Lancaster

[Scherf]

Actually, the number of 28 sorties comes from a docco I saw in the P.R.O. re: relative weight of bombs delivered by Lancs and the cookie-equipped mossie. I believe the term used was "life load", comparing the average tonnage dropped by Lancs and their life expectancy in terms of sorties, vs the respective numbers for the mossie with the cookie, all expressed in terms of the investment required.

Lanc larger investment, bigger load, shorter life-expectancy.

[Karnak]

Much shorter life expectancy and much greater loss of men when one was lost.

The Mossie would have been a better bomber than the Lanc if produced and used in hordes, but Arthur Harris was in love with the idea of big planes dropping bombs by the gross.

[Karnak]

Here is the data on sortie totals, tonnage delivered and aircraft lost:

[Scherf]

Thanks Karnak.

Always wondered about the load/sortie number for the Lanc. As that's in tons, it works out to about 8728 lbs per sortie - I thought the Lanc's capacity was well above that?

[Karnak]

Longer ranged missions would carry less tonnage.  Many B-17 raids were 4,000lbs per bomber.

[Scherf]

Cheers Karnak.

[Noir]

and the mozzie needed way less bombs to bring a site down due to its superior precision, but the RAF didn't feel safe with no tail gunner bombers (they prefered sitting ducks like the blenheim lol)

Am not well placed to talk, the french in 1939 still had flash red and blue combat uniforms, they just missed the feather on the hat lol. The german didn't need flares to paint ground target, they just looked where soldiers were

[Furball]

Originally posted by Noir
and the mozzie needed way less bombs to bring a site down due to its superior precision, but the RAF didn't feel safe with no tail gunner bombers (they prefered sitting ducks like the blenheim lol)

wtf?

blenheim first flew in 1935 and was actually about 50mph faster than any fighter in service at the time.

it was not preferred to the mosquito, and was pretty much withdrawn from service by the time the mossie was introduced!

that fact is, it would not have been worth replacing the RAF heavies with the mossie because the heavies could carry over 4 times the bombload.

The argument is, the mossie could carry a similar load to a daylight raid by b17's / 24's without the vunerability of the bigger bombers.

[Furball]

Originally posted by Scherf
Thanks Karnak.

Always wondered about the load/sortie number for the Lanc. As that's in tons, it works out to about 8728 lbs per sortie - I thought the Lanc's capacity was well above that?

Also they would often load up with cannisters full of incendries and such, which were much lighter, they would not always take a full load of the heavier HE bombs.

[Scherf]

All a moot point now, sadly. I didn't get long enough with that file at the PRO - I was hoping it would go into more detail about the man-hours required for the heavies and the mossies. Perhaps it does, but I had to get back to the real world...

I suppose I'm not alone in wondering why there weren't more of them. (I think wartime production was around 6,700 of the 7,800 or so total production - most common variant was the FB.VI).

[Kurfürst]

Originally posted by Noir
and the mozzie needed way less bombs to bring a site down due to its superior precision, but the RAF didn't feel safe with no tail gunner bombers (they prefered sitting ducks like the blenheim lol)

[/B]

Hmm, the typical Mossie nightbomber (only those had bulged bomb bay to accomodate a single thin walled 4000 lbs bomb, pretty much useless for anything else than bringing down brick structures) sortie was made from something like 30 000 feet. At high speed, during the night, practically blind. Precision? Doh.

As for the claimed reduction of loss rate, actually Mossies had about DOUBLE the loss rate than normal bombers operating in the daylight, ie. 8% vs. 4%. The most common FBVIs could carry 1000, then 2000 lbs of bomb, not much more than a fighter bomber or other types, and far-far less than true heavy bombers. It was LIGHT bomber, designed because of shortage of material, not a wonder weapon, but proved versatile. As a night bomber, it was used after the Bomber Command was defeated in the Battle of Berlin, and normal heavy bomber losses would be unbearable, so nightbomber mossies were despatched to keep up the attack for at least propaganda purposes, for the actual damage from a single bomb release somewhere 30 000 ft over Berlin at 400mph was negliable an totally random in its effect. As some poster put it on LEMB, the Mossie was a "high profile nuisance" for the Germans. It had some propaganda value, but very little actual effect as a bomber. As nightfighter or fighter bomber, it was much-much more useful, and oddly much less acknowladged.

[Noir]

am no blenheim expert sorry, just thougt of it cause it looks really crappy

mozzie could have been intruced way earlier in its bomber version since de havilland had already it ready, but RAF choose to only use it as recon at first.

my point is that even if the heavier bombers could carry 4x more bombs, they needed more bombs to bring a target down. I can't prove my point since I can't find back the webpage about it. I got pwned !

from what I've read mozzies couldn't be used as high alt bombers, so they couldn't take their role.

[Scherf]

For the 8%, are you talking about Bomber Command?

As for the delay in getting it introduced - IIRC there was a gap of something like a year between the initial proposal and the initial order. Got it all at home in the books, but I'm on the road now so I can't check. There was also a second order to stop development during the crisis of 1940, but I believe Geoffrey de Havilland in his memoirs says he basically ignored this latter instruction, counting on a later flip-flop.

All so much "what-if" really - fact is the heavies outnumbered the mossies.

Does anyone know when the Lancs started to roll off the line, and how many factories were involved?


PS - Thanks Furby, hadn't considered the inceniaries - horrid things.

[Karnak]

No, Kurfurst is talking about the low alt missions of the FB.VIs for Fighter Command.  You have to understand Kurfurst's reasoning, it is really simple once you learn it: British = Utter complete garbarge that was the most unsuccesful waste of resources imaginable.  He will then twist whatever numbers he can find to justify his feelings.  Using low level FB.VI intruder losses to claim that Mossie bombers, entirely different aircraft flying completely different mission profiles, had higher losses than other bombers is one such example of his misinformation efforts.

Note also his metioning of RAF Bomber Command losing "the Battle of Berlin" is something completely fictional.  RAF heavies sustained higher and higher losses until the RAF finally cleared the Mosquito Night Fighters to operate over German territory.  They decimated the German Night Fighter corps in something called "Moskito Panik".  RAF heavies operated in mass numbers until the end of the war, hardly the sign of a "defeated" force.

Once you look at what was really being discussed, you can see that Mossie bombers suffered far lower losses than other bombers, either at night or during the day.  Only the Ar234 could really have bettered that record really.

Evidence suggests that had the British put the resources into Mossies that they put into Lancs and Halibags they would have delivered more tons of bombs for lower losses.  Using Pathfinder Mossies increased the accuracy of the main RAF raids, be they other Mossies or big four engined bombers, to the same level as USAAF daylight raids or better.  What it came down to is that you could get three of four Mossies for the resources used in one Lanc.  However, due to the choices made by the British how the Mossie would have done as the primary RAF bomber will never be known

Noir,

Mossies most definately could be used as high alt bombers.  Even Kurfurst acknowleges that.  The reason they didn't play a big role was politics and the fact that Arthur Harris was infatuated with the massive bombers, carpet bombing civilians.  He didn't want Mossies at all.

[Noir]

BTW some bomber mozzie could hold the 4000lb "cookie" bomb....I want that to sink cvs LOL