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

[GrauGeist]

All Luftwaffe ammunition left tell tale traces of potato pollen and schnapps residue. an internet fact now you read it.

Fact!

Hi Dave - I wonder if I should have spellchecked 'hoes'?

lmao!!
I honestly didn't catch that typo - I was more interested in the content of the post and I suppose my subconscious fixed it as I read.

 

[pbehn]

There was a problem in Australia with the Australian Lee Enfield rifles where certain parts would not fit Lee Enfields made in the UK because the Lee Enfield inch was not the standard British inch.
If the US built Mosquitos this would probably cause no interchangeability problems on most parts but those with close tolerances would possibly not fit because of the minute difference in standards.

There are two issues, one is the standard system and another is the quality assurance control system.
QA/QC
It is possible for a company to operate and set its own standard, it only becomes an issue when something like what you describe happens. If someone decides to have their own inch measure different to everyone else then a cock up awaits. The Mars probe that was lost could have been constructed using the imperial system, or the metric system but by having contractors using both and being careless with units led to losing the whole thing. In my life at home a gallon is a gallon and it is an Imp. gal. Same for anyone in USA, it is a gallon but a US gal. On this forum you have to be specific because planes were built by both nations using their own measures.

 

[wuzak]

IMO - a mix of 2000# AP with 2000#HE would have been a far superior load out for B-17/B-24 against targets like Schweinfurt and Petroleum/synthetic plants.

This is what the British 2,000lb AP looked like.

OP 1665 - British Ordnance; Part1 - Aircraft Bombs and Pyrotechnics; Chapter 6 - Semi-Armor-Piercing and Armor-Piercing Bombs: A.P. 2,000-lb. Mks I, II, III and IV (Service)

It had a 9% charge to weight ratio.

Did the US have a 2,000lb AP bomb? I know they had the 1,600lb AP bomb.

How many 2,000lb bombs could the B-17 carry? From what I can tell, only 2 stations allow for 2,000lb GP bombs to be fitted internally, but they can load 2 x 1,000lb at the same time. These could be GP, or AP, or another 1,000lb bomb type.

But would you want the AP to fall after the GP bombs?

Up to 6 1,600lb AP could be carried. in overload condition. The two standard stations for the 1,600lb AP are lower than for the 2,000lb GP bomb, so you could put 1,000lb bombs in the same stations that are used when carrying the 2,000lb bombs.

If you do use AP bombs, won't they have less effect unless they are right on target?

 

[wuzak]

There are two issues, one is the standard system and another is the quality assurance control system.
QA/QC
It is possible for a company to operate and set its own standard, it only becomes an issue when something like what you describe happens. If someone decides to have their own inch measure different to everyone else then a cock up awaits. The Mars probe that was lost could have been constructed using the imperial system, or the metric system but by having contractors using both and being careless with units led to losing the whole thing. In my life at home a gallon is a gallon and it is an Imp. gal. Same for anyone in USA, it is a gallon but a US gal. On this forum you have to be specific because planes were built by both nations using their own measures.

One interesting thing for me reading D Deleted member 68059's booke was that the British and Americans used metric units for some things, and weren't afraid to mix units. Such as the amount of tetra-ethyl lead added to fuel was measured in cubic centimetres per gallon.

And IIRC, spark plugs used metric threads.

 

[pbehn]

One interesting thing for me reading D Deleted member 68059's booke was that the British and Americans used metric units for some things, and weren't afraid to mix units. Such as the amount of tetra-ethyl lead added to fuel was measured in cubic centimetres per gallon.

And IIRC, spark plugs used metric threads.

You should post "spoiler alert" that book is on my Christmas list lol.

It doesnt surprise me at all. Almost my whole life was spent inspecting pipes for gas and oil lines. Most was for the North Sea. In the British sector all pipes must bear the API logo for insurance purposes so they are ordered in inches and the grade is in PSI but the order and the final tally list are the only places I saw imperial units, all was in metric. Maximum length was 12.1m so they can fit in a standard 40ft container lol

I once had to use some ultrasonic scanning equipment to measure tank floor corrosion in Saudi Arabia. The equipment was state of the art but was from USA and only worked in inches. It was developed for the programme investigating the Space Shuttle boosters and security on it meant you couldnt change much. I am a Brit, I am used to inches and feet yards etc. But this fffing thing only used inches, 436.754 inches from datum and 324 "thou" from the surface didnt mean anything in my head at all, like sometimes seeing decimetre on a report.

 

[GrauGeist]

And IIRC, spark plugs used metric threads.

Not sure about other engine types, but the LS-85 spark plug used on Allison engines had a 14mm thread with a 1.25 thread pitch.

