twin engined bombers.

Discussion in 'Aviation' started by starling, Jul 4, 2008.

  1. starling

    starling Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2008
    Messages:
    231
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Occupation:
    none,disabled..
    Location:
    bomber command hq.
    now,i know lots of twins were used for other duties,so what do you think was the best all round twin engined bomber of ww2.please do include other duties as well,as i think this would make good reading.yours,starling.
     
  2. otftch

    otftch Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2006
    Messages:
    1,384
    Likes Received:
    19
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Occupation:
    retired
    Location:
    Franklinton,NC
    I would have to go with the mosquitto.What did it NOT do well ?
    Ed
     
  3. KrazyKraut

    KrazyKraut Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2008
    Messages:
    339
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ju-88 and Pe-2 imo.
     
  4. trackend

    trackend Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2003
    Messages:
    4,039
    Likes Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Occupation:
    Retired tech support railway engineer
    Location:
    Ipswich, Suffolk
    Mossie, brilliantly concept totally went against the grain (no punn intended) at a time when stressed skin alloys was the in thing.
     
  5. parsifal

    parsifal Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2008
    Messages:
    10,678
    Likes Received:
    676
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Urban Design/Strategic Studies Tutor
    Location:
    Orange NSW
    I think the mosquito was the best twin engined bombe. Adequate bomb load, high performace, and tru multi-role. add to that low production costs, and you have a war winner
     
  6. starling

    starling Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2008
    Messages:
    231
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Occupation:
    none,disabled..
    Location:
    bomber command hq.
    i like the wellington.but how would the pe-2 or the tu-2,or tu-4.i am not up on russian aircraft,compare to the mossie.yours,starling.
     
  7. DerAdlerIstGelandet

    DerAdlerIstGelandet Der Crew Chief
    Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2004
    Messages:
    41,768
    Likes Received:
    684
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    A&P - Aircraft Technician
    Location:
    USA/Germany
    I think the best twins were (in no particular order)

    Junkers Ju 88
    Mosquito
    B-25 Mitchell

    these 3 aircraft were very vesatile, while I consider the Ju 88 the most versatile.
     
  8. Flyboy2

    Flyboy2 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2008
    Messages:
    676
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    Las Vegas, Nevada
    Agreed. I actually think the Mosquito is a little better just because of the brilliance of the design and because of its speed. I don't know, Ju88 was pretty good as well.
     
  9. Tony Williams

    Tony Williams Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2004
    Messages:
    273
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Occupation:
    Freelance gun and ammunition writer and editor
    Home Page:
    Mosquito clearly first - it had a huge payload/range and was so fast that it was extremely difficult for the Luftwaffe to intercept. At a time when the Lancaster and other RAF heavy night bombers were suffering 5% losses on each raid, the Mossie's losses were 0.5%. That made it astonishingly efficient, because it was necessary to replace the planes and crews at only one-tenth of the rate (and with only two crew, two engines and no guns, each loss was far less costly). In other versions the Mossie was also highly versatile, being as good a night-fighter as any in the war, and was used in anti-submarine work too (especially the Tsetse, with that 57mm Molins gun).

    Second place would be the Ju 88 family. Equally versatile, but lacking the performance of the Mosquito.

    I'm not sure where the rest would come. There were some good US and Soviet mediums, but I don't have enough information about their service records to make meaningful comparisons. It's important to remember that the strength of the opposing fighter force made a lot of difference to the effectiveness of bombers (as did the presence or otherwise of escort fighters). A bomber might do well in one theatre but get slaughtered in another, or if the circumstances changed.
     
  10. FLYBOYJ

    FLYBOYJ "THE GREAT GAZOO"
    Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2005
    Messages:
    23,203
    Likes Received:
    786
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Aircraft Maintenance Manager/ Flight Instructor
    Location:
    Colorado, USA
    I give the Mossie high marks in it's operational record and it's versatility. Although it light construction was a plus, it was also it's undoing in the post-war years. The Ju 88 also a versatile aircraft, but I'll throw the A-26 into the mix. Fast, modern, remote control turrets, and a great bomb load, it served until the 1960s.
     
