What if America built De Havilland Mosquitoes instead of the B-17 Flying Fortress?

[Donald Johnson]

Ah. Revisionist history. That will work.

Useful Revisionism seeks to understand the decisions made given information then available. It's not Monday Morning quarterbacking as much as it is determining the key players and overriding (often inhibiting) philosophies. Decision-making bureaucracies have to absorb input from engineers and pilots, it's most valuable intellectual resources, to move forward. (My recent experience driving United pilots in Houston suggest that this lesson still hasn't been learned).

Could this same narrowness of the military mind have contributed to the F-35 $1.6 trillion boondoggle, a backwards-looking, soon-to-be-obsolete concept that just won't die?

 

[Donald Johnson]

Not true - from the time he saw the Me262 fly in 1943 he envisioned it as a "Schnellbomber" and it could be debated that this insistence of the 262 being deployed as a bomber actually sped up it's introduction.

That's not consistent with this assertion:

>>Fortunately for the British, too few Me-262s were assigned to the air-superiority role, since Hitler wanted Schnellbombers. And for that, we can thank the Mosquito. When a single Mosquito flew a photorecon mission over Berlin in March 1943 and was fruitlessly chased by several Me-109s and Fw-190s, the Führer decided that, by God, he was going to have a fleet of superfast light bombers, and the 262 reluctantly accepted a role for which it was never intended.

Hermann Göring was another Mosquito fan. "In 1940 I could fly as far as Glasgow in most of my aircraft, but not now!" he famously said. "It makes me furious when I see the Mosquito. I turn green and yellow with envy. The British, who can afford aluminum better than we can, knock together a beautiful wooden aircraft that every piano factory over there is building….They have the geniuses and we have the nincompoops."<<

The Miraculous Mosquito

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Elliott Roosevelt, (a drinking buddy of Vance Chipman) campaigned for this according to a Wikipedia article:

>>Elliott (with a pilot) flew the first U.S. reconnaissance missions over the theater in a borrowed RAF de Havilland Mosquito. This led to a long campaign for the U.S. adoption of this British aircraft, as Elliott held the American counterparts (modified Boeing B-17Cs and early Lockheed P-38s) to be inadequate and unlikely to survive in contested airspace.<<

Well they got that one wrong, didn't they?

No, I do not fully understand the procurement process, an essential element in deciding priorities then and in the future.

Well do some research - you'll find that most of the time it's the government (the customer) drives the boat more than what people believe.

I had a college professor assert that at the beginning, wars are always prepared for with the last war's tactics. It's the transition from peacetime, backwards thinking to futuristic projection that determines the rate of innovation. Did we have some stumbling blocks? We need to know.

Well said...

 

[buffnut453]

Could this same narrowness of the military mind have contributed to the F-35 $1.6 trillion boondoggle, a backwards-looking, soon-to-be-obsolete concept that just won't die?

"Backwards-looking" and yet it's the most game-changing combat aircraft to enter service since the advent of guided air-to-air missiles?

Oh, and it's a boondoggle that's been bought into by a great many of America's key allies, thus enhancing interoperability as shown by the deployment of USMC F-35Bs aboard HMS Queen Elizabeth, operating alongside their RAF counterparts.

Precisely what will make the F-35 obsolete? Enquiring minds would like to know.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

That's not consistent with this assertion:

>>Fortunately for the British, too few Me-262s were assigned to the air-superiority role, since Hitler wanted Schnellbombers. And for that, we can thank the Mosquito. When a single Mosquito flew a photorecon mission over Berlin in March 1943 and was fruitlessly chased by several Me-109s and Fw-190s, the Führer decided that, by God, he was going to have a fleet of superfast light bombers, and the 262 reluctantly accepted a role for which it was never intended.

Hermann Göring was another Mosquito fan. "In 1940 I could fly as far as Glasgow in most of my aircraft, but not now!" he famously said. "It makes me furious when I see the Mosquito. I turn green and yellow with envy. The British, who can afford aluminum better than we can, knock together a beautiful wooden aircraft that every piano factory over there is building….They have the geniuses and we have the nincompoops."<<

The Miraculous Mosquito

You're basing this on one article with no references to historical facts! Goring's answer to the Mosquito was the Ta 154.

 

[GrauGeist]

First of all, never rely on Wikipedia. Ever.
Anyone can edit it without benefit of peer review.
Secondly, Americans were involved in observing the European theater long before mid-1941, when the first few Mosquito's became operational. Double-check the timeline to see when the Mossie made high-speed recon missions, you may be surprised. The Spitfire and others were in use way before that point in time.

In regards to the F-35, it appears you've fallen victim to the media hype. Don't feel bad, though - this has been going on as long as the mitary has been appropriating aircraft. Next time you read an artical about the F-35, replace the word "F-35" with "F-16" or "B-1" or even "B-36" and you'll have a diatribe that's virtually verbatim.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Could this same narrowness of the military mind have contributed to the F-35 $1.6 trillion boondoggle, a backwards-looking, soon-to-be-obsolete concept that just won't die?

