Was the B-17's Bomb Bay Really a Fatal Flaw? I'm Doubting the Lancaster's Superiority

[Alan Stevens]

I believe the difference between the brilliant Lancaster and the B-17, the most magnificent aircraft to ever fly, is that they were designed in different "eras" for different missions. The B-17 was designed around 1935(?) as a "patrol and defend the coastline" kind of plane for a theoretical war. The Lanc' was the result of an ongoing evolution of the Manchester (How much crap can we dump on the Baddies?) with actual war experience as part of the Lanc's design.
I hope we will be hearing from the folks who actually know what they're talking about.

The original 1935 B-17 didn't have all those turrets and guns that B-17F and G had. It was comparatively lightly armed. The last variant was almost a new design.

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

The original 1935 B-17 didn't have all those turrets and guns that B-17F and G had. It was comparatively lightly armed. The last variant was almost a new design.

I think that might be Rob's point, that evolution (from B-17D to -G, or from Manchester to Lanc, was a matter of the air forces adapting to combat conditions, equipment difficulties, and so on.

Neither the B-17D nor the Manchester were suitable for continued combat ops over NW Europe. The two companies, and air forces directing them, had different approaches to different difficulties.