Lancaster verses Boeing

[Tony B]

I'd not have thought that the sea could be to smooth. The Medway charts still show a seaplane landing area that was the Sunderland works.

[Jessie The Jeep]

It's iinteresting that Wickipeadia gives the range of the B17 as 1,738 miles whilst the Sunderland had a range of 1,780 miles............ :evil: :evil:

 

 

Sunderlands may have had a good range, but the Atlantic is a big place, and during the worst time of the Atlantic War, Britain was struggling for war materials to build and fight with. Coastal Command used any suitable aircraft it could get its hands on, which included US built aircraft. I've read that they had to fight hard to get support and materials for that section of the forces.

 

My books state the following, but don't add under what conditions these figures were obtained under. I'd have to check my B-17 pilots manual for that.

 

B-17E range as 3,200, combat radius 1,600 mls

B-17F range as 3,800, combat radius 1,900 mls

 

Another book says.... Max Range

 

B-17E range as 3,300 mls

B-17F range as 4,420 mls

 

This max range could have included bomb bay fuel tanks, but again, the book doesn't state conditions for the test. I'm guessing both sets of figures came from similar tests, particularly the B-17E test.

 

Fuel consumption could be cut to 95 gallons ( US ) per hour on long range settings allowing a good loiter ability.

 

I'm always cautious about Wiki info, as anything can be added there without being fact, but because it is on there, people take it as fact. I usually try and find another source to back up anything I find on Wiki.

 

Steve

[Tony B]

Do you know if the practice of shutting down engines was used to increase loiter time? During the Great War, small non ridged airships were used to patrol the channel. At Godmasham Estate, just outside Ashford is a defile called airship. the remains of the pit used to house the control tub of the airships is still there.

[Jessie The Jeep]

Do you know if the practice of shutting down engines was used to increase loiter time? During the Great War, small non ridged airships were used to patrol the channel. At Godmasham Estate, just outside Ashford is a defile called airship. the remains of the pit used to house the control tub of the airships is still there.

 

 

The B-17 would burn more fuel on two engines than it would on four at long range settings. Mixtures were leaned, RPM cut to 1250, altitude lowered, prop pitch adjusted.

 

Steve

[antarmike]

The B29 was developed into the B50 (although substantially changed and was copied more or less exactly (apart from powerplant) as the Tupelov Tu-4

[Jessie The Jeep]

The B29 was developed into the B50 (although substantially changed and was copied more or less exactly (apart from powerplant) as the Tupelov Tu-4

 

 

It looked identical, but as far as I've read, very little was interchangable as all the material thicknesses, dimensions etc, were converted from imperial to Russian standards. They got the B-29's to copy from a few aircraft forced to land in Russia due to battle damage.

 

Steve

[antarmike]

The Atlantic was also closed by the B24 liberator with 2000+ miles range and another Consolidated aircraft, the PBY Catalina with a range of 2545 miles.

[antarmike]

Altough that isn't very good when you concider the Focke-Wulf FW 200C-3 (Condor) had a range of 2759 miles

[ArtistsRifles]

Given the choice - I think I'd prefer to take the Sunderland (or as the Germans called it the "Flying Porcupine") for the on-board facilities. Neither the B24 or the PBY5 were renowned for their creature comforts!! :-) :-) :-)

[Jessie The Jeep]

True, the Condor had a good range, originally being an airliner. The 2,760 mls range is stated at 'Overload Fuel'. Whether that allowed for any bomb load I can't find. Standard fuel load gave a range of 2,210 mls. Its bomb bay was a small add on gondola to the bottom of the fuselage. Bomb load was carried both in this bulge and externally on the wings, totalling 4,626 lbs. Range figures that I have found doesn't state whether eny external load was being carried as this would have an effect on range.

 

Unfortunately for the crews, the aircraft also had a reputation for in-flight structural failure!

 

Only one Fw200 survives today, and that was recovered from a Fjord in Norway in the 1990's.

 

Steve

 

[antarmike]

Another plus fror the lanc was it was modular, and it was relatively easy to uses whole sections of one damaged lanc and bolt them into another with different damage. I have seen photos of Lancs where the paint line between the black undersurface and the upper camoflage has had distinct steps in it at the joint lines indicating part of one aircraft has been bolted straight into another without repainting. Easy Battle damage repair has to be a big plus foor a warbird.

[antarmike]

The Lancaster was also built in two forms, one with Rolls Royce Merlins, but a significant number were also built with Bristol Hurcules Air cooled radials, and having engine production spread between to manufactures ensure engines will always be available, should a manufacturers factory be bombed.

 

American aircraft were never at risk of losing engine production, so never needed a backup plan, but as backup plans go tis one was very good, since both versions of the lanc were excellent.

 

The Merlin Lanc had a total of 6560 Horsepwer, but The Hurcules engine version had 6900.

 

with Bombs away it was faster than the Merlins and was loved by the crews because it got them out of danger zone far quicker.

 

 

[Jessie The Jeep]

Many warplanes in addition to the Lanc were repaired in the field by changing major airframe components. I read somewhere that the B-24 production ran to something over 18,000, PLUS another 2,000 airframes worth of spares.

 

B-17's were repaired in the same way. There is a photo somewhere of a B-17 with a natural metal front fuselage and wings with an olive drab tail, the join being just behind the Radio Room. Outer and inner wing panels, fins, tailplane and rear turret were also modular sections and could also be swapped. My 1/6 scale model comes apart for transport at the same positions, giving four wing panels and three fuselage sections, although the fullsize had additional break down points.

