Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Fighters, Bombers and Recon Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Magic Mossies
Aussiegunneragain    7/11/2010 9:01:10 AM
There was a thread on here a few years ago put up by a fellow named Shooter, who was trying to make the argument that the Dehavilland Mosquito was a strategically insignificant aircraft which should never have been produced for the RAF, because it represented a waste of engines which could have better been used in Avro Lancasters. Shooter, an American, had a hobby of trying to diss any non-American type that had an excellent reputation (the Spitfire was another favourite target) and most people here told him he was being a clown with that being the end of it. However, the thread has stuck in the back of my mind and made me wonder whether in fact the Mossie, despite its widespread usage in a variety of roles, was in fact underutilised in the daylight strategic bombing role? It did perform some very important low level raids such as the daylight raid on the Phillips radio works (along with Ventura's and Bostons - far less Mossies were shot down)in Holland during Operation Oyster. However, I can't find many references to the Mossie being used for the sort of regular high altitude daylight strategic bombing missions that the B-17 and other USAF daylight heavies conducted. Consider its characteristics: -It could carry 4 x 500lb bombs all the way to Berlin which meant that you needed three mossies to carry a slightly larger warload than one B-17 did, which upon this basis meant more engine per lb of bomb in the Mossie. -However, the Mossie was hard to catch and was more survivable than the Heavies. The latter only really became viable with the addition of long-range escort fighters, something that the mossie could have done without. -It only required two crew versus ten on a B-17. Without intending to be critical of the USAF daylight heavies, because they were one of the strategically vital assets in winning WW2, I am wondering whether had the RAF used the Mossie in the role at the expense of night bombing operations in Lancasters? I have read accounts that suggest that the later were not really directly successful in shutting down German production, with the main contribution being that they forced the Germans to provide 24/7 air defence. If they had used Mossies more in the daylight precision role is it possible that the impact that the fighter-escorted USAF bombers had on German production might have been bought forward by a year or so, helping to end the War earlier? Another idea that I have is that if Reich fighter defences had started to get too tough for unescorted Merlin powered Mossies on strategic daylight missions, that they could have built the Griffon or Sabre powered versions that never happenned to keep the speed advantage over the FW-190? Up-engined Fighter versions of the Mossie would also have probably had sufficient performance to provide escort and fighter sweep duties in Germany in order to provide the bombers with even more protection. Thoughts? (PS, in case anybody hasn't worked it out the Mossie is my favourite military aircraft and my second favourite aircraft after the Supermarine S-6B ... so some bias might show through :-). I do think it has to rate as one of the best all round aircraft of all time based on its merits alone).
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38   NEXT
45-Shooter       2/12/2013 4:39:48 PM

The Mossie could carry  4,000lbs of bombs 1,500miles, ie. Berlin and backThe great circle range from the center of down town London to the same point in Berlin is 578.471 miles! The range from the air fields is about 85-100 miles less. So it is about 1,030 miles round trip with the bombs dropped half way, NOT 1,500 miles.
 
B-17 was also around 4,000lbs for Berlin The Bomb load for G model B-17s was 6-8,000 pounds to berlin depending on the altitude they rerquired. The 4,000 pound figure is from early E models.
 
Also a nice quote:  "Post war, the RAF found that when finally applied to bombing, in terms of useful damage done, the Mosquito had proved 4.95 times cheaper than the Lancaster......."
  Though not sure if that is just in terms of manufacturing, crew, fuel etc, but guess the many precision raids helped. As many of the posts point out, the loss rates of the mosquito were also far lower than the Lancaster (some figures reveal it to be about 1/4 - 1/3 ). 
Since I just discovered this week end that the Lancaster was such a crew killer, I now tend to think the Mossy WAS a great replacement for the Lanc!

 
Quote    Reply

giblets       2/12/2013 6:08:27 PM
Shooter, really not sure why you are trying to prove, but thanks for showing that the Mossie could actually take the 4,000lb bombs much further than Berlin, which it regularly did.
As for the 8,000lbs of bombs to Berlin, possible in theory, but never done, in fact the furthest it was ever taken was Nienburg.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Edweirdo/Maximum_reported_B-17_%26_B-24_bomb_loads ;
" target="_blank">link
 
 
So the Mossie regularly did this mission, and the B-17 never did (though it did take 4,500lb to Poland, 1,500miles reported, it's longest mission of the war), 
 
Quote