Favorite 5 Aircraft- All Eras Allowed.
- Thread starter HealzDevo
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
cheddar cheese
Major General
Cougar said:
Too right! I enjoyed "Memphis Belle" a damn sight more than I enjoyed "The Dambusters" 8)
the lancaster kicks ass
Major General
- 19,937
- Dec 20, 2003
DaveB.inVa said:
the argument in question stems from american crews in american planes compared to british crew in british planes, we (the british) knew how to bomb at night, we'd been doing it for years, and we weren't bad at it, the americans on the other had bombed mostly by day so had no experience at night so in the instance of night bombing a british crew in a british plane would be the better choise............
cheddar cheese
Major General
The B-29 makes so much more sense. Faster, better ceiling, better range, could carry more than the Lancaster further, stronger, better armoured. Name me one area in which the Lancaster was superior to the B-29...
mosquitoman
Master Sergeant
The names Tallboy and Grand Slam come to mind, also would you do the dambusters raid in B-29s?
cheddar cheese
Major General
Grandslams were fitted to B-29's after the war 
Carrying a tallboy would be nothing, but because it was an American plane I dont think they would be using British bombs
Carrying a tallboy would be nothing, but because it was an American plane I dont think they would be using British bombs 
wmaxt
Staff Sergeant
mosquitoman said:
The Abomb comes to mind (though the Lanc could probably be fitted up for one - same difference) as for the dam busters why not? The B-29 flew fine on the deck and the extra speed may have helped considering the short range and light bomb load (for a B-29). My dad (as a crew cheif)flew them low on occasion though it was rare and frowned on (Safety issue) and only done for short distances, a lark so to speak, it could be done easily.
We have B-52s with 70,000lb bomb loads doing "nap of the earth" flying, why not a B-29?
DaveB.inVa
Airman 1st Class
- 225
- Dec 20, 2004
The B-29B also had the AN/APQ-7 Eagle radar. It was a wing shaped unit that was slung between the bomb bays where the AN/APQ-13 was on most other B-29's. The AN/APQ-7 was a better radar than was the H2S or H2X (thats basically what the AN/APQ-13 was anyway). All I'd read said the Lincoln had an H2S. Its hard to find stuff on it anyway, I wish theyre was as much info about it as you can find about the Lancaster! I did read about a version of the Lincoln that had 2 20mm cannon in the mid upper turret, thats pretty cool!
British or American... I think it wouldnt hurt to have a better radar!! Even then Id still go with the B-29.
British or American... I think it wouldnt hurt to have a better radar!! Even then Id still go with the B-29.
Lightning Guy
Master Sergeant
- 2,511
- Apr 29, 2004
The discusion about the Lanc dropping a nuke has already run. Post war, the Lincoln wasn't considered a very useful bomber because it would most likely be unable to escape the blasty of a nuke. The Lanc wouldn't have been any better.
the lancaster kicks ass
Major General
- 19,937
- Dec 20, 2003
cheddar cheese said:
but the american crews would have a clue what they were doing at night!!!! we on the other hand did, yes the B-29 was a better bomber than the lanc, but not if the crue doesn't know what it's doing, and why do you assume i'm thinking of using the lancaster?? why can't i use a lincoln??
and about the B-29 on the dams raid, it was to big and whilst i can't say this for sure as i don't know, i doubt it was manouverable enough, the B-29's speed would have been of no advantage as the raid had to be done at a set speed.....................
evangilder
"Shooter"
Wait a minute Lanc, the B-29s did do night bombing of Japan for the Tokyo firebombing raids. They knew how to bomb at night.
Lightning Guy
Master Sergeant
- 2,511
- Apr 29, 2004
And technologically they were better equipped with a more advanced radar set than any Lanc. Still, I suppose we should be impressed you finally acknowledged that the Lanc wasn't the best bomber in the war.
cheddar cheese
Major General
For the escape and the flight over there it would...
Gemhorse
Senior Airman
Yeah, apparently they were the first jet fighter capable of delivering a nuclear strike, but their design was especially unique, a real treatise in avionic economy...their original cost per aircraft was around $800,000....
