Poll: Best strategic bomber of Cold War (1950-1970)?

[swampyankee]

Each has some good points, but, like all these kind of polls, it all comes down to how does one define best. The Cold War never really turned hot, except for proxy wars in places no one really cared about except for their value as tokens in the proxy war, so one can't really evaluate their combat performance (had it done so, we would look back, with nostalgia, at the electric light)

On the issue of the RAF: the V-bombers were all great aircraft, but for all the reported penury of the British governments' defence budget, why three aircraft for the same mission?

 

[Shortround6]

On the issue of the RAF: the V-bombers were all great aircraft, but for all the reported penury of the British governments' defence budget, why three aircraft for the same mission?

actually four.

Short Sperrin

First flew in 1951, only two built. Was always the fall back position in case the other three failed. Belt, suspenders and tape?

 

[The Basket]

Muggins turn.
Instead of making the best aircraft just build to keep factories open and people employed. Probably best explanation.
Vulcan rules!

 

[parsifal]

other for me. specifically f-111 early marks introduced from july 1967. Still the best bomber in 2017, able to combine strategic and tactical functions with extremely high survivability rates, and with updated avionics very high first round hit rates. They are sorely missed in the RAAF inventory.

 

[swampyankee]

I'm surprised they were worried about the B-58 being able to penetrate enemy air-space at high-altitude. From what I remember

• Our MIM-14 missile batteries had a great deal of difficulty being able to carry out a successful mock-intercept against them; the SA-2 and MIM-14 were said to have similar capabilities
• The MiG-21, Su-9, Yak-28, Su-11, and Su-15, and Tu-28 all had speeds that were either inferior to the cruise speed to superior to cruise, but inferior to top-end dash-speed, and IIRC, the first two, third, and fifth needed rear-quarter intercepts at first.
  
• Comparisons against the F-106's were unrealistic as the USSR did not have anything similar to the Genie (I'm not sure if the USAF thought otherwise...)
• I do know that the SA-2's did have variants with nuclear warheads as of 1964: I'm not sure whether we knew that or not, but that does seem a good way to make interceptions greatly more likely! I could imagine wanting to fly in the weeds rather than stay up high

I think they were more worried about the B-58's poor serviceability, high loss rate, and insufficient range.

 

[Zipper730]

I think they were more worried about the B-58's poor serviceability, high loss rate

I know it was maintenance intensive, I'm not sure what caused such a high loss-rate: Sometimes it gave me the vibe that it performed so much like a fighter that they couldn't keep up with all the checklist items, and were looking at so many dials and switches as they barreled down the field and into the air that they lost situational awareness.

As for insufficient range, I was told they had enough range to make it across the Atlantic, and in that record flight, they lost an engine. I know they were going to carry out periodic course corrections and that takes up more space than a straight-line course, but it's only about 600-900 nm from the border of Russia to dead center (not sure where they would refuel).

 

[Zipper730]

To the OP: I was thinking you should have created the post around different eras: I would go from the following eras

1. 1935 to 1939: He-111, Blenheim, B-17, B-24, Ju-88
   
2. 1939 to 1945: Ju-88, He-111, B-17, B-24, B-25, Avro Lancaster, Avro Lincoln, B-29
   
3. 1945 to 1950: B-29/B-50, B-36, B-45, B-47, Canberra
   
4. 1950 to 1957: B-29/B-50, B-36, B-45, B-47, B-52, Canberra, Vulcan, Victor, Mya-4, Tu-16
   
5. 1957 to 1965: B-47, B-52, B-58, V-Bombers, Canberra/B-57
   
6. 1965 to 1975:
   
7. 1975 to 1992:
8. 1992 to Present:

Or something like that

 

[fubar57]

The OP hasn't been here for 4 years

 

[parsifal]

this new format catches me like that all the time. it lists 'similar threads 'which I will sometimes go to. I need to keep reminding myself to check the dates on stuff. many of these old threads are well past their use by dates I think

 

[Zipper730]

Should I just create a new thread around this purpose or just let it be?

 

[stona]

I dunno, but its a bit of a stretch putting the Ju 88 in 1936-1939
Cheers
Steve

 

[Shortround6]

Likewise the B-17 and B-24. The XB-24s first flight was December 29, 1939.