 

On the Lancaster, I know the outer wings could be removed at the diheadral break complete with outer engines. I don't know whether the centre wing was one piece through the fuselage, but I suspect it was. I know the mainspar passes through the Lanc fuselage ( a major obsticle in bailouts ), but I don't know if this was a structural member in the fuselage to carry the wing loads, or whether it was part of the actual wing. If it was one through spar, it would make replacing the inner wings a major engineering project. The fuselage splits in several places like the Fort, and I'm guessing replacing a tailplane or fin would be relatively easy.

 

Maintenance is one area where US and UK air forces often differed. One RAF engineer I talked to, said they would mess on with an unservicable engine for hours fault finding to get it operational. He said the American engineers, if they couldn't find anything quickly, would just drop the engine and replace it, and let the specialist engine units find the problem. While the US forces had more supplies and equipment, many line chiefs still used 'Midnight Requisitioning' and canibalising of 'Hangar Queens' to get the spares to keep their planes airworthy. As one 100th BG Engineering officer told me, the guys back in the US had no idea how many spare parts it was going to take to keep a Bomb Group in the air, so we had to find other ways to get the spares we needed.

 

Regarding powerplants, there was concern that the supply of 'Cyclones' may run short. As a result, B-17E #41-2401 was modified by Vega with Allison V-1710-89 V12's rated at 1,425HP. It was known as the XB-38. It flew for the first time in May 1943, and was found to have a much improved performance over the original B-17E, but in June, it was lost to an engine fire in flight. No further developments were made after this as Gen. Arnold felt the supplies of the Wright engine would remain adequate.

 

Picture here - http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/a/a3/XB-38.jpg

 

Steve

[antarmike]

The range or he Condor I quoted is with a 3000 Lb bomb load

[Tony B]

Sunderland was also used in the Berlin Airlift, it was the only aorcrafact able to fly in salt safley.

[ferrettkitt]

The Lancaster was also built in two forms, one with Rolls Royce Merlins, but a significant number were also built with Bristol Hurcules Air cooled radials,

 

 

The Lancaster was also a development of an earlier design the Avro Manchester powered by Rolls Royce Vulture engines developing 1700+hp. The Vulture engine failed in service taking a number of other promising projects with it. The failure of the Vulture engined Manchester caused the designer Roy Chadwick to alter his design and add four Merlin engines instead of two Vulture engines.

 

There's also a book on the Avro Manchester: The Legend Behind the Manchester by Author Robert Kirby which is well worth a read as it also covers the development, war service, fate of the Manchester's in service and the development of the Manchester into the Lancaster. Before reading about the Lancaster you have to read about the Manchester just to get the proper perspective on the early war years with Bomber Command.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avro_Manchester

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roy_Chadwick

 

Rgds

Andy

 

Why the interest my Grandparents worked for Avro as aircraft fitters / builders during the war years. Sadly they've both gone

 

[Jessie The Jeep]

So sad when the people involved pass, taking their stories with them. My Grandfather-in-law ( Lynne's Grandad on her mothers side ) worked on the spotlight set up for the Dambuster Lancs. He died before Lynne and I ever met, but I would have loved to spend some time with him hearing about it.

 

Steve

[Tony B]

Altough that isn't very good when you concider the Focke-Wulf FW 200C-3 (Condor) had a range of 2759 miles

 

Doenitz was always complaing he never had enough Ariel recce. Goering hated him anyway. The condor was meant to be a civil airliner and was really to delicate for military use. John Terraine's Business in Great Waters, published by Wordsworth military library is well worth reading on the U boat campains of both wars. 800+ pages but worth the plough.

[AlienFTM]

Oddly enough, this was what it was designed for back in 1934, and it was the RAF who ended up using it for this purpose!

 

Steve

 

 

Have you heard about the plans to build giany icebergs to use as unsinkable aircraft carriers to plug the Atlantic Gap? Churchill was very enthusiastic and the Canadians were designing / building one as they went alomg before the gap was closed by other technology.

 

Somebody (name of Pyke I think) discovered that mixing ice and wood pulp made a substance which torpedoes couldn't even scratch. They called it Pykerete (sp) in his honour. ISTR the plan was to be 1/2 mile long and displace a million tons and Churchill wanted 100 built. IIRC all that remains are at the bottom of the Canadian lake where it was being developed.

[Jessie The Jeep]

Yes, I read about that just recently on another forum. It was virtually bullet proof, as shown in a test to Generals and Admirals. A block of normal ice shattered when fired on with a pistol. The other block was Pykrete, and the bullet ricocheted off it and hit one of the high ranking staff!

 

Steve

[ashley]

I am sure i caught a glimpse of a programme about this the other night on the history channel along with the bats and explosives devices scenario.

 

Ashley

[antarmike]

The ill fated Vulture was anh X24 engine. It reminds me of another myth, That the Merlin was named after King Arthurs magician. It wasn't, A Merlin is a bird of prey, as is Griffon ,Vulture, Pergrine and other Rolls Royce engines of the period!

[hardyferret]

For me personally the Lancaster, but this is second to the Mosquito, Grandfather worked for Vickers then De- Havilland, the grace and sound of the Mosquito is without equal.

Was lucky to watch one in the 70's at a Biggin Hill show

 

 

HF

[Degsy]

I can't see any point in comparing the Fortress and the Lancaster, they were designed with 2 totally different concepts in mind.

[antarmike]

I meet up occasionally with an ex wartime navigator of a Sunderland, spent time in Hong Kong.

 

The amazing thing was that they could not take off if the water was too smooth (hull suction), so they sometimes had to send the harbour launch out to chop the surface up a little before takeoff!

 

He had a great respect for the marque, said it was like being posted to a floating hotel, complete with even a workshop and lathe!

 

 

The Sunderland hull shape changed with the Mk111. This saved 10% of the total air drag, but did it also help with the Sunderland unsticking from calm water?