right then, the comparision between the lanc and B-17, i've already had to prove countless people worng about this, so i'll jsut copy a post i made a while back
I don't have very extensive sources on the B-17, but the source I do have (the data I believe alder posted), states that the B-17 dropped 640,036 tons of bombs, however it does not give a time frame, this could include pre-war, and it does not give location, some of this tonnage could have been dropped over the pacific. This tonnage was dropped over 291,508 sorties (same source), so by my reckoning this is an average of 2.92 tons carried per sortie, and as far as I know the USAAF didn't use many, if any, incendiaries and no mines............
In comparison the Lancaster dropped 604,612 tons of bombs, all over Europe, all during wartime. Now whilst yes, this figure is lower than that of the B-17, the Lancaster also carried an amazing 51,513,105 incendiaries!! and when you consider the RAF's smallest incendiary weighed 4lbs, we're looking at least another 95,559 tons, in incendiaries, however as there were bigger incendiaries this figure will actually be higher. the current total for the lanc now stands at 700,171 tons, already higher than the tally for the B-17 (and all other bombers in Europe). Then (yes there's more) the Lancaster also laid over 12,000 sea mines, and we can assume the bulk of these were 1,850 lb parachute mines, so this is another 9,910 tons, bringing the total up to 710,081 tons! Whilst this is not all bombs, it is all offensive weapons loads, so the Lancaster did carry a greater tonnage than the B-17, it simply wasn't all bombs.
And if we take the Lancaster's final tonnage figure, and bear in mind the lanc made 156,308 operational sorties, the lanc carried, on average, 4.5 tons per sortie, however due to my calculations using the minimum figures, the actual number would be higher........
So to conclude, not only did the Lancaster carry more tonnage per sortie than any other plane in Europe, the lanc carried, when all offensive stores are taken into account, more tonnage than any other plane over Europe...........
And as a side note, the lanc also carried a further 6,684 tons of food to starving dutch people during operation manna of May 1945..........
And again, post war, the Lancaster carried a further 74,000 now ex-prisoners of war back to Britain...........
so the lanc carried a greater ammount of offensive stores than the B-17, and carried it in a fewer number of sorties, so on average the lanc carried more than the B-17 per sortie, quite important...........
next point, the Mk.XIV Computing bomb sight was just as accurate as the Norden, it's also worthy of note that it was 617Sqn, a squadron of lancs, that became the most accurate heavy bomber squadron of the war........
pbfoot said:
its plain to see using archaic radar and flares to mark a target is not quite as accurate as the mk 1 eyeball one couldn't even calculate wind drift
tell that to Wing Commander Cheshire, he didn't have any problems in his lanc over berlin at 100ft marking with flares, and the smoke he dropped allowed the crews to calculate wind drift, then ofcourse there was the pathfinding mossies and P-51s, campare this to B-17s in the day, often all the B-17s would drop their bombs when their bombing leader did, what does this mean? the first lot of bombs would be accurate, the bombs from the houndreds of planes behind wouldn't
wmaxt said:
A 2,000mi missiom the lanc needed a bombay fuel tank, the B-17 did not.
what exactily is your source for this exactly? because it's not true........
wmaxt said:
A 2,000mi mission the Lanc carried a 7,000lb bomb load, the B-17G carried 6,000lb bomb load, However if you remove the chin terret, the waist gunners and their support equipment for night work it could carry 2,000lb more, or 8,000lbs.
again a source for this would be nice.......
The ultimate range of the B-17 ig greater than the Lanc.
you know what i'm gonna ask for with this one
the Lanc fiew 166,000 sorties for ~4,000 losses for a 2.4% loss rate. The B-17 flew 450,000 sorties for a 4,754 loss for a rate of 1.05
those figures are about as accurate as CC's marksmanship, and what about the tonnage per plane lost? the lanc dropped 132 tons for eact plane lost, more than double the 51 tons per halibag lost, what about the B-17??