Big bombers.

[the lancaster kicks ass]

it would have been a waste of resorces, they didn't need a bomber that big..............

 

[Lightning Guy]

Well the B-36 idea was started when the US realized they might not be able to count of using Great Britain as a base for its existing "heavy" bombers. The B-36 was intended to be able to bomb Germany with a useful load from bases in the US.

 

[plan_D]

Disgusting, they actually believed Britain might fall...

 

[Lightning Guy]

Well, during the early part of the war in looked like a iminent reality that the Wermacht would invade Britain. The Battle of the Atlantic was in doubt until late'43 or so. I'm not sure if the B-36 was expecting that Britain would fall or realizing that America might not always be able to count on British bases (like in a future war).

 

[plan_D]

May I point out the Royal Navy was never being beaten by the Kriegsmarine. Naval war is vastly different from ground or air war.

You would have been better saying; America were smart, they were preparing for the worst. As anyone should.

 

[the lancaster kicks ass]

Well the B-36 idea was started when the US realized they might not be able to count of using Great Britain as a base for its existing "heavy" bombers. The B-36 was intended to be able to bomb Germany with a useful load from bases in the US.

not true, the B-36 was first designed to be able to carry a nuclear weapon to mosco and back during the cold war..................

 

[plan_D]

Well that's stupid because the B-52 could bomb many places in Russia with a Nuke. They had 7 B-52s flying 24/7 as part of their Tri-Defence.

 

[Lightning Guy]

I may have been mistaken it where the B-36 was intended to bomb. I just know that it was made that big because the US was "preparing for the worst" by developing a bomber that would not be dependant on British bases to hit targets in EurAsia.

 

[plan_D]

That's a better answer.

 

[brad]

b36 was very good

 

[Lightning Guy]

Very big.

 

[plan_D]

Yes, very, very big. The B-52 is the best bomber of that kind to be created, it's combat record proves it.

 

[Lightning Guy]

During the First Gulf War, several Iraqi units surrendered not because they were attack by B-52 but because they had seen units that had! Now that is an effective weapon.

 

[the lancaster kicks ass]

but it has no defencive armourment.............

 

[Lightning Guy]

Up through the B-52G there were 4 .50cal machine guns in a remote tail turret. In the B-52H they were replaced by a single Vulcan 20mm cannon. But of course (as you Brits well know) it is the electronic defenses that are most important now. Although, I know the B-52 managed to shoot down at least 2 MiGs over Vietnam.

 

[plan_D]

And I've heard they can be fitted with air to air missiles anyway. Their record shows their effectivness, nothing can beat them in their role. They can launch nukes, cruises or just a lot of conventional bombs.

 

[cheddar cheese]

does anyone have some stats for the b-52 or b-36? i havent seen any yet and it would be interesting to see some

 

[Lightning Guy]

The B-52 can carry 80,000lbs of conventional bombs. That should be all the stats you need.

 

[cheddar cheese]

i wanted more really... but still

 

[the lancaster kicks ass]

i'll get you more to morrow.......................

nothing can beat them in their role

that's because there are no other real heavy bombers out there.................