This $1.6 trillion boondoggle now outnumbers F-15s and A-10 in the USAF inventory. Once again you're citing information from the mis-informed or detractors that know little or nothing of how this machine actually works.

 

[GrauGeist]

Precisely what will make the F-35 obsolete? Enquiring minds would like to know.

The Iranian Quahar 313 - complete with a pioneer tape deck in the dash. It's been shocking and aweing the world since 2013...

 

[Donald Johnson]

This $1.6 trillion boondoggle now outnumbers F-15s and A-10 in the USAF inventory. Once again you're citing information from the mis-informed or detractors that know little or nothing of how this machine actually works.

Multiple sources are confirming that it is expensive to operate, buggy, and too often not combat-ready:

>>Those who live by technology die by it too. Unsurprisingly, the F-35's 8 million lines of code are buggy, as are the 24 million lines running the aircraft's maintenance and logistics software on the ground. Sometimes pilots have to press Ctrl+Alt+Delete while in flight to reboot the multimillion-dollar radar. The F-35 computer code, government auditors say, is "as complicated as anything on earth." What can be coded can also be hacked, another vulnerability for the F-35.<<

The F-35 tells everything that's broken in the Pentagon

 

[Donald Johnson]

"Backwards-looking" and yet it's the most game-changing combat aircraft to enter service since the advent of guided air-to-air missiles?

Oh, and it's a boondoggle that's been bought into by a great many of America's key allies, thus enhancing interoperability as shown by the deployment of USMC F-35Bs aboard HMS Queen Elizabeth, operating alongside their RAF counterparts.

Precisely what will make the F-35 obsolete? Enquiring minds would like to know.

As relating to the issue of the forward-looking Mosquito being dismissed by backwards-thinkers, the F-35 is a piloted plane whose days are numbered:

>>The F-35 project has been troubled from the start and the future of jet planes is in doubt. Many believe the F-35 will be the last jet plane. But piloted planes retain an air of necessity in the military. A recent Rand study published by the Air Force Times reports that former pilots, over every other classification, have been promoted to positions of power, shaping debate about the future of jet planes. The current commander at Truax, Col. Erik Peterson, comes from this background.

The chief of staff of the Air Force, Gen. David Goldfein, believes that the future of fighting adversaries is cyber warfare. This, along with missile technology and drones, are what the future holds — not fighter jet planes. The romantic image of dogfighting is no longer reality.<<

Opinion | The F-35 is already obsolete

 

[GrauGeist]

The Hill as a source??
Seriously??

For the love of God, stop.

Want to learn about the F-35 from reliable sources, read this thread. Tons of citations, legitimate sources and input from people who have actually worked on yhe project:
some F35 info

 

[Donald Johnson]

You're basing this on one article with no references to historical facts! Goring's answer to the Mosquito was the Ta 154.

HistoryNet is a goto for high school history teachers seeking to develop controversial history topics for students to explore. If you can find a source that contradicts this, I'd like to see it.

I recall articles written in my youth that the Me 262, handicapped as it was by its range, would never have made a useful bomber, that it's utility as a fighter posed a far greater strategic threat to our bombers and fighters, and that Hitler's insistence delayed it.

 

[Donald Johnson]

The Hill as a source??
Seriously??

For the love of God, stop.

Want to learn about the F-35 from reliable sources, read this thread. Tons of citations, legitimate sources and input from people who have actually worked on yhe project:
some F35 info

Cenciotti is an enthusiast, not an objective analyst.

The Hill is a conservative-leaning, fairly sensible and objective publication. The progressive Left wants the F-35 scrapped altogether. Meanwhile, Elon Musk proclaims:

>>At a recent US Air Force Association conference, Elon Musk, creator of the SpaceX reusable rocket, told thousands of fighter pilots that 'the fighter jet era has passed'.<<

Dead Stealth: What Happens if Fighters Like the F-35 Are Obsolete?

 

[GrauGeist]

HistoryNet is a goto for high school history teachers seeking to develop controversial history topics for students to explore. If you can find a source that contradicts this, I'd like to see it.

I recall articles written in my youth that the Me 262, handicapped as it was by its range, would never have made a useful bomber, that it's utility as a fighter posed a far greater strategic threat to our bombers and fighters, that Hitler's insistence delayed it.

When the Me262 was being demonstrated to Hitler, he turned to Messerschmitt and asked if it could be a Schnell bomber and Willy immediately said "Yes!". In Nazi Germany, yes was always the right answer, even if it was not.
At the time of this demonstration, the Arado Ar234 was preparing to go into production. Originally conceived as a high-speed recon aircraft, the Ar234 became the world's first jet bomber - Hitler could have had that instead.
The Henschel Hs132 was also in the works, it was a dedicated dive-bomber that was a bit larger than the Heinkel He162. Again, another bomber.

There was no need to modify the Me262A-1a into a bomber other than to placate the Fuhrer.
To back up a few years, Heinkel introduced the world's first combat jet, the He280, which was a true fighter with it's first flight in 1941, when the Me262 was still in the prototype stage (and a year away from flying under jet power) and the RLM yawned at it, even though it could have been in production by 1942 save for the engine issues.

There's alot more than meets the eye when it comes to the German jet program and the typical info on the internet...

 

[Donald Johnson]

When the Me262 was being demonstrated to Hitler, he turned to Messerschmitt and asked if it could be a Schnell bomber and Willy immediately said "Yes!". In Nazi Germany, yes was always the right answer, even if it was not.
At the time of this demonstration, the Arado Ar234 was preparing to go into production. Originally conceived as a high-speed recon aircraft, the Ar234 became the world's first jet bomber - Hitler could have had that instead.
The Henschel Hs132 was also in the works, it was a dedicated dive-bomber that was a bit larger than the Heinkel He162. Again, another bomber.

There was no need to modify the Me262A-1a into a bomber other than to placate the Fuhrer.
To back up a few years, Heinkel introduced the world's first combat jet, the He280, which was a true fighter with it's first flight in 1941, when the Me262 was still in the prototype stage (and a year away from flying under jet power) and the RLM yawned at it, even though it could have been in production by 1942 save for the engine issues.

There's alot more than meets the eye when it comes to the German jet program and the typical info on the internet...

Again, as a retired history teacher looking for ways to inspire students to research and extrapolate, I need to know if the sources in common usage (Historynet is aggressively "out there") are wrong. Unfortunately, too few have access to this forum and these experts.

I'm keenly interested in the proliferation of spotty sources on the Internet which is why I'm here discussing this issue. Were we being fed propaganda in the past? That is an issue for students to explore as well.

 

[pbehn]

Going by memory, there was a single Mossie bombing mission to the Politz oil refinery in Poland. It was escorted by 4 P-51Ds. Don't recall dates other than it was conducted in winter.
Reason I recall this, is because they were jumped by Me262s and narrowly escaped.

Its on the Mosquito web page 21 January German Jet Encounters

 

[pbehn]

Operation Carthage was also an escorted mission - Mustang Mk.IIIs being used. 4 Mosquitoes and 2 Mustangs were lost in that raid.

One of the Mosquitoes crashed after hitting a lamp post.

Thanks, there were many things I could have put in, like on the Amiens raid Typhoons were involved, a follow up mission to photograph Amiens prison involved 2 PR mosquitos and 4 Typhoons, one typhoon was damaged by flak at the coast and two others damaged with a pilot injured. Never repeat a surprise raid.

 

[pbehn]

As relating to the issue of the forward-looking Mosquito being dismissed by backwards-thinkers, the F-35 is a piloted plane whose days are numbered:

There were many designs that were forward looking, the idea of a "fast bomber" is as old as bombers themselves. The Blenheim and Do-17 were fast when introduced. Actually doing it is another thing. The Mosquito was as advanced as the P-51 in its own way but if the Germans had it it would not have been as successful, The UK isnt continental Europe and UK defences werent the same as the Germans had in Europe.

 

[wuzak]

Going by memory, there was a single Mossie bombing mission to the Politz oil refinery in Poland. It was escorted by 4 P-51Ds. Don't recall dates other than it was conducted in winter.
Reason I recall this, is because they were jumped by Me262s and narrowly escaped.

Its on the Mosquito web page 21 January German Jet Encounters

The Mosquito was a PR version, not a bomber.

 

[Snautzer01]

Again, as a retired history teacher looking for ways to inspire students to research and extrapolate, I need to know if the sources in common usage (Historynet is aggressively "out there") are wrong. Unfortunately, too few have access to this forum and these experts.

I'm keenly interested in the proliferation of spotty sources on the Internet which is why I'm here discussing this issue. Were we being fed propaganda in the past? That is an issue for students to explore as well.

Hi,
Take this in mind when viewing internet sources
Many books written in the not that ancient past use the same sources. An awfull lot of them are surpassed with more and other archive source material wich can and will frequently change viewpoints.
The fan boy sites. Those have an agenda. They think airplane x is the best and listen to no reason. Not from real live pilots to manuals to documents. Blind but stubburn.
Propaganda. Try to find here on this board the discussion on the P-61 nightfighter. For all sorts of reasons as Dana Bell explained it was not that a great plane. In fact it was far less then great. But period documents would make one believe it was great. Only after really researching and digging one can get another more realistic opinion. And this is not just 1 case.
Interpretation of facts. Somehow people see the same charts in different ways or come to a totally different view on the same subject i.g could the luftwaffe have won the battle of Brittain or the p-51 won the war. Not only armchair generals will fight over these kinds of subjects but even professional historians.
Writers. Not all writers stick to facts some (Caitlin i.g. ) have quite a big thumb. Or just want to sell books and juice up history with imagination
Now if you really want to teach youngsters, show them how archives work. Let them chase the sources of the books they read. That will be interesting, and let them try to find new material. Tons of it still waiting.

If one would try to do research only based in internet sites, wiki etc one would risk a very bad research outcome.