Luftwaffe and Allied Air Forces Discussion Forum

Luftwaffe and Allied Air Forces Discussion Forum (http://forum.12oclockhigh.net/index.php)
-   Allied and Soviet Air Forces (http://forum.12oclockhigh.net/forumdisplay.php?f=7)
-   -   The momentous cost of Bomber Command. (http://forum.12oclockhigh.net/showthread.php?t=23072)

richard.k 29th November 2010 23:14

Re: The momentous cost of Bomber Command.
 
3 Squadrons from the RCAF contingent in Africa attacked Foggia railyards with an average load of 4,500 lbs of ordinance from between 8 to 10,000 feet in mid August 43 at night with Wellington X's. Looking though other August attacks, there was nothing above 10,000 feet and some crews down to as low as 6,000 feet. Bombing accuracy would obviously be better, defences lighter. I wouldn't relish the thought of pounding over the Ruhr at between those heights, day or night. A whole different ball game.
Richard

Kutscha 30th November 2010 00:25

Re: The momentous cost of Bomber Command.
 
Quote:

And please remember that this large bomb could be carried by the 54 Mosquito B Mk IVs that were modified by BC with a bulged bomb bay. So I believe the Mosquito was up to fulfilling the Transportation Plan had that aircraft been available in numbers - which it would have been in the absence of BC.
That would be 20 B.Mk IVs, not 54.

That would be the 4000lb 'blast' bomb, the Cookie. BC didn't modify the Mosquito, deHavilland did. deHavilland also built a few 'pregnant' B. Mk XIs of the 54 built and 390 'pregnant' B.Mk XVIs.

Bomb load was 4 x 500lb bombs.

Tell us Tony how the Mosquito could have been built in greater numbers. To carry a similar weight of bombs as the Lancaster and Halifax on a mission, up to 7 times as many Mosquitoes would be required. Where were all these extra highly trained pilots and navigators to come from?

glider1 30th November 2010 04:55

Re: The momentous cost of Bomber Command.
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Kutscha (Post 118164)
That would be 20 B.Mk IVs, not 54.

That would be the 4000lb 'blast' bomb, the Cookie. BC didn't modify the Mosquito, deHavilland did. deHavilland also built a few 'pregnant' B. Mk XIs of the 54 built and 390 'pregnant' B.Mk XVIs.

Bomb load was 4 x 500lb bombs.

Tell us Tony how the Mosquito could have been built in greater numbers. To carry a similar weight of bombs as the Lancaster and Halifax on a mission, up to 7 times as many Mosquitoes would be required. Where were all these extra highly trained pilots and navigators to come from?

Depending on the range wanted Mossie's often carried 2 x 500lb bombs under the wing. The 'pregnant' mosquito could carry 6 x 500lb bombs internally.

The extra highly trained pilots and navigators would probably come from the crews not shot down in Lancasters and Halifax's. The Mosquito loss rate was a fraction of the Heavy Bombers and only heaven knows how many lives would have been saved.

Juha 30th November 2010 09:00

Re: The momentous cost of Bomber Command.
 
Hello Glider
Lanc load to railway yards in France seems to have been 13 - 14 x 1000lb, 1 x 4000lb + 16 x 500lb or 18 x 500lb and in Western Germany 16 x 500 + 30 x 40lb, so one Lanc could carry a same load than 3 – 4 Mossies and that 13 – 14 x 1000lb load would have been uneconomical to divide to Mossies, unbulged Mk IV could carry 1 x 1000lb + 2 x 500lb, I’m not sure if even bulged bomb bay had enough width for 2 1000lb GPs. Marshalling yards were one of the target types which suited better to Lanc than Mossie or Boston.

Juha

Steve Smith 30th November 2010 09:38

Re: The momentous cost of Bomber Command.
 
I thought this thread was finished, but it has sprung back to life.


For what we are about to receive !!!!!!!

Is it me or is this subject becoming somewhat stretched out and monotonous !!!

Allan125 30th November 2010 10:04

Re: The momentous cost of Bomber Command.
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve Smith (Post 118172)
I thought this thread was finished, but it has sprung back to life.

For what we are about to receive !!!!!!!

Is it me or is this subject becoming somewhat stretched out and monotonous !!!

hi Steve

I have to agree with you and cannot see where we go from here!!

Allan

SES 30th November 2010 10:32

Re: The momentous cost of Bomber Command.
 
I concur. May I suggest this finishing note please:

RETURN AT DAWN



By Morris Marshall
(RNZAF Overseas, from Contact, Feb 1944)

The early dawn has seen their first homecoming,
Has seen them struggle grimly through the skies.
The skylark hearkens to the engines' pulsing
and feels akin to every man who flies.

The grazing beast lifts gentle eyes in wonder
To gaze upon the victors' brave return
But knows not of the dangers that beset them
Who flew into the dark of early morn.

And winging back from out the far horizons,
Now hidden deep in smoke from work well done
The bomber crews give thanks to One Almighty
Who gave them strength to battle till they won.


bregds
SES

CJE 30th November 2010 12:25

Re: The momentous cost of Bomber Command.
 
If everyone could use the standard police size, it would help to read each post without us having gaping zombie eyes at the end of the thread.

Merci.

John Beaman 30th November 2010 14:57

Re: The momentous cost of Bomber Command.
 
Well, I think this thread has outlived its usefulness. I'm closing it.


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 20:32.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2018, 12oclockhigh.net