Best medium bomber?

mosquitoman · Mar 6, 2005

Nah it's got to be the Mossie just look at those clean lines, that cavernous bomb bay, the guns and cannon on the front and the rockets on the wings

DAVIDICUS · Mar 6, 2005

Some of the A-26 B models had eight .50 cal. machine guns packed in the nose and six .50 cal. machine guns mounted in the wings in addition to dorsal and ventral mountings of two .50 cal. machine guns each. The dorsal .50's could be locked into a forward firing position enabling the pilot to unleash the fury of sixteen .50 cal's. (At a cyclic rate of 700 rpm, that's a total of 11,200 rpm or 187 rps!)

Of course, the above was in addition to bombs in the internal bomb bay and rockets mounted under the wings.

Compared to that, the Mosquito was just an annoying wooden insect capable of inflicting a mere topical, itchy welt. :agrue:

mosquitoman · Mar 7, 2005

Okay. hows about Russian planes as I'm sure the Pe-2 and Tu-2 (I think) were equal medium bombers

the lancaster kicks ass · Mar 7, 2005

or even some jap designs??

mosquitoman · Mar 7, 2005

good point, Jap bombers didn't have the armour of protective armament though. The bombload wasn't the best as range was what the Japanese wanted

cheddar cheese · Mar 7, 2005

DAVIDICUS said:
Some of the A-26 B models had eight .50 cal. machine guns packed in the nose and six .50 cal. machine guns mounted in the wings in addition to dorsal and ventral mountings of two .50 cal. machine guns each. The dorsal .50's could be locked into a forward firing position enabling the pilot to unleash the fury of sixteen .50 cal's. (At a cyclic rate of 700 rpm, that's a total of 11,200 rpm or 187 rps!)

Of course, the above was in addition to bombs in the internal bomb bay and rockets mounted under the wings.

Compared to that, the Mosquito was just an annoying wooden insect capable of inflicting a mere topical, itchy welt. :agrue:

Ah, guns, nice!

Id prefer a B-25H though.

DAVIDICUS · Mar 7, 2005

I wonder how effective that 75mm gun actually was. A prototype of the A-26 was to have a 75mm gun and two fifty caliber machine guns packed into the nose but they decided it wouldn't be that effective with a manual, slow rate of fire. Perhaps the A-26's mission requirements required less shipping attacks.

How successful was the B-25H with it's gun?

mosquitoman · Mar 7, 2005

I've heard reports that 3 shells hurt a Jap destroyer so much it had to be beached and one shell mad planes disentegrate

DAVIDICUS · Mar 7, 2005

From http://www.341stbombgroup.org/aircraft/b25h.htm

"Combat sorties confirmed that the cannon-armed B-25H offered no particular advantage over specially-adapted strafers armed exclusively with machine guns. At this stage in the war, targets specifically suited for cannon attack were relatively few and far between, and many targets that were vulnerable to the cannon were also vulnerable to a battery of 0.50-inch machine guns or to bombs. Consequently, the use of the heavy cannon was generally abandoned in the South-West Pacific by August of 1944."

I bet 16 fifties can cause a plane to disintegrate too. Besides, I heard that the A-26 could leap tall buildings in a single bound.

mosquitoman · Mar 7, 2005

I never knew the A-26 had legs with which it used to leap

cheddar cheese · Mar 8, 2005

Sheer number of guns is bringing me over to the A-26 guys.....

mosquitoman · Mar 8, 2005

How many did the strafer B-25 have?

KraziKanuK · Mar 8, 2005

mosquitoman said:
How many did the strafer B-25 have?

The B-25J, 8 in the nose, 2 each fuselage side, and 2 in the upper turret.

DAVIDICUS · Mar 8, 2005

The strafer B-25's were basically equal in armament to the A-26's. Some even had racks for rockets. The A-26 could bring an additional two fifties to bear, but when you're talking about that many guns, two more don't confer superiority.

The flight performance of the A-26 was quite clearly head and shoulders above the B-25 though.

mosquitoman · Mar 8, 2005

If the A-26 is the best attack bomber, hows about the best level bomber that was classed as medium?

DAVIDICUS · Mar 8, 2005

I have seen the A-26 Invader classified as an attack bomber, a light bomber and a medium bomber.

It's various roles and functions were indistinguishable from the B-25 Mitchell.

With it's 6,000lb bomb capacity (4,000lbs internal and 2,000lbs external) it could walk the walk of a medium bomber like the B-25, but at a running pace.

mosquitoman · Mar 8, 2005

And the Mossie could carry exactly the same amount to Berlin and back twice in one night

DAVIDICUS · Mar 8, 2005

Yes but how can you take an aircraft seriously when it was was built of wood by people with bad teeth.

Surely you wouldn't disagree.

BombTaxi · Mar 8, 2005

But the mossie lost some of its vital speed and maneuverability with a 'Cookie'in the bomb bay...and the Mitchell/Invader had the benefit of being tougher and the advantage of a defensive armament.

cheddar cheese · Mar 8, 2005

Indeed. The Mossie only really had the advantage when its load had been dropped.

Best medium bomber?

Master Sergeant

Staff Sergeant

Master Sergeant

Major General

Master Sergeant

Major General

Staff Sergeant

Master Sergeant

Staff Sergeant

Master Sergeant

Major General

Master Sergeant

Banned

Staff Sergeant

Master Sergeant

Staff Sergeant

Master Sergeant

Staff Sergeant

Tech Sergeant

Major General

Users who are viewing this thread

Similar threads