Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: Perrine on September 17, 2010, 10:29:05 PM
-
I wonder why US air force did not just borrow thousands of mosquito bombers to bomb germany in daylight? I think if US used mosquito bombers casualties to american airmen would have been less than triple digits.
I think the aircrew survivability would be high and effectiveness against strategic targets would be the same as flying b17/b24 since US bomber crew would use the ultra top secret norden bombsight.
Also, in real life I doubt germany had any mass produced interceptors that can intercept 1000+ mosquitos besides the limited me 163 and 262.
-
Probably because there was not enough production to do so and then some. Considering what was coming off the line on US production lines and all the contracts to fill, switching over to Mossies by license on the fly would have been tough.
-
Another thing I would wonder is what were the losses to ack as opposed to losses from enemy fighter action. One must also ask if a damaged mosquito is as survivable as a damaged heavy bomber of any type.
-
Well, the USAF did: the B-58 'Hustler'. The US Army Air Corp bomber force was was restricted as Guppy35 said:
Probably because there was not enough production to do so and then some. Considering what was coming off the line on US production lines and all the contracts to fill, switching over to Mossies by license on the fly would have been tough.
-
(in reply to babaji)
Which bombers? XVIs or the whole inventory? Day? Night? Both?
Can give rough estimates if you like.
-
I would think Guppy hit the nail on the head, and i also think bomb load would have alot to do with it
-
The USA did look at producing the Mosquito but I forget the reason why it did not do so.
If Canada could produce 6710 Mosquitoes during the war, can you imagine how many the Americans could have produced? One problem would have been engines though, as Packard Merlins were needed for the P-51.
Perrine, much is made of the Norden bombsight but both the Germans and the British had bombsights just as good.
mbailey, the typical bomb load of American heavies was 4-5000lb. Two Mosquitoes fitted with the Avro carrier could carry 6000lb of bombs. If the American heavy is shot down there is no bombs on target. If one of the Mosquitoes is shot down, there is still 3000lb of bombs on target.
-
i would imagine survivability had a large part to play.
although the AAF suffered incredible losses during the war over europe, there were also a lot of aircraft that brought their crews back home, and did so in such condition as they shouldn't have been able to maintain flight.
it actually took a bit to shoot down b17's, and in all obviousness, it wasn't the easiest thing in the world to do....especially if you condiser the formations they flew. most attackers had 6+ guns firing at them regardless of angle. often times more.
i know you're about to try to say that the interceptors would never catch the mossies.......but you would be very wrong.
all that would have been required for them to catch them, would be to be at altitude before the buffs get to their interception point(as they often were anyway). then it would be a matter of diving on them, take the shot, rinse, and repeat. this would have been devastating to the mossies, as the bomber version was(i think) undefended?
-
Without escorts the heavies were sitting ducks. Remember Schweinfurt and Regensburg.
The Mossie had a cruising speed over 100mph faster than the heavies. The Germans had all the time to set up the interception of the heavies but with the Mossie, as history tells, the Germans had a hard time intercepting Mossies. Mossies would not be in large bomber streams as the heavies were, but would operate like the British heavies at night. That is as individual squadrons. It would be hard for the Germans to concentrate fighters for attacks on the Mossies with Mossie formations spread all over the map unlike American heavies which were all bunched together.
-
I think there are a couple of points that are not being look at thoroughly enough in this discussion.
1.) I think that everyone is overestimating the accuracy of strategic high altitude bombing. The USAAF post war strategic bombing survey showed that accuracy during the war was vastly over rated.
2.) I think the effectiveness of German AAA is vastly underrated, again according to the USAAF statistics half the heavy bomber losses were due to AAA. With radar guided proximity fuse's this danger wouldn't have diminished for the mosquito.
3.) Given the complexities of manufacturing a wooden aircraft it would have been a substantial change to the US aircraft manufacturing industry to switch to the Mosquito.