And like most spark plugs on automobile engines of the day (which also had a 14mm thread), it required a 13/16" or 21mm deep hex socket to remove/install.

 

[drgondog]

This is what the British 2,000lb AP looked like.

OP 1665 - British Ordnance; Part1 - Aircraft Bombs and Pyrotechnics; Chapter 6 - Semi-Armor-Piercing and Armor-Piercing Bombs: A.P. 2,000-lb. Mks I, II, III and IV (Service)

It had a 9% charge to weight ratio.

Did the US have a 2,000lb AP bomb? I know they had the 1,600lb AP bomb.

How many 2,000lb bombs could the B-17 carry? From what I can tell, only 2 stations allow for 2,000lb GP bombs to be fitted internally, but they can load 2 x 1,000lb at the same time. These could be GP, or AP, or another 1,000lb bomb type.

But would you want the AP to fall after the GP bombs?

Up to 6 1,600lb AP could be carried. in overload condition. The two standard stations for the 1,600lb AP are lower than for the 2,000lb GP bomb, so you could put 1,000lb bombs in the same stations that are used when carrying the 2,000lb bombs.

If you do use AP bombs, won't they have less effect unless they are right on target?

Good catch Wuzak. I suppose that 2000#GP vs 2000#AP with only 9% is a question to be pondered I have read several German accounts of US bombing that expressed opinions that the standard 500# GP was not very useful for major industrial targets.

 

[Deleted member 68059]

You should post "spoiler alert" that book is on my Christmas list lol.

It doesnt surprise me at all. Almost my whole life was spent inspecting pipes for gas and oil lines. Most was for the North Sea. In the British sector all pipes must bear the API logo for insurance purposes so they are ordered in inches and the grade is in PSI but the order and the final tally list are the only places I saw imperial units, all was in metric. Maximum length was 12.1m so they can fit in a standard 40ft container lol

I once had to use some ultrasonic scanning equipment to measure tank floor corrosion in Saudi Arabia. The equipment was state of the art but was from USA and only worked in inches. It was developed for the programme investigating the Space Shuttle boosters and security on it meant you couldnt change much. I am a Brit, I am used to inches and feet yards etc. But this fffing thing only used inches, 436.754 inches from datum and 324 "thou" from the surface didnt mean anything in my head at all, like sometimes seeing decimetre on a report.

It annoyed several readers that the units were all mixed up, "why cant you standardise them!" some said, "I cant" I replied, as they are quotations and they were mixing up all the units and measures in the original letters - if I had "edited" them to nicely match, no doubt someone would have noticed this was far too convenient and probably would have pointed out that I`d been doctoring original text. So you cant win, I opted for awkward but accurate originality.

 

[MiTasol]

All Luftwaffe ammunition left tell tale traces of potato pollen and schnapps residue. an internet fact now you read it.

You are right. Abraham Lincoln said so.
But then again he also said you cannot believe everything you read on the internet.

 

[pbehn]

It annoyed several readers that the units were all mixed up, "why cant you standardise them!" some said, "I cant" I replied, as they are quotations and they were mixing up all the units and measures in the original letters - if I had "edited" them to nicely match, no doubt someone would have noticed this was far too convenient and probably would have pointed out that I`d been doctoring original text. So you cant win, I opted for awkward but accurate originality.

I havnt got the book yet but to me such things add another dimension, these men were extraordinarily clever, flitting between units is done without thinking because they think differently.

 

[MiTasol]

Not sure about other engine types, but the LS-85 spark plug used on Allison engines had a 14mm thread with a 1.25 thread pitch.

And like most spark plugs on automobile engines of the day (which also had a 14mm thread), it required a 13/16" or 21mm deep hex socket to remove/install.

The vast majority of aircraft engines use 18mm threads but the odd one used 14mm and one engine I have worked on, cant remember which but maybe the Walter in the Meta Sokol, used 10mm plugs.
The harness thread is usually 5/8-24 or 9/16-27 but the odd one used 5/8 something - can remember - must be getting old. That of course means every plug has metric at one end and non metric at the other.

 

[special ed]

Most model T ford engines spark plugs were tapered pipe thread. I keep one to confuse the young ones.

 

[GrauGeist]

Most model T ford engines spark plugs were tapered pipe thread. I keep one to confuse the young ones.

My 1919 Metz Express truck had four beautiful spark plugs.
When I say beautiful, I mean it - these things were a work of art.
The steel hexagonal base (that was trimmed in red enamel) gave way to an upward tapering green hexagonal porcelain that was topped by an ornate brass cap (that had a thin red enamel pin-stripe around it's circumference), which had a brass stud and a large, knurled thumbscrew for the 10 gauge stranded wire's eyelet.

