The Best Bombers of WWII

Site Issues 2007 Archive Room
#81

Cash wrote:

I used two sources - The Bomber Command War Diaries, page 376.
The Bomber Command War Diaries wrote:
In winter, individual Mosquitoes were sometimes able to make 2 flights to Berlin under the cover of darkness in the same night, changing crews after the first landing.

Bomber Command Handbook, page 65.
Bomber Command Handbook wrote:
It was with Bomber Command’s Light Night Striking Force that the Mosquito achieved the most dramatic results, often flying to Berlin and back twice in one night to drop 4,000lb Blockbuster Bombs.

Strange how the BCWD uses the word “sometimes” whereas the BCH uses the word “often”. To me these different words suggest a bit of urban myth. No doubt there were some COs who went for the maximum effort of two trips in one night it doesn’t sound like it was Bomber Command policy to do so though. Certainly the latter day crabs I have flown with are too keen to get to their 5 star hotels and BA air hostesses to consider doing two sorties in one night :wink:

#82

if we think about

strategic materials savings and cost of production.

range / fuel consumption.

Crew losses (max 2), including in OTU’s and development units.

Aircraft losses - (one of the better records among WWII aircraft.)

Accuracy of bombing achieved, as in NOT over Texas!

Weight of bombs/HE delivered.

IF all the above scores are taken against the number of sorties achieved,

then …

I would expect the Mosquito BMkIV would come out way ahead, of any other bomber type. It was ‘half serously’ put among the Air Staff if dropping prod’n of the Lanc and Halifax might not be a good idea.

IIRC the Pathfinder BMkIV’s, and ‘own unit’ marker Mossies (Viz Cheshire), had specially tuned engines on very lean mixtures increasing their endurance and allowing loitering over targets.

IIRC - When Le May decided to fly the B29’s low and carrying mostly incendiaries, the remote turrets - whose performance really was problematic - were not fully manned/ammo’d up, only the tail stinger 20mm was.

This was done to improve endurance / lower fuel consumption / increase bomb load.

No other bomber had an uninterrupted bomb-bay like the Lanc, hence fitting Grand Slams under the wings of the b29! DRAGGGGGGG!

For me the vote for Best bomber is the Mossie biv, by a long chalk, and a tied 2nd for the Lanc and b29.

JBTW I have a friend, still alive, who was the navigator/radar guy on the only BMkIV - of the PFers - ever chased at night (AM and quite well-lit) by an Me rocket fighter, they only just pulled away, at a ground speed of 440 knots as the Me’s ‘energy’ dropped away, the Me did not open fire. He helped write the official war history for Aussie.

Strangely PF and Mossie bomber crews seem to be the only crew who knew that NF’s really were the main threat. The fighter the Mossie crews really feared were the 88’s and the Heinkel 219 UHU.

Timbo

#83

My My My the Brits and the Yanks are head to head on this one! :smiley:

#84

The best Bomber was the B-29 no question, but off course there is other tactical aicraft that was as good their task. For example low level attack bombers like the B-25 and Ju-88A, torpedo bombers like the SM-79 and Beaufighter, etc.

#85

The Soviet P-=E-8 was the Best Bomber in WW2. No it didn’t DO enough to get on most list. The Soviets did not have enough of this craft to be used effectively (or for any length of time). The attack on Berlin and a few other targets was all that was accomplished.
I would appreciate comments. And especially any and all information on articles and sources which cover the PE-2’ few missions. Details are lacking.

#86

Somehow I doubt that. The Soviets copied the B-29 from examples that crash landed after missions to Japan, down to the minutest respects, including some of it’s American writing. So, I do not know how you can say that the PE-8 was better. Although, the PE8 looks rather impressive and certainly must have had potential from what little I read on it…

#87

BTW, I’d make the Mosquito a candidate for the best light bomber, by far…

#88

I hate debates/polls like this, as there too many variables. the problem is each major nation operated under different bombing doctrines and I agree the whole issue should have been probably split into different categories.

I can claim no patriotic bias here, because Australia did not developa bomber during the war.:wink:

Because of the different bombing doctrines and means of attacking the enemy I will split my answers a bit, sorry if it’s a bit long winded. Firstly for the RAF the Lancaster and the Mosquito win hands down, remembering the doctrine of RAF Bomber Command was predominantly night bombing, thats why I don’t believe you can directly compare a B-17 to a Lanc.

For the US, there are three major contendors. The B-29, B-26 and the B-17, all excellent aircraft designed under differing circumstances. After problems in it’s early development the B-26 was a truly ecellent aircraft and was most underestimated by the ‘experts.’

For the Germans, the Ju-88/Ju-188 family easily the best after early teething problems and the ridiculous attempt to turn it into a dive bomber.

The Italian SM-79 was a very fine airplane, even if it looked a bit antiquated It was said to be as tough as anything else flying.

And finally I agree the Soviets had a very fine aircraft in the Pe-8. Fast and tough, it could get the job done and was perhaps the most underestimated bomber of the war.

Regards to all,
Digger.

#89

Interesting fact.
A late model Mosquito bomber could carry approximately the same amount of bomb load to Berlin as a B-17, 4,000Ib.
Though it should be qualified with the information that a B-17 could carry far heavier loads on shorter range missions

#90

the US B-29 was the greater and most important strategic bomber in the war.

#91

can anyone help me:confused: