Which was better the B-17 or the B-24 in Europe

Which was the better bomber for the allies in Europe

  • Total voters
    33
  • Poll closed .

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

I believe they were more accurate at night then the 8th was during the day although neither side USAAF or Bomber Command could hit a cow in the ass with a scoop shovel
 
I've heard some say both planes did a good job as bait to bring the LW up to the P-47's P-51's.
 
I voted for the B-17, while the B-24 was faster, and could carry a greater bomb load, I believe from what I've read on the two types that crews found her an extremely demanding aircraft to fly,both because she had very heavy controls and because her low speed characteristics were quite dangerous, and also experienced lots of snags as result of design inadequacies that were just not there on the B-17. If you read Ernest K. Gann's "Fate is the Hunter", you'll see from a pilot's perspective what the shortcomings of the Liberator were.

Either way, both aircraft were legendary.
 

An observation but the B17C as used first by the RAF was shot full of bugs that made it close to usless. An interesting question is that if the RAF hadn't first used one in action what would the USAAF have been trying to use in action?
 
pbfoot said:
I believe they were more accurate at night then the 8th was during the day although neither side USAAF or Bomber Command could hit a cow in the ass with a scoop shovel
Click to expand...

No entirely true Neil.
All the precision bomber attacks ( Dam Busters etc) were carried out by the RAF.
John
 
In a word? UNSUSTAINABLE. Even with the B-17E, losses were bad enough to make many question the wisdom of daylight bombing. The earlier C-variant would surely have fared worse than the E because of it's poorer defensive armament.
 

Great thread. Like these stats that Jabberwocky found. Surely a USAAF General / GAF would be swayed by these (assuming that it was intelligence that was coming back to them at the time)?
 
I voted for the B-17 along the same reasoning as Alta Hase and I've heard that the Fortress was a better and stable platform thanthe Lib.

I'll try to fix the spelling mistake in the thread title!
 

What's the source of those "average" CEP figures for the B-17 and B-24? I'm assuming they come from tests rather than from operational statistics?

As for the CEP issue, remember that part of the problem was actually identifying the right target. Quite often errors by the lead navigator and bombardier would result in the bombs being dropped miles away from the intended target. Also note that the lateral separation within a large formation, coupled with bomb "wobble" as they fall, would result in bombs hitting the ground a considerable distance from where the lead bombardier was aiming, even if he was looking at the right target. Finally, remember that only a few aircraft were actually fitted with Norden bombsights - the rest of the formation simply toggled their weapons when the lead dropped his bombs. Overall, I'm surprised the figure of 8% falling more than 5 miles from the target isn't a larger percentage.
 
I don't know the figures by type but as they used the same bomb sight and bombed from a similar altitude I would expect the results to be similar.

In the Paper on the Allied bombing offensive there is the following quote re USAAF Accuracy

This quote is from the "United States Strategic Bombing Survey. Summary Report. Washington Sept 1945"

'Conventionally the air forces designated as "the target area" a circle having a
radius of 1000 feet around the aiming point of attack. While accuracy improved during the war, Survey studies
show that, in the over-all, only about 20% of the bombs aimed at precision targets fell within this
target area. A peak accuracy of 70% was reached for the month of February 1945. These are important facts
for the reader to keep in mind, especially when considering the tonnages of bombs delivered by the air
forces. Of necessity a far larger tonnage was carried than hit German installations."

With the average being 20% over a 1000 ft point of the target I do not believe that the B17/B24 averaged 38.2% or 28.2% its a mathmatical impossibility

The link if anyone would like review the paper that contains this quote is

NOTE Best viewed with screen realization 1024 x 768,
 
No doubt they are an average of all raids. However you cannot pick and choose in war what the weather/opposition/dumb luck will be and the average is the average. I have little doubt that in perfect weather, no opposition and low altitude most airforces are going to get good results.

If people want to debate which plane/bomb sight/airforce is the best then it can only be (in my view) in all conditions.

There is another thought. If the USAAF had a peak result of 70% in one month which is by any standards an excellent result, they must have had some dreadful months to get the average down to 20%
 
If am I not wrong I told it somewhere but not sure where...Willi Reschke told me (and writes the same in his book) that Lib was an easy target while Fort was a hard nut. And W. R. has 20 four engine bombers on his credit.

But this is only one point of view...resistance.

In general, both bombers had its own positives and negatives. But they both helped to bring a peace to the world. I personally like Fort but would never say that Lib was worse. There are several discussions like that on inet and they never came to an end. Never try to tell a B-17 vet that Lib was better otherwise all the hell brakes loose and viceversa
 
flying at different altitudes and of course for the LW pilot/crew what were they flying engaging both bomber types from the rear ? in my case having interviewed a few fellows they all said if the attack was determined and with authority neither is any tougher to bring down. without US escorts the bomber formations are helpless
 

True.

MG 151/20 was a game changer.

I couldn't imagine sitting in the left seat and watching through the windscreen as cab-ranked Fw 190's came through the formation from 12 o'clock.

Can you say "pucker factor"?

Kudo's to those that made it through...bigger ones to those that didn't.

Not a nice place to be in 1943.
 
B-24. Love those 7-league boots enabling a wider range of applications, but then I am considerng the Atlantic Ocean as included with the "in Europe." As I understand it, the B-24's flying from Lages and other North and Central Atlantic bases closed the 'gap' before the arrival of the ASW escort carriers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

A
Best British single engined radial aircraft in WW2?
2
Replies
23
Views
2K
nuuumannn
A
Is Mig 21 Better For Fight
2
Replies
20
Views
2K
Zipper730
Second best fighter of World War II
Replies
15
Views
925
SaparotRob
  • Poll
Which was better
Replies
5
Views
823
Supermarine-SpitfireMkXIV
  • Poll
AH-4 Apache vs black hawk
2 3 4
Replies
76
Views
4K
Thumpalumpacus
Menu
Log in
Register