 | twin engined bombers.| Aviation Discuss twin engined bombers. in the World War II - Aviation forums; now,i know lots of twins were used for other duties,so what do you think was the best all ... |
|
07-04-2008, 10:43 AM
|
#1 | | Senior Member
Join Date: May 2008 Location: carbon canyon
Posts: 154
Country: | twin engined bombers. now,i know lots of twins were used for other duties,so what do you think was the best all round twin engined bomber of ww2.please do include other duties as well,as i think this would make good reading.yours,starling.
__________________ fair and balanced,just like fox news. |
| |
07-04-2008, 12:27 PM
|
#2 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Ocala Florida USA
Posts: 105
Country: | I would have to go with the mosquitto.What did it NOT do well ?
Ed |
| |
07-04-2008, 12:35 PM
|
#3 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 189
Country: | Ju-88 and Pe-2 imo. |
| |
07-04-2008, 12:46 PM
|
#4 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: UK
Posts: 3,542
Country: | Mossie, brilliantly concept totally went against the grain (no punn intended) at a time when stressed skin alloys was the in thing. |
| |
07-04-2008, 04:54 PM
|
#5 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 912
Country: | I think the mosquito was the best twin engined bombe. Adequate bomb load, high performace, and tru multi-role. add to that low production costs, and you have a war winner
__________________ Do not judge on abilities, but on choices |
| |
07-05-2008, 10:25 AM
|
#6 | | Senior Member
Join Date: May 2008 Location: carbon canyon
Posts: 154
Country: | i like the wellington.but how would the pe-2 or the tu-2,or tu-4.i am not up on russian aircraft,compare to the mossie.yours,starling.
__________________ fair and balanced,just like fox news. |
| |
07-05-2008, 11:40 AM
|
#7 | | Der Crewchief
Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Ansbach, Germany
Posts: 29,767
Country: | I think the best twins were (in no particular order)
Junkers Ju 88
Mosquito
B-25 Mitchell
these 3 aircraft were very vesatile, while I consider the Ju 88 the most versatile.
__________________ US Army Blackhawk Crewchief 2000-2006 Classic ww2aircraft.net quotes: fly boy said: "isn't that the first jet bomber? becasue i have flown one in a flight sim before and i know how it handles" "wait what ok who made the b-2 crash come on people that messed up its a b-2" "ah yes the mistel those things are so annoying is games and in real life" |
| |
07-05-2008, 07:09 PM
|
#8 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Las Vegas, Nevada
Posts: 262
Country: | Agreed. I actually think the Mosquito is a little better just because of the brilliance of the design and because of its speed. I don't know, Ju88 was pretty good as well. |
| |
07-06-2008, 02:34 AM
|
#9 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 257
Country: | Mosquito clearly first - it had a huge payload/range and was so fast that it was extremely difficult for the Luftwaffe to intercept. At a time when the Lancaster and other RAF heavy night bombers were suffering 5% losses on each raid, the Mossie's losses were 0.5%. That made it astonishingly efficient, because it was necessary to replace the planes and crews at only one-tenth of the rate (and with only two crew, two engines and no guns, each loss was far less costly). In other versions the Mossie was also highly versatile, being as good a night-fighter as any in the war, and was used in anti-submarine work too (especially the Tsetse, with that 57mm Molins gun).
Second place would be the Ju 88 family. Equally versatile, but lacking the performance of the Mosquito.
I'm not sure where the rest would come. There were some good US and Soviet mediums, but I don't have enough information about their service records to make meaningful comparisons. It's important to remember that the strength of the opposing fighter force made a lot of difference to the effectiveness of bombers (as did the presence or otherwise of escort fighters). A bomber might do well in one theatre but get slaughtered in another, or if the circumstances changed.
__________________ Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition website |
| |
07-06-2008, 07:57 AM
|
#10 | | IP/Mech THE GREAT GAZOO
Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Colorado, USA
Posts: 13,207
Country: | I give the Mossie high marks in it's operational record and it's versatility. Although it light construction was a plus, it was also it's undoing in the post-war years. The Ju 88 also a versatile aircraft, but I'll throw the A-26 into the mix. Fast, modern, remote control turrets, and a great bomb load, it served until the 1960s.
__________________ "IF ITS RED OR DUSTY, DON'T TOUCH IT" |
| |
07-06-2008, 08:27 AM
|
#11 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Montrose, Colorado
Posts: 2,170
Country: | The A26 came in late but it was a heck of a twin engined bomber. As a bomber, probably superior to the Mosquito. |
| |
07-06-2008, 08:55 AM
|
#12 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: oregon
Posts: 2,256
Country: | Quote:
Originally Posted by FLYBOYJ I give the Mossie high marks in it's operational record and it's versatility. Although it light construction was a plus, it was also it's undoing in the post-war years. The Ju 88 also a versatile aircraft, but I'll throw the A-26 into the mix. Fast, modern, remote control turrets, and a great bomb load, it served until the 1960s. | Joe - I was thinking with you. Having said that, if the question was best based on versatilty I would go first with Mossie, second with the Ju88.
The A-26 was simply a better weapons system than the B-25, and as a medium bomber I think it was better than the B-26, the B-25 and the Ju 88.
But the B-25 through mid 1944 was the 'do everything' medium for US, serving in all services and all theatres. The only thing it didn't do vs the Ju 88 was recon and 'bomber interceptor' simply because there was no need to force fit the B-25 when other systems were in place that were far better than both.
Obviously the Ar 234 is best 'future weapon system' and best at the end of the war on sheer performance vs contribution - but it wasn't around long enough to cause any problems. |
| |
07-06-2008, 10:21 AM
|
#13 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 102
Country: | Ju-88 and Mossie. Both are "Jack of all trades". Maybe slight edge to the Mossie, but not by much. |
| |
07-08-2008, 08:01 AM
|
#14 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Adelaide
Posts: 244
Country: | Beaufighter? Could that be classed as a bomber at all or only a fighter-bomber?
__________________ Im an Aussie and very very proud of it. |
| |
07-08-2008, 08:28 AM
|
#15 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: UK
Posts: 3,542
Country: | I think the Mossies performance gave it the edge over the JU88 |
| | | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | | | | | Display Modes | Linear Mode |
Posting Rules
| You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts HTML code is Off | | | All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:42 AM. |  | |