|
| |||||||
| Aviation Discussion on the aircraft of WWII. |
 |
| | LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
05-15-2009, 02:08 AM
| #1 |
| Junior Member Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 25
| carrier capable bomber what was the first carrier capable bomber (not dive bomber or torpedo bomber) bomber like the b-17 or b-24 |
|         |
|
05-15-2009, 02:19 AM
| #2 |
| Senior Member  Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Redding, California
Posts: 3,347
| *technically* it was the B-25, which was used in the Doolittle mission to bomb Tokyo. But that was a one-time deal. A B-17 or B-24 is just way to large to be deployed on an aircraft carrier.
__________________  "Look back over the past, with its changing empires that rose and fell, and you can foresee the future." - Marcus Aurelius, Emperor of Rome > I Support Doug Gillis < |
| |
|
05-15-2009, 02:29 AM
| #3 |
| Junior Member Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 25
| i meant what was the first heavy bomber which was carrier capable |
|
| |
|
05-15-2009, 02:35 AM
| #4 |
| Junior Member  Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 24
| The first carrier capable bomber would be the B25, but as it has been mentioned before it was a one time deal. On the other side, the B25 was a middle weight bomber (2 engines), not a heavy bomber. As it has also been mentioned no way a WWII heavy bomber (4 engines) like the B24 or B17 had been able to make it in a carrier. |
|
| |
|
05-15-2009, 03:01 AM
| #5 |
| Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Redding, California
Posts: 3,347
| To give you a rough idea why a "heavy" can't be launched from a carrier... The Hornet, which launched the B-25s for the Doolittle raid, has a deck of about 825 feet and is about 114 feet wide. Keep in mind that there is a structure (island) on the deck that narrows the usable width of the deck to a certain degree. A B-17 has a wingspan of 103 feet and would require a runway of about 3,400 feet. The B-24 had a wingspan of 110 feet, just 4 feet shy of the Hornet's overall deck width.
__________________ "Look back over the past, with its changing empires that rose and fell, and you can foresee the future." - Marcus Aurelius, Emperor of Rome > I Support Doug Gillis < |
|
| |
|
05-15-2009, 06:40 AM
| #6 | |
| Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 1,763
| Quote:
| |
|
| |
|
05-15-2009, 07:37 AM
| #7 |
| Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Lazio
Posts: 804
| carrier capable don't need the landing on carrier?? so no B-25 p.s. maybe Savage Last edited by Vincenzo; 05-15-2009 at 10:22 AM. |
|
| |
|
05-15-2009, 02:43 PM
| #8 |
| Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 374
| The first proper carrier based bomber was the d.H. Sea Mosquito with first deck landing in 1944 but entry into squadron service in 1946. It had folding wings, conformal fuel tanks on the outer wings and radar in the nose. |
|
| |
|
05-15-2009, 05:24 PM
| #9 | |
| Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Redding, California
Posts: 3,347
| Quote:
Since the Hornet did indeed launch 16 B-25 bombers from her deck, that would make the B-25 bomber the first to be accomodated by a carrier. 
__________________ "Look back over the past, with its changing empires that rose and fell, and you can foresee the future." - Marcus Aurelius, Emperor of Rome > I Support Doug Gillis < | |
|
| |
|
05-15-2009, 08:31 PM
| #10 |
| Senior Member  Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: South Carolina
Posts: 3,732
  | Well, the A-6 Intruder could carry almost as much bombs as a B-17 - 15k lbs.
__________________ "Those who forget the past are condemned to repeat it" "Those who dwell in the past, condemn the future"  Last edited by vikingBerserker; 05-15-2009 at 10:01 PM. |
|
| |
|
05-15-2009, 08:52 PM
| #11 |
| Senior Member  Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Orange County, CA
Posts: 10,279
| B-25's were capable of landing on a carrier. Although for all practical purposes, the B25 was not dedicated carrier bomber.
__________________ "Pilot to copilot..... what are those mountain goats doing up here in the clouds?" |
|
| |
|
05-15-2009, 09:26 PM
| #12 |
| Senior Member  Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Virginia
Posts: 490
| Not to mention Syd Bottomley landing a PBJ (a USN B-25) aboard USS Shangri La in November 1944 and then taking off with the aid of a catapult (hydraulic type, not steam). So yeah, it could be done. Also by June 1948, Johnny Hayward's VC-5 was operating P2Vs off carriers on a regular basis. Of course, these are all twin engine types. The USN TBD and TBF and the Japanese B5N had perfectly respectable level bombing capability. I'd have to look up what the Japanese used, but the USN planes used Norton bombsights.
__________________ hmmm ... I wonder what this switch does ... |
|
| |
|
05-15-2009, 09:50 PM
| #13 | |
| Junior Member Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 24
| Quote:
Any idea if it was possible for a "raw" B25 to land on an "raw" carrier, or extensive modifications to the plane landing gear and the carrier arresting and recovery equipment were required? That could mean that, in theory, an option for Doolittle's B25 could have been to come back to the Hornet instead of going all the way to China. Right? Was possible for Doolittle to do that: to go, bomb and come back to the Hornet or or distances made that a no-no? | |
|
| |
|
05-15-2009, 10:22 PM
| #14 | |
| Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Orange County, CA
Posts: 10,279
| Quote:
__________________ "Pilot to copilot..... what are those mountain goats doing up here in the clouds?" | |
|
| |
|
05-15-2009, 10:52 PM
| #15 |
| Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: South Carolina
Posts: 3,732
| I believe the Blackburn Baffin though designed as a Torpedo-Bomber could also be used as a level bomber and were used in 1934.
__________________ "Those who forget the past are condemned to repeat it" "Those who dwell in the past, condemn the future" |
|
| |
|
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
| |
Linear Mode
