Lancaster over Hamburg

Added on March 3rd, 2010 by Wyrdstone | Report Post
Tags:Military, WTF

Could carry a bomb that weighed about 10000kg
B17 would carry 1/3 of that

7 Comments

Inline Feedbacks

View all comments

figosound (#16176)

14 years ago

dunno… b17 perhaps was more sturdy, and required less fuel… why has the allies chosen b17 if not so?

atkinson (#2026)

14 years ago

Lancaster:
Bombs: Maximum normal bomb load of 14,000 lb (6,300kg) or 22,000 lb Grand Slam with modifications to bomb bay.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avro_Lancaster
B-17:
Bombs:
* Short range missions (<400 mi): 8,000 lb (3,600 kg)
* Long range missions (?800 mi): 4,500 lb (2,000 kg)
* Overload : 17,600 lb (7,800 kg)
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B-17_Flying_Fortress
Atk

atkinson (#2026)

Reply to atkinson

14 years ago

Ops: And four wonderful R&R Merlin! 😉

figosound (#16176)

Reply to atkinson

14 years ago

ok, lancaster has bigger payload, but i was wondering: b17 -> 12000+ built, lancaster -> 7000+ built

That must have something to do with economy of scale, less metal used, maybe better maneuverability or easier repairs…

Atk, please illuminate us!

Or, at least, post some dickgirls 🙂

rebelyell2006 (#3264)

Reply to figosound

14 years ago

The Lancaster was more suited for night-time bombing, requiring more bomb space but less crew space, to combine with the advantages of not being seen by the enemy fighters.

The Flying Fortress was just that — a fortress going through the air. It had more armor, more crew members, and more machine guns, generally 13 .50-caliber M2’s compared to the 8 .303-caliber machine guns on the Lancaster.

atkinson (#2026)

Reply to figosound

14 years ago

Lancaster: 7,377
B-17: 12,731
B-24: 18,482 “It was produced in greater numbers than any other American combat aircraft of World War II, and still holds the record as the most-produced American military or naval aircraft.”
(Wiki)
Is a matter of industrial capacity, not quality of the aircraft.
But all they was good planes!
Atk