I am intrigued as to what might have happened if the RAF had used more Mossies instead of the 4-engine types. Part of me thinks there would have been less losses as there would have been fewer aircrew (gunners et al.) needed. Not politically correct to let the commissioned ranks take the brunt of it on their own though....
Also I am reading a book on the Me262 - one of the few planes to best the Mossie.
I have some more Mossie footage somewhere so something to look forward to... prob can at least put up some footage of the Mossie at Duxford. museum
well whilst the mossie was ana amazing bomber, it still couldn't deliver the same punch as the heavies, the heavies were always needed, the mossies however did a fantastic job of supporting them..........
I suppose you need a mix of forces to do the job but if you could have two Mossies for every Lanc (split the crew and engines) then with the Mossie's bombload a lot of damage could have been done. But the real force multiplier would have been the higher survivability - certainly compared to the Stirling.
Mossies also did great work on nuisance raids and intruders shooting down LW nachtjagers, etc. As someone said 'you can't have enough Mosquitos'!
Yes, that's the point. Surely the Mosquito with full bombload wouldn't reach Berlin or Peenemunde.
But on the other hand there were several flights of those planes to the Reich's Capital (of course with no ordnance).
surely universal and efficient Mosquito was, it also burned well...
Well I didn't know that , maybe because I was never so interested in this "wooden marvel" until recently.
I wonder if the German Ta154 Moskito, if made operational, could match with the British Mossie...
They had the range - Mossies were used to drop flares over Berlin and others supported main force planes in different ways. Their bombload was not that far off the B17 with a fifth of the crew to lose.
They did not have to be shot at to crash... in the Far East they suffered from the heat and insects!
But what I am on about is effectiveness.... I bet 70% of the bombs the heavies' crews took to Germany were wasted. The Gulf War F117 is probably the equivalent of the Mossie as far as precision attacks were concerned.
I reckon it is not so much the plane as the crews... not everyone could fly let alone usefully exploit a Mossie.
I have a great respect for the lads of Bomber Command but wish they did not get used up in what appears to be such a callous way.
This article is courtesy of http://www.mikekemble.com/ww2/aircraft.html
The raid on Amiens Prison is probably the single most "famous" raid undertaken by the Mosquito. The idea was to precisely bomb only certain buildings in the complex in order for many hundreds of prisoners to escape the clutches of the Gestapo. This took place on February 18th 1944. Members of the French Resistance were being held there, awaiting execution. 18 Mosquito's took part, swooping down at well in excess of 300 miles an hour to a height of about 60 feet from the ground in order to precisely blow holes in the prison walls. Other targets were the guard sleeping quarters and eating areas. The 3.5 m (12 ft) wide hole blasted in the south wall, through which 258 prisoners escaped, of whom 179 were common criminals, 29 were termed 'French politicals' (which usually meant they were Communist Party workers), and 50 were members of the French Resistance, some of whom had been convicted of committing terrorist acts against German soldiers or the local French population
I don't think you can compare the mossie to other bombers perticuly the Lanc. They were entierly different and used in different ways. What is evident is how manuvouable they both were. The Lanc could curkscrew with 12,000lbs bomb load and the mossie could fly at over 300mph with a 4,000lbs bomb load and 'micks it' with most fighers
I would just like to say that I thought the comment about the He-177 Grief was in jest. At least I hope it was. It had a reputation as the Flying Coffin. Because the engines were coupled together, as it was designed originally as a heavy dive-bomber, they had a nasty habit of engine fires. Quite a large number were lost to non-combat operational factors such as engine-fires. All in all a good bomber doesn't get such a bad name for itself amongst ground crew. It is possible that with work the He-177 Grief could have made the transfer that the Mancester 2 did into the solid, dependable Lancaster, but they didn't. A bomber with the level of losses that plane had, not to mention aircrews is a drain on any airforce in peacetime let alone wartime. Please note that the facts for this are remembered from www.luft46.com
Naturlich - der Grief waz fantastique unless you had to fly in it!
Very interesting technically and as it turned out double engine power units were a dead end - ex for the Fairey Gannet but that was a turboprop. A better LW idea was the Arado fighter which had a pilot etc between the engines.
All this is by the by - my main point was that the 4-engine heavies were an anachronism even then IMHO. Inefficieent even when used en masse - no one else in WW2 used this approach - bomber fleets at night. The Soviet air force was largely tactical.