Bombers and Agility

[Shortround6]

For bombers "agility" may mean the ability to change direction quickly (small changes in direction) rather how fast they can do a 180 or larger turn?

This may have more to do with control authority than wing loading or even power loading.

Just suggesting that "Agility" may be different than "maneuverability".

 

[ThomasP]

Hey Darthtabby,

If you have not already done so you might want to check out the pilot's manuals for the different bomber types. Pretty much all of the manuals will have a section titled "Flight Restrictions" or "Restricted Maneuvers". An example of this is the A-20A Havoc manual dated Mar'42:

Flight Restrictions

a. Maneuvers Prohibited:
Loop
Spin
Roll
Immelmann
Vertical Bank
Stall
Inverted Flight

b. Other Restrictions:
(1) Do not exceed 412 M.P.H. indicated airspeed.
(2) ......

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Makes me wonder if my assumptions are wrong, or if maybe wing loading is a far less useful indicator of maneuverability in bombers then it is for fighters. @Greyman's comment about the British finding the B-17 less maneuverable then the B-24 would seem to suggest wing loading isn't as good an indicator for bombers.

Wing loading doesn't discriminate but again you have to consider power to weight ratio.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

For bombers "agility" may mean the ability to change direction quickly (small changes in direction) rather how fast they can do a 180 or larger turn?

This may have more to do with control authority than wing loading or even power loading.

Just suggesting that "Agility" may be different than "maneuverability".

If you have a large aircraft with barn door control surfaces and no hydraulic boost to help, I think it's going to be pretty obvious how agile the aircraft will probably be.

 

[pbehn]

Holy !

All three types had bomb bays that were similar in length and width but the Lancaster could carry more weight of bombs, bigger bombs and carry them further and higher. The Stirling carried a lot of aluminium and air to and from the continent.

 

[GrauGeist]

Aircraft with larger wing areas did have better high altitude flight abilities, but this would work against them at lower altitudes.

 

[pbehn]

All things are relative, if you started flying one of these beauties, maybe a Stirling did seem like a real hot rod. The Heyford wasnt retired until 1941.

 

[GrauGeist]

How long did it take the elevator to reach the command deck of that monster??

 

[pbehn]

How long did it take the elevator to reach the command deck of that monster??

I think the pilot lowered himself down a brass pole above the hangar doors.

 

[nuuumannn]

All three types had bomb bays that were similar in length and width but the Lancaster could carry more weight of bombs, bigger bombs and carry them further and higher.

The Lancaster/Manchester's was the only one that was not sectioned or constrained for whatever reason, which meant it could carry a variety of bomb types that pre-war designers didn't take into account when they first approached their bomber designs. The Halifax bomb bay for example was constrained by the complex door operating mechanisms, which protruded into the the bomb bay itself, the folding of the doors also providing obstruction, the upper-most entering the bomb bay to sit alongside its inner wall. A portion of the Halifaxes' and Stirling's bomb loads were carried in wing bays.

All things are relative, if you started flying one of these beauties, maybe a Stirling did seem like a real hot rod. The Heyford wasnt retired until 1941.

I remember the first time I heard of this type was the big Matchbox model, the aircraft might have been a ponderous thing, but it made a real impressive model!

 

[WARSPITER]

I think the pilot lowered himself down a brass pole above the hangar doors.

Actually, it was what barrage balloons were originally used for. The plane couldn't be used on days here there was too much wind to launch the balloon.

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

All things are relative, if you started flying one of these beauties, maybe a Stirling did seem like a real hot rod. The Heyford wasnt retired until 1941.
View attachment 643395

This plane seems to violate the weird/ugly/weird and ugly rule. It's weird and ugly, but not Russian.

 

[GrauGeist]

Or French...

 

[pbehn]

It seems to be constructed from wreckage.

 

[Dimlee]

All things are relative, if you started flying one of these beauties, maybe a Stirling did seem like a real hot rod. The Heyford wasnt retired until 1941.
View attachment 643395

Biplanes are agile. This dieselpunk fantasy thing is a biplane.

 

[pbehn]

Biplanes are agile. This dieselpunk fantasy thing is a biplane.

The lower two storeys are a biplane, the upper terrace is a rocket.

 

[Just Schmidt]

The Lancaster/Manchester's was the only one that was not sectioned or constrained for whatever reason, which meant it could carry a variety of bomb types that pre-war designers didn't take into account when they first approached their bomber designs.

If memory serves, it was because the specification called for it to be able to carry torpedoes internally.

 

[pbehn]

If memory serves, it was because the specification called for it to be able to carry torpedoes internally.

Sometimes strange things happen with designs a requirement becomes a maximum. They could all carry the bombs that were specified but not the big cookies tall boys and Grand Slams that werent dreamed of at the time.

 

[Shortround6]

Biplanes are agile. This dieselpunk fantasy thing is a biplane.

Well, we all know the Fokker DR 1 and the Sopwith triplane were agile therefor this

Must be agile too

 

[pbehn]

Well, we all know the Fokker DR 1 and the Sopwith triplane were agile therefor this
View attachment 643509
Must be agile too

I think the dive limits on these planes was a simple "dont dive"