|
08-03-2006, 05:45 AM
| #166 | |
| Senior Member  Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 19,945
 | Quote:
  i've tried to make it as explicitly clear as possible that i'm not arguing for the lanc being the better bomber, i was simply commenting on their bomb bays in responce to annother member's post! go back, read all my posts carefully, i make it explicitly clear if you take the time to read them as opposed to just reading me say "lanc" and "B-29" and assume i'm contradicting myself by arguing for the lanc being the better bomber, because i've made it quite clear i'm not!
__________________  "Reminds me of the time I sank the Tirpitz" comments a Spitfire pilot, "One pass of course, old boy." | |
|         |
|
08-03-2006, 09:00 AM
| #167 | |
| IP/Mech THE GREAT GAZOO   Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Colorado, USA
Posts: 16,049
| Quote:
__________________ "IF ITS RED OR DUSTY, DON'T TOUCH IT"  | |
|
| |
|
08-06-2006, 07:29 AM
| #168 |
| Senior Member  Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 11,978
 | lanc, my picture was of a B-29A with a Grand Slam. It's carrying the load in the exact same way as the Lancaster, "semi-recessed". How is the Lancaster's bomb-bay more diverse? When the B-29 can carry the same equipment internally too.
__________________ "When you go home tomorrow, don't expect anyone to know what you have been through. Even if they did know, most people probably wouldn't care anyway. Some of you may get the medals you deserve, many more of you will not. But remember this, all of you are now members of the front-line club, and that is the most exclusive club in the world." - Lt. Col. Matthew Maer CO 1st Battalion, the Princess of Wale's Royal Regiment. Camp Abu Naji, Oct. 2004  To those in that club. |
|
| |
|
08-06-2006, 11:02 AM
| #169 |
| Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 19,945
| it can't carry a tallboy internally, it can't carry a 12,000lb HC bomb internally, it can't carry an 8,000lb HC bomb internally, i don't know the exact dimensions but you'd have to be quite abstract to get a cookie in there, not to mention the range of different payloads, in one lanc you can fit a massive variety of different bombs in one go, pictures i've found of the B-29's bomb bays arrangement seem to be suggestive of the bomb bays being particularly suited to carrying pretty much one size of bomb at a time, and i believe the biggest the yanks had in that range was the 2,000lber? the only modification i've seen for the B-29 even attempting to carry the tallboy internally still has the tallboy semi-recessed..........
__________________ "Reminds me of the time I sank the Tirpitz" comments a Spitfire pilot, "One pass of course, old boy." |
|
| |
|
08-07-2006, 04:10 AM
| #170 |
| Der Crewchief  Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Ansbach, Germany
Posts: 33,150
| Uh Lanc the B-29 had a larger bombay than the Lancaster so how was the Lancasters more versatile? The B-29 could carry the same weapons internally as the Lancaster. You need to post some evidence for that arguement of yours because its not true.
__________________  fly boy:"isnt that the first jet bomber becasue i have flown one in a flight sim before and i know how it handles"[/I] |
|
| |
|
08-07-2006, 05:55 AM
| #171 |
| Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 19,945
| length of tallboy- 21ft length of B-29's bomb bays- each one was 13ft 6 inches, she had two but there was the huge wing spar running between them, ruling out the tallboy internally......... the 12,000lb HC bomb would also be ruled out owing to similar dimensions this diagram  also suggests that bombs were only carried facing each other on those racks and bombs were not faced outwards into the centre? I'm also struggling to find dimensions of the cookie and 8,000lb bomb, however if the bombs are stacked in pairs to the sides then no racks would be available anyway and I'd imagine it'd be a squeeze in terms of bomb diammeter........... Lancaster Bomb Loads that site lists a number of the lancaster's standard payloads, many of which carry a wide range of different bombs and commanders knew that for whatever bombing they were doing the lancs could carry any combination of RAF bombs for the exact desired effect, the bomb loads were easily adjusted to what was needed allowing many, many more possabilities that were not "standard" as a final note on bbomb bay versatility after the dams raid, all lancs were converted back into standard bombers no different to any other lancs and were back on normal ops in the next few weeks............
__________________ "Reminds me of the time I sank the Tirpitz" comments a Spitfire pilot, "One pass of course, old boy." |
|
| |
|
08-07-2006, 06:28 AM
| #172 |
| Der Crewchief Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Ansbach, Germany
Posts: 33,150
| Good info, where did you get that diagram at?
__________________ fly boy:"isnt that the first jet bomber becasue i have flown one in a flight sim before and i know how it handles"[/I] |
|
| |
|
08-07-2006, 06:42 AM
| #173 |
| Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 19,945
| sorry should've said, source on right click, or just go straight to B-29 Cutaways: 39th Bomb Group (VH) there are some very interesting shots on that page.........
__________________ "Reminds me of the time I sank the Tirpitz" comments a Spitfire pilot, "One pass of course, old boy." |
|
| |
|
08-07-2006, 09:53 AM
| #174 |
| IP/Mech THE GREAT GAZOO Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Colorado, USA
Posts: 16,049
| To carry oversized bombs internally the B-29 had to be modified and there were plans to modify several for this role.
__________________ "IF ITS RED OR DUSTY, DON'T TOUCH IT" |
|
| |
|
08-08-2006, 03:02 AM
| #175 |
| Der Crewchief Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Ansbach, Germany
Posts: 33,150
| Cool thanks guys, learned something new.
__________________ fly boy:"isnt that the first jet bomber becasue i have flown one in a flight sim before and i know how it handles"[/I] |
|
| |
|
08-18-2006, 08:56 PM
| #176 |
| Junior Member Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: San Diego, Calif.
Posts: 6
| Best Bomber Was Heinkel He-111 My vote goes to the He-111 for providing the opp'ty for so many of our brave lads to get onto the score board. |
|
| |
|
08-19-2006, 06:25 AM
| #177 |
| Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 19,945
| what the and just how many Americans actually shot down He-111s? after the BoB they were mostly used on the eastern front, and there were easier bombers to shoot down.............
__________________ "Reminds me of the time I sank the Tirpitz" comments a Spitfire pilot, "One pass of course, old boy." |
|
| |
|
08-23-2006, 04:20 AM
| #178 |
| Der Crewchief Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Ansbach, Germany
Posts: 33,150
| Interesting concept I guess.
__________________ fly boy:"isnt that the first jet bomber becasue i have flown one in a flight sim before and i know how it handles"[/I] |
|
| |
|
08-25-2006, 12:49 PM
| #179 | |
| Member Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 79
| Quote:
 But seriously, the He-111 was a good aircraft for it's original design criteria, and was one of the mainstays of the Luftwaffe until it was rendered obsolete. | |
|
| |
|
08-26-2006, 10:38 PM
| #180 |
| "Shooter"   Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Moorpark, CA
Posts: 14,803
| Wow, thanks for doubling the number of Americans in the BoB.  There were only 7 Americans that flew in the BoB. Unfortunatlly, some Americans don;t know that there was actually a war going on in Europe before we got involved!  Morons.
__________________ http://www.vg-photo.com For once you have tasted flight you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards, for there you have been and there you will long to return. Leonardo Da Vinci |
|
| |
 |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
| |
Linear Mode
