The Best Bomber of WWII: #4

[syscom3]

Could a whole wing of Arado's be stationed on Guam and then fly 1600 miles to Japan and carry a usefull bombload? And have the avioncs required to navigate and find its targets?

I think not.

[mosquitoman]

I would go B29; Lanc; Liberator; Hally; Fort simply because I think the Halifax was better than people make out, I don't have any stats to prove this, it's my personal opinion

[davparlr]

Originally Posted by DerAdlerIstGelandet

Exactly there about there Arado.

It was a great aircraft but its range was limited and its payload was limited. Its only advantage over the others is its speed.

The B-17 and the B-24 to me are a toss up. Personally the B-24 was probably a better bomber but you can not beat the survivability of the B-17 which the B-24 did not have.

Yeah, that is a tough call. Certainly the B-17 was a better flying aircraft and had a grace about it the B-24 could only dream of.

[plan_D]

Could the B-29 operate without being detected? The Ar-234 did.

[syscom3]

Originally Posted by plan_D

Could the B-29 operate without being detected? The Ar-234 did.

And why was it undetectable?

[plan_D]

How am I supposed to know? But I do know the Allies didn't report a single Ar-234 operating over France or Britain until well into the Ar-234s service, and the first one destroyed was on it's landing pattern.
The Ar-234s operated over Britain until the last days of the war without any Allies knowing.

[syscom3]

It has no stealth charachteristics, therefore it should have been seen on radar.

Maybe its speed was such that radar operators ignored it as being "something cant be flying that fast"

[plan_D]

Possibly. Either way, it wasn't reported or reacted to.

[trackend]

Spoke to a ex Raf pilot two weeks ago in Spain Mossie who joined at the end of WW2 he flew Mosquito's mainly, including in Korea. He told me that he ferried Lancs and Halifaxes and didn't think much of the Halifax. He also flew Daks as part of the Berlin airlift.

[syscom3]

Originally Posted by trackend

.....he flew Mosquito's mainly, including in Korea. .....

They flew in Korea? I didnt knwo that.

[FLYBOYJ]

Never heard that but the RAF had Mosquitoes until 1960 or 61....

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Either way the Ar-234 in no way is the best bomber of WW2. As stated by myself and others it was a great aircraft and represented the future of modern bombers but other than superior speed it did not have the capabilities of the B-29, Lancaster, B-17, and B-24 and that is the ability to pulverise whole countries into submission basically.

[Neilster]

Originally Posted by plan_D

How am I supposed to know? But I do know the Allies didn't report a single Ar-234 operating over France or Britain until well into the Ar-234s service, and the first one destroyed was on it's landing pattern.
The Ar-234s operated over Britain until the last days of the war without any Allies knowing.

Perhaps the home defence radar at the time was incapable of detecting a single aircraft. Fleets of He 111s yes but a single quite small Ar 234?

Either that or they knew they were there but as the Ar 234 is penetrating at very high speed and altitude, what could scramble, climb to that height and catch it before it's gone? The Meteor 1s weren't fast enough.

Just a couple of thoughts.

Cheers, Neilster

[Henk]

Well Neilster the Arado 234 Blitz did not have a great range if you take that a jet engine loves to drink up fuel.

I wonder if the Ju-390 bomber version could have been a great bomber? I am not talking about at the time it flew but if it stats could have proved it self as a great bomber.

Forget about the situation of Germany of the time.

[Neilster]

Originally Posted by Henk

Well Neilster the Arado 234 Blitz did not have a great range if you take that a jet engine loves to drink up fuel.

I was referring to an earlier post about the detectability of Ar 234s over Britain and was not making any statement about their suitability as a bomber. Over Britain they were reconnaissance machines and according to The Arado Ar-234...

When used as a reconnaissance aircraft, the Ar-234B carried a 300 liter (79 US gallon) drop tank under each engine in place of the bombs.

And further...

The fuel consumption of the Jumos varied widely with altitude. At 10,000 meters, it was a third of what it was at sea level. This meant that for low-altitude bombing missions, the operational radius of the aircraft was only about 190 kilometers (120 miles), while in high-altitude reconnaissance operations the range was as much as 720 kilometers (450 miles) with the drop tanks.

Also, your statement about jet engine fuel consumption is somewhat broad. Early gas turbines were thirsty by modern standards but they were more compact than piston engines and their associated supercharger installations, leaving extra room for fuel. All gas turbines are much more efficient in the cold, dry air at high altitude, which is where a recon aircraft spends most of its time.

As far as I'm aware, as part of Operation Fortitude North, the Allied strategic deception to convince Germany of a US Army Group in East Anglia, some German aircraft were deliberately allowed to overfly England in order to see the dummy formations. I know that Ar 234s were involved in these missions and that may go part way to explaining why it appears they were "undetected".

Even a high flying, single Ar 234 would most likely be spotted by the Observer Corps in the clear conditions conducive to reconaissance operations, and it then could have been picked up by the accurate locally based radars that were common by mid 1944. Whether it could have been intercepted is another matter.

Cheers, Neilster