Heinkel 111

[MiloMorai]

How is medium bomber defined? Mossie had both range and bombload of one.

 

And btw:"The medium bomber was generally considered to be any level bomber design that delivered about 4,000 pounds (1,800 kg) of ordnance over ranges of about 1,500 to 2,000 mi (2,400 to 3,200 km)."

 

 

That definition would make the B-17 a medium bomber as its typical load in the ETO was 4000lb.

[Finkeren]

Say which plane you think is better medium bomber?!

Nominating a plane to be "the best" in its class is always gonna rely on a certain portion of personal preference, and there is no definate answer there. However, it is relatively easy to identify planes, that do not quality for the title, and the He-111 is among them. It's simply not outstanding in any way other than having a relatively large bomb load. Other than that its capabilities are at best average.

 

So what was the best medium bomber of WW2?

 

I realise that the B-25 propably was "the best", meaning that it's the one I would rather have been flying in combat myself. Better defensive armament and overall survivability, just puts it it a class of its own.

 

However, I have a personal favourite in the Tu-2S. It has pretty much got it all, and beats the He-111 in every category except internal bomb load. In key areas it is so far above the 111, that there's no contest at all: It's far more maneuverable in every way, 100km/h faster, has a 50% greater service ceiling, climbs far better, has strong offensive guns and carries a similar or even bigger bomb load when using external hard points (and unlike the He-111 it did not require rocket assisted take off when fully loaded)

[MiloMorai]

No one has mentioned the B-26. Had the lowest loss rate in the ETO.

[LLv34_Flanker]

S!

 

 I would bet on A-26 Invader as best medium bomber. Fast and armed to teeth. Only one that saw 3 wars too: WW2, Korea and Vietnam.

[Cybermat47]

No one has mentioned the B-26. Had the lowest loss rate in the ETO.

Wasn't she also known as 'The Flying Whore'?

[MiloMorai]

S!

 

 I would bet on A-26 Invader as best medium bomber. Fast and armed to teeth. Only one that saw 3 wars too: WW2, Korea and Vietnam.

 

Needs a 'B' before the numbers to be a bomber. 'A' was for 'attack'.

Wasn't she also known as 'The Flying Whore'?

 

And few more uncomplimentary names.

[LLv44_Mprhead]

That definition would make the B-17 a medium bomber as its typical load in the ETO was 4000lb.

Not really, I think with 4000lb bombload B-17's range would be more than 2000mil. And anyway, I think maximum bombload of 9600lb kinda would put it out of medium bomber class. Ofc that is true in sense, B-17 could deliver 4000lb with 2000mil range... And yes, I did get your point. But still, I think that definition of medium bomber is not so clear than we would maybe think, as mossie demonstrates.

 

If we would start listing best medium bombers, B-25 and B-26 would both be high on mine.

[6./ZG26_Gielow]

So wait, now you are confusiing "effective" with "best"?

 

 

Maybe I'm not being clear.  They are different aircraft in different roles.  Sorry.  You're just trying to distract attention onto unrelated topics.

To be effective is to be the best.

 

I told that he177 is a strategic bomber and he111 is a medium bomber.

Edited November 16, 2013 by Rama
removing rude comments

[6./ZG26_Gielow]

http://historyofwar.org/articles/weapons_he111_combat.html

 

So, the Luftwaffe lost half of the He 111s in the BoB that they started the battle with, to planes armed with .303 machine guns. Yeah, sounds like a real winner!

 

And there's the problem the 111 had. The idea that bombers would always be able to outrun enemy interceptors was a flawed concept that cost the Germans big time again and again and again, and that's why it was gradually withdrawn from Luftwaffe service as the war dragged on. Even the most mediocre LaGG-3 or Yak could intercept it in 1941.

Losses were high due to lack of fighter cover and use of radar for interception. 109 with no external tanks. Just ask 8th air force before mustang cover in 43. It was the same case.

 

I said that He111 could outrun fighters back on 30s not in 41. Sorry.

B-25, hand's down. Better-armed, more robust, and far more versatile.

 

No way!! You just looking cold performance numbers again. B25 havent seen half action that he111 had seen. Besides that he111 had more advanced payload with guided rockets, bombs and torpedo kommandgerat.

[Bearcat]

 

Did you read the part about " manual performance numbers as you theorical guys like"?! OK I see you cant understand what you read like our pal up there. I can enlight you because I am good guy. I meant that he177 in paper would be the best heavy bomber. But just in paper. Did you got it now?!

 

P51?! Are ou joking?! 109 had ten thousands more kills than P51. 109 is the best fighter plane ever!! But I know that allied propaganda, discovery and history channels wont let you think for yourself.

 

OK guys we need to ratchet some of the passion back a bit..

[Meteor2]

This discussion has left its track a little bit, I think. I love flying the 111 in CoD, but I would never think of it as the "best" medium bomber of WW2. In its development it was targeted as a civilian plane for the Lufthansa and only later some mlitary qualities were disccovered.

