b17vs b24

[DCCBOSS]

B24's overated in the game ...unless your taking BURN RATE!.....lol
999000 <S>
ps. and why people continuely put Lancasters in missions verses B17i'll never know why.

Bomb load out "I perfer the 24's myself" 

[Lusche]

ps. and why people continuely put Lancasters in missions verses B17i'll never know why.

Because of the "awesome" bomb loadout. Which is simply overkill most of the time. Its very rare a Lanc pilot does really utilize his 14k of bombs, because he either get's shot down first or he is using 5 bombs where (with good aim) one bomb would be enough.

[colmbo]

colmbo, can you tell us the tale of how you got into flying B-24's and B-17's?

Sure.  I had just retired and the wife wanted me out of the house. <G>

I visited the airplanes when the came to Alaska in 2000.  I hung with them as much as I could, volunteered to help on the ramp (I had just retired as an airport Police Officer so knew the rules), wiped oil off the airplanes - lots of oil and went for rides in both airplanes.  I donated the bucks to become a plane sponsor which let me fly to Fairbanks with them and then onto Juneau as well.  I just put out some effort.  The Chief Pilot asked me if I was interested in flying the airplanes on tour - the dumbest question I've ever been asked <G>.  When I replied in the affirmative he said go get your multi-engine rating and come see us.  That was June of 2000.  In July the wife and I flew our 182 to Oshkosh and back - bumping into the bombers again in Montana and once back in Alaska I tied up some lose ends then it was off to the LA area for a quickie multi course then on the Hartford, Conn where I met with the crew and spent the rest of the year on tour with them.  At first I only got to fly the city to city flight (no paying pax), but once I had the minimum times I was flying right seat in the airplanes.  Kept building time and ended up getting pushed in the B-24 and worked up for a type rating.  Left the tour in May of 2002.  The wife toured with us as well for over a year...probably the best memories of my life flying the airplanes and getting to meet the wonderful men who flew them in combat.

[colmbo]

The B-17 was easier to handle (lower control forces) and might have been able to take more damage.

The B-17 is a nicer flying airplane than the B-24 for sure. The B-24 takes more work to fly well..but they were both flown into combat by guys with only 200-300 hours.  As for control forces the B-17 has very, very heavy ailerons and a very slow roll rate.  The rudder is stiff but very powerful and the elevator is fairly light but the airplane responds slowly to any control input.  The B-24 has a very heavy elevator (sometimes you almost need two hands for the flare), the ailerons aren't heavy and the airplane has a good roll rate, the rudder is heavy -- especially with an engine out.  After the 2-engine out landing for the checkride the right leg was crippled. <G>

[phatzo]

I remember seeing a vid on youtube years ago of you taking off in the b-24 can you post a link if you still have it. 

[Becinhu]

Bomb load out "I perfer the 24's myself" 

if you take the 500lbers in the 17 you can drop the same number of hangers with better durability than the 24s

[thndregg]

if you take the 500lbers in the 17 you can drop the same number of hangers with better durability than the 24s

I prefer durability and defenses over bomb load as well. Have patience, use only the amount of ordnance you need, plan your approach to target to "get the most bang for your buck", and effectively get back home. When you fly with others in your group, it's not how fast you get there and back that matters, it's how cohesive your group is- keeping defensive firepower together as best you can.

[Stiglr]

E25280 wrote:

We sometimes have to remind ourselves that the cartoon AH world of constant throttle-to-the-firewall flight is not what was experienced by the men who flew in the real deals in WWII.

 

You don't say... 

Careful, Addink will come to take your head off for suggesting that...

[colmbo]

I remember seeing a vid on youtube years ago of you taking off in the b-24 can you post a link if you still have it. 

I think you'll find it here.

[999000]

I think Thndregg and Becinhu ...drinking the same juice as I.......
999000 <S>

[Brooke]

I especially like the B-24 because it played such an important role in WWII yet is so much less well-known than the B-17.

Similarly for the P-47/P-51 relationship.

[colmbo]

I especially like the B-24 because it played such an important role in WWII yet is so much less well-known than the B-17.

Similarly for the P-47/P-51 relationship.

I had a WWII 8th AF vet tell me that the reason the B-17 got so much more press/fame was that the B-17 bases were closer to London, the press guys didn't take the time to go farther out for their stories...no idea how accurate that is.

The B-24 flew in all theaters, it could haul more, farther and faster than the B-17.  She really didn't get a fair shake in the glory department IMO.

[phatzo]

I think you'll find it here.

thanks mate

[Cooley]

In the game, im still undecided and ive been flyin em since warbirds back in the late 90's

B17- Love how it turns, how it looks and that rear gun, and a tad better climb rate at low alt (important for CV killin)

B24- Love the History of it, Good Friends with a wwII Vet B24 Pilot from 90th HBG, like the extra 2x1000 pounders or the 4x2000 loadout, love Greebos Navy Skin and that 90th Jolly Roger

B24 dies quicker, but carries more ord, so you have to decide whats more important

Colmbo,what a sweet job, I always go to Livermore and Concord when you guys are here in N.Cali,
last time, smacked my head pretty bad climbing around in the B17, Inside of the B24 seemed much more roomy
I would think the Crews prefered the B24, cept for Ploesti type missions

[Chalenge]

I just got done reading: "WOW!" by Ralph Welsh (B-24 Pilot) which was a compendium of 80+ B-24 stories, not one "Mission" recollection was at 30k or higher.   

Seeing as the known Service Ceiling was 28k, I doubt it was "regularly" exceeded.   In fact I'd say the common alt of 24's in WWII was 25-27k.   

Service ceiling is defined as the point at which climb rate is 100 feet/second. Service ceiling at 50000 lbs is lower than 42000 lbs. Either way it doesnt matter what the plane did in WWII because in AH it can and does go above 30k. If you have absolute proof that the plane COULD NEVER get above 30k then post it.