Most capable bombers of WWII by nationality

[Nemisis]

but thats not performance....which you previously said the list was based on so dont be a moron and stop contradicting your self...not to mention this statement is unclear....tho english might not be your primary language.

Lol, this sentence is just riddled with spelling and grammatical errors  . Not to mention its a run-on sentence. Make sure you have good spelling, grammar, and sentence structure before you say someone is unclear, possibly because English is their second language.

[Ack-Ack]

Why exclude the B-17 and B-24 from the US list of most capable bombers?  Or the Betty from the Japanese list? 


ack-ack

[Karnak]

Why exclude the B-17 and B-24 from the US list of most capable bombers?  Or the Betty from the Japanese list?  


ack-ack

B-17 and B-24 you could make a valid argument for, I don't think they are as good as the B-29, but you could argue it.

The G4M is clearly inferior to the H8K2, P1Y1, Ki-67 and B7A.

[cobia38]

  B-38 isent on your list,it is a very capable bomber

[Die Hard]

The Greif is historically lamented for its early stability and engine problems, but the fact is that by the A-5 model these problems were ironed out and the He 177 had proved itself to be the most technically advanced bomber of the Luftwaffe. The RAF were impressed by the postwar tests on the He 177 A-5 and the single long-range He 177 A-7 they captured. Another very advanced bomber, the B-29, also had a reputation for catching fire, and also took two years to have its problems ironed out, after which it became one of the most successful bombers of aviation history. Unlike the B-29 the He 177 never got the chance to show its full potential due to the misfortunes of war.

He 177 A-1
First production series, 130 built. Stability problems. Engine problems.

He 177 A-3
    Second production series, 170 built. Sixteenth and subsequent aircraft powered by DB 610 A/B engines. Engine problems. Structural problems.

He 177 A-5
    Main production series, 826 built. Strengthened wing, shortened undercarriage oleo legs, increase in maximum external bomb load.

Those 300 A-1's and A-3's are largely responsible for the Greif's unfavorable reputation.

[Karnak]

He177A-5s still had horrible reliability, far worse than the troublesome B-29A, they just weren't having 33-50% of aircraft on a mission abort due to mechanical failures.

[Imowface]

I would say the P1Y2 was the most capable japanese bomber of the war, good speed, and 3000lbs of bombs, which is quite good for a japanese bomber

[milesobrian]

The Ar234 saw service in squadron strength.  The P.108 did not, in fact it saw extremely little service compared to the Ar234.  The slight trickle of P.108s wasn't enough for me to include it, however, if you like, simply place it at the top of the list for best Italian bomber.

The Ar234's competition is the Ju188, Do217 and He177.  The He177 was a disaster and can be entirely eliminated from competition simply for its attempt to bring back WWI Gotha mission abort rates.

o so now you are going by the aces high standards of inclusion...

[milesobrian]

Lol, this sentence is just riddled with spelling and grammatical errors  . Not to mention its a run-on sentence. Make sure you have good spelling, grammar, and sentence structure before you say someone is unclear, possibly because English is their second language.

again typical idiot response with nothing to do with anything on topic...but im glad you can come in and fix my spelling and grammar errors for people who might not be smart enough to figure it out anyways...the only reason i mentioned that English might be their second language was because instead of making fun of someone for spelling or grammar i just assume that they arent native English speakers instead of being critical of something so irrelevant....are you so dense that you cant figure it out when someone has a typo...you cant make connections and figure it out???

honestly most people capable of thinking critically can figure this stuff out...You see while im on my laptop on the forums playing the game on my desktop i have higher priorities than to make sure that i use perfect spelling and grammar....its not like im writing a term paper or something.

[Die Hard]

He177A-5s still had horrible reliability, far worse than the troublesome B-29A, they just weren't having 33-50% of aircraft on a mission abort due to mechanical failures.

Nor did the He 177A-5, but I'm sure you have documentation that says otherwise, or?

[Die Hard]

As for the reliability of the B-29...

On the night of June 14-15 1944, 92 B-29's took off from India to strike at the Imperial Iron and Steel Works at Yawata on Kyushu - a vital target that turned out a quarter of Japan's rolled steel.

92 bombers left India.
79 reached the staging bases in China.
75 took off from the bases.
68 left China, the others aborted after take-off.
47 reached the target at Yawata.


Meanwhile, half a world away, the He 177A-5 had been in production for 7 months, and was enjoying a fair bit of success on the eastern front, being almost impervious to enemy interception.

[mechanic]

Actually, the Mossie was better than the Lancaster no matter the enemy activity.  It carried more than a quarter of the Lancaster's load, not a fifth, and did so on fewer man hours and less fuel per pound of bombs.  It would have been more effective to build mass numbers of Mosquitos rather than fewer Lancasters.

I tend to agree on the Mossie horde point. Not only would 4 Mossies carry the same load as 1 Lancaster but there would also be 3/4 payload remaining for the loss of one plane compared to 100% loss of payload for the loss of one lancaster.

Double the costs for engines if using 4 Mossies, but large savings in material and weapons/ammo over building a lancaster.

[Nemisis]

again typical idiot response with nothing to do with anything on topic...but im glad you can come in and fix my spelling and grammar errors for people who might not be smart enough to figure it out anyways...the only reason i mentioned that English might be their second language was because instead of making fun of someone for spelling or grammar i just assume that they arent native English speakers instead of being critical of something so irrelevant....are you so dense that you cant figure it out when someone has a typo...you cant make connections and figure it out???

honestly most people capable of thinking critically can figure this stuff out...You see while im on my laptop on the forums playing the game on my desktop i have higher priorities than to make sure that i use perfect spelling and grammar....its not like im writing a term paper or something.

Miles, you fail to understand that you can't say someone is unclear because english might not be their primairy language while leaving giant, spelling and grammatical errors in your post without sounding like an arse (and you do).

[MiloMorai]

As for the reliability of the B-29...

On the night of June 14-15 1944, 92 B-29's took off from India to strike at the Imperial Iron and Steel Works at Yawata on Kyushu - a vital target that turned out a quarter of Japan's rolled steel.

92 bombers left India.
79 reached the staging bases in China.
75 took off from the bases.
68 left China, the others aborted after take-off.
47 reached the target at Yawata.

Meanwhile, half a world away, the He 177A-5 had been in production for 7 months, and was enjoying a fair bit of success on the eastern front, being almost impervious to enemy interception.

Nice comparison. How about comparing the first deployment of the B-29 to the first deployment of the He-177.

Maybe you could tell us about the 13 He-177s that tried to participate in a Steinbock mission in Feb 1944. Then there was I./KG40 that had to be withdrawn back to Germany after 2 weeks of operations due to low serviceability.

[Karnak]

Nice comparison. How about comparing the first deployment of the B-29 to the first deployment of the He-177.

Nah, that would reveal his argument as bankrupt.