4.) The number of Mosquitoes would have been double what was required for the heavy bombers. This isn't due to bomb load, this is due to manufacturing demand for spare parts and airframes to keep the number flying correct. So lets assume a 1.5 multiplier to carry the equivalent bomb-load as the heavy bombers with an additional multiplier for spares and repair parts.
While we may be enamored with the performance of the new Mosquito in AH (and it did have extraordinary performance historically) there are many factors that weigh against it being used as the primary strategic bombing platform for the US during WW2.
-
The problem of changing one aspect of a conflict and extrapolating the effects is that you also have to factor in the enemy's reaction to that change. If the Allied air campaign over Europe was fought mostly by large numbers of fast unarmed bombers like the Mossie it is likely the German aircraft designers would have developed their interceptors to meet that threat. Instead of adding armor and heavy guns, they would have focused on speed and endurance. A large part of the Mossie's success stems from the Luftwaffe primarily using aircraft and tactics designed to meet the threat of slower heavy-bombers. Without the heavy-bombers for the Luftwaffe to concentrate on I think the Mossie would have had a hard time over Germany.
-
didn't heinkel also have a jet powered fighter, that could've entered combat many years before the messerschmitt?
-
1.) I think that everyone is overestimating the accuracy of strategic high altitude bombing. The USAAF post war strategic bombing survey showed that accuracy during the war was vastly over rated.
2.) I think the effectiveness of German AAA is vastly underrated, again according to the USAAF statistics half the heavy bomber losses were due to AAA. With radar guided proximity fuse's this danger wouldn't have diminished for the mosquito.
4.) The number of Mosquitoes would have been double what was required for the heavy bombers. This isn't due to bomb load, this is due to manufacturing demand for spare parts and airframes to keep the number flying correct. So lets assume a 1.5 multiplier to carry the equivalent bomb-load as the heavy bombers with an additional multiplier for spares and repair parts.
1. I totally agree, no matter what plane was used, the actual effect on the war would not have changed. The effect on casualties and costs on the other hand...
2. Smaller plane is less likely to be hit by AAA and generally it is harder to hit a faster moving target, but much more important - the time spent in AAA is significantly lowered. AAA avoidance is a big argument favoring the mosquito in daytime.
4. The major complexity and cost in maintnance comes from the engines. So roughly one 4-engine bomber is roughly similar to a pair of 2-engine bomber. The total number of crew in a mosquito is less than half that of a B17. The cost in fuel per lb. explosive delivered is better. In all efficiency parameters the mosquito was superior by a large margin. The whole development of the mossie and the idea to remove all defensive armament was driven by pure efficiency calculations (extensively described in Sharp & Bowyer).
i know you're about to try to say that the interceptors would never catch the mossies.......but you would be very wrong.
all that would have been required for them to catch them, would be to be at altitude before the buffs get to their interception point(as they often were anyway). then it would be a matter of diving on them, take the shot, rinse, and repeat. this would have been devastating to the mossies, as the bomber version was(i think) undefended?
Catching the mosquitoes with fighter marginally faster requires a very careful setup and accurate guidance to intercept. Any interference (escorts and forward fighter sweeps) would ruin any carefully prepared defense. By not relying on massive boxes for defense, the mosquito raids can be in several waves not letting the defenders time to refuel and reorganize after the previous wave - especially if their total numbers were higher than the B17 (~twice?) it would overwhelm the defenders. As someone mentioned above, destroying one mosquito allows the other to reach the target - half a B17 is not going anywhere. In any environment that involves clouds, a single mosquito has a far better chance to escape enemy fighters than a single B17 with all its useless guns, by diving into the clouds.
Finally, for casualty calculations, in terms of crew, a loss of a B17 equals five mosquitoes.
I guess that the real reason mosquitoes (or similar) were not used by the 8th is that A) American industry was not as adept as the British one in woodworks, but the could be overcome. B) Would the US fight its war with a non American main bomber. Can anyone even imagine that? and C) Not enough people believed it would work just because it was a new and radical concept. Remember that even for the RAF it took a lot of time to digest what De-Havilland was trying to sell them.
