Best overall bomber ww2

[jonesfuk]

Hi Al,l my friend and i were having a debate about the best overall bomber of ww2 i say B29, my friend says Avro Lancaster, we are both British so no sentiment aloud just pound for pound better plane, can some one settle this debate. Thanks---Fred

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

B-29 was the more advanced and more capable bomber. There is no argueing it.

 

[Colin1]

...can some one settle this debate

What debate?
The B-29 could haul a greater bombload further, faster and higher
It could also absorb more damage


...and take that ridiculous shirt off

 

[davebender]

Yup. However to make this competition fair you need to match aircraft by a specific time period.

The Lancaster entered service during 1942 and was effective almost immediately.

Like the German He-177, the B-29 was rushed into service before serious mechanical problems were worked out. Arguably it was ineffective prior to 1945.

IMO one could argue the He-177 held the "best heavy bomber" title during 1944. By 1944 most of the He-177 mechanical problems had been fixed. The B-29 was not yet ready.

 

[Vincenzo]

i'm with davebender, B-29 it's superiour but it's (very) late war bomber, He 177 it's sure the second (after trouble fixed) but it's a late war bomber, Lancaster had over half war in operation and for a four engined it's long time (no four engined bomber fightning for all the war, the B-17 was the only in service from start to end (but don't start operation before of summer '41 so more late of stirling and halifax)

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

I agree that the two should no be properly compared. Comparing the B-29 to the Lancaster is like comparing the F-15 to the F-4. It does not change the fact that the B-29 is superior, but it is not a contemperary of the Lancaster.

It would be better to compare the Lancaster to the B-17. In that debate, I would have to side with the Lancaster.

 

[timshatz]

It would be better to compare the Lancaster to the B-17. In that debate, I would have to side with the Lancaster.

If I had to command a force that was charged with a strategic bombing mission, I'd rather have the Lancaster.

If I had to FLY the missions of that force, I'd rather have the B17.

 

[Thorlifter]

I agree with Adler on his comparison. Both 4 engine bombers? Yes. But it's not really comparing apples to apples.

If you compare early to mid war 4 engine bombers, your choices would be the B-17, B-24, Lancaster, Sterling, and the Halifax. Did I forget any?

Without getting into the details, I'd pick the Lancaster over the B-24, then the B-17, IMO.

 

[Vincenzo]

foget Pe 8

 

[Thorlifter]

True Vincenzo. Sorry about that. However, the Pe-8 was no where near a major player in the war. After all, less than 100 were even built. Would you place the Pe-8 above any of the aircraft I listed? I sure wouldn't.

 

[Vincenzo]

Pe 8 was surely more advanced plane of Stirling...

 

[Colin1]

Then the question needs to be fielded more clearly

best bomber of WWII was the B-29 hands-down. Best bomber of its generation would depend on which generation we are talking about, the Hampden/Whitley/Wellington, the B-17/B-24/Lancaster et al or the next-generation strategic bombers like the B-29/He177.

 

[jonesfuk]

Thanks for your replies chaps, i have read a lot of previous posts on this subject and the debate will proberbly go on for many a year.
And Colin about my shirt, you must be a Liverpool fan from M40 corridor, enough said.

 

[Vincenzo]

Built in few number (fewer of Pe 8 ) but also the Piaggio P-108 was a middle war bomber (first mission is around 3 months later of Lancaster)

 

[Colin1]

And Colin about my shirt, you must be a Liverpool fan from M40 corridor, enough said.

Good lord man
try a Newcastle fan from the A1(M) corridor...

 

[dunmunro1]

When the first dummy A-bombs were produced, the B29 was unable to carry them. The USAAF conducted the first A-bomb drop tests using borrowed RCAF Lancasters.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

When the first dummy A-bombs were produced, the B29 was unable to carry them. The USAAF conducted the first A-bomb drop tests using borrowed RCAF Lancasters.

And that makes the Lancaster more superior how?

 

[FLYBOYJ]

When the first dummy A-bombs were produced, the B29 was unable to carry them. The USAAF conducted the first A-bomb drop tests using borrowed RCAF Lancasters.

I'm going to put it bluntly - I think this is 100% bullsh!t and if proven wrong I will fully apologize.

The ONLY WW2 unit to train to drop the atomic bomb was the 509th Composite Group and in their squadron history they NEVER used any other bomber type but B-29s. Operation Silverplate modified B-29s so they could carry the atomic bombs and that program started in 1943.

Although I take Wikipedia with a grain of salt, they do have a good page on the 509th. There is NO mention of any Lancaster.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/509th_Composite_Group

Here's a page on the dummy atomic bombs

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pumpkin_bomb

 

[FLYBOYJ]

And a bit more....

The first drop tests of a prototype atomic bomb was done on August 13, 1943 when a 14/23 scale model atomic bomb was dropped from A US NAVY TBM AVENGER AT DAHLGREN NAVAL PROVING GROUND!!!!!

"The making of the atomic bomb By Richard Rhodes," PAGE 478.

 

[dunmunro1]

This site mentions the possible use of the Lancaster for the A-bomb drops:
Operation Silverplate
but I'm certain I read that the first test drops were done with a Lancaster. I'll keep looking till I find it.