Most Dangerous Position on a Bomber....?

Whats the most dangerous position on an Allied Bomber during WW2?

  • Nose

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Cockpit

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Top Turret Gunner

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Radio Operator

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Waist Gunner(s)

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Ball Turret Gunner

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Tail Gunner

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Total voters
    0

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

Status
Not open for further replies.
Lanc what bomber type and mission profile? I say a torpeado plane that dose not have high cover is going to take a lot of hits and the pilot is the worst place. But as the B-24s showed even they flying high got a lot of pain from the flak.

So hear is a question, would you rather fly into flak or fighters?
 
I would rather fly into fighters. That way your gunners would at least have a chance of taking the fighters out. And as you would be in a bomber you would be in a formation more than likely - strength in numbers. Also there would probably be fighter escort.
 
Yup....

But I would still take the enemy fighters situation over FLAK anyday of the week... Ive read some after action reports from bomber crews and its almost sickening the loss of life there was... One article I read stated that on a run over Dusseldorf (I think) in the matter of 1 minute, 20 B-17s went down to FLAK.... They were on their bomb run, armed and open, when the FLak hit...

Thats insane....
 
Yes, I don't like the prospect of a 88mm or 105mm FlaK shell ripping into the bombers bodywork. But I think the prospect of being chased down by a Schwalbe blazing four 30mm is just as scary.
 
After seeing some of the pictures of flak over some targets, I think I would rather take my chances with a fighter. Not that either sounds pleasant, but at least with the fighter you can see it coming. Flak just hits. You could wind up well ventilated by either though.
 
And as you would be in a bomber you would be in a formation more than likely - strength in numbers
Click to expand...

that's not really true, the americans thought that if they put their B-17s in huge formations they would be able to protect each other, didn't really work...................
 
But in practice it didn't. In fact a lot of the time they ended up shooting each other.
 
I thought it was a benefit in American regimes, easier to shoot each other.

Oh..buh-zing!
 
Don't ask me, I'm preparing to get drunk. Don't ask him...he's well...people in the medical practice generally start the speech with "I'm sorry..." when they tell families their son has what lanc has.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

M
  • Poll
Which one is overall better between Ta-152H and P-47M/N?
2
Replies
30
Views
2K
_PabloSniper_
  • Poll
German multiengine jet bomber best immune to Allied interception
Replies
0
Views
891
Vahe Demirjian
A
Best British single engined radial aircraft in WW2?
2
Replies
23
Views
2K
nuuumannn
  • Poll
AH-4 Apache vs black hawk
2 3 4
Replies
76
Views
6K
Thumpalumpacus
  • Locked
  • Poll
best ww2 bomber
Replies
9
Views
2K
Admiral Beez
A
Menu
Log in
Register