers.
The Ki-49 was also fast (306 mph) and like the Ki-48, had armor and self sealing tanks (the Japanese Army seemed to figure out the need for this faster than the Navy). Power to mass (0.21) and wind loading (31 lbs) were better than most fighters. Bomb load was slightly better than the Ki-49 (2200 lbs / 1000 kg) and it was fairly heavily armed. They proved to be fairly vulnerable to P-40s though and not many were made (they were made through the war but production seemed to be at a very slow pace). I still think it was a good design with a lot of potential.
The Martin 167 "Maryland" and 187 "Baltimore" were very nice bombers, the 167 counting probably as a light bomber more ideal for recon, though it was used in the medium bomber role (attacking Axis airfields etc.). The Maryland could do 304 mph and had a 1,300 mile range, with some substantial forward armament and good performance and maneuverability (wing loading 28.5 lbs, power / mass 0.157) only carried 2,000 lbs of bombs. There was even an Ace flying Marylands, the marvelous eccentric Englishman Adrian Warburton who was unfortunately killed in action in 1944.
The Martin 187 / Baltimore, another of the "airforce that could have been- Le sigh" which was supposed to go to France, was a really scrappy little plane which n my opinion, is the aircraft that the B-26 was trying to be and should have been. It had the same speed and power as a Maryland, though a higher wing loading. It became effectively a British plane, produced by the Americans but to British specs (and sometimes modified by the Brits in the field), and rather than loading it down with ten machine guns, 7 crew, and all kinds of other stuff they didn't really need, they up-gunned it just enough with a .50 cal dorsal turret. It carried a small (2000 lbs) bomb load, but seemed to be able to bomb accurately. More valuable though was that it had a very high survival rate, once they were being escorted by fighters, it had the best survival rate in the MTO. Part of the secret was apparently speed. The Baltimore airframe was apparently very stable and vibration -free at high speeds. After they attacked their target (often an Axis air base) they would go into a high speed shallow dive and fly away at as much as 400 mph, while their escort mixed it up with the 109s and 202s. Post war they were used for high mach number dive testing. The main downside of this aircraft is they were hard to fly, requiring substantial skill for takeoffs especially.
The Ju 88 of course, I don't have to introduce or explain. They did poorly in the BoB and seemed to take a while to find their legs. They couldn't really use them as true dive bombers (after while they realized that the wings were getting bent in the steep dive pull-outs) but even as a 'glide bomber' they seemed pretty accurate, and their performance was good enough to often evade older fighters like Hurricanes and Fulmars. They seemed to excel in the maritime role. Made good heavy fighters and night fighters too as we know.
The Pe 2 also impresses me with it's accuracy and fairly high survival rate (at least by the dismal standards of the Russian Front). It wasn't as good as a mosquito by any means but it seemed to hit relatively small targets like German flak guns on a fairly routine basis. It could dive bomb, it was fast (330-340 mph) and carried a decent payload for such a fast plane (2200 lbs / 1000 kilo). I'd like some of these in my air armada if I had a choice.
LeO 45 gets honorable mention. Quite fast for 1940 at 308 mph, and somewhat heavily armed with a 20mm defensive cannon. There must have been something good about it because the Germans took at least a mild interest in it.
I like the B-25 too of course. It proved very versatile in both the MTO and Pacific, and was equally good at smashing up German airfields or sinking Japanese ships. But it wasn't that fast and at least against the Germans, it really needed fighter escorts to have a good survival rate. It's size and relatively slow speed precluded it from being used that much over Northern Europe, due to the ferocity of German light-AA.
Runners up late war (1943-1945)
For the late war, I like the A-20G, the A-26, the Ki-67, the Tu-2
I think the A-20G may be a pretty good rival to the A-26, it's a very thorough upgrade of the A-20 and was available a lot earlier. 325 mph, good power to mass (for a bomber), twin .50s in the dorsal turret, 6 x .50s in the nose cone. They were quite devastating against the Japanese. They liked them better than the A-26 in the Pacific apparently because they had better visibility from the cockpit. A-26 was faster though, at ~ 350 mph (nominally) it was the only other Allied bomber I know of which even comes close to the Mosquito. They were used with some success from Italy and in the Balkans. Quite heavily armed too and relatively small. The only real flaw was that it came late (fall 1944 in Europe) in relatively small numbers.
