Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
and Ablacores, but these seem to only be used in Maritime operations.
It's really unfair to throw the B-25 / B-26/B-34 into the comparison to the A-20 as they were MEDIUM bombers (hence the "B" designation). The A-20 Havoc, A-22 Maryland & A-30 Baltimore were ATTACK bombers (hence the "A" designation). The ATTACK aircraft were characterized by having only a pilot and a rear facing gunner and depending on the configuration sometimes a bombardier in the nose . MEDIUM bombers had a full crew: pilot, co-pilot, turret gunners, bombardier, radio/navigator, tail gunner and of course greater range. Single engine ATTACK aircraft were too characterized by only a pilot and a rear facing gunner e.g. A-24 Banshee, A-25 Shrike, A-31/A-35 Vengeance.All three aircraft - Boston (both DB-7 and A-20 types), Maryland, and Baltimore were in fairly heavy use in the Med at the same time, though a bit overlapping as Maryland was gradually phased out as a bomber in favor of the Baltimore. The Baltimore and Boston were both fairly heavily modified, especially in terms of armament, though capabilities were similar as level bombers. The Mitchel / B-25 came in to action fairly late in the game, as did the B-17 and B-24 heavy bombers.
Their other main competition on the Allied side was the Blenheim, which was largely phased out pretty early on.
Here are some facts I know:
Boston was quite fast (up to 310 mph in some configurations, more in the later war versions but those were too late for action in the med). I think (only based on anecdotal comments by pilots) it was the fastest of the three down near sea-level, but not by much.
Boston / A-20 was used quite effectively in the anti-shipping role in the Med with mast-height bombing techniques and sunk some ships close to shore.
Some versions of the Boston were more heavily armed with nose guns (often added in the field) for use as low-level 'strafers', though due to effective German AAA, they took heavy losses and this strafing strategy was somewhat curtailed as compared to the Pacific. It was also used in Maritime strikes to supress flak on the ships.
Boston was considered a bit cramped by crew, as were the Maryland and Baltimore, but the narrow fuselage also contributed to their speed.
They trained in Bostons as a night fighter but I don't know if it was ever used as such in the MTO.
Had a moderately high loss rate. It was not unusual if you read through the raids in MAW that they would lose 1 or 2 on a raid of 10-20 bombers.
Had somewhat short range (~900 miles).
Maryland was quite fast (up to about 300 mph) with a pretty good 'typical' cruise speed (over 250 mph)
Was considered agile and even used as a fighter against enemy maritime aircraft (had 4 forward firing .303 guns). There was at least one ace who scored at least five victories flying Marylands (mostly against enemy sea planes etc.). The same guy also flew the recon missions prior to the famous Taranto raid in his Maryland.
Seemed to carry a lighter bomb load in practice than the Baltimore or the Boston (often only carrying 2 bombs).
Was lightly armed and (so far as I know) never up-gunned (defense was from Vickers K guns).
Pretty good range (~1200 mile).
Had a moderate loss rate which became higher until it was phased out for over-land strikes.
Ended up being used in the maritime and high speed recon role after being supplanted as a bomber over the intensively contested land war.
Baltimore was quite fast (305 mph) but had a lower cruise speed than the Maryland.
Also had an exceptional dive speed, and was used for post-war testing of supersonic flight rather amazingly.
It was very difficult / tricky to takeoff requiring perfect coordination of throttles.
Once in the air it was considered agile, almost as much as the Maryland.
Like the Maryland it had four wing mounted .303 guns, (but no nose mounted guns like the Boston).
Had a fairly high loss rate initially when used sporadically and often on unescorted missions.
Ended up with the lowest loss rate of all bombers on the Allied side once flown in better planned (and better escorted) missions later in the war.
Fairly short range (~1,000 miles) depending on load.
Was up-gunned with dorsal .303 being replaced by a turret with two .50 cals.
Was used in bombing operations by the British until the capitulation of Italy.
All three had a fairly low bomb load, with both A-20 and Martin 187 / Baltimore carrying about 4 x 500 lb bombs on most missions, while Maryland often only carried two.
Bombing was pretty accurate though, and all three twin engined types were considered more effective against operational targets like airfields, ports, and supply dumps etc. than the fighter bombers were.
