The Best Bomber of WWII: #4 - Page 43 - Aircraft of World War II

kool kitty89 · 10-31-2008, 07:09 PM

Sure do, you could have checked wikipedia: North American XB-28 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

But for photographs of US aircraft here's an excellent site: Main Aircraft Page

However, in this case the only picture given is that same one on wikipedia, so a google search is propably the best: XB-28 - Google Image Search

Graeme · 10-31-2008, 09:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kool kitty89

Here's an article on the XB-28: North American XB-28 Dragon
(I'm not sure why it lists a bombload of 4,000 lbs max, but then mentioned 6,000 lbs in the description, perhaps 6,000 lbs was with external load as well?)

A typo Chris. If you read Wagner's "American Combat Planes" (which he quotes from), the specification is listed as 2,040 miles with a 600 lb bomb load.

In 1945 NAA 'improved' the XB-28 to include turboprops, and from there onwards to the all-jet B-45...

D.H firemoth · 11-01-2008, 08:34 PM

Well the OHKA kamakazi jet rocket thing? would be good for knocking out ground targets becouse of its tremendous speed and explosive power

kool kitty89 · 11-01-2008, 09:24 PM

THat wasn't even its intended role though, it was used against ships.

Burmese Bandit · 12-05-2008, 11:25 AM

Best bomber....again, as with any 'best' thread, the headache of trying to juggle so many important criteria at once...

But my vote, in the end, must go to the B-17. For its impact and the role it played in the strategic thinking of so many postwar air forces.

syscom3 · 12-05-2008, 12:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Burmese Bandit

Best bomber....again, as with any 'best' thread, the headache of trying to juggle so many important criteria at once...

But my vote, in the end, must go to the B-17. For its impact and the role it played in the strategic thinking of so many postwar air forces.

Even though it was the B29 that had the most impact on strategic warfare?

What about the B29's superior performance over the B17 in every catagory?

FLYBOYJ · 12-05-2008, 12:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Burmese Bandit

But my vote, in the end, must go to the B-17. For its impact and the role it played in the strategic thinking of so many postwar air forces.

I think the B-29 had more of an influence....

Burmese Bandit · 12-05-2008, 09:19 PM

Yes, the B-29 had a tremendous influence - which is exactly my point. No B-17, no B-29. The USAAF had a tremendous fight just to get the B-17 funded (No thanks to the US Navy) and most people would agree to the proposition that had the USAAF lost the political and budgetary battle then, the B-29 would never have been built .... at least not by the USA!

FLYBOYJ · 12-05-2008, 09:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Burmese Bandit

Yes, the B-29 had a tremendous influence - which is exactly my point. No B-17, no B-29. The USAAF had a tremendous fight just to get the B-17 funded (No thanks to the US Navy) and most people would agree to the proposition that had the USAAF lost the political and budgetary battle then, the B-29 would never have been built .... at least not by the USA!

While I agree with your points, the fact is the B-29 was the most technically advanced and best heavy bomber of WW2.

kool kitty89 · 12-05-2008, 11:50 PM

And besides, the B-24 shared a lot of the work with the B-17, and were used in greater numbers. (each having their advantages over the other)

Burmese Bandit · 12-05-2008, 11:55 PM

Yep, the 29 had many technical innovations (you can see the influence of the 29 all the way down to the B-1B!) and yes, the 24's wing was a marvel in its time.

But war is more than just technical stats. War is politics, money, and also being in the right place at the right time.

FLYBOYJ · 12-06-2008, 12:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Burmese Bandit

But war is more than just technical stats. War is politics, money, and also being in the right place at the right time.

And the B-29 was all of that. Aside from the atomic bombing and its participation in the war, it paved the way for the next generation of bombardment aircraft and it's legacy is still with us today.

It was, by far the best bomber of WW2.

drgondog · 12-06-2008, 11:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Burmese Bandit

Yes, the B-29 had a tremendous influence - which is exactly my point. No B-17, no B-29. The USAAF had a tremendous fight just to get the B-17 funded (No thanks to the US Navy) and most people would agree to the proposition that had the USAAF lost the political and budgetary battle then, the B-29 would never have been built .... at least not by the USA!

I tend to agree the importance of the B-17 with respect to American airpower. No B-17 in the late 30's - no real Strategic airpower doctrine in place, probably no B-24 and possibly no B-29 because thye USN would have prevailed and restricted long range Army Air to continental US.

Probably the most important with the B-52 alongside.

That doesn't make the B-17 the 'Best' because of all the reasons advanced on performance as well as impact to the closure of WWII.

syscom3 · 12-06-2008, 11:48 AM

The B29 also had another innovation that was radical for its day, was the way the US Govt. decided on how to finance and produce it.

This was the first military contract in US history that was financed as "cost plus, fixed fee".

By removing the cost burden off of Boeing, technological advances could be incorporated into the design without Boeing worrying about going bankrupt if it didn't work out.

Burmese Bandit · 12-06-2008, 09:28 PM

....and which also opened the way to the *polite cough* cost 'overuns' abuse we see today...

12-06-2008, 11:48 AM	#644
syscom3 Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Orange County, CA Posts: 10,280	The B29 also had another innovation that was radical for its day, was the way the US Govt. decided on how to finance and produce it. This was the first military contract in US history that was financed as "cost plus, fixed fee". By removing the cost burden off of Boeing, technological advances could be incorporated into the design without Boeing worrying about going bankrupt if it didn't work out. __________________ "Pilot to copilot..... what are those mountain goats doing up here in the clouds?"

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

10-31-2008, 07:09 PM	#631
kool kitty89 Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: San Jose, CA Posts: 2,412	Sure do, you could have checked wikipedia: North American XB-28 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia But for photographs of US aircraft here's an excellent site: Main Aircraft Page However, in this case the only picture given is that same one on wikipedia, so a google search is propably the best: XB-28 - Google Image Search

11-01-2008, 08:34 PM	#633
D.H firemoth Junior Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Posts: 8	Well the OHKA kamakazi jet rocket thing? would be good for knocking out ground targets becouse of its tremendous speed and explosive power

11-01-2008, 09:24 PM	#634
kool kitty89 Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: San Jose, CA Posts: 2,412	THat wasn't even its intended role though, it was used against ships.

12-05-2008, 11:25 AM	#635
Burmese Bandit Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2008 Posts: 475	Best bomber....again, as with any 'best' thread, the headache of trying to juggle so many important criteria at once... But my vote, in the end, must go to the B-17. For its impact and the role it played in the strategic thinking of so many postwar air forces.

12-05-2008, 09:19 PM	#638
Burmese Bandit Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2008 Posts: 475	Yes, the B-29 had a tremendous influence - which is exactly my point. No B-17, no B-29. The USAAF had a tremendous fight just to get the B-17 funded (No thanks to the US Navy) and most people would agree to the proposition that had the USAAF lost the political and budgetary battle then, the B-29 would never have been built .... at least not by the USA!

12-05-2008, 11:50 PM	#640
kool kitty89 Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: San Jose, CA Posts: 2,412	And besides, the B-24 shared a lot of the work with the B-17, and were used in greater numbers. (each having their advantages over the other)

12-05-2008, 11:55 PM	#641
Burmese Bandit Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2008 Posts: 475	Yep, the 29 had many technical innovations (you can see the influence of the 29 all the way down to the B-1B!) and yes, the 24's wing was a marvel in its time. But war is more than just technical stats. War is politics, money, and also being in the right place at the right time.

12-06-2008, 09:28 PM	#645
Burmese Bandit Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2008 Posts: 475	....and which also opened the way to the polite cough cost 'overuns' abuse we see today...