The Best Bomber of WWII: #4

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

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:
You answers do not matter Lanc, his statistics say so...
Click to expand...

Are you afraid of what the numbers say in a different analysis?

If it shows the Lanc was still better, then thats the way it is. If it shows that the differences were so small to be insignificant, then thats the way it is. If it shows the B24 as better, then thats the way it is.
 
well, i don't know how it can be made any more simple sys, the loss rates for both planes i've calculated from all sorties, day and night, they did in the war, using all the losses they sustained during the war............

the tonnages were the total tonnages dropped offensively during the war............

Some data for the B24 beats out NO data for the Lanc
Click to expand...

that's not true, there being no data implies that there were none made, as if you make something like that then data can be collected, there IS data for the lanc, i just don't have the exact data you're after...........
 
Heres the first set of info I have for the 8th AF B24's operating in the ETO, all of 1942 and through June 30 1943.

715 sorties with 24 loss's.

Only 2 BG's were used in this time period, with one of them for only a few months of this time period (93rd and 44th BG). I have to look at the 15th AF (MTO) records because they probably had most of the B24 groups in that time period.

So Lanc, how many Lanc sorties and loss's occured in this time period.
 
Lets see, lets break down what you just said.


syscom3 said:
And I proved plenty about the production rates. Among them:
1) The B24 was built in far more quantities per factory than the Lanc.
Click to expand...

You did not prove anything because everyone already knew that. So what exactly did you prove. That did not prove that the B-24 was easier to make. It proved that the US had a greater production capacity, which guess what, was never contested, that is a fact and everyone knows that.

syscom3 said:
2) Untill Flyboy finally found some data showing how many man hours were needed to build the B24, noone really knew who was better. We still dont have the data for the Lanc other than we figure it was similar to another Brit bomber.
Click to expand...

Which proves what? Nothing.

syscom3 said:
3) I had some preliminary data for the B24. None of you had anything for the Lanc. Some data for the B24 beats out NO data for the Lanc.
Click to expand...

However what did this data prove? Nothing. You seem to think it proves the Lanc was harder to build which makes the B-24 so much better. It does not. Do I have to start repeating this like you do over and over like you love doing?
syscom3 said:
4) We all learned a bunch about bomber production.
Click to expand...

That I did, but I question whether you did because facts about Aircraft building that me and FBJ have posted you seem not to believe. You still seem to think that building a Bomber or any aircraft for a matter of fact is like building a Ford.
 

And the fact that so many were scrapped so quickly PROVES my earlier statement. The B-24 served well but it was a DUMPTRUCK! Once the war was over, it got turned into Fords!!!! 6000 gone in one year!!! The Lancaster remained around for many years, not because of desperation, because it was an adaptable airframe.
 
I'm with Joe, it's a bit entertaining. To be honest though, it's starting to become rather boring.

Oh, and the Lancaster rocked. No stats, just 'cuz I said so. NYAAA-NYYAAAAA!!!





 
If it gives you a headache, then dont read the thread anymore.

I will continue to post things about this as its opened all sorts of variables on what made both planes so great.
 
ok sys i did want you want, it took me several hours but i did it!

ok so you stated over Europe the B-24 did 715 sorties from january 1st 1942 'til june 30th 1943 for 24 lost, i make that a loss rate of 3.4% agreed?

well, the lancaster, in the above time period (although her first opperational was in March '42) completed, accounting for day and night sorties, 17,100 sorties exactily, and 585 were lost, believe it or not, that comes out as 3.4% too

however i had this feeling you were going to say that's just because the lanc flew by night, so i calculated the the figures for the lancaster's daytime operations for the same period (1st jan. '42 - 30th June '43)...........

just to clarify by a daytime sortie is considdered one in which the aircraft is dispatched at returns in the same day...........

and so for this period the lanc did 382 daytime sorties for 13 aircraft lost, believe it or not but AGAIN that comes out to a loss rate of 3.4%

but as i was on a role, i thought why stop at the daytime sorties for that period? why not do the whole war?

so i did!

and i can confirm that throughout the entire war the lancaster did 40,139 daytime sorties! and only 281 were lost on these daytime raids, you know what that makes the lancaster's loss rate for daytime sorties in WWII?? 0.7% !!!!

also considder that by '42 the B-24 had several years development, the lanc was in service in it's first mark with no problems and needed no adjustments!
 
I will trust his figures. I find it intresting that the loss rate was equal. Next I will look at the figures for Jul 1 1943 to Dec 31 1943.

And the B24 first flew in 1940, with low rate production starting in 1941. No B24 groups were in the UK untill late 1942, and even then it was only two groups through out the first half of 1943.
 
syscom3 said:
And the B24 first flew in 1940, with low rate production starting in 1941. No B24 groups were in the UK untill late 1942, and even then it was only two groups through out the first half of 1943.
Click to expand...

And at that point bomber command was taking the brunt of the Luftwaffe...
 
well if they didn't arrive until late '42 why'd you make me go through the whole of '42

and i'm sorry but it may take me a while to get many figures like that again, i've got a major bit of coursework to do for the next two weeks so anytime i'm not on here i'll be doing that................
 
The reason I had you post the results of 1942 was to show that there were so few B24 sorties, there really wasnt any meaningfull comparison between the two. I think that the 2nd half of 1943 and first half of 1944 is when we can begin t make meaningfull comparisions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

Making the best use of Jumo 211 series?
2
Replies
21
Views
2K
peceed
P
A
Best WW2 Seafire vs. best A6M Zero
Replies
9
Views
1K
Shortround6
S
Paper comparing the flight performance of the P-40E Warhawk and the A6M2 Zero
Replies
8
Views
1K
Ivan1GFP
I
T
Early records of UK preparation for WWII
Replies
3
Views
784
yulzari
A
Best Axis four engined bomber?
Replies
9
Views
2K
dedalos
D
Menu
Log in
Register