Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Wing loading doesn't discriminate but again you have to consider power to weight ratio.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.
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.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".
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.Holy!
I think the pilot lowered himself down a brass pole above the hangar doors.How long did it take the elevator to reach the command deck of that monster??
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.
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.
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.I think the pilot lowered himself down a brass pole above the hangar doors.
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. ThisAll 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
The lower two storeys are a biplane, the upper terrace is a rocket.Biplanes are agile. Thisdieselpunk fantasything is a biplane.
If memory serves, it was because the specification called for it to be able to carry torpedoes internally.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.
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.If memory serves, it was because the specification called for it to be able to carry torpedoes internally.
Well, we all know the Fokker DR 1 and the Sopwith triplane were agile therefor thisBiplanes are agile. Thisdieselpunk fantasything is a biplane.
I think the dive limits on these planes was a simple "dont dive"Well, we all know the Fokker DR 1 and the Sopwith triplane were agile therefor this
View attachment 643509
Must be agile too