Lanc VS B17

[ridenlow]

Ok from wat i have read and heard the Lancaster was much better than the B17, except for the fact of poor defens, but the Lanc was able to take off in half the time it took a B17 to take off, it could go twice as far and also carry twice the payload, now all these are put into affect in AH except for, the fact that it takes the Lanc ywice as long to take off then the B17, why is that?

[Citabria]

payload.

take off in lanc empty and see the difference

[ridenlow]

Ya i know that, but in RL the Lanc fully loaded still took off faster?

[XtrmeJ]

Obviously not.

[ridenlow]

But it does J, i will find a website that has the proof and show it to you!

[Jasta]

well no matter what you find about takeoff rates, there is one thing about the B17... it was definately not the best bomber in the theatre, but because of both the popularity it recieved and the numbers in which they were built, it is the most famous.

About 12,000 B17s were produced compared to about 7300 Lancasters.

Also, we have some very stunning videos and photos of B17s flying dangerous missions into Germany with flak bursting all over, valiantly flying straight and level to bring bombs to the doorstep of the Axis.

 But the only videos we have of the British night bombing are peaceful little shots of them taking off at dusk, or from the belly of a Lancaster as the helpless German town is ridden with incindiary bombs while the Lancasters float in the dark with much less risk than the american bombers.

The Lancaster probably was the best, but the thing is that the British still chose the B24s to do any day bombing or patrol work they had. So no one really knows. A Lancaster pilot will tell you his was the best, and the 17 pilot says his was the best.

Its a little BS propaganda and a little truth. Take everything with the b17 and Avro 683 with a little grain of salt.

[ridenlow]

Ya i know that, but wat i am wondering if is there zanyway to tell HTC bout this, and maybe modify the Lanc, cause the Lance takes way to long to take off, and climbs SLOW

[Overlag]

the whole reason the Lancaster could carry so much bombs was because it had almost no guns compaired to the B17.... The B17 was built to defend itself as well as take many hits...this ment it was alot heavier empty (i think)

If the americans had designed the B17 without all them armour plates, and all them .5 guns it would have carried ALOT more bombs.... but whats the point if it cant get to the target before getting shot down?

[ridenlow]

The lanc was for a NOE run, or a night time run were u did not reun into many enamys!

[B17Skull12]

the lanc's only real draw back i can see is the fact it had no belly gunner, which the brits traded out for bombload.  The germans exploited this to the best of their ability.  They mounted 20 or was it 30mm? guns point upward at 80 or 70 degrees (???) and the pilot would look up through an aim and fire.  the lancs were hopeless again't those attacks if there wasn't a lanc underneath ya.

The b17 didn't have this problem i've also heard that the framing and construction of the B17 was a whole lot better than that of the lanc (source may not be accurate).  Personally be being a luftwaffle dweeb i say you have a better chance of living in a B17 in AH, but i make swiss cheese now out of most that i see.  now if you really want a good bomber in AH2, you're looking for the B26.  Strong plane, Faster, and hurts if you HO.  Best bomber in AH IMO.

[B17Skull12]

Originally posted by ridenlow
The lanc was for a NOE run

Lancs where slaughtered when they did NOE.  was it 47 or 67% loss on the damn busting missions?

Antiaircraft gun just murdered them.  The mossie was NOE plane.  it was a 100mph faster, which made it harder to hit and was alot smaller.  Get in a 37mm gun on an airfield and have a lanc fly over at 50 feet and tell me how hard it is to hit it.  Not very, while the mossie is faster and smaller.  Harder to hit than the huge lumber lanc dont ya think?

[Karnak]

ridenlow,

Do you know if that was comparing a B-17 with a Lanc with paddle bladed props or not?  From what I've read the paddle bladed props made a huge difference and I don't know if AH's Lanc has them or not.

[beet1e]

Originally posted by ridenlow
Ok from wat i have read and heard the Lancaster was much better than the B17

well of course it was - it was British.

EssexBoy: "but whats the point if it cant get to the target before getting shot down?" Indeed, but even the B17s, despite their massive armament of some 13 guns were still getting shot down in huge numbers when flying from England to bomb Germany. Operations had to be suspended until a suitable escort could be brought into service. That escort was, of course, the P51.

[Overlag]

Originally posted by beet1e
well of course it was - it was British.

EssexBoy: "but whats the point if it cant get to the target before getting shot down?" Indeed, but even the B17s, despite their massive armament of some 13 guns were still getting shot down in huge numbers when flying from England to bomb Germany. Operations had to be suspended until a suitable escort could be brought into service. That escort was, of course, the P51.

at name

yes i understood that...but day time bomber loses for lancs was....err next to terrible?

at least the B17's had a chance to defend themselfs....and could see what they was bombing (although not really HIT anything...lol)

[fluffy]

On the note of night bomber casualties - something like 10,000 Canadians flying Lancs and the similar Halifax bombers went down in those night raids - radar guided Luftwaffe night fighters took a terrible toll of them.  It was no picnic. Proportionately to the population of the country that would have represented the equivalent of about 100,000 U.S. airmen. It was a very different game from the massive day raids of the incredibly brave B17 and B24 crews, but the casualty rates were still terrible, and there were no fighter escorts to fend of the night fighters (there was some Allied night fighter activity, but I believe it was very limited).  The crews were told that they were firebombing factories instead of the civilian population centers they were actually hitting. It was a terrible war.