 

[NevadaK]

My 1919 Metz Express truck had four beautiful spark plugs.
When I say beautiful, I mean it - these things were a work of art.
The steel hexagonal base (that was trimmed in red enamel) gave way to an upward tapering green hexagonal porcelain that was topped by an ornate brass cap (that had a thin red enamel pin-stripe around it's circumference), which had a brass stud and a large, knurled thumbscrew for the 10 gauge stranded wire's eyelet.

Somewhat like this? Not quite the same, but tapered green porcelain.

 

[nuuumannn]

You're correct of course for flush rivet ED, the pan head rivet will meet requirements with 1 1/2 Dia.

Yup, indeed, dome headed rivets having the 1.5 dia ED, but we used to standardise everything on 2D when I worked in the structures bay. Not my forte, but I can bang a panel together when need be. I built an ali letter box out of wasted sheet metal parts from the scrap bin after a tree fell on my original one and crushed it...

 

[GrauGeist]

Somewhat like this? Not quite the same, but tapered green porcelain.View attachment 648598

Yes, similar to that, though the porcelain had an inward curve to the taper as well as being a bit taller.

Great photo!

 

[MCamp]

Yeah, I already pointed out that the figure is obviously very limited and the damage radius would depend on many factors. I'm not making any precise claim on how big a crater was anyway, but more the figure on what the radius of destruction was. Again, with the caveat that obviously 'destruction' means something different for many different types of structures.

Nevertheless, it's quite clear that if only 20% of the bombs are falling within 1,000 feet / 300 meters of their target, that is a fairly low ratio of bombs actually hitting the target. Maybe it's 2%, maybe it's 5%, maybe it's 7%. But it's low. And that means a lot of missions before the target is actually destroyed.

And I think the Mosquitos were doing quite a bit better than that.

Seems to me it depends on the size of the target. a refinery, factory, ball bearing plant are all likely to contain things worth damaging in a thousand foot circle many would be a thousand feet by themselves

 

[WARSPITER]

The disruptive effect must also be noted in conjunction with accuracy. Misses around a factory still damaged other infrastructure
and would also have been a pain as transport access would often be blocked as well. UXB's would also need to cleared.

 

[MiTasol]

My 1919 Metz Express truck had four beautiful spark plugs.
When I say beautiful, I mean it - these things were a work of art.
The steel hexagonal base (that was trimmed in red enamel) gave way to an upward tapering green hexagonal porcelain that was topped by an ornate brass cap (that had a thin red enamel pin-stripe around it's circumference), which had a brass stud and a large, knurled thumbscrew for the 10 gauge stranded wire's eyelet.

That makes it a much later plug. The original was mica insulator and mica plugs were still in use in the USAAF into 1942 and maybe later.
Porcelain plugs were first patented in the 30's
This is the oldest I found several years back as part of dating a wreck.

 

[Geoffrey Sinclair]

I'm ot familiar with Ellis, What are his soucess? Does he define loss as MIA (failed to return), or MIA plus Cat E/Salvage? How does he define Combats?

You need to contact Ellis. I do not have a copy of the book, only some notes from it. The theme is the allies were not that intelligent and largely buried the axis under a pile of stuff. He has another book with a focus on data, John Ellis, WWII A Statistical survey.

I'll have to re-read to see if you have the context correct, but if so - what a sloppy way to draw a conclusion regarding timing and comprehensiveness of LW upgunning from machine gun (MG 17??) to 20 and 30mm. The primary replacement to cowl mounted machine cannon from machine gun on Bf 109 and Fw 190 and Me 110/210/410 occured in early 1943 for virtualy all Day Fighters opposed to 8th AF. The MG 17 7.92mm was long gone in 1943. I wonder how many friendly fire hoes from surrounding M2 50 caliber were counted?

Apart from the rifle calibre machine guns the FW190A-3 in spring 1942 upgraded the armament to 2 high velocity and 2 low velocity 20mm cannon, Fw190A-6 was the upgrade to 4 high velocity 20mm cannon in June 1943, the A-7 introduced the heavy machine guns in late 1943. Production difficulties held up fitting the 30mm to Bf109, how many 30mm cannon equipped German fighters were there through 1943 and 1944, most histories note the rockets were the 1943 answer and the 30mm as the 1944 answer.

Perhaps for the Bf109 two of the 20mm cannon were add ons? Best avoided to keep performance, then comes the gap between production and making it to the units, the way on 30 April 1945 the 15th AF had 46 P-51B, 62 C and 251 D, the P-38 units 58J and 201 L. While the B-24 units had G, H, J, L, M models. The 16 October 1943 Luftwaffe response included Bf109E and F from the training units. See Caldwell.

