fighter-killing bombers of WW2

[FLYBOYJ]

It might be a shock to you, but Japanese sources say otherwise.

Sometimes the claims were close, sometimes exaggerated.

Same thing goes with the Jpanese claims of allied aircraft.

For example, look at the SBD claims, 138 kills? Those are totals that look more like a fighter group. Look at the PB4Y claims. 210? Thats quite some tally for an airplane that hardly saw any action in the the big air battles in the SW pacific, and CBI.

I'd like to see the sources for the Japanese claims - 138 kills for SBDs - that won't surprise me - on the other side 78 SDBs were lost to Japanese fighters

 

[Udet]

We have discussed this issue in past threads.

Also, we pretty much agreed bombers lose to fighters. Whatever the number of defensive guns carried in to attempt a defese against fighters, for as long as you fly inside that clumsy and hardly manouverable tube -especially the B-17- your many many times more nimble, agile, manouverable and faster enemy will make you bite the rocks with all your teeth in far, far bigger numbers.

Bombers, on their own, are losers.

 

[Udet]

you might find this link of interest:

http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=785

 

[Gemhorse]

Definately the de Havilland Mosquito, it took care of a respectable number of enemy fighters...and before anyone jumps down my throat about the ''unarmed variants'', there were ''armed variants'' as well, especially the FB Mk. VI's, which were used to good effect besides the 'Strike Wings'.....

 

[elmilitaro]

The de Havilland one of the best and fastest bomber of WW2.



Especially if it was armed.