Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
The only plane I know referred to as a "light bomber" in the WW2 period is the Mosquito, but I dont know if that was actually documented as such. It was light because it was much less than a Wellington, and it was a bomber because it had no defensive armament and no aggressive armament. In the same period as the Mosquito was introduced the Do-17 was classed as a medium bomber and the Typhoon was a fighter bomber although they all had similar bomb loads.
I was talking about WWI, and extended it to the period between WWI & WWII in the US & UKThe only plane I know referred to as a "light bomber" in the WW2 period is the Mosquito
In principle it is the same. The WW1 Gotha bomber carried 350KG of bombs the Vickers Vimy carried 1,123Kg but they were both late WW1 "heavy bombers"I was talking about WWI, and extended it to the period between WWI & WWII in the US & UK
There were always twin engined bombers from WW1 era. When you stop counting just engines, a Typhoon with either rockets or bombs could carry more offensive fire power than a Do-17, but it had more horsepower and less crew too.This is a guess but I would say when twin engine bombers came upon the scene. I can see that single engine bombers could then be defined as light bombers. Later on these early twin engine bombers such as the Blenheim became light bombers as the capability of twin engine bombers improved.
True, but when the the Do17 and Hampden were in service in the first couple of years of the war the Battle and Stuka were light bombers. Things developed quickly and by the time the Typhoon and P47 were in service they had to a large degree usurped the Do17, Hampden and Blenheim which in turn were replaced by the Ju88, B25 and B26There were always twin engined bombers from WW1 era. When you stop counting just engines, a Typhoon with either rockets or bombs could carry more offensive fire power than a Do-17, but it had more horsepower and less crew too.
So that came after the first World War? That's a good starting point, since it appears to be after WWI, and definitely between WWI & WWII.'Light' and 'heavy bombers' were not a thing, even though that's how we might refer to them today, but there were bomber squadrons, reconnaissance squadrons, bomber reconnaissance squadrons etc depending on what time during the war we are talking about.
Please bear in mind that the conflict was in France, they had a serious interest in the outcome.nuuumannn
So that came after the first World War? That's a good starting point, since it appears to be after WWI, and definitely between WWI & WWII.
The post was really fascinating, particularly how the French were the first to pursue squadrons explicitly for aerial combat and aerial bombardment.
There were always twin engined bombers from WW1 era. When you stop counting just engines, a Typhoon with either rockets or bombs could carry more offensive fire power than a Do-17, but it had more horsepower and less crew too.
Was the term "light bomber" used informally or formally by the allied side? I'm curious because I've heard the Airco DH.4 referred to as a day-bomber & general purpose aircraft and, while I'm not sure if it was referred to informally or formally as a light-bomber, it was sometimes described as such post-war at the minimum.
The Typhoon just didn't fly as far as the Do-17, not that the Do-17 was a long range aircraft.
The Do 17 was actually not very capable of an aircraft, although it was reasonably fast for its time and equipped with cameras the Do 17E was an excellent long-range reconnaissance platform. The Do 17Z could carry a maximum bomb load of 1,000 kgs over 600 kilometres range, or 500 kgs over twice that, so as a bomber there needed to be more of them to deliver a given load compared to other types in the German inventory.
I was just trotting it out because it is a fact. I dont think the Typhoon was a great aircraft but in terms of air support for ground troops it had more horse power and fire power than the Do-17 and just one crew, plus a much better chance of getting away. The Do-17 is called a medium bomber, it was used in much the same roles as the Typhoon for its short lived life as a front line combat plane. To me it is just an illustration of how things had moved on between 1940 and 1943Thank you. I just get a bit tired of the Typhoon being trotted out as some sort of single engine medium bomber.
It took quite a while to get the pair of 1000lb bombs with several modifications, like using a long span (tempest?) tail plane and different tyres (especially tail wheel) before carrying the 100lbs bombs was common. The pair of 500lb bombs was a lot earlier and need little if any modification aside form the bomb racks?
Most fighter bombers being rather short ranged they were not really in same class or ability as medium bombers (even small ones or borderline light bombers).
The Typhoons and their pilots did a lot of good work and faced one of the best AA defenses in the world at the time.