-
didn't heinkel also have a jet powered fighter, that could've entered combat many years before the messerschmitt?
No, as the engine was not fully developed. At the same time, the British also had jet powered fighter.
-
While I am an advocate of the Mosquito in general, one downside to this proposal would be that it would have a far lower impact on the Luftwaffe. It would leave a lot more of the Luftwaffe for the VVS to deal with as for many Luftwaffe fighters a Mosquito was practically uninterceptable. B-17s and B-24s were able to be used as very effective bait to pull the Luftwaffe up where it could be engaged and destroyed and I am not sure twenty thousand Mosquitoes would have the same effect.
It also would have pushed the Germans into developing faster interceptors (the prior mentioned Heinkel jet was, as I recall, not any faster than a Bf109G-10) which may have been an issue for the undefended Mosquitoes. That said, not being locked into formations does open up a lot of options that slow, heavy bombers relying on turrets would not have.
-
B) Would the US fight its war with a non American main bomber. Can anyone even imagine that?
It would have been like the P-51, which is half British. American companies would have licensed the design and then built it, like they did with the Packard Merlin, and we would have had, say, "the Ford B-27 Mosquito." :)
-
i know you're about to try to say that the interceptors would never catch the mossies.......but you would be very wrong.
all that would have been required for them to catch them, would be to be at altitude before the buffs get to their interception point(as they often were anyway). then it would be a matter of diving on them, take the shot, rinse, and repeat. this would have been devastating to the mossies, as the bomber version was(i think) undefended?
look at this and focus @ the speed between 32k feet to 24k feet.
Mosquito vs most common luftwaffe interceptors in 1944
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/newscores/genchart.php?p1=15&p2=110&pw=2>ype=0)
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/newscores/genchart.php?p1=84&p2=110&pw=2>ype=0)
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/newscores/genchart.php?p1=9&p2=110&pw=2>ype=0)
To evade the enemy all mosq had to do is simply hit WEP and dive from 30,000 feet to 25,000 to get to its sweet spot to run away from luft interceptors mentioned above. There's no way to reposition after first pass, luft interceptors basically have to chase it (like la-7 chasing temp @ deck) until fuel runs out.
-
well think of it this way,
If the US forces did use them to bomb german wouldn't the germans have invented the 163 and 262 much earlier?
eventually they would have to put guns in the mossies which would slow them down to fend off the enemy or bring EVEN MORE
aircraft for escorts.
they would eventually have to go to the bigger bombers because they can take more of a beating, got more guns and a much bigger payload
and even then they would now be dealing with heavily armed aircraft that are faster and harder to hit.
Your question has to many varibles
Avanti
-
Which is why I try to stay out of woulda coulda shoulda threads.
whoops
-
If the US forces did use them to bomb german wouldn't the germans have invented the 163 and 262 much earlier?
No.
-
well think of it this way,
If the US forces did use them to bomb german wouldn't the germans have invented the 163 and 262 much earlier?
When did the Germans 'invent' the 163 and 262?
eventually they would have to put guns in the mossies which would slow them down to fend off the enemy or bring EVEN MORE aircraft for escorts.
How many P-38s, P-47s and P-51s were there?
they would eventually have to go to the bigger bombers because they can take more of a beating, got more guns and a much bigger payload and even then they would now be dealing with heavily armed aircraft that are faster and harder to hit.
No.
Your question has to many varibles
Yes but think it of a war game at War College.
Avanti
-
Karnak, you think the Germans would have allowed Mosquitoes to roam freely over Germany?
Do you think the 109K-4 would have appeared earlier with not a fully developed DB605 engine. It might have pushed the introduction of the Dora though.
One target the Allies failed to take out was German power generating stations. Also remember that RAF BC was dropping huge bomb loads on Germany.
