|
|
#1
03-13-2007, 06:52 PM
|
||||
|
||||
ww2 bombers
Ok... let me start out like this i think the b-17 was a good bomber back in the day and it did very good in the air with combat against b-24s but the lancaster was one of the best british bombers there ever could be and..... i am so proud enough that they had done well in the war (the british) im not british thought lol....but the point is i just want an oppinion on which bomber was your favorete?
thx.. 
|
|
#2
03-13-2007, 07:00 PM
|
||||
|
||||
Lots O Bombs
I think that the Lancaster may have it. It deffinately holds its own with the bomb load, 5000 more pounds than the B-17 if im not mistaken. Then again it didn't have the best deffences or speed. I think it only had 7 gun positions. Still its a hard choice.
|
|
#3
03-13-2007, 07:46 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
honestly i am still in love with super-fortress. Alot were shot down because american's did a brute force daytime bombing raids trying to smash german infrastructure into apple sauce.
Lancasters mainly flew at night. Brits did not have the resources nor industrial capability to make day-time bombing and replace losses on a scale US did. So my favorite: Superfortress!
__________________
Silly human, you cannot harm a twinkie.
|
|
#4
03-13-2007, 08:02 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Got to admit it
you know what dude your right! England did not have the best industrial power and they did only do night raids so thumbs up to the americans for doing those daylight raids.
Last edited by CFcops : 04-10-2007 at 12:56 PM.
|
|
#5
03-13-2007, 08:09 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
did they?
Did the lancasters always fly at night? like i thought they flew in the daytime to? oh well i might be wrong because i seen some videos of lancasters flyin at day time on there way to bomb Germany i think.
|
|
#6
03-14-2007, 05:45 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
lancansters mainly flew at night and bombed heavy industrial targets. UK had a high success with mosquito which flew during the day and night and functioned as fighter and as a bomber
__________________
Silly human, you cannot harm a twinkie.
|
|
#7
03-14-2007, 08:51 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
yes... that is the truth, mosquito was a good fighter bomber and i can't BELIEVE that it was made of wood. But it was like that for a good reason.....so the enemy did not detect them with their radar. I like it...
|
|
#8
03-16-2007, 07:33 AM
|
||||
|
||||
Lancaster's finest quality is the bombload, but also indirectly lead to it's number one disadvantage- no belly turret.Lancasters were very vulnerable from underneath and german nightfighters exploited that. Many were shot down beacuse of that. My vote also goes to the superfortress.That plane could absorb so much punishment and still return home. I don't think it had a rival in that matter.
|
|
#9
04-01-2007, 03:25 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
dident the b-24 fly higher then the lancaster??
|
|
#10
08-11-2008, 11:58 AM
|
||||
|
||||
Lancaster
The Lancaster Only had 3 defensive gun positions Nose 2, Dorsal 2 Tail 4, All hese guns were small caliber ( 303) browning , & did not have the hitting power of Cannons. The British bombed at night after heavy losses of bombers during daylight raids at the begining of ww2. However these losses were also due to the Quality of there early bombers i.e. Whitleys, Hamdens & Battles.These bombers were slow & poorly armed & nota match for Lufftwaffe 109's& 110.fighters. The British continued with night bombing even after the introduction of their 4 Engined Heavy bombers, The Lancaster, Halifax & Stirling. When America entered the bombing war they thought they would
 try precision bombing using heavily defended (50cal cannon) bombers , during the day.Using Box formations. Both methods had successes & losses.It also meant that 24 hour bombing could be maintained against enemy targets.
__________________
The Past is another place! They do things differently there.....
|
 |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Linear Mode