As for counting friendly holes that was going on and for the 8th Air Force at least 3 B-24 and 5 B-17 are listed as shot down by other USAAF heavy bombers. Another B-17 shot itself down and a B-24 destroyed itself during a pre flight gun test. A larger number were lost after being hit by friendly bombs.

Bovine fecal matter tenderly cooled with flailing. USSBS did perhaps the best they could given the facts at and.

Your cuisine is your decision. So obviously having read the USSBS report in question, what are the shortcomings?

A better summary in my opinion combines Don Caldwell's table for LW losses on August 17 are 42 lost/27 damaged to all operational reasons including 9-1-8 single and T/e fighters to P-47 escort. His sources included Schmid, Prien and so many other German and Brit sources, as well as McF/N and Craven, Wesley and Cates, USAF HRC studies,
Taking B-17s Claims and losses per 8th AF Summary Reports used by both Freeman and McFarland/Newton were 36-3-118 for 1st BW and 24-1-50 for 4th BW, Between 1st and 4th BW, the claims for LW aircraft were 148-18-63 and 140-19-36. Total Bomber claims = 288-37-99 --------> compared to 42-27 reported by LW to both Fighters and bombers. If US Fighters, with much more rigorous examination of claims is assumed '0" then Bomber over claim is ~ 7:1.

8th FC claims were 19-3-4 for loss of 3. Asume for moment that 56th/78th and 353rd FG claims of 19-3-4 were further reduced by Victory Credits Board (source of USAF 85) to 19-0-9 and that they are accurate correspondence with LW losses. Subtract 19 from 42 (LW reported loss) = 23 remaining for B-17

288/23 = ~12.5:1 overclaim for B-17 on August 17, 1943..

Interesting Donald Caldwell uses the USAAF Statistical Digest for bomber losses, not the David Osborne B-17 list, published a decade before. Plus all those web sites dedicated to the individual bomb groups.

So RAF fighters are listed as scored zero kills from 14 claims, the USAAF ones 9 from 19 claims, then out of 42 reported Luftwaffe fighter losses 33 lost to bomber fire, versus 288 claims.

From British Intelligence in World War II (Hinsley), talking about how the RAF tightened up on kill claims, January to June 1943, the RAF fighter command allowed 249 kill claims against Luftwaffe fighters, the true number of kills was 235.

Having dug further into the loss list for 17 August 1943, cross checked against group web sites, 3 lost to battle damage, 3 lost to flak and fighter, 49 to fighters, 6 to flak, 1 to fuel starvation, 1 to Mechanical failure over the Mediterranean after being hit by flak and fighters, total 63 or in other words 33 fighters to 49 bombers, plus shares.

And skip the 14 October raid, after all Caldwell ups the Luftwaffe fighter losses to 53 (though 51 losses is the activity table total) of which 13 claimed by US fighters, versus 186 kill claims by the bombers, assuming every US fighter claim is correct, 40 to 186, under 5 to 1 overclaim, if 6 of the fighter claims are correct 46 to 186 or 4 to 1 overclaim.

Caldwell has 36 Bf109, 10 Bf110, 3 Fw190, 2 Me410 lost, the Luftwaffe quartermaster has 33 Bf109, 3 Bf110, 3 Fw190, 1 Me410, the Bf110 difference is effectively the 6 losses from II/ZG26 (Quartermaster has another 7 Bf109 and 1 Bf110 lost to non combat causes on operations)

Updated B-17 losses, 3 Battle Damage, 2 flak and fighter, 54 fighter, 5 flak, 1 fuel starvation, 1 landing accident, 3 mechanical failure, total 69. Caldwell says 60 B-17 lost, Freeman says 60 lost, 7 Category E.

Using Caldwell, 53 or 51 fighters lost versus 54 B-17 plus shares to Luftwaffe fighters, even if all 13 USAAF fighter claims are correct out of 51 losses, that leaves 38 to 54+shares, under 2 to 3 fighter to bomber.

tell me why YOU believe that LW day fighters were not upgunned to 15mm/20mm and 30mm cannon from early 1943 forward?

Good to know your ability to misunderstand things is still other people's fault. The ratio of cannon to machine gun hits (note no calibre of machine gun was reported but the cannon are reported as 20mm) shows the upgunning.

Tell me again about 'hole counting science' that YOU believe is statistically significant to postulate prsence of machine gun to cannon ratio of returned bombers with battle damage - and perhaps methods to differentiate from a.) exploding 20mm shrapnel or b,) Splinters from heavy flak, or c.) Friendly Fire from fighters and bombers?

I believe that is what you call a homework assignment, for you to find and consult the relevant 8th Air Force damage reports. Rather than me boring you with more deathless prose. I note the German 20mm had contact fuses, the majority of the US aircraft present did not mount cannon.