Baltimore seemed to be the best at escaping / contending with Axis fighters, and their raids usually caused substantial damage. After their raid they would go into a shallow high speed dive to escape the battle area.
Boston was the most effective strafer and maritime strike aircraft.
Maryland had the best range and seems to have been the most effective in the fighter role.
All three were basically low to medium altitude aircraft; fast, pretty agile, light bombers. Less heavily armed than the later Allied day bombers.
B-25 carried up to 6 x 500 lb bombs, and B-24 up to 16 of them, and the latter two seemed to have done the most to pulverize Axis basis, though they took significant losses, and that was after Allied air cover was at it's maximum level. So I think they proved more decisive but the Baltimore seemed to be the best suited for the higher threat environment.
I think the A-20G was actually faster than some of the earlier marks, thanks to bigger engines.
Their earlier light - medium bombers like Blenheim, Wellington and Beaufort were gradually relegated to maritime operations or phased out.
There was a tradeoff between speed and defense. If you had a bomber which was as fast as the fighters (i.e. Mosquito) then no guns were necessary. Anything slower than that and some guns were a good idea, apparently, but they had to be implemented with as little extra drag and weight as possible.
It took a while for the range of the A-20 to get to where the US wanted it.
The US never ordered any of the R-1830 powered planes and went for the R-2600 powered version from the start.
Ignoring the Fuel capacities of the French and early British aircraft the Americans started with 500 US gallons in the A-20 and A-20A designs.
However when protection was applied the US versions dropped to 400 gallons until the A-20C which got a 140 gallon tank in the upper bomb bay. No reduction in the bomb load.
The A-20G-20 could carry up to 325 gallons in the upper bomb bay in three tanks. These tanks were self sealing.
The G's also had a couple of ferry tank arrangements with non-self sealing tanks but that was well after any decision about the Baltimore would have been made.
As far as the Pe-2 goes, why bother.
Unless you really change the fit/finish and get a really good engine it is slower than the A-20. doesn't carry as much for bombs, is shorter ranged and doesn't have any better defensive armament.
The 360mph speed listed in Wiki is very wishful thinking.
Agree with you on the designations and difference between attack bombers and medium bombers, usage became blurred. The Blenheim became classified as a light bomber and saw replacement with Mosquitoes and Bostons, Mitchells, Baltimores etc, but the Beaufort was the opposite; it was designed for the maritime role - it was a torpedo bomber that was often used as a strike aircraft carrying bombs, the Aussies certainly used it in that role.
The Mosquito is interesting as it was used both in the level bombing and attack role, two different variants doing the different duties, but the same airframe, the FB.VI variant armed with four x .303s and 4 x 20mm cannon in the attack role, even though B.IVs, the unarmed bomber variants did carry out interdiction roles at low level...
Yes the Mosquito couldn't be used anywhere it rained. Luckily Britain is well known for for its dry low humidity climate.Mossie seems to have done just about everything well, though the wood construction didn't seem to appreciate perpetual rain, high humidity and heat. So not ideal for the Pacific.
A-20s, until the solid nose versions had 3 man crews. Sometimes a 4th man was carried to act as gunner on the lower rear gun. Sometimes this position was listed (and a seat provided) but the crewman not carried.It's really unfair to throw the B-25 / B-26/B-34 into the comparison to the A-20 as they were MEDIUM bombers (hence the "B" designation). The A-20 Havoc, A-22 Maryland & A-30 Baltimore were ATTACK bombers (hence the "A" designation). The ATTACK aircraft were characterized by having only a pilot and a rear facing gunner and depending on the configuration sometimes a bombardier in the nose . MEDIUM bombers had a full crew: pilot, co-pilot, turret gunners, bombardier, radio/navigator, tail gunner and of course greater range. Single engine ATTACK aircraft were too characterized by only a pilot and a rear facing gunner e.g. A-24 Banshee, A-25 Shrike, A-31/A-35 Vengeance.
A-36s were used in the CBI to good effect, but their range would be a limiting factor if used in the PTO.
The USAAF used A-20s and B-25s against Japanese shipping and ground targets with devestating effect.
I can't see the Peshka offering anything more than the A-20 and B-25 were capable of.
Yes the Mosquito couldn't be used anywhere it rained. Luckily Britain is well known for for its dry low humidity climate.
Mossies were used for years in India, Hong Kong and Burma without any problems.