View Poll Results: Mosquito or B-17 FTW?

Voters
60. You may not vote on this poll
  • Mosquito

    39 65.00%
  • B-17

    21 35.00%
  1. #1
    for a Berlin-distance flight it makes sense, as the Mossie is extermely difficult to intercept, carrying as much as a 17 for that distance, not to mention the proven versatility of the Mossie

    if lost, you lose 2 men, not 10

    more stategic materials saved producing wooden Mossies insteading of aluminum 17sto be used in other types

    Packard Merlin production could go into more Mossies (and Spits and maybe even a re-engineered Whirly?)
    Wouldnt be as much need for 51s with merlins as Mossies wouldnt need intensive escort as a 17 did

    Wright Cyclone production could have went into Grumman Skyrockets, which would have made things MUCH better for the USN at the time, instead of suffering with Wildcats


    Mossie FTW!
    Share this post

  2. #2
    I went b17, because they have 50cals.
    Share this post

  3. #3
    R_Target's Avatar Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    3,686
    ROFL.
    Share this post

  4. #4
    I think you have to consider that more planes were lost to flak on such missions than being intercepted by fighters. For that reason i might want more engines and armor on my plane.



    Bill
    Share this post

  5. #5
    stalkervision's Avatar Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    7,567
    Originally posted by thefruitbat:
    I went b17, because they have 50cals.
    and count them all!


    your too funny F/b !
    Share this post

  6. #6
    M_Gunz's Avatar Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,979
    Mossie could carry to Berlin what a B-17 could carry to Berlin? Source please!
    Share this post

  7. #7
    ^this. I have trouble believing that a twin-engine light bomber had the same payload as a four-engine heavy. Otherwise I like the idea of a bomber that is too fast to intercept (I would imagine that it was harder for AA gunners to track a faster target as well).
    Share this post

  8. #8
    berg417448's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    2,259
    Think about how many more kills the Luftwaffe pilots could have had as they dived on all of those lovely unarmed Mosquito targets. No need to worry about or dodge defensive fire. Yummy!
    Share this post

  9. #9
    Originally posted by Frankthetank36:
    (I would imagine that it was harder for AA gunners to track a faster target as well).
    The difference in speed is not going to make it any more difficult for AA to compensate while they aim. These aren't mach speeds we are speaking of.
    What should be noted is not so much the accuracy of the guns, but rather the density of the flak beds. There was so much flak being hurled at bomber formations that even a 1 percent hit count brought down many planes.

    For the sake of argument i will just agree that a two engine light bomber could carry the same load as a B-17 (though very unlikely).

    I still have trouble believing that well positioned interceptors couldn't still catch those planes. Now they are more vulnerable with out gunners or armor.



    Bill
    Share this post

  10. #10
    Originally posted by BillSwagger:
    <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Frankthetank36:
    (I would imagine that it was harder for AA gunners to track a faster target as well).
    The difference in speed is not going to make it any more difficult for AA to compensate while they aim. These aren't mach speeds we are speaking of.
    What should be noted is not so much the accuracy of the guns, but rather the density of the flak beds. There was so much flak being hurled at bomber formations that even a 1 percent hit count brought down many planes.

    For the sake of argument i will just agree that a two engine light bomber could carry the same load as a B-17 (though very unlikely).

    I still have trouble believing that well positioned interceptors couldn't still catch those planes. Now they are more vulnerable with out gunners or armor.


    Bill </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

    Yeah, IF you get the position right. The mossies speed payed off not in outrunning fighters, but in greatly extending the time taken to intercept as well as somewhat reducing warning time.
    Share this post