-
Karnak, you think the Germans would have allowed Mosquitoes to roam freely over Germany?
Not anymore than they had to, hence my second paragraph.
-
No.
what makes you say this?
just wondering for my personal gain that's all :)
How many P-38s, P-47s and P-51s were there?
Still sending them would have been an unnecessary risk of life and aircraft
and would also mean more muntions would have to be made, more fuel would be used etc
-
I think the fact most of you are missing is that the U.S. Air Force wasn't created until 1947 so using a Mosquito, or any other bomber to bomb Germany would have been in violation of the surrender signed by Germany in 1945. :devil
I do believe the USAAF did use some mossies as photo recon birds (or some other specialized use) during the war. :aok
The fact of the matter is that the US, as well as Great Britain built and used heavy four engined bombers for the majority of the bombing sorties, and they won. Neither Germany nor Japan had a heavy long range bomber and they lost. Hmmm :headscratch:
-
USAAF had assorted recon mossies, nightfighters and the occasional spy craft on strength.
-
what makes you say this?
You would know if you had pondered this question
When did the Germans 'invent' the 163 and 262
The 262's development started in 1938, with maiden flight in 1942...
-
The 262's development started in 1938, with maiden flight in 1942...
Yes I know that Lusche. It was a question for Avanti. ;);)
............................. ............................
videos of its condtruction
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c7cVvYdLeek (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c7cVvYdLeek)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pacluxeWkCw&feature=related (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pacluxeWkCw&feature=related)
............................. ...............
American Mosquitos
General Henry "Hap" Arnold, commander of the United States Army Air Forces (USAAF), witnessed a demonstration of the Mosquito on 20 April 1941 as a guest of Lord Beaverbrook. Geoffrey de Havilland JR was in prime form that day, screaming the machine low over the ground and performing sharp maneuvers with one engine feathered. Arnold was extremely impressed, and returned to the US with engineering drawings of the machine.
There matters more or less stood with the Yanks until late 1942, when a B.IV Mosquito was given to Colonel Elliot Roosevelt, the American President's son and commander of a USAAF reconnaissance squadron in North Africa, equipped with Lockheed F-4 Lightning reconnaissance aircraft. The B.IV was faster and had much longer range than the Lockheeds, and Elliot Roosevelt began to press for adopting the British machine.
In the meantime, Mosquitos were finally beginning to roll off the production lines at de Havilland Canada in the Toronto area, and in December 1942 Geoffrey de Havilland JR brought one of the first Canadian Mosquitos down to Washington DC. Hap Arnold ordered that airport traffic be held off for a half hour to allow de Havilland to put on an aerial demonstration over the city. Geoffrey De Havilland then left for California to perform more demonstrations. He went by train in order to see the country, and the Mosquito went separately. In Los Angeles he met with his cousin, actress Olivia de Havilland.
Hap Arnold now became very determined to get his hands on the Mossie, beginning with a offer to swap P-51 Mustangs for Mosquitos. The British turned him down. The Mosquito was increasingly seen as difficult to replace. Had Canada been producing Mosquitos in volume at the time, the Americans might have been able to get their hands on part of the production, but the Canadians were slow to ramp up, with only 90 Mosquitos built there in 1943. At least Arnold's persistent lobbying to get Mosquitos helped convince Bomber Command that they had something of value.
The Americans did manage to get their hands on a relatively small batch of Canadian aircraft. The US signed an agreement with the British government in October 1943 for 120 Canadian-built Mosquito bombers, but limited production meant that the US only got 5 B.VIIs and 35 B.XXs. They were converted to a reconnaissance configuration with US-built cameras, redesignated "F.8", and sent to the UK for service with the USAAF Eighth Air Force.
The F.8's camera suite was minimal and the single-stage Merlins really didn't provide the performance the USAAF wanted, and so the F.8s were eventually replaced by PR.XVIs. The Americans obtained over a hundred PR.XVIs, along with a handful of T.IIIs for conversion or continuance training.
