Mosquito better than B-17?????

Discussion in 'Aviation' started by Chiron, Feb 17, 2005.

  1. Chiron

    Chiron Member

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2005
    Messages:
    104
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Occupation:
    Student
    As far as I know, it seems that, in terms of speed and of crash rate, Mosquito
    had much beeter record than all other bombers, including the famous B-17.

    So, why Allies decided to choose B-17 over Mosquito?
    and why B-17 is QUEEEN of Bombers?
     
  2. Soren

    Soren Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2005
    Messages:
    6,624
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Huh ?

    The B-17 is a large Bomber, and the Mosquito is a Bomber-interceptor or nighfighter !
     
  3. cheddar cheese

    cheddar cheese Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Messages:
    20,349
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Occupation:
    Student
    Location:
    WSM, England
    B-17 isnt Queen of Bombers, B-29 is :D Well the Lancaster was better than both in the real world :D

    Well the Mossie was British, and The B-17 was American, and it would make more sense for the USAAF to use their bomber rather than the British. Besides, Mosquito's were very good at other roles besides bombing and were being used for other duties (nightfighting, recon etc), and nearly twice the amount of B-17's were built compared to the Mossie and were more readily available. I agree using the Mossie would have made more sense but it wasnt the practical thing to do.


    Welcome to the site as well :D
     
  4. cheddar cheese

    cheddar cheese Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Messages:
    20,349
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Occupation:
    Student
    Location:
    WSM, England
    Soren, the Mossie could carry almost the same load as the B-17 normally carried the same distance, and much faster :D
     
  5. Soren

    Soren Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2005
    Messages:
    6,624
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Well the B-17 could carry good load more bombs !! Thats why it was used more for bombing than the Mossie !
     
  6. Soren

    Soren Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2005
    Messages:
    6,624
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    What !! We are talking about the same mosquito here right ?
     
  7. cheddar cheese

    cheddar cheese Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Messages:
    20,349
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Occupation:
    Student
    Location:
    WSM, England
    Yep, B-17 normally carried 8000lbs to Germany, right? The Mossie could do the same with 6,000lbs, but much faster :D

    Yes, in terms of maximum the B-17 could carry 17,600lbs, but not very far. ;)
     
  8. Soren

    Soren Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2005
    Messages:
    6,624
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Yes thats right. I just thought you meant they had the same bomb load, wich they certainly havent :!:

    :)
     
  9. cheddar cheese

    cheddar cheese Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Messages:
    20,349
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Occupation:
    Student
    Location:
    WSM, England
    No that would just be stupid :lol:
     
  10. Soren

    Soren Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2005
    Messages:
    6,624
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Yeah you can say that again :!:

    :D
     
  11. the lancaster kicks ass

    the lancaster kicks ass Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2003
    Messages:
    19,980
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    38
    actually it wasn't uncommon for B-17s to carry a meer 2,000lbs to berlin, but the most common load was 6,000lbs...........
     
  12. mosquitoman

    mosquitoman Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2005
    Messages:
    2,990
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Occupation:
    student
    Location:
    Saffron Walden/Sheffield
    Home Page:
    I don't think a B-17 could carry a cookie to Berlin TWICE in one night though, I can think of a plane that could cough*mossie*cough :werecomingforyou:
     
  13. the lancaster kicks ass

    the lancaster kicks ass Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2003
    Messages:
    19,980
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    38
    and the mossie was just as accurate by night than the B-17 was by day.........
     
  14. mosquitoman

    mosquitoman Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2005
    Messages:
    2,990
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Occupation:
    student
    Location:
    Saffron Walden/Sheffield
    Home Page:
    and it wasn't made out of essential war materials, it was the wooden wonder
     
  15. the lancaster kicks ass

    the lancaster kicks ass Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2003
    Messages:
    19,980
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    38
    fewer crew lost if, in the unlikely event, one was shot down..........
     
  16. Chiron

    Chiron Member

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2005
    Messages:
    104
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Occupation:
    Student
    "Mossie could carry almost the same load as the B-17 normally carried the same distance, and much faster"

    Ya, I too found that statement from some website regarding of Mossie's bomb load. But, it seems unbelievable. I meant, B-17 was a HEAVY bomber and equiped with 4 engines, whereas Mosquito had only two.

    Here is what I found from RAF History on Mosquito:

    "An example of the tremendous accuracy achieved by Mosquitos can be shown by comparing figures for the attacks on the V-weapons sites. The average tonnage of bombs required to destroy one of these sites by B-17 Flying Fortresses was 165; for B26 Marauders it was 182 tons and for B25 Mitchells 219 tons. The average for the Mosquito was just under 40 tons!"

    So, from this view, does it means that Mosquitor was much superior and technological advanced to any other bomber in WWII? Since Mosquito already qualifies several components of modern bombers: fly with high speed, solo mission, long distance, and most importantly all, the precise bombing.
     
  17. mosquitoman

    mosquitoman Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2005
    Messages:
    2,990
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Occupation:
    student
    Location:
    Saffron Walden/Sheffield
    Home Page:
    Other mosquito variants would be night escorts, shooting down and german nightfighters and providing tactical and weather reconnaisance
     
  18. the lancaster kicks ass

    the lancaster kicks ass Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2003
    Messages:
    19,980
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    38
    but remember the mossie was much lighter so didn't need more engines..........

    and the B-17 was a heavy but very rarely carried heavy payloads...............
     
  19. Chiron

    Chiron Member

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2005
    Messages:
    104
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Occupation:
    Student
    "and the B-17 was a heavy but very rarely carried heavy payloads......"

    I agree. And it seems also that whereas B-17 suffered tremendously in air until the arrival of P-51, the Mosquito was capable of conducting solo operation without accompanying fighters to safeguard itself from enemies' planes.

    (MM.......something tells me that B-17 wasnt a good plane after all....)

    In comparison with Mosquite's bombing record, how effect was B-17's role in strategic bombing?
     
  20. evangilder

    evangilder "Shooter"
    Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2004
    Messages:
    19,419
    Likes Received:
    137
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Occupation:
    Network Engineer/Photographer
    Location:
    Moorpark, CA
    Home Page:
    You are really comapring apples to oranges. Yes, the mosquito did fly solo missions against small targets, but large industrial targets required a large formation of aircraft with a large amount of bombs.

    Realistically, how do you think the Mossie would have faired if they had had large formations of them attacking large targets? Because of their relative size, they would obviusly be more manueverable against fighters, but with a full bomb-load, they would be heavy and slower to manuever as well.

    The roles that the aircraft were designed for are different. You have a right to the opinion that the B-17 was "not so good", but fo rthe role it was designed for, it did a good job.
     
Loading...

Share This Page