Honorable mention goes to the Ar 234 - ingenious design and quite beautiful to look at, though slower with bombs on I think and was barely in the war. Ju 388 also beautiful aircraft, and I have read some accounts by Allied pilots describing spotting them but being unable to catch them as they were seen pulling away with their Mw/50 or Nitro or whatever. Maybe some of those crews survived the war thanks to that.
EDIT: Amended light bombers per feedback -
Everybody had different criteria for 'light', 'medium' and 'heavy' bomber. I think for the US it had in part to do with altitude.
My criteria for a light bomber is (somewhat arbitrarily) something that carries about the same amount of bombs as a fighter bomber to a range not much greater than a fighter bomber can fly. These are kind of useless unless they are super accurate or deadly (i.e. dive bombers or torpedo bombers) or have a good survival rate, though with a navigator they could also be useful as pathfinders. A medium bomber is a plane that can carry more than a typical fighter bomber (often about 2,000 lbs) and carry it a bit further than most fighter bombers can fly (say close to 1,000 miles nominal range). A heavy bomber is something that carries a lot of bombs a very long distance (say closer to 2,000 miles) - to me there's only a few of those: B-29, Lancaster, B-17, B-24, Hallifax etc.
My criteria for what makes a good bomber is different from most. Most people seem to believe whichever bomber could carry the heaviest load of TNT to the target area and drop it somewhere in the vicinity was the best. To me what makes a good bomber is destroying their target at a fairly high rate, i.e. not 1 or 2% of the time but 30 or 40% of the time (per raid, lets say). And mostly returning to base intact, as in, the majority of the squadron makes it back.
So by those criteria, the Mosquito is by far the best bomber. It could fly a long distance, with a moderate bomb load, quite often hit the target and usually fly back. That is a good bomber.
To me also, there were two criteria in WW2 which made a bomber survivable. One was speed and / or altitude, the other was guns (and armor etc.). Speed was better because it meant the bomber could do it's job without fighter escort. The heavy guns etc. only worked with a fighter escort. This was readily apparent not just with heavy bombers over Germany but also medium and light bombers (and some heavy) over the MTO and light and medium bombers over the Pacific (US heavy bombers could just about operate with impunity in the PTO, but they didn't do much damage until the second half of the war when the B-29s arrived).
Runners up early war (1939-1942)
For the early war, I like the A-20C, the Kawasaki Ki-48, the Nakajima Ki-49, the Martin 167 and 187, the Ju 88, the LeO 451, and the Pe-2
The A-20C was very fast for the early war, around 330 mph, with a high cruising speed. Small bomb load but with their good handling they could be used in fairly accurate low level attacks. Tended to make it back to base especially if flying with escorts or at night. They were useful for the Americans, the British, and the Russians, both over land and in a Maritime context.
The K-48, which looked almost exactly like a Hampden, was also quite fast, 314 mph, had armor unlike most Japanese bombers, had excellent handling, and very good range (1,500 miles). Very small bomb load of 1700 lbs / 800 kg and lightly armed, and it just seemed not to be made in very large numbers.
The Ki-49 was also fast (306 mph) and like the Ki-48, had armor and self sealing tanks (the Japanese Army seemed to figure out the need for this faster than the Navy). Power to mass (0.21) and wind loading (31 lbs) were better than most fighters. Bomb load was slightly better than the Ki-49 (2200 lbs / 1000 kg) and it was fairly heavily armed. They proved to be fairly vulnerable to P-40s though and not many were made (they were made through the war but production seemed to be at a very slow pace). I still think it was a good design with a lot of potential.