Valid in the 30ies but less and less in the 40ies. Nevertheless, I am very excited to see, how much love for details will go into this nice (at least for me) plane. CoD has set interessting standards here. Will BoS meet them???

[6./ZG26_Gielow]

Yeah, I read that you were making assumtions about people you don't know.

 

"In paper" the he177 had an awful lot of problems and crashes.  You have a funny way of defining "best".

The major flaw was coupled engines that overheated. On paper it was a great design idea because you could have the power of 2 engines and the drag of 1 propeller. I said in paper would be the best heavy bomber.

Edited November 16, 2013 by Rama
removed provocative comment

[LLv44_Mprhead]

This is pointless anyway. JtD summed the whole thing up quite well earlier: "Judging by what's been said so far, a medium bomber is any plane that is inferior to the He 111, whereas any plane superior to the He 111 in any way is not a medium bomber. With that definition, you're safe to end up with the He 111 as the best medium bomber, ever, period. Any other definition, and things get way too complicated. ;)"

There are lot's of bombers that are more robust, have better manoeuvrability, survivability, better range, better defensive armament, higher service ceiling etc. Like B-25, B-26, Tu-2, Ju-88 to name a few, but none of this matters, because OP has chosen to define "best medium bomber" in a way, that He 111 fits in and discards any catergories where He 111 does not shine.

 

P.S. B-25 was also used to launch guided missiles and it was in service until 1979, giving it a career of 38 years, where as He 111 served from 1935 to 1958, which gives it 15 years shorter career. But I am sure this can also be expained away

[MarcoRossolini]

Any ideas about he111?! Or just trying to playing funny guy?! Just saying because you are not impressing anyone here

 

 

Can we agree that we both are and make an end to it?

 

Bloody hell, 38 years of service? For a piston engined aircraft, that's damn impressive, I think that's the most telling piece of evidence there.

 

I'm still trying to see what Gielow is getting at here, he's saying that He.111 is the best medium bomber of the war but has he backed up his statements at all? Whilst at the same time demanding that we do? He's trying to prove something here, not us.

[FlatSpinMan]

Wow.You have completely lost the plot here, JG62Gielow.

This kind of behaviour is not cool at all. I'll tidy up this thread in a moment.

[FlatSpinMan]

Okay. Edited out pretty much every damned post on this page as they contributed nothing to the cause of human advancement, and in some cases  I suspect may have actively worked against it. Now that we all have that out of our systems, let's proceed.

[HeavyCavalrySgt]

To be effective is to be the best.

 

I told that he177 is a strategic bomber and he111 is a medium bomber.

 

By your logic, the Hurricane must have been the best fighter in the Battle of Britain because it shot down the most enemy aircraft.  It was undoubtedly effective, but most people probably wouldn't call it the best.

 

When evaluating something as complex as an aircraft, there are usually things they do well, things the do acceptably and things the don't do well.  With any luck, they are employed in ways that meet their strengths, like the Hurricane was, while minimizing the impact of their weaknesses.

 

The major flaw was coupled engines that overheated. On paper it was a great design idea because you could have the power of 2 engines and the drag of 1 propeller. I said in paper would be the best heavy bomber.

 

Yeah, on paper it killed a lot of crews.  Sorry.

[SKG51_robtek]

With the He177A4 almost all flaws of this bomber were gone and Germany had a strategic bomber when it could use only tactical bombers anymore

[DD_Arthur]

The best bomber of the war was the Mosquito. It could take the same payload to Berlin as a B17.  All other designs which involved crew operated defensive armament or power operated turrets were based on the false premise of the self-defending bomber which was developed in the nineteen thirties.  The only effective defences for the daylight bomber are either long range escort fighters or the height and speed performance of the bomber itself.  By adding weight, complexity, drag and extra crewmen to operate defensive systems, the performance of a conventional bomber becomes so compromised that it is a sitting duck.

 

This was true from August 1914 right up to May 1st. 1960.

 

On the other hand, flying the HE111 in CoD is an absolute blast.  Really looking forward to what BoS can do with this iconic aircraft. Also really looking forward to flying a Mosquito in a future theatre in this series......hopefully.

Edited November 17, 2013 by arthursmedley

[Cybermat47]

The best bomber of the war was the Mosquito.

I respectfully disagree. In terms of bombload, the best was the Lancaster. It could take a 4000Ib 'blockbuster' bomb, and incendiaries, to Berlin.

[MarcoRossolini]

Whilst Payload wise of coarse the Lancaster is up there (though then I think for destructive power the B-29 might have it there, being a nuclear bomber) but notice how basically the premise of the mosquito (not having defensive armament and loads of gunners protecting it) has been carried through til today?

[DD_Arthur]

I respectfully disagree. In terms of bombload, the best was the Lancaster. It could take a 4000Ib 'blockbuster' bomb, and incendiaries, to Berlin.

 

 The Lancaster could take two blockbusters to Berlin.   The Lancaster and the B17 were the worst bombers of WW2!

