Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Roosevelt was always briefed on a-bomb development
Your post above shows a profound ignorance of this topic.
An attack on the USA could be done with a Ju 390.
To summarise, two reasons why the Lancaster, and that includes ALL Lancaster marks - and the Lincoln could not have carried out the atom bomb raids on Japan.
2. The Lancaster did not have the performance to carry out the mission parameters as they were actually flown.
In short, the Lancaster could not have done it.
There was also the saddle tank Lancaster, designed specifically for Tiger Force to bomb the Japanese mainland.
doubt that there would have been a problem advancing a small production run AVRO Lincoln, the Lincoln essentially being a Lancaster with a new extended wing and two stage supercharged Marlins.
Yup, he kew about a weapon, but he didn't know what it was capable of. Very few did. That's what I'm saying. Also, I was reacting to your posts, nothing in them revealed that he knew exactly about the bomb.
Profound ignorance, huh. Yet its you who won't accept the Lancaster couldn't do it, and here we are heckling down a side route so you can justify yourself.
Interesting - your interpretation of failed is a bit different than other's.There was one aircraft built, and it never proceeded to production. It was a failed design.
Interesting - your interpretation of failed is a bit different than other's.
The B-19 project wasn't high priority at thw onset, so development took longer than expected. It's performance, however, was above and beyond what had originally been anticipated...hardly a "failed design".
And while we're on the subject of failed design, tell me again, about that illustrious Lancaster MK VI...
If it was so reliable, along with it's sister, the Lincoln, why did the RAF feel it needed 70 B-29s? Again you want to ignore the fact by 1945 the Lancaster/ Lincoln series of bombers had been eclipsed in design and operational capability by the B-29/ B-50 series. The Lancaster (and Lincoln) were great aircraft but as been pointed out many times retained features that were obsolete by 1945. The RAF didn't get back into the modern bomber game until the Canberra came along and then later with the V bomber series.The Lancaster VI was certainly more reliable than the early variants of the B-29.
The lanc VI was a low production variant
Bock's Car dropped a ~50% more powerful bomb at ~28.9k ft, versus ~31.6k ft for Enola Gay. Enola Gay could have probably dropped at 24k ft quite safely. The bombs weighed ~10k lbs, and were not especially heavy by Lancaster standards.
The Lancaster VI did have the altitude performance to have dropped either bomb at the historical release altitude , having a service ceiling of ~29k ft at 65000lb TOW (full fuel and ~14K bomb load). Why keep repeating something that has been shown to be untrue? Max TOW for the Lanc VI was 72000lb. The Silverplate B-29s had all armament (except tail guns) and armour stripped where a Lanc VI had full armament, so a "Silverplate" Lanc would perform better than a standard Lancaster VI.
The Lancaster would have had to have flown a modified flight path that included landing at either Okinawa or Iwo Jima. Bock's Car actually landed at Okinawa. A "Silverplate" Lincoln could probably have flown the same route as Enola Gay.
The Silverplate B-29s probably had a TO weight of 115-120k lbs.
In the big picture, yes this argument is pointless. The B-29 existed and it was the best aircraft for the job. That didn't stop us before hammering on "what ifs" before, and it won't stop us in the future.
If it was so reliable, along with it's sister, the Lincoln, why did the RAF feel it needed 70 B-29s? Again you want to ignore the fact by 1945 the Lancaster/ Lincoln series of bombers had been eclipsed in design and operational capability by the B-29/ B-50 series. The Lancaster (and Lincoln) were great aircraft but as been pointed out many times retained features that were obsolete by 1945. The RAF didn't get back into the modern bomber game until the Canberra came along and then later with the V bomber series.
View attachment 590032
Defenseless as far as an air campaign and even then Japan still had several thousand combat aircraft available.Attacking a nearly defenceless Japan in Aug 1945, is not quite the same as launching a nuclear strike against an intact USSR in the early 1950s, with far more powerful A-bombs than were used against Japan.
Must have been a fun thread, where can I find it?This is starting to remind me of the thread that tried to prove the Helcat could've done the Mustangs escort mission to Berlin and back !
Starts about here !Must have been a fun thread, where can I find it?