Versatile Heavy Bombers

[blue swede]

Thank you for the reasonable response.

I believe it was fitted with an anti-tank gun. Sorry if I was presumming that it meant that it actually saw action in that role. I'll have to check my rescources.

Thanks again.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Well while your opinion is valid and all and thankyou for you opinon. The He-177 was no where near as versatile as the B-24, B-17, or the Lancaster.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Well while your opinion is valid and all and thankyou for you opinon. The He-177 was no where near as versatile as the B-24, B-17, or the Lancaster.

Agree!

 

[Glider]

I certainly think that the He 177 is one of the 'what might have been stories' if they had hasked for a Heavy Loong Range bombers and left the manufacturers to get on with it.
But I am afraid it wasn't and the B24 and Lanc had he better of it.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

I agree. The He-177 had good potential but never fully developed mostly due to its engine problems....

 

[CurzonDax]

That seemed to be a major problem of the Axis a lack of heavy long distance bombers. But also in the beginning of the war thier doctorine did not call for it.

:{)

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

And that is the reason why. The Blitzkrieg tactic did not call for it and because of the initial success of the Blitzkrieg Hitler wanted dive bombers for support of the ground forces.

This offcourse was a big mistake.

 

[CurzonDax]

So then, and I know I can sit there and look at performance charts all day but I don't think it will answer my questions, how come Luftwaffe mediums had such short legs while USAAF mediums did not? Did thier engines use up that much gas? B-25s and B-26s seemed to be able to stay over the continent for days compared to lets say the 111 over England?
I know that it would have been more bombs on target vs a heavy but if the 111s could have extended thier legs, in the Battle of Britian, they could have done more damage.
Again was this a MPG issue 'cause the '25s and '26s where heavier aircraft as far as wieght and it seems to me they had much better range than most of thier Axis counterparts save Bettys and I know why these aircraft could go far.

I hope I made sense
:{)

PS moderators, the last few times I have tried to preview my answers, the server asks me again (and yes I have put it to automatically log me in each time) for password and user name. And then it will not post my post.

:{)

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Well here is what I believe the reason for that is:

1. The German bombers such as the He-111 were originally designed as transports. When you fitted all the bombs that took up tank space and then add defensive armament this will all effect the range the aircraft can fly.

2. The German bombers that were in use were designed before the B-26 and so forth. If you look at later German bombers there range was much better than those of the earlier bombers such as the He-111 and Do-17.

3. The German bombers that were designed before WW2 started were designed just for that. They were designed with the Blitzkrieg type of tactics that Hitler thought would win him the war. They were also not designed to be over England for a long time. There mission was to get there blitz and go home. They did not plan on the war lasting very long.

Again if you look at later German bomber designs, there were designed with this weakness in mind and had longer ranges.

 

[CurzonDax]

Nevertheless, like the 17, were the G version was nothing like the B version. I just wonder if the boys at Hienkel thought of re-doing the 111 or was the design at its limit. Remeber the 17 and the 111 are contemporaries as far as original technology.

:{)

 

[crowdpleaser]

im building an 1:72 scale model of a lanc dambuster, does any1 show me theirs.

by the way, are theire any more dutch people registered ?

cp 8)

 

[the lancaster kicks ass]

i don't have any pictures of dambuster models, however any questions you have i will gladly answer............

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Nevertheless, like the 17, were the G version was nothing like the B version. I just wonder if the boys at Hienkel thought of re-doing the 111 or was the design at its limit. Remeber the 17 and the 111 are contemporaries as far as original technology.

:{)

Just my thoughts and that would be that the He-111 could not be redesigned much more to accomadate more fuel.

 

[crowdpleaser]

well not partically any questions but do you have a nice wallpaper of a nice lanc.

thnx 8)

cp

 

[the lancaster kicks ass]

any varients of the lanc in particular? i have several large shots that could be used as wallpaper, including the ones below, these aren't all of them so if you want something else i'll see what i can do...........

i really am sorry for those of you on dial-up

 

[CurzonDax]

HMMM I think Lanc likes Lancs, wadda y'all think. Seriously though the 1st shot of the RCAF Lanc with the drones is outstanding! I forgot the designation but they look like the same as the US variants.

:{)

 

[the lancaster kicks ass]

that's the Mk.10 DC (Drone Controller) only two were converted..................

 

[Gnomey]

Nice pics Lanc, stole some for myself...

 

[CurzonDax]

that's the Mk.10 DC (Drone Controller) only two were converted..................

Are they target drones or recon drones. Just wondering if they are the same the US used.

:{)

 

[FLYBOYJ]

that's the Mk.10 DC (Drone Controller) only two were converted..................

Are they target drones or recon drones. Just wondering if they are the same the US used.

:{)

They were.....