American pilots converting from their Lockheed F-4 and F-5 Lightnings, which had "handed" propellers, had to be trained to deal with the Mosquito's tendency to roll against the rotation of its propellers on takeoff. There was a worse problem in that over-anxious fighter pilots tended to mistake Mosquitos for Messerschmitt Me-410s, which in fact did have a similar configuration, and so the USAAF gave their PR.XVIs red-painted tails as a recognition aid.
The majority of the Yank PR.XVIs were used in their intended photoreconnaissance role, but a good number of them were used for weather reconnaissance, and they were also modified for special tasks. Some were fitted with US-built "H2X" targeting radar, the American three-centimeter counterpart to the British ten-centimeter H2S, mounted in the nose radome. As American crews referred to H2X as "Mickey" for some forgotten reason, these were known as "Mickey Ships". Some USAAF Mosquitos were fitted out for dispensing chaff, and seven were fitted with communications gear to support Allied agents and resistance forces in Occupied Europe.
USAAF Mosquitos were also fitted to use the LORAN navigation system, the American answer to Gee, and as LORAN was something of an Allied standard later in the war it is plausible that some RAF Mosquitos had LORAN receivers as well.
Some sources also mention that the USAAF operated a squadron of NF.30s in Italy late in the war, but details are unclear. The USAAF returned all their Mosquitos at the end of the war, as part of the reverse Lend-Lease agreement.
http://www.faqs.org/docs/air/avmoss2.html#m8
-
Yes I know that Lusche. It was a question for Avanti. ;);)
I know. You misread me - that remark was directed at Avanti too, I was just pointing him at your question again ("You would know if you had pondered this question:") :)
-
I know. You misread me - that remark was directed at Avanti too, I was just pointing him at your question again ("You would know if you had pondered this question:") :)
;) :cheers:
-
Once the proper design changes and re-training were implemented, the B-26 had the lowest loss rate of any USAAF bomber when hostilities ceased in WWII. The Allies had other capable craft, not just the Mossie or Heavy Bombers.
-
B-26 had the lowest loss rate of any USAAF bomber when hostilities ceased in WWII.
I bet the loss rate of all USAAF bombers dramatically decreased when hostilities ceased in WWII. :bolt:
-
I bet the loss rate of all USAAF bombers dramatically decreased when hostilities ceased in WWII. :bolt:
Liar! :noid
-
Best source for info on USAAF Mossies is Norman Malayney, who has struggled for years to overcome the cycle of oft-repeated myths becoming "common knowledge." See his critiques of published info here:
http://www.mossie.org/forum/read.php?1,4334
and Part 2 (!) here:
http://www.mossie.org/forum/read.php?1,4335
The USAAF nightfighter squadron using Mossies was the 416th NFS in Italy, though they sent a detachment up to Etain in France to join the 425th NFS' P-61s there.
-
Also....the Luftwaffe developed the He219 to counter the mosquito.
When the He219 entered service it claimed 70% of all mossie kills by the Luftwaffe.
The He219 was faster......and very heavily gunned.
-
Also....the Luftwaffe developed the He219 to counter the mosquito.
When the He219 entered service it claimed 70% of all mossie kills by the Luftwaffe.
The He219 was faster......and very heavily gunned.
:rolleyes:
Someone needs to do much more research.
-
He219 never hit 400mph in Luftwaffe service. All the reference books publish Heinkel's claimed performance, not what the gunned, armored and radared production He219s could do.
-
Well, technically the US Airforce didn't exist during WWII, it was formed on September 18, 1947.
-
He219 never hit 400mph in Luftwaffe service. All the reference books publish Heinkel's claimed performance, not what the gunned, armored and radared production He219s could do.
Unless you have some new documentation, that claim has never been properly supported in previous He 219 threads here. I think MiloMorai posted some performance charts that showed the 219 doing ~360 mph at Steig und Kampfleistung... What it did at emergency power has yet to be documented to my knowledge.