[Old Crow]

All good points, mustangdriver. I certainly did not mean to imply that we should not learn from our vets. To the contrary, they are an invaluable and irrepleceable resource. But, the other birds mentioned have numerous proponents, as well. So, in my book, they are all great warbirds. Perhaps a better way to sum up my view is not so much that the B-17 is overrated as the other planes are underrated.

[Aircrafty]

Originally Posted by FormerViperDriver

You're absolutely wrong on the night bombing thing. The reason the RAF bombed at night was because it was much safer. They even purposely sacrificed bombing accuracy (which was much less at night) in favor of higher survivability. The fact that a higher percentage of Lancaster crews didn't make it out was due in part to poor aircraft design (higher susceptibility to hits and more difficult crew egress once hit). The fact that Lutwaffe fighters could get closer unobserved was a factor, but it was far from the only one. Now, it is true that towards the second half of 1944, German night fighters (and radar network) got better and better, to the point that maybe the safety of the night wasn't what it was in 1943, and that conversely daytime bombing got safer and safer with the advent of the P-51 as an escort fighter (and P-47/P-38, for the targets that weren't too far) and the decline of the Lutwaffe (FlaK remained deadlier in daytime no matter what). This is common knowledge, but I don't see how that makes the B-17 overrated.

Your bomb load argument is much more to the point, and if you'd stick to that line of thought, then maybe you could convince people the B-17 was overrated (although you will NEVER convince me it is THE MOST overrated aircraft of WW II). But this day/night business just won't cut it. And I'll say this: a smaller bomb load on target is better than lots of bombs two miles away.

As for the Zero, Joe Foss was flying an F-4F Wildcat when he said that. Enough said. If a fighter earned its reputation by beating up on Wildcats (and Buffalos), well, it's in trouble in my book. These are not exactly great referrences...

FVD

I'm not so naive to think I could convince any American that their weapons or indeeed their miltary policies weren't superior to everyone elses. You asked for peoples opinons on the subject and you got them and I don't care if you agree or disagree with what I say.

No I'm not wrong about the night bombing. As I said earlier, I made my comment about the night bombing as some explanation for the different loss rates. You appear to be introducing a separate arguement for day versus night bombing. But as you continue to exhibit a strongly biased American viewpoint partly because of your miltiary education training, is there any point in entering into discussions with you.

Anyway here goes. Initially night bombing provided some protection to bombers but with improved onboard radars in Luftwaffe aircraft, it was far from "safe". And flying at night time even in peace time is known to be more dangerous than flying in daylight. Investigations proved that American daylight pattern bombing was no more accurate than night time bombing by individual RAF aircraft attacking via ground looking radar methods.

Further more American heavy bomber crews found it difficult to find their targets in the daylight and needed brightly colored formation aircraft to get them organised for a raid. I suspect their chances of finding their targets by themselves at night time would be slim. Which together with the believed impact of around the clock day and night bombing on the German people and industry was why American bombers did not attack at night. If you wish to believe it was because American pilots were somehow braver to fly in the daytime rather than they lacked the training to operate effectively at night is your choice.

[bsmith13]

Aircrafty and I have had this particular discussion before. I got tired of being told I was a victim of American military propoganda, so I stopped replying.

Aircrafty, please site your sources for the statement "Investigations proved that American daylight pattern bombing was no more accurate than night time bombing by individual RAF aircraft attacking via ground looking radar methods."

As I don't know the answer, also please tell me when the RAF began bombing via radar.

You also stated "Initially night bombing provided some protection to bombers but with improved onboard radars in Luftwaffe aircraft, it was far from "safe". The operative word here is "safer", not "safe" as you quoted it. According to Air Ministry correspondence, Bomber Command raids during daylight were curtailed in 1939-1940 after unsustainable (read 50% plus per mission) aircraft loss rates. Night flying is dangerous, but the RAF never again approached 50% aircraft loss rate/mission, nor did the USAAF.

On an unrelated note, after having read multiple monographs regarding B-17s and B-24s, I would have to say that the survivability of a B-17 would place it above a B-24 in effectiveness. Payload is only part of the equation when discussing effectiveness, likewise speed; crew survivability is at least as important.

See "Air War" by Jablonski, "Winged Victory" by Perret, "B-17 Flying Fortress" by Caidin and "Consolidated B-24 Liberator" by Bowman. I have more to list if you are so inclined.

[Old Crow]

Here are some interesting statistics to chew on. RAF bomber sorties in WW2 totaled 754,818 and total bombers lost totaled 9,949, while USAAF bomber sorties totaled 687,462 with bomber plane losses of 11,965. (From US Strategic Bombing Survey: Statistical Appendix to Overall report (European War) (Feb 1947) table 1

Since this seems to have partially morphed into a discussion about B-17 versus B-24, here is a link to an academic analysis of this sub-issue:

http://www.uk-us.org/stinet/warproduction.pdf

Here is an article from Air Force magazine (online) with an interesting discussion of the overrated issue in microcosm: B-17 versus B-24

http://www.afa.org/magazine/Oct2006/1006bomber.asp

[Martin Baker]

[quote=bsmith13;49987]Aircrafty and I have had this particular discussion before. I got tired of being told I was a victim of American military propoganda, so I stopped replying.

Aircrafty, please site your sources for the statement "Investigations proved that American daylight pattern bombing was no more accurate than night time bombing by individual RAF aircraft attacking via ground looking radar methods."

As I don't know the answer, also please tell me when the RAF began bombing via radar.

The RAF starting bombing with Oboe radar at the end of 1942
http://histru.bournemouth.ac.uk/Oral...stem-oboe.html

[Aircrafty]

Originally Posted by Old Crow

Here are some interesting statistics to chew on. RAF bomber sorties in WW2 totaled 754,818 and total bombers lost totaled 9,949, while USAAF bomber sorties totaled 687,462 with bomber plane losses of 11,965. (From US Strategic Bombing Survey: Statistical Appendix to Overall report (European War) (Feb 1947) table 1

If you check this link you'll discover that you have the RAF stats listed as USAAF and visa versa: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strateg...g_World_War_II

[VMF115]

This is going to kill me,,,,,,But I have to say the P-61,,yes it was the first fighter designed with a state of the art radar system, had excellent performance ,,,but it entered the war a tad late to make a difference …it's still one of my favorites however.

[FormerViperDriver]

Originally Posted by Aircrafty

I'm not so naive to think I could convince any American that their weapons or indeeed their miltary policies weren't superior to everyone elses. You asked for peoples opinons on the subject and you got them and I don't care if you agree or disagree with what I say.

No I'm not wrong about the night bombing. As I said earlier, I made my comment about the night bombing as some explanation for the different loss rates. You appear to be introducing a separate arguement for day versus night bombing. But as you continue to exhibit a strongly biased American viewpoint partly because of your miltiary education training, is there any point in entering into discussions with you.

Anyway here goes. Initially night bombing provided some protection to bombers but with improved onboard radars in Luftwaffe aircraft, it was far from "safe". And flying at night time even in peace time is known to be more dangerous than flying in daylight. Investigations proved that American daylight pattern bombing was no more accurate than night time bombing by individual RAF aircraft attacking via ground looking radar methods.

Further more American heavy bomber crews found it difficult to find their targets in the daylight and needed brightly colored formation aircraft to get them organised for a raid. I suspect their chances of finding their targets by themselves at night time would be slim. Which together with the believed impact of around the clock day and night bombing on the German people and industry was why American bombers did not attack at night. If you wish to believe it was because American pilots were somehow braver to fly in the daytime rather than they lacked the training to operate effectively at night is your choice.

Ah, yes, here it comes. the desperate final maneuvers before defeat: ad hominem attacks ("strongly biased American viewpoint partly because of your military education training,", i.e. "you're unable to think for yourself, you brainwashed moron"), the fictitious attribution (where in all my posts did I ever mention anything about American pilots being braver that any one else?), the lack of substantive support for argument, etc...

Indeed, there is no point.

Let me ask you: if the RAF was so accurate at night, why Dresden?

FVD

[Martin Baker]

Originally Posted by FormerViperDriver

Ah, yes, here it comes. the desperate final maneuvers before defeat: ad hominem attacks ("strongly biased American viewpoint partly because of your military education training,", i.e. "you're unable to think for yourself, you brainwashed moron"), the fictitious attribution (where in all my posts did I ever mention anything about American pilots being braver that any one else?), the lack of substantive support for argument, etc...

Indeed, there is no point.

Let me ask you: if the RAF was so accurate at night, why Dresden?

FVD

Don't forget the 8 Airforce bombed Dresden to

[VMF115]

My great uncle flew b-17 missions and then was assigned as a lesion officer to the RAF bomber command, he flew with them in a Lancaster several times and said he would rather fly a B-17 in to a formation of Me-109’s the fly a night mission in a Lancaster…funny thing he said the several mission he flew the pilot and co-pilot where stinking drunk by the time they returned to base …the reason if they got hit they knew the would be getting out. He did say it was not normal but a few did practice it…
He him self said it has a death trap......

As for accuracy they had none his first bombing mission with the RAF was a failure, they missed their target by 15 miles but they sure did kill a lot of sheep.

Btw My great uncle retired from the Air-force in 1975

He had a long and active military career, flew b-17 mission of Europe and in Vietnam he commanded and flew B-52’s..make the Rank of Brigadier General and was busted down when He told the brass to shove it. Did not like how the air wars was being fought.