the lancaster kicks ass
- Dec 20, 2003
right, let's start of with the lanc Vs. B-24, right sys, what've you got? what makes you so dillusional you think the B-24 was more versatile than the lanc?
This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
As bombers certainly, but both found uses in other areas. Maritime surveillance and search and rescue for example. The Lanc was even used for Arctic surveillance for a time. They were both readily adaptable designs, and while not the newest aircraft in existence by the end of the war, their lives weren't completely over yet either.syscom3 said:...as post war they were both obsolete.
syscom3 said:How about comparing a tiger force Lanc (with modifications) compared to a B32.
the lancaster kicks ass said:i think there are many the lanc could do that the B-24 couldn't! and i've done a bit of research on the B-24 varients and i haven't really been blown away i mean how many different combinations of bombs could the B-24 take internally? could she carry large parachute mines? could she carry an upkeep? not a chance, could she carry a tallboy or grandslam, that's even less likely, what about all the electronic aids the lanc carried, how often was the B-24 used as an engine test bed? the lanc was used to test many piston engines mounted in the nose and even how two outboard engines taken out and replaced with jet engines!not to mention jet engines mounted in the tail and bomb bay, the B-24's bomb bay was barely big enough for bombs let alone engines