 | 
01-06-2006, 02:39 PM
|
#61 | | Master of Ewes
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 19,959
Country:  | are you totally oblivious to the difference in size of the production lines we're talking about, at it's peak the ENTIRE A.V. Roe production group (that accounts for every factory, excluding the canadian one) employed 29,000 staff for lancaster production, willow run alone exployed 42,000, does that mean nothing to you?
you're not proving anything with this argument, i'm willing to drop it..........
__________________ 
"Reminds me of the time I sank the Tirpitz" comments a Spitfire pilot, "One pass of course, old boy." | 
|  | |
01-06-2006, 03:02 PM
|
#62 | | IP/Mech THE GREAT GAZOO
Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Colorado, USA
Posts: 13,207
Country:  | Quote: |
Originally Posted by syscom3 If you have all the componants needed to build a sub assembly, it can be built in no time at all. | Wrong! How long to you think it will take to assemble this!? 
Ribs and formers are jig located and positioned. All longerons have to be layed up, drilled, deburred, temporially installed with "clecos" (do you know what that is?) and then riveted together. You could only stick so many people within the assembly to do this.... 
__________________ "IF ITS RED OR DUSTY, DON'T TOUCH IT"  | |
| | |
01-06-2006, 03:14 PM
|
#63 | | IP/Mech THE GREAT GAZOO
Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Colorado, USA
Posts: 13,207
Country: | Quote: |
Originally Posted by the lancaster kicks ass are you totally oblivious to the difference in size of the production lines we're talking about, at it's peak the ENTIRE A.V. Roe production group (that accounts for every factory, excluding the canadian one) employed 29,000 staff for lancaster production, willow run alone exployed 42,000, does that mean nothing to you?
you're not proving anything with this argument, i'm willing to drop it.......... | I don't think our friend Sys had a clue how long it takes to assemble an aircraft sub assembly, especially one entirely riveted together... 
__________________ "IF ITS RED OR DUSTY, DON'T TOUCH IT" | |
| | |
01-06-2006, 03:39 PM
|
#64 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Orange County, CA
Posts: 8,285
| If twenty five B24's rolled off the assembly line, then 25 B24's rolled off the assembly line. Sub assembly assembly time is irrelevent. What counts is the total number of bombers produced per day/week/month.
Ive never heard of an airplane being flown into service without a major structural assembly. Theres been plenty of planes flown into service minus parts that dont distract from its airworthyness.
And the B24 still stands as being more efficient to build as if the Lanc design was as good, then it could be built just as fast.
Perhaps theres something in its design that held up the mass production? Perhaps the wings were complex enough it couldnt be built fast?
Lets see some numbers.
None of this conjecture.
__________________
"Pilot to copilot..... what are those mountain goats doing up here in the clouds?" | |
| | |
01-06-2006, 03:41 PM
|
#65 | | IP/Mech THE GREAT GAZOO
Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Colorado, USA
Posts: 13,207
Country: | Quote: |
Originally Posted by syscom3
Ive never heard of an airplane being flown into service without a major structural assembly. Theres been plenty of planes flown into service minus parts that dont distract from its airworthyness.
| WRONG - There are government inspectors that will make sure every part on the drawing is accounted for -
If you do that in the civilian world the FAA would fine and bring criminal action unless any deviations are documented.....
__________________ "IF ITS RED OR DUSTY, DON'T TOUCH IT" | |
| | |
01-06-2006, 05:35 PM
|
#66 | | World Traveler
Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Royal Deeside/St Andrews, Scotland, UK
Posts: 11,544
Country: | I agree with you FBJ, what matters is the total time to produce 1 bomber from it's components not the time it takes to assemble 1 bomber from sub assemblies.
Found this pic of a Lancaster production line: 
__________________  "Success is not Final, Failure is not Fatal, it is the Courage to Continue that Counts"
Sir Winston Churchill
"To him the People of the World Largely owe the Freedom and Liberties they Enjoy Today"
Enscription on Hugh Dowding's (AOC Fighter Command 1936-40) statue in London
Moderator WW2 Talk: A WW2 Discussion Forum
My Photo Collections on Flickr
| |
| | |
01-06-2006, 05:38 PM
|
#67 | | IP/Mech THE GREAT GAZOO
Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Colorado, USA
Posts: 13,207
Country: | Quote: |
Originally Posted by Gnomey what matters is the total time to produce 1 bomber from it's components not the time it takes to assemble 1 bomber from sub assemblies. | YEP!! 
Oh - nice photo! 
__________________ "IF ITS RED OR DUSTY, DON'T TOUCH IT" | |
| | |
01-06-2006, 05:39 PM
|
#68 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: London
Posts: 2,819
| Quote: |
Originally Posted by syscom3 Willow Run built a B24 per hour. Are you denying that? (Im saying 60 minuts is more or less 56 minutes in the scheme of things).
