Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: mussie on April 25, 2006, 01:05:52 AM
-
The B17G had a max internal bomb load of 9600lbs and could also carry 2 x 4000lbs external bombs
http://www.fscwv.edu/users/rheffner/b17/b1711.shtml (http://www.fscwv.edu/users/rheffner/b17/b1711.shtml)
Although all subsequent models had lugs and controls for their attachment, the underwing racks were not installed at the factory.
The above link talks about the F Model but if you look here You will see that the G had a max shortrange payload of 17600
http://www.fscwv.edu/users/rheffner/b17/b1716.shtml (http://www.fscwv.edu/users/rheffner/b17/b1716.shtml)
Specified defensive armament was as follows: Thirteen 0.5-inch Browning machine guns in chin, nose, dorsal, center- fuselage, ventral, waist, and tail positions. Maximum short-range bombload was 17,600 pounds.
So why not add two external racks to the B17 and charge Perks to exceed the current 6000lbs load and even more if you want the 2 x 4000lbs bombs
-
Those loadouts are only possible for short distances, which the B-17's not often flew.
Considering short distances, the Lancaster would be able to carry MUCH more
-
Hey that would bring us up to *two* perked bombers. Whooot! Im all for it
-
If I'm not mistaken ( & often am ) didn't the mosquito carry a heavier load than the B-17?
-
Originally posted by Brenjen
If I'm not mistaken ( & often am ) didn't the mosquito carry a heavier load than the B-17?
Did a quick internet search. The heaviest bombload I could find listed for a Mosquito was a few variants designed to carry a single 4000lb bomb. A couple listed 2 1000lb bombs plus 2 500lb bombs on the wings.
One site said a Mosquito was once mistakenly outfitted with over 10,000lbs of ballast and still made it airborne without too much trouble, which may be the origin of the "myth". Another possible origin of the "myth" is that B-17s often did not fly with max weight of ordinance and probably flew many missions with 8 or so 500lb bombs, to which someone would observe it is the same total weight as a Mosquito could carry.
In AH the B-17 can carry 6 1000lbs bombs, and as the original post suggests, the airframe was capable of carrying much more. So even if someone could find a way to convert the Mosquito's 10,000lbs of ballast into actual ord loadout, the Fortress would still have it beat.
Completely unreleated note: HOLY COW-- They got up to a MOSQUITO T MK 43 ! ! ! ! ! :O Abd I thought getting up to a Spit XVI was overkill . . .
-
Originally posted by E25280
Completely unreleated note: HOLY COW-- They got up to a MOSQUITO T MK 43 ! ! ! ! ! :O Abd I thought getting up to a Spit XVI was overkill . . .
Check out the spit 21.
Bronk
-
or the spit 24 :D
brauno, the mossie could carry more than 4k if it wanted to... it's just like the b17 taking far less than it could for range. i heard that mossies went over the recommended quite often, and the RAF used to pride itself on the fact that the mossies could carry a greater payload than b17's on similar missions, but doing it 100 mph faster:D
-
gotta love mossies. silly planes that were an anchor of english wit throuout the war!:aok
-
the fact that the mossies could carry a greater payload than b17's on similar missions, but doing it 100 mph faster
That's sort of what I was refering too; on similar length missions the mossie carried a larger payload & delivered it faster & more accurately. I read where they blew up a prison camp wall to let some prisoners escape or something like that. The mossie doesn't get it's just recognition.
Sorry if this is sort of a hi-jack, it seems relevant to me.
-
The claim is that the cookie mossie could haul 4k to Berlin, and that B-17s *to Berlin* also carried 4k.
I make no claim to have accurate info. re: B-17 missions, I'm just the messenger.
-
Originally posted by Brenjen
That's sort of what I was refering too; on similar length missions the mossie carried a larger payload & delivered it faster & more accurately.
They were more accurately? Even with the B-17's Norden bombsight?
-
i think a lot of the later mossies had radar bombsites;)
-
They also flew low & during the daylight more often than not which helped the accuracy.
-
First my caveat -- I am by no means an internet whiz and my patience for long research is low, so I only spent about an hour or so searching. That being said . . .
Have to agree with Scherf. I can find references to Mossies being able to get to Berlin carrying a 4,000lb bomb, and that B-17s to Berlin carried 4,000lbs also. Other than that, I can not find a reference that shows the Mossie ever carrying more than the single 4,000lb bomb, whereas the B-17 clearly could.
As for the accuracy claim, again I saw several statements that the mossie tended toward better accuracy, but no proof of these statements. I am sure it is out there somewhere, but not seeing it plastered everywhere someone makes this claim makes me wonder if "selective data" is used. That is, if the mossie was more accurate overall because of a large number of low-level raids, then we are comparing apples and oranges. Perhaps the mossie was as or more accurate than a B-17 at 20,000 feet -- or maybe not. Haven't found the data.
One place I saw even tried to posit the argument that lives would have been saved if the allies would have replaced heavy bombers with nothing but Mossies. His claim is that no German fighter could ever catch the mossies. While I am sure this is true in the early war years, I have a hard time believing that fleets of Mossies flying at 20,000 feet to Berlin in 1944 could not have been intercepted by German fighters (262 anyone?). Furthermore, if it was high speed / zero defensive armament the Germans had in their skies rather than Fortresses, their development of fighters would have gone the direction of light interceptors with light armament rather than armored 190s with 30mm cannon. That is to say, "what ifs" always have a counter-arguement and tend to get pretty useless.
That kind of got off topic, but no point deleting it. I would welcome any hard data anyone has to back up these claims, but I am still skeptical. Besides 4K lbs to Berlin, I just am not seeing any solid support. Without said support, I have to assume it is another matter of a plane's reputation or "mystique" overwhelming the facts (which seems to occur far too often).
Final note before I get flamed: I am not trying to say the mossie was in reality a "bad plane" or take away from its well documented accomplishments. It was clearly a great plane and did some remarkable things. All I am saying is, lets not go overboard if it isn't warranted.
-
Originally posted by frank3
They were more accurately? Even with the B-17's Norden bombsight?
B17 accuracy was way over-rated, was more like war propoganda.
There is a table somewhere showing the average tonnage of bombs required to destroy a V1 site by each aircraft. The Mosquito was much lower than other aircraft.
-
the nordon bombsite was plenty accurate if you were flying strait and level without turbulance or flak. also, due to the risk of capture of the bombsite, only the lead bombers were equipped with them.
-
Originally posted by Brenjen
I read where they blew up a prison camp wall to let some prisoners escape or something like that.
This raid was on the History channel some weeks back.
The Mossies came in very fast and low and did in fact hit the wall and also the cafeteria. Timing was critical, because the guards ate at a certain time, and they wanted maximum hurt placed on them.
Unfortunatly, there was a school not far away that also took some hits and there were fatalities amongst the staff and children.
Some of the prisioners were also kia/wia, but many did escape because of this raid