My father was F/Lt HHM Cave, pilot with 419 Squadron, 6-Group. He completed his tour with 1800 hours of flying, on numerous aircraft types, including the liberator. I will report what my father said about the Lancaster.
"The Lancaster was the finest aircraft I have ever flown. It was like flying a Tiger Moth, really, except that it had 4 engines. It just floated like a bird! It didn't want to land! It was if it just loved to fly! It was responsive to the controls-just a little touch of the controls, the rudder or the control column, to bank or climb or dive, just a slight movement and it performed beautifully and smoothly. The pilot had fantastic visibility. You could see everything, it was like being in a greenhouse. I could look around, if I arranged my seat to its highest and shortened the rudder pedals to the fullest extent, I could see right around through 360 degrees and it was wonderful to see like that. I could see right into the astro hatch and if Jonesy (Wireless OP) was there, I could see him and also look right at Nick Horychka in the Mid-Upper Turret. The aeroplane was absolutely beautiful. Now we had never flown this plane before so I went out with an American who was on the Squadron by the name of Lt. Joe Hartshorn. He was an awfully fine man. He did one circuit and landing and he then stepped out of the airplane and I took it from there." Please note here that Joe Hartshorn was an American (who won a DFC) with the squadron.
Dad also flew the B-24 Liberator, during his stint with Coastal Command (Cornwall, England). Now this was obviously a pivotal aircraft during the war because of its very long range and its use in anti-submarine warfare. Dad's comments: "It handled like a cow"
Dad, on a bet, once did a circuit and bump (take-off, orbit and landing) all by himself--no one else on the aircraft. His notation in his logbook (the JPEG of which I can email) was "F/Lt. HHM Cave pilot, scratch crew". Can any of you claim to have done that in any of the other aircraft in question?
There have been comments on this forum on the defensive armament of the Lanc. Christ knows why they opted for .303 Brownings. That was an unnecessary cost savings dictated by the Air Minisitry. It could just as easily have been provided with 50 cal guns, but note that the Lancaster B1 HK541 included modifications that would have ben used for Tiger Force in the Pacific.
The B-29 was clearly a superb aircraft. However it was a "next generation" piston bomber and clearly in a different league than either the B-24, B-17 or the Lancaster. It's bomb loads were almost entirely incendiaries and you can pack a lot of these in to such bombers. It didn't have to contend with either a significant fighter presence, nor flak. Nor was it used in any kind of a precision role. Also, the lancaster was clearly capable of carrying the atomic bomb. The Heinkel HE 177? Don't even go there! If it had any kind of promise, the Germans would have jumped on the design.
But the Lanc? It was clearly the first use of a strategic bomber in a strategic PRECISION role. Neither the B-17 nor the B 24 could make that claim, nor could they carry either the tallboy, grand slam nor "Upkeep" . The Lanc was used with precision (617 squadron) against the dams, against viaducts, U-Boat Pens, railway tunnels (Saumur), and battle ships (Tirpitz), The Daisy Cutter was not larger than the Grand Slam in terms of weight. Also if you consider the normal bomb ordnance carried by main-force aircraft, it could out-compete either the Forts or Box Cars or Halibags, based on lift, hands down. Note that after the war, Albert Speer, the Reich's Minister of Armaments, was interrogated by the Americans. He indicated that when it came to bombing of oil production in Germany, British raids were more effective because of the larger size of bombs they used. No doubt this was due to bomb bay size. Finally, against Berlin, remember the Mosquito could fly to the Big-Smoke twice in one evening, with a 4000 bomb--the same bomb load that the B-17 force carried, with a crew of 2 men, 2 engines, at twice the speed of B-17's and without fighter support or defensive armament and at a signficantly lower rate-of-loss!
Finally my Dad, reminising about landing on American airfields (when diverted after a raid because of weather)..."We used to like opening our bomb doors when we landed at American bases, because we could show off how much we could carry. A 500 lb bomb [rolling around the bomb bay] fell onto the tarmac. I've never seen people run so fast in all my life!"
At the end of the day, the war was fought with the munitions and aircraft the allies had available and chose to use. Both the B-17, B-24, B-29, Lancaster and Halifax were a critical components for the war effort. Both the American and British contributions were denigrated by Galbraith's report on the Strategic Bomber Offensive. Recently, historians such as W. Overy and Middlebrook have concluded the efforts of this offensive were critical towards winning WW II.
If you wish to look at my father's contributions to the war effort...
Hanover
JDCAVE