The Best Bomber of WWII: #4

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


I hadn't even realized it had switched threads at first.


The closest thing to my proposal was the XB-28, but while a high performance high altitude bomber, it was still designed with full defensive armament, so it can't be properly compared in terms of bomb load. (iirc 4,000 lbs, the B-25 having a 6,000 lb capacity, though I'll have to go check others than wiki to be sure) But in service ceiling and performance at high altitude, with two turbocharged 2,000 hp engines it had excellent altitude capabilities.
 
The thing about the mosquito and its speed wasn't that it was 2mph faster than the equivalent German fighter or whatever. its that if the Mossie is flying 20,000ft above you at near on 400mph, or only slightly less than your own max speed, without having to climb as well, you are not going to make an intercept. When you have spent the last 2 relaxing years shooting down Blenhiems for fun this is going to spoil your day.

The plaudits for the Mosquito are well deserved. Even though my own soft spot is for the fabulous, but less spectacular Beaufighter, which is not actually a bomber, I know.
 
So imagine an aircraft cruising at 300+ mph at over 25,000 ft. (with capability to reach nearly 400 mph as well) At granges comparable o a B-17, but with slightly lower payload.
 
Sounds like the Mosquito KK, except for it being slow?

(I actually think the best bomber of WW2 was the B-29, technologically and for its last decisive action, but if I was some theoretical bomber jockey flying throughout the war I would have spent it flying Mosquitoes, if I had a choice, and after surviving 1939-40 flying Wellingtons - the best in that period that would allow the move to Mosquitoes.)
 
Everything i've read or heard about the Mossie was the actual speed they operated at was about 240-260 , 240 being preferable as it made navigation easier.
 
pbfoot said:
It was a fine aircraft but as for being a war winner not at all , they could not outrun single seaters of the LW I believe much of the hype that still pervades on the Mossie
is a carry over from ww2 propaganda
Click to expand...

Granted that by 1944 the A/C being sent against the DH 98 had at least 20KM/hr + speed advantage but as someone else mentioned in this thread they had to catch up. As usual i have none of my reference stuff with me so i cant give you the stats but there arent that many cases of DH 98's being lost in direct air to air combat. Certainly there are famous cases sush as the loss of 464Sqdn commander during the Famous Amiens prison raid. But to be fair he was already right down on the deck at -500ft when he was caught by six FW 190's. Even so he aparently almost got away as he and many others had before and after.

An interesting side bar is that one of the NF squadrons had a few A/C " illegally " fitted with NO2 injection which the pilots claimed to have elevated the top speed of the bird up to 710Km/Hr+ in short bursts. This was used to close with the radar cntacts as fas as possible. Whish i could tell more about this so feel free to add if anyone knows more.

Finally as a point of pride for the DH 98 it was one of the major requirements placed by the Air ministry on De Haviland is that this new High altiude fast bomber of theirs that they were pitching did in fact outrun fighters just as claimed. Again no references {sorry} But the prototype DH 98 W4050 was in fact given an Air trial where it did outpace a PR Spitfire in front of Air ministry and Senior RAF oficers {Geoffery De Haviland Jnr was if i'm remembering correctly the Pilot } Based mostly on the strength of this demonstration the first order for 50 A/C was placed by the Air Ministry.

One more just for luck i dont think the DH 98 had that much of a public profile during the war itself { certyainly it was propodandized } {if thats even a word } After the war however is when i beleive it began to get larger than life due to a couple of interesting events. The one i will mention here is 1952 i think a DH 98 Piloted by H.B. "Mickey" Martin acheived the record for a piston engined A/C on an Atlantic crossing which i beleive still stands today { I would have to check } But you see the point i'm making i'm sure. No not a war winner on its own but then nothing is
Always great to Chew over the fat.
 
kool kitty89 said:
I hadn't even realized it had switched threads at first.


The closest thing to my proposal was the XB-28, .
Click to expand...

No I unfortunately knew of the parralell threads and in fact there is another on most versitile A/C which is gettin a lot of the same attention. Like i said loose track a bit cause the subjectss are so similar.

Have vaguely heard of the XB-28 sounds interestin. The germans themselves exsperimented with an A/C which mirrored the DH 98 but i cant remember bugger all about it right now

Cheers
 
pbfoot said:
Everything i've read or heard about the Mossie was the actual speed they operated at was about 240-260 , 240 being preferable as it made navigation easier.
Click to expand...

Certainly these speeds would of been prudent for most of the 2TAF oporations as they were navigating from -150ft most of the way. Pathfinder Mossies had a bit more room to play and were conseqently operating at higher speeds. From what i can glean pilots generally Oporated their DH 98's at about 75% capacity more for fuel savings than anything else those merlins get very thirsty once they're opened right up apparently. One of the reasons that drop tanks for these A/C was such a valuable and almost unatainable item in 1943/4.
 
Here's an article on the XB-28: North American XB-28 Dragon

(I'm not sure why it lists a bombload of 4,000 lbs max, but then mentioned 6,000 lbs in the description, perhaps 6,000 lbs was with external load as well?)

Note, my earlier comments on the 300 mph cruise and ~400 mph top speed were speculation an an a/c similar to the B-28, but optimized for performance, unarmmed, and reduced crew. (or a turbocharged B-26 with similar configuration)


And I'm not totally sure on the B-25's max bombload (it would depend on the model as well) I think the maximum internal capacity was 4,000 lbs (2x 2,000 lb?) Consolidated B-24 Liberator


And the B-26B could carry up to 8,000 lbs (4x 2,000 lb) internally, though normally 4,000 lbs was the maximum carried.
Martin B-26 Marauder
 
kool kitty89 said:
Here's an article on the XB-28: North American XB-28 Dragon
(I'm not sure why it lists a bombload of 4,000 lbs max, but then mentioned 6,000 lbs in the description, perhaps 6,000 lbs was with external load as well?)
Click to expand...

A typo Chris. If you read Wagner's "American Combat Planes" (which he quotes from), the specification is listed as 2,040 miles with a 600 lb bomb load.

In 1945 NAA 'improved' the XB-28 to include turboprops, and from there onwards to the all-jet B-45...

 
Well the OHKA kamakazi jet rocket thing? would be good for knocking out ground targets becouse of its tremendous speed and explosive power
 
Best bomber....again, as with any 'best' thread, the headache of trying to juggle so many important criteria at once...

But my vote, in the end, must go to the B-17. For its impact and the role it played in the strategic thinking of so many postwar air forces.
 

Even though it was the B29 that had the most impact on strategic warfare?

What about the B29's superior performance over the B17 in every catagory?
 
Yes, the B-29 had a tremendous influence - which is exactly my point. No B-17, no B-29. The USAAF had a tremendous fight just to get the B-17 funded (No thanks to the US Navy) and most people would agree to the proposition that had the USAAF lost the political and budgetary battle then, the B-29 would never have been built .... at least not by the USA!
 

While I agree with your points, the fact is the B-29 was the most technically advanced and best heavy bomber of WW2.
 
And besides, the B-24 shared a lot of the work with the B-17, and were used in greater numbers. (each having their advantages over the other)
 
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
1K
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
749
yulzari
A
Best Axis four engined bomber?
Replies
9
Views
2K
dedalos
D
Menu
Log in
Register