Many people have told you that you can complete a plane an hour but not build one
The Lincoln was more or less a beefed up Lanc? Right?
Wrong. It had so many differences it was renamed and new factories were needed. Try looking it up
And in 1943, the UK was not subject to the mass bomb raids of 1940 and 1941.
We had air raids until mid 1944. Not as heavy certainly but we couldn't ignore the danger. Plus of course the thousands of V1's that were launched against us and the hundreds of V2's
And your "shadow" factories would still be nearby the assembly plant(s).
Depends on the bit your producing.
Depen | | |
| | |
01-06-2006, 05:40 PM
|
#69 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: London
Posts: 2,819
| You would think that I would hav the hang of using quotes by now wouldn't you. | |
| | |
01-06-2006, 07:14 PM
|
#70 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Orange County, CA
Posts: 8,285
| Quote: |
Originally Posted by FLYBOYJ Quote: |
Originally Posted by syscom3
Ive never heard of an airplane being flown into service without a major structural assembly. Theres been plenty of planes flown into service minus parts that dont distract from its airworthyness.
| WRONG - There are government inspectors that will make sure every part on the drawing is accounted for -
If you do that in the civilian world the FAA would fine and bring criminal action unless any deviations are documented..... | Im refering to the 2nd world war aircraft. The USAAF gave waivers whenever it wanted just to get aircraft in service.
Why did you think I would compare commercial aircraft of these days as opposed ot 1941-1945?
__________________
"Pilot to copilot..... what are those mountain goats doing up here in the clouds?" | |
| | |
01-06-2006, 07:32 PM
|
#71 | | IP/Mech THE GREAT GAZOO
Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Colorado, USA
Posts: 13,207
Country: | Quote: |
Originally Posted by syscom3
Im refering to the 2nd world war aircraft. The USAAF gave waivers whenever it wanted just to get aircraft in service.
| So am I - the USAAF was not going to allow half built aircraft in service, if so they would of left out armor plate, self sealing tanks and radios. Quote: |
Originally Posted by syscom3 Why did you think I would compare commercial aircraft of these days as opposed ot 1941-1945? | Becuase of your own words.. Quote: |
Theres been plenty of planes flown into service minus parts that dont distract from its airworthyness.
| 
__________________ "IF ITS RED OR DUSTY, DON'T TOUCH IT" | |
| | |
01-06-2006, 08:37 PM
|
#72 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Orange County, CA
Posts: 8,285
| Self sealing tanks are important enough. So why would the production planners allow the wings to be built without them?
And armour plate can be installed at depots or on the tarmac while the plane is readied for acceptance. You think an assembly line would be stopped over that? I think not.
Note - this discussion is about WW2 bombers not year 2005 commercial aircraft. Dont use twisted logic to imply Im reffering to today and not 65 years ago.
__________________
"Pilot to copilot..... what are those mountain goats doing up here in the clouds?" | |
| | |
01-06-2006, 08:57 PM
|
#73 | | Minister of Whoopass
Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Long Island Native in Mississippi
Posts: 13,169
Country: | Quote: |
Dont use twisted logic to imply Im reffering to today and not 65 years ago.
| Thats a pretty brash statement there...
__________________  "Boyington was a Drunk, but He was a Drunk We'd Follow Straight Into Hell..."
-- Lt. William Northrop Case | |
| | |
01-06-2006, 09:05 PM
|
#74 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Orange County, CA
Posts: 8,285
| Because the subject of this post is Lanc vs B24 in the war years, and has nothing to do with commercial aircraft manufacture of 2005.
__________________
"Pilot to copilot..... what are those mountain goats doing up here in the clouds?" | |
| | |
01-06-2006, 09:08 PM
|
#75 | | IP/Mech THE GREAT GAZOO
Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Colorado, USA
Posts: 13,207
Country: | Quote: |
Originally Posted by syscom3 Self sealing tanks are important enough. So why would the production planners allow the wings to be built without them? | Initial production B-17s, P-40s, SDBs and B-24s were built without them. Quote: |
Originally Posted by syscom3 And armour plate can be installed at depots or on the tarmac while the plane is readied for acceptance. You think an assembly line would be stopped over that? I think not. | No it wouldn't - but it also won't be sent in combat without them. Quote: |
Originally Posted by syscom3 Note - this discussion is about WW2 bombers not year 2005 commercial aircraft. Dont use twisted logic to imply Im reffering to today and not 65 years ago. | Hey, your words were quoted, not mine....
__________________ "IF ITS RED OR DUSTY, DON'T TOUCH IT" | |
| | | 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 08:15 AM. | | |