  11. renrich

    renrich Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2007
    Messages:
    4,542
    Likes Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Occupation:
    real estate
    Location:
    Montrose, Colorado
    The A26 came in late but it was a heck of a twin engined bomber. As a bomber, probably superior to the Mosquito.
     
  12. drgondog

    drgondog Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2006
    Messages:
    7,359
    Likes Received:
    561
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Executive, Consulting
    Location:
    Scurry, Texas
    Joe - I was thinking with you. Having said that, if the question was best based on versatilty I would go first with Mossie, second with the Ju88.

    The A-26 was simply a better weapons system than the B-25, and as a medium bomber I think it was better than the B-26, the B-25 and the Ju 88.

    But the B-25 through mid 1944 was the 'do everything' medium for US, serving in all services and all theatres. The only thing it didn't do vs the Ju 88 was recon and 'bomber interceptor' simply because there was no need to force fit the B-25 when other systems were in place that were far better than both.

    Obviously the Ar 234 is best 'future weapon system' and best at the end of the war on sheer performance vs contribution - but it wasn't around long enough to cause any problems.
     
  13. mad_max

    mad_max Member

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2006
    Messages:
    113
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Ju-88 and Mossie. Both are "Jack of all trades". Maybe slight edge to the Mossie, but not by much.
     
  14. Watanbe

    Watanbe Member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2007
    Messages:
    526
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Occupation:
    Student, Casual
    Location:
    Adelaide
    Beaufighter? Could that be classed as a bomber at all or only a fighter-bomber?
     
  15. trackend

    trackend Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2003
    Messages:
    4,039
    Likes Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Occupation:
    Retired tech support railway engineer
    Location:
    Ipswich, Suffolk
    I think the Mossies performance gave it the edge over the JU88
     
  16. starling

    starling Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2008
    Messages:
    231
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Occupation:
    none,disabled..
    Location:
    bomber command hq.
    yes,but did the b25-6,do anything other than medium bombing.starling.
     
  17. FLYBOYJ

    FLYBOYJ "THE GREAT GAZOO"
    Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2005
    Messages:
    23,203
    Likes Received:
    786
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Aircraft Maintenance Manager/ Flight Instructor
    Location:
    Colorado, USA
    Yes - in the Pacific it did a variety of roles, low level strike, night bombing and close support. The A-26, B-26 wnet on the serve in Korea and Vietnam.
     
  18. starling

    starling Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2008
    Messages:
    231
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Occupation:
    none,disabled..
    Location:
    bomber command hq.
    so the b25 was a strike aircraft with loads of 12.7mm m.g,skip bombing jap boats,yes.starling.
     
  19. drgondog

    drgondog Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2006
    Messages:
    7,359
    Likes Received:
    561
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Executive, Consulting
    Location:
    Scurry, Texas
    The B-25 role in the PTO was almost as legendary as the Mossie in ETO/MTO... and no medium bomber including perhaps the Ju 88 was as effective in the anti-shipping role.

    When Pappy Gunn took out the Nav/Bombadier glass and replaced with nose and cheek 50's, and developed skip bombing techniques, it was the most devastating low level attacker in the PTO. It may have been the most important contributor to the slaughter of Japanese shipping and troop cariers in the Battle of Bismark Sea - which may have saved New Guinea.


    It did not fly as a Night Fighter or high altitude Recon like the Ju 88 and Mossie variants

    Small note - no others struck Japan from a Carrier.

    Interestingly it lasted in the USAF as a twin engine Group hack along with the C-47 as primary cross country, instrument trainer, 'get your monthly flying time' as long as the A/B-26 - although the A/B-26 flew combat ops far longer than the B-25
     
  20. starling

    starling Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2008
    Messages:
    231
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Occupation:
    none,disabled..
    Location:
    bomber command hq.
    were the b25-6,ever used on radar equipped anti sub missions.what was the b25-6 range.did the mossie not fly in the pto.starling.
     
Loading...

Share This Page