Adler17
Prussian Feldmarschall
And the constructors of that plane worked before by Messerschmidt and Focke-Wulf...
Adler
Adler
-
Civilization 7 has been announced. For more info please check the forum here .
Top 10 Bomber Aircraft of All Time
- Thread starter El Justo
- Start date
The merlin design was much better at high altitudes. when they were still using the allison it limited the planes performance above 20,000 feet.
Ronald Harker, a Rolls Royce test pilot, first recommended mating the Mustang airframe to the Merlin engine, an idea which would transform the P-51 into a decisive weapon, capable of escorting American bombers all the way to Berlin. Harker test-flew an RAF Mustang on April 30, 1942, and noted that it was 30 MPH faster than the Spitfire Mk V and had almost double the range.
Harker's memo recommending the Merlin-Mustang combination (in which he erroneously identified Edgar Schmued as a former Masserschmitt employee) got the attention of Rolls Royce management,
Clausewitzian
Chieftain
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2007
- Messages
- 90
It's one of those strange things of WW2 that the germans never got their bomber act together after the war had started and the starting designs were proven flawed. Their only halfway decent medium bomber in mass production was the Ju-88 and they had no heavies. The allies left them far behind in both the medium and heavy bomber aspect (Mosquito, B-17 etc) as the war progressed. The fact that the He-111 remained a work horse for so long really says it all.
But then the allies kinda lagged in the tank department. The Sherman, by the way, is tougher to judge than you might think. It had one advantage over the Tiger types, in that it was mechanically more reliable. It was also far and away the most common type used by the allies, bringing all sorts of logistics advantages with it. There is something to be said for 20 Shermans that are operational, can easily be kept operational and can be used to blast infantry all over the place to 1 cranky Tiger that doesn't work most of the time and can't cross most bridges due to weight when it does (kinda nullifying a tanks mobility advantage). The germans had the Sherman option with the Panzer IV coupled to an improved gun (that could, sorta, deal with t-34's), but they chose a different course. I'll grant the tiger owned the fear factor, lol. And the german Panther is considered one of the finest all-round tanks of the war.
Dunno much about the soviet bomber story. They surely must have made some good ones?
After WW2 is kinda tough. The B-52 is obvious as a heavy, but for the rest...surely there has to be some pretty tough competition for the medium slot to the Tornado. I'm sure the yanks would want to posit the f-15E or F-111 or somesuch as a contender, and the russians probably have some too...
But then the allies kinda lagged in the tank department. The Sherman, by the way, is tougher to judge than you might think. It had one advantage over the Tiger types, in that it was mechanically more reliable. It was also far and away the most common type used by the allies, bringing all sorts of logistics advantages with it. There is something to be said for 20 Shermans that are operational, can easily be kept operational and can be used to blast infantry all over the place to 1 cranky Tiger that doesn't work most of the time and can't cross most bridges due to weight when it does (kinda nullifying a tanks mobility advantage). The germans had the Sherman option with the Panzer IV coupled to an improved gun (that could, sorta, deal with t-34's), but they chose a different course. I'll grant the tiger owned the fear factor, lol. And the german Panther is considered one of the finest all-round tanks of the war.
Dunno much about the soviet bomber story. They surely must have made some good ones?
After WW2 is kinda tough. The B-52 is obvious as a heavy, but for the rest...surely there has to be some pretty tough competition for the medium slot to the Tornado. I'm sure the yanks would want to posit the f-15E or F-111 or somesuch as a contender, and the russians probably have some too...
ravensfire
Member of the Opposition
It looks like the list is really only looking at "pure" bombers - planes that fly pretty straight and level to drop their payloads.
So, what would the tactical bomber list look like? (Dive bombers, tactical bombers, fighter bombers - anything but the big lumbering bombers!)
-- Ravensfire
So, what would the tactical bomber list look like? (Dive bombers, tactical bombers, fighter bombers - anything but the big lumbering bombers!)
-- Ravensfire
sabo
My Ancestors were Vikings
as far as payload, speed, adaptability (nuclear, non-nuclear), and out right terror bombers it would have to be the B-52. They predict that bomber will be in service for 100 years before it's retired. it was the one thing the Veitnamese dreaded the worst, not to mention Iraq.
General_CFR
Warlord
Interesting thread 
I'd like to add, that speaking about WW1 I should mention Ilya Muromets, the world's first four-engine strategic bomber. It was created by Igor Sikorsky.
Totally there were built more than 80 of them. During World War I, the Germans often refused to attack Ilya Muromets in the air due to their defensive firepower. On September 12, 1916, the Russians lost their first Ilya Muromets in a fight with four German Albatroses, three of which it managed to shoot down. This was also the only loss to enemy action during the war, while three others were damaged in combat, but managed to return to base to be repaired.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sikorsky_Ilya_Muromets
Performance
Maximum speed: 110 km/h (68 mph)
Wing loading: 36.8 kg/m² (7.5 lb/ft²)
Power/mass: 7.7 kg/hp (16.9 lb/hp)
Endurance: 5 hours with 300 kg (660 lb) of bombs & armament, 10 hours with extra fuel.
Armament
Various numbers and combinations of guns at different points during the war, including 12.7 mm, 15.3 mm, 25 mm, 37 mm, and 76.2 mm guns, Maxim guns, Lewis guns, Madsen guns, Colt machine guns and Leonid Kurchevsky's experimental recoilless guns among them.
Various loads of 50 kg, 100 kg and 656 kg bombs or 6 x 127 mm rockets (under the wings) depending on fuel, armament and crew carried. With three crew and two defensive machine-guns, a V type Ilya Muromets could carry 500 kg (1,100 lb) of bombs.
I'd like to add, that speaking about WW1 I should mention Ilya Muromets, the world's first four-engine strategic bomber. It was created by Igor Sikorsky.
Totally there were built more than 80 of them. During World War I, the Germans often refused to attack Ilya Muromets in the air due to their defensive firepower. On September 12, 1916, the Russians lost their first Ilya Muromets in a fight with four German Albatroses, three of which it managed to shoot down. This was also the only loss to enemy action during the war, while three others were damaged in combat, but managed to return to base to be repaired.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sikorsky_Ilya_Muromets
Performance
Maximum speed: 110 km/h (68 mph)
Wing loading: 36.8 kg/m² (7.5 lb/ft²)
Power/mass: 7.7 kg/hp (16.9 lb/hp)
Endurance: 5 hours with 300 kg (660 lb) of bombs & armament, 10 hours with extra fuel.
Armament
Various numbers and combinations of guns at different points during the war, including 12.7 mm, 15.3 mm, 25 mm, 37 mm, and 76.2 mm guns, Maxim guns, Lewis guns, Madsen guns, Colt machine guns and Leonid Kurchevsky's experimental recoilless guns among them.
Various loads of 50 kg, 100 kg and 656 kg bombs or 6 x 127 mm rockets (under the wings) depending on fuel, armament and crew carried. With three crew and two defensive machine-guns, a V type Ilya Muromets could carry 500 kg (1,100 lb) of bombs.
El Justo
Deity
yes, General CFR, that bomber was one of the first (if not the very first) bombers that struck fear into the enemy. i would think though that the reasonit's not on the list is b/c of payload capacity, ie the lack of it.
re the buffer and vietnam:
yes, it was perhaps the single most devestating aircraft that charlie feared. however, few realize that the AC-130 and the AC-47 were also feared by the insurgents. now, these aircraft aren't necessarily bombers in the pure sense (they're converted transport planes of ww2 vintage). instead, they performed in a fixed-wing gunship role and let me tell ya, they really knew how to put lead on target. their saturation rate of 105mm shells and 20mm gatling gun rounds scared the poop out of charlie. cuople this w/ advanced optics (ie see-in-the-dark) and these bad boys wreaked havoc on the HCM. i recall reading some NVA diaries and they mentioned how devestating the gun ships were against the convoys.
re the buffer and vietnam:
yes, it was perhaps the single most devestating aircraft that charlie feared. however, few realize that the AC-130 and the AC-47 were also feared by the insurgents. now, these aircraft aren't necessarily bombers in the pure sense (they're converted transport planes of ww2 vintage). instead, they performed in a fixed-wing gunship role and let me tell ya, they really knew how to put lead on target. their saturation rate of 105mm shells and 20mm gatling gun rounds scared the poop out of charlie. cuople this w/ advanced optics (ie see-in-the-dark) and these bad boys wreaked havoc on the HCM. i recall reading some NVA diaries and they mentioned how devestating the gun ships were against the convoys.
Zardnaar
Deity
I'm not American, British or German. B52 really is no 1 IMHO with the next 4 probably being Lancaster, B17, B24, and something else.. No german bomber should really be on that list (German tanks or fighters another story though).
Adler17
Prussian Feldmarschall
Well we can discuss about the Stuka, but here more as tactical bomber, which should be in another category, and the Zeppelin R.VI bomber of ww1.
Adler
Adler
Zardnaar
Deity
Not bad machines but top 10????
El Justo
Deity
the stuka is probably in a different class of aircraft. a very good machine for its time though.
e350tb
Stupendously Illogical Englishman
1. Avro Lancaster
2. Avro Lincoln
3. Vickers Wellington
4. B-29 (there you go, America)
5. Handley Page Halifax
6. Ju-87 Stuka
7. De Haviland Mosquito
8. B-17 Flying Fortess
9. Heinkel He-111
10. Canberra
2. Avro Lincoln
3. Vickers Wellington
4. B-29 (there you go, America)
5. Handley Page Halifax
6. Ju-87 Stuka
7. De Haviland Mosquito
8. B-17 Flying Fortess
9. Heinkel He-111
10. Canberra
El Justo
Deity
that list, coupled w/ your avatar, appears overtly biased and leaving the buffer off that list says alot...
and leaving the buffer off that list says alot...EnlightenmentHK
Emperor
- Joined
- May 28, 2007
- Messages
- 1,479
I'm more of an MBT guy myself, but I think the B-52 is a safe #1. Thing is massive, effective, durable, and pretty soon you'll have versions of it that have taken on 4 generations of pilots. Most of the B-52's built today will probably outlive me. Amazing aircraft. I'll leave the rest up to the aerophiles.
