Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Again folks, looking into an ACTIVE bomber that contributed to the war effort - looking into it's construction, systems, armament, performance, operational impact and longevity, the B-29 takes it by a mile hands down. The closest bomber to the B-29 was the Lancaster but it was a half of generation behind the B-29.
Me too glider - I think I'm going to have to post it about every 2 or 3 pages....I have lost track of the number of times that this point has been correctly made.
Yes...Hi FBJ
You mean that the other bombers were a generation earlier dont you?
Perhaps - my point is if you compare all operational heavy bombers rivet by rivet, wirebundle by wirebundle, avionics, armament and firecontol the B-29 was the most advanxced heavy bomber of WW2.Besides none of them were ever required to do the things the B29 was. It was wartime and the CREWS were unbelievable regardless if they hated the aircraft they were given they flew them to and beyond the ability of the aircraft on paper.
This is the same for all the competitors. and if, for example, the Feuhrer had ordered a bombing mision to the States then massed Dorniers and Heinkles would have done it somehow.
Men Not Machines.
Regards
Dragonsinger
The best bomber for me was the DH96 by far. Just think if the "1000 bomber raid" were all Mosquitoes. IMO they're more accurate than the Lancs, 24's and 17's, much faster and they could probably defend themselfs better
edd
i like the vickers wellington.she served the whole war,and did more jobs as well.she fought through the blitz and dished out some,in retaliatary raids on berlin etc.took part in the 1000 aircraft firestorm raids.coastal command,the lot.had a good bombload.i hope u all agree.yours,starling
Hi FBJ
You mean that the other bombers were a generation earlier dont you?
Besides none of them were ever required to do the things the B29 was. It was wartime and the CREWS were unbelievable regardless if they hated the aircraft they were given they flew them to and beyond the ability of the aircraft on paper.
This is the same for all the competitors. and if, for example, the Feuhrer had ordered a bombing mision to the States then massed Dorniers and Heinkles would have done it somehow.
Men Not Machines.
Regards
Dragonsinger
All the pilots and crews in Germany would not have been successful in putting one Dornier or Heinkel over the US or Hitler would have ordered it done - I suspect that if the Ju 390 could have really reached NY with one bomb, Hitler would have ordered it done for propaganda reasons.
Do you have an approach in mind that would have put any German bombers over the US.. bases, refueling approach, range and payload from some nominal base?
Aircrews are crucial but they are just one component of the weapons system and tactics to make it all work.
And the US could not of put one plane over the ETO if they had to fly from New York..I think he is meaning if they were in Cuba or south of the border of the US..It would be like the US in England... The crews on all sides made there planes work..For stuff that they never were made to do ...
And the US could not of put one plane over the ETO if they had to fly from New York..I think he is meaning if they were in Cuba or south of the border of the US..It would be like the US in England... The crews on all sides made there planes work..For stuff that they never were made to do ...
I forgot to mention - the Germans had zero hope of any foothold in South America save Argentina and our ability to blockade Argentina, as well as put bases in Brazil was absolute.
On the other hand the Germans had no surface fleet to put a footprint Anywhere they could strike the US - or do you have a different POV?
Just think of a single B29 with an atomic bomb.
You could miss your target by a mile and still destroy it.
Could the Mossie do that?