[Cybermat47]

The Lancaster could take two blockbusters to Berlin.   The Lancaster and the B17 were the worst bombers of WW2!

I'm going to assume that you meant Mosquito in your first sentence.

 

The Lancaster could carry a 22,000Ib bomb to Wilhelmshaven!

[MiloMorai]

Lancaster bomb load options, http://www.lancaster-archive.com/lanc_bomb_loads.htm

[Cybermat47]

Lancaster bomb load options, http://www.lancaster-archive.com/lanc_bomb_loads.htm

Thanks! That's given me some ideas for missions for IL2 1946 DBW

Whilst Payload wise of coarse the Lancaster is up there (though then I think for destructive power the B-29 might have it there, being a nuclear bomber) but notice how basically the premise of the mosquito (not having defensive armament and loads of gunners protecting it) has been carried through til today?

I think that's due to the fact that MGs aren't as good as defensive armament in the age of SAMs, AAMs, and DAMNs.

[LukeFF]

The best bomber of the war was the Mosquito. It could take the same payload to Berlin as a B17.  All other designs which involved crew operated defensive armament or power operated turrets were based on the false premise of the self-defending bomber which was developed in the nineteen thirties.  The only effective defences for the daylight bomber are either long range escort fighters or the height and speed performance of the bomber itself.  By adding weight, complexity, drag and extra crewmen to operate defensive systems, the performance of a conventional bomber becomes so compromised that it is a sitting duck.

 

This was true from August 1914 right up to May 1st. 1960.

 

To be fair the Germans did pick up on that idea with the war, in the form of the Ar 234. But, of course by that time the German bomber force was a shell of its former self.

[Lord_Haw-Haw]

Wasn´t the Lancaster a bit of a death trap, that when hit, the crew had troubles to bail out?

[Furio]

Just in the interest of logic, we should stop comparing apples and oranges, or a He111 with an A26. The Heinkel was a very good bomber in the Spanish Civil War. But the same is true for the Tupolev SB, faster than every fighter at the time of it’s debut, but hopelessly obsolete when WWII began. Talking of German medium bombers and guided missiles, the Do217 was better than the 111 in any respect.

 

In any case, if we want to seriously discuss bombers – heavy, medium or light doesn’t matter – we should do two things. First: compare types of the same generation. Second: use some simple math. The whole scope of any bomber is to deliver bombs. We should compare bomb load with: speed, range, crew (how many lives you lose for each bomb delivered). All these factors considered, the Mosquito is surely one of the best WWII bombers.

 

Finally, if we look just at the value of target destroyed (the most important criterion to judge any plane, or any weapon system), the best was almost certainly the Fairey Swordfish.

[thx1138]

Wasn't she also known as 'The Flying Whore'?

 

"One A Day In Tampa Bay" used to be the old expression when they first started flying them. (15 in 30 days !)

 

http://www.323bg454bs.org/Assets/PdfFiles/Thunderbolt%20080303.pdf

 

 

OTOH... I saw a good vid of a guy demonstrating one engine out flying and he and the B 26 did very well !

Edited November 17, 2013 by thx1138

[MiloMorai]

How to fly the B-26 video (47 min)

[HeavyCavalrySgt]

"One A Day In Tampa Bay" used to be the old expression when they first started flying them. (15 in 30 days !)

 

http://www.323bg454bs.org/Assets/PdfFiles/Thunderbolt%20080303.pdf

 

 

OTOH... I saw a good vid of a guy demonstrating one engine out flying and he and the B 26 did very well !

 

I learned to sail in Tampa Bay, and my 'home' airport is just off the Bay.  

 

The first commercial air passenger service flew across it, and is about to celebrate the 100th anniversary.

[Meteor2]

"On the other hand, flying the HE111 in CoD is an absolute blast. Really looking forward to what BoS can do with this iconic aircraft. Also really looking forward to flying a Mosquito in a future theatre in this series......hopefully." (Arthur wrote).

 

Hurra, I am not the only One, being excited to see, how BoS will handle the He-111...

The CoD plane is very good, indeed.

[Dart_17]

"Best" is always a slippery thing to pin down, as often it is defined by who is doing the judging.

 

The Hurricane was the best fighter in the BoB - if we were to ask the UK's senior staff. It was plentiful, capable, repairable, and they had plenty of pilots qualified to take them to the enemy. In war, effective numbers mean more than efficient ones 99.99% of the time. Being on the losing end of a 3:1 kill ratio sucks but isn't a hinderance to victory if one has a 5:1 numerical advantage.

 

Ask a Spitfire pilot and he'd disagree; then again ask a Hurricane pilot and he may have a contrary opinion - and the 109 pilot would roll his eyes at both of them, saying that it was simply a matter of numbers and mission constraints that turned against them.

 

The statistician will have a definitive opinion, as will the training director, the maintenance chief, and the logistics officer. They may or may not agree.

 

WWII is hard to speak to on "bests" in aviation because there was rarely a time of parity in the air (the BoB being an exception). Come 1943 and the Allies had air superiority; by mid 1944 they had air dominance.