- Thread starter
- #41
The Problem is for the 'fast, unarmed bomber" to actually work it has to cruise fast. Peak speed is pretty much useless if the plane has to cruise at low speed in order to reach the target. It could take a MK V Spitfire around 2 minutes to go from the low 200mph range to full speed. This is why they had to cruise at high speeds and why the US escorts flew at 300mph + and weaved above the bombers.
Unarmed bombers or bombers with sketchy armament are going to have to cruise fast. They cannot cruise slow and hope to accelerate and run when when bounced. The R-2800 was pretty economical at low power settings. It got real thirsty when pushed.
That is why I don't think that a B-26 would've make a good fast bomber. It would take a bomber that can max out at 370-380 mph, so it can cruise above 300 mph.
Sorry for the misunderstanding, I really wasn't suggesting the Tigercat as a bomber. It was the smallest twin R-2800 powered plane I could think of and if it couldn't fly the distances wanted at the speeds needed than any larger plane is going to have real trouble.
Roger that.
Main problem the Tigercat had to achieve meanigful ranges/radii is the meager volume of internal fuel. It is actually 426 US gals in early models, 455 US gals in F7F-3; the night-fighter did not carried nose tank so it went down to 375 US gals. That makes for under 230 US gals per engine in best case, and even the P-47C looks like a long ranged (if low flying) bird with it's 305 gals + 'cow udder' belly tank against the F7F.
The A-20 did not have R-2800, but was a bit bigger than F7F.
...
found a listing for the (X)TSF. Bay could hold one Mk 13-3 torpedo, one 2000lb bomb, two 1600lb AP bombs, four 1000lb AP bombs, two 1000lb bombs or four 500lb bombs...
Thanks for the data.
What I'd like for the bomb bay would be an longish one, so 2 x 2000 lb bombs can be carried in tandem, or 3 pairs of 500 lb-ers.
Sounds a lot like an A-26
Unfortunately, it was a bit too late in game, the 1st A-20s with 3 bomb bay tanks (= 325 US gals total, plus 400 gals of wing fuel) were not produced before 1944 I believe.
How fast does the unarmed/lightly armed bomber have to fly to get a reasonable measure of safety?
Granted you do not have to fly all of the mission at high cruise speeds, just the parts over enemy territory.
That depends on when and where.
The DB-7 was a reasonably safe aircraft vs. LW fighters (and Flak) in 1940, of 64 in service only 8 were lost to fighters and Flak during the BoF. That is for a 305 mph aircraft vs. 350 mph Bf 109 and 320 mph Bf-110; however it cruised at 270 mph. Granted, the tasks were not that long ranged. Soviet Pe-2 and Tu-2 were also reasonably safe aircraft vs. LW opposition (especially if we apply Soviet standards of ww2), though the performance disadvantage was considerable.
The faster bomber should be a more riskier target to take head-on, and it will also be harder to hit from side quarters. Faster aircraft should be also safer vs. Flak, not just presenting itself as a tougher target to acquire a good firing solution, but will also allow for fewer shells/burst to be fired upon it.