Mosquito better than B-17?????

cheddar cheese · 02-17-2005, 04:21 PM

Ah sorry.

Well the Lancaster flew night missions as opposed to the B-17 during the day. Also, the Lancaster had a MUCH higher payload and was MUCH more manoeverable. The Lancaster's also tended to fly in smaller groups than the B-17's. Granted, it was not as tough but it did not need to be.

evangilder · 02-17-2005, 04:24 PM

I think the Lancaster vs. B-17 debate has been over-debated. They both had their advantages and disadvantages and I honestly like them both. I would have loved to have seen the Sally B and the Lanc fly together when I was over there. They often both flew at the air shows I attended, but not together. I think that woud have been cool.

Chiron · 02-17-2005, 04:31 PM

"are you just trying to find a way to bash the B-17?"

No, actually I like B-17 as much as I love all the bombers. I just want to know every bomber's advantage and its disadvange being a role in strategic bombing in WW2. And I want to know why some bomers were much capable of conducting some missions, while other did not.

evangilder · 02-17-2005, 04:44 PM

Okay, the way you worded a few things made me wonder. No offense was meant. The B-17 design and thinking at the time was that a well armed bomber would not be as vulnerable to enemy fire as they couls shoot back. Obviously that wasn't quite the case. Shooting back is one thing, being able to outmanuever and get away from the attacker is quite obviously another.

The B-17 could take substantial damage and make it back home. Granted, the planes could be damaged bad enough to be a write-off, but the crew could get another plane and fight on. The Lancaster was the heavyweight in Europe and was one heck of an aircraft as well. They both performed a hell of a job under the worst of conditions.

cheddar cheese · 02-17-2005, 04:46 PM

Agreed on all counts.

evangilder · 02-17-2005, 04:51 PM

The problem with debating like aircraft is that you will have devout fans of each type that will heartily argue that the plane they love is better than the other. The reality is that during the time, both types performed their roles as they were able to. This goes for the Fortress vs Lanc, Lightning vs Mosquito, etc. In both of those cases, I like them both and wouldn't think one "better" than the other.

By the way, speaking of that, I am 2 weeks away from getting my Mahogany P-38! I have a Mahogany Mossie already, so now I can put them side by side.

cheddar cheese · 02-17-2005, 04:56 PM

Nice!

Make sure the P-38 is on show more, and that its on a higher shelf

wmaxt · 02-17-2005, 05:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cheddar cheese

Agreed on all counts.

I Agree as well. What isn't always mentioned is that the B-17 was designed in 1935/36 to fight it's way in and back out that itr was able to do as well 9 years later against a foe a generation ahead (or was it two by that time?) is increadible.

The Lanc a generation ahead of the B-17 was designed for night bombing and did an exceptional job at it.

Hand in hand they were great and did the job they were there to do!

evangilder · 02-17-2005, 05:02 PM

Heh, I am going to have a challenge just fitting it in with the others! I have a Mahogany Stuka and Corsair in there as well as some smaller metal WWII birds! I think I'm gonna need a bigger displlay case.

wmaxt · 02-17-2005, 05:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cheddar cheese

Nice!

Make sure the P-38 is on show more, and that its on a higher shelf

I did just get a Phantom Mustang model. It's got a clear shell that shows all the inner workings and motors that spin the prop and operate the landing gear. It is a limited edition that is no longer produced but is sometimes available on ebay.

The P-38 is my favorite but this is still cool.

cheddar cheese · 02-17-2005, 05:07 PM

Me too. Theres no way im going to fit all my models in my room

Chiron · 02-17-2005, 05:13 PM

Nice info. Thanks. I bought the Fly Journal last month, which was the special edition devoted fully on B-17. One thing that I still had hard time to grasp is that before the appearance of P-51, why didnt US Air Force came up any solution to safeguard the B-17's vulnerability against fighters during bombing? I meant several B-17 veterans had commented on how dangerious was the condition of thier planes without P-51 around.

Why so late? Thats why I had heard some academics (although they are Birtish) had commented that Mosquito should be in the forefront of strategic bombing, not B-17.

evangilder · 02-17-2005, 05:18 PM

That does sound cool, wmaxt!

Nonskimmer · 02-17-2005, 05:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by evangilder

Heh, I am going to have a challenge just fitting it in with the others! I have a Mahogany Stuka and Corsair in there as well as some smaller metal WWII birds! I think I'm gonna need a bigger displlay case.

Sounds like quite a collection! In fact, I think I remember some pics you've posted of part of it.
Myself, I have need for a larger case for my collection of WWII soldiers. (they are not dolls!

) They look a bit silly standing amongst my wife's Barbie collection.

evangilder · 02-17-2005, 05:21 PM

Well, part of the problem in those days was that many fighters simply did not have the range to escort the bombers deep into Germany and back. The P-38 did though, and for awhile, it did escort. It would have been an interesting experiment to fly the B-17 with the Mossie flying escort. That would have been doable early in the war, but I think it was a question of available aircraft versus missions to fly.

There were American units that flew the Mossie though. I know I posted a pic of one a while back in one of these threads.