Gemhorse
Gemhorse
trackend
Chief Master Sergeant
Hi Evanglider
Canvey Island is near the mouth of the Thames North side of the river
3 X 4 miles, population 40,000 ,linked to the main land by two bridges and very crowded.
Four miles further towards the mouth lies one part of the D-day Mulberry harbour it ran aground whilst being towed over. also on the other side of the river lies the wreak of the Montgomery a liberty ship that broke her back whilst carrying 3,000 tons of ammo The navy divers examine her every year just to check on the stability of her cargo as removal of it is believed to be more of a hazard than to leave it in place
Canvey Island is near the mouth of the Thames North side of the river
3 X 4 miles, population 40,000 ,linked to the main land by two bridges and very crowded.
Four miles further towards the mouth lies one part of the D-day Mulberry harbour it ran aground whilst being towed over. also on the other side of the river lies the wreak of the Montgomery a liberty ship that broke her back whilst carrying 3,000 tons of ammo The navy divers examine her every year just to check on the stability of her cargo as removal of it is believed to be more of a hazard than to leave it in place
evangilder
"Shooter"
Okay, I think I know where that is now. I hadn't heard of it before, so I was curious. I lived in the dazzling urban area of East Anglia for 3 years. (tongue in cheek, nothing out there but farms and airplane patches)
(tongue in cheek, nothing out there but farms and airplane patches)Gemhorse
Senior Airman
CC, that's not fair....Memphis Belle was in colour, The Dambusters B/W...
The Lincoln, I've since read, WAS capable of a nuclear strike, but it wasn't really in it's Flight Agenda....
The Lancaster was the true original and successful '' Nightbomber '', and it's contribution at that time of the conflict was huge....They also greatly developed night-bombing by the use of radar, and as an aircraft, were much loved by all it's crews....
The B-17 broke in the '' Daylight '' bombing, along with the B-24, and I believe their accuracy improved with the Norden bombsight....The B-17 was a better bombing-platform, the B-24 had greater range and duties, but both aircraft were loved by their crews....
All these aircraft were able to sustain enormous damage, and more often than enough, make it back, a credit to their designers, groundcrews and flight crews....
The B-29, despite it's initial teething-troubles, was the Best Bomber of the War, despite being active only in the Far East/ Asia, and combined ALL the accumulated tactics of Battles in the ETO/MTO, and it's firebomb raids paralleled raids like Hamburg....they tried hard to conventionally-bomb Japan into submission, but eventually had to resort to the A-bombs....I recall reading somewhere that they had 20mm's in their rear turret.....
The presence of just one B-29 in England, sent the Germans into a tizz, thinking that if all these other Allied bombers weren't enough....whoa !!!
It's a shame 3 crashed-landed in Russia, because their copying the design really upset the post-war balance of power.....but we're all still here folks, so maybe it was destiny....
My favourite is always the Lancaster, but I love the B-24 too....they were built in the most numbers, but I just love the Consolidated Logo in the steering wheel, quite a novel touch.....
The Lincoln, I've since read, WAS capable of a nuclear strike, but it wasn't really in it's Flight Agenda....
The Lancaster was the true original and successful '' Nightbomber '', and it's contribution at that time of the conflict was huge....They also greatly developed night-bombing by the use of radar, and as an aircraft, were much loved by all it's crews....
The B-17 broke in the '' Daylight '' bombing, along with the B-24, and I believe their accuracy improved with the Norden bombsight....The B-17 was a better bombing-platform, the B-24 had greater range and duties, but both aircraft were loved by their crews....
All these aircraft were able to sustain enormous damage, and more often than enough, make it back, a credit to their designers, groundcrews and flight crews....
The B-29, despite it's initial teething-troubles, was the Best Bomber of the War, despite being active only in the Far East/ Asia, and combined ALL the accumulated tactics of Battles in the ETO/MTO, and it's firebomb raids paralleled raids like Hamburg....they tried hard to conventionally-bomb Japan into submission, but eventually had to resort to the A-bombs....I recall reading somewhere that they had 20mm's in their rear turret.....
The presence of just one B-29 in England, sent the Germans into a tizz, thinking that if all these other Allied bombers weren't enough....whoa !!!
It's a shame 3 crashed-landed in Russia, because their copying the design really upset the post-war balance of power.....but we're all still here folks, so maybe it was destiny....
My favourite is always the Lancaster, but I love the B-24 too....they were built in the most numbers, but I just love the Consolidated Logo in the steering wheel, quite a novel touch.....
Attachments
Adolf Galland
Airman 1st Class
"The B-17 was a better bombing-platform, the B-24 had greater range and duties, but both aircraft were loved by their crews.... "
that's not true, most of the crew that had flown on both plane said they love the b-17
that's not true, most of the crew that had flown on both plane said they love the b-17