The Martin 167 "Maryland" and 187 "Baltimore" were very nice bombers, the 167 counting probably as a light bomber more ideal for recon, though it was used in the medium bomber role (attacking Axis airfields etc.). The Maryland could do 304 mph and had a 1,300 mile range, with some substantial forward armament and good performance and maneuverability (wing loading 28.5 lbs, power / mass 0.157) only carried 2,000 lbs of bombs. There was even an Ace flying Marylands, the marvelous eccentric Englishman Adrian Warburton who was unfortunately killed in action in 1944.
The Martin 187 / Baltimore, another of the "airforce that could have been- Le sigh" which was supposed to go to France, was a really scrappy little plane which n my opinion, is the aircraft that the B-26 was trying to be and should have been. It had the same speed and power as a Maryland, though a higher wing loading. It became effectively a British plane, produced by the Americans but to British specs (and sometimes modified by the Brits in the field), and rather than loading it down with ten machine guns, 7 crew, and all kinds of other stuff they didn't really need, they up-gunned it just enough with a .50 cal dorsal turret. It carried a small (2000 lbs) bomb load, but seemed to be able to bomb accurately. More valuable though was that it had a very high survival rate, once they were being escorted by fighters, it had the best survival rate in the MTO. Part of the secret was apparently speed. The Baltimore airframe was apparently very stable and vibration -free at high speeds. After they attacked their target (often an Axis air base) they would go into a high speed shallow dive and fly away at as much as 400 mph, while their escort mixed it up with the 109s and 202s. Post war they were used for high mach number dive testing. The main downside of this aircraft is they were hard to fly, requiring substantial skill for takeoffs especially.
The Ju 88 of course, I don't have to introduce or explain. They did poorly in the BoB and seemed to take a while to find their legs. They couldn't really use them as true dive bombers (after while they realized that the wings were getting bent in the steep dive pull-outs) but even as a 'glide bomber' they seemed pretty accurate, and their performance was good enough to often evade older fighters like Hurricanes and Fulmars. They seemed to excel in the maritime role. Made good heavy fighters and night fighters too as we know.
The Pe 2 also impresses me with it's accuracy and fairly high survival rate (at least by the dismal standards of the Russian Front). It wasn't as good as a mosquito by any means but it seemed to hit relatively small targets like German flak guns on a fairly routine basis. It could dive bomb, it was fast (330-340 mph) and carried a decent payload for such a fast plane (2200 lbs / 1000 kilo). I'd like some of these in my air armada if I had a choice.
LeO 45 gets honorable mention. Quite fast for 1940 at 308 mph, and somewhat heavily armed with a 20mm defensive cannon. There must have been something good about it because the Germans took at least a mild interest in it.
I like the B-25 too of course. It proved very versatile in both the MTO and Pacific, and was equally good at smashing up German airfields or sinking Japanese ships. But it wasn't that fast and at least against the Germans, it really needed fighter escorts to have a good survival rate. It's size and relatively slow speed precluded it from being used that much over Northern Europe, due to the ferocity of German light-AA.
Runners up late war (1943-1945)
For the late war, I like the A-20G, the A-26, the Ki-67, the Tu-2
I think the A-20G may be a pretty good rival to the A-26, it's a very thorough upgrade of the A-20 and was available a lot earlier. 325 mph, good power to mass (for a bomber), twin .50s in the dorsal turret, 6 x .50s in the nose cone. They were quite devastating against the Japanese. They liked them better than the A-26 in the Pacific apparently because they had better visibility from the cockpit. A-26 was faster though, at ~ 350 mph (nominally) it was the only other Allied bomber I know of which even comes close to the Mosquito. They were used with some success from Italy and in the Balkans. Quite heavily armed too and relatively small. The only real flaw was that it came late (fall 1944 in Europe) in relatively small numbers.
Honorable mention goes to the Ar 234 - ingenious design and quite beautiful to look at, though slower with bombs on I think and was barely in the war. Ju 388 also beautiful aircraft, and I have read some accounts by Allied pilots describing spotting them but being unable to catch them as they were seen pulling away with their Mw/50 or Nitro or whatever. Maybe some of those crews survived the war thanks to that.
EDIT: Amended light bombers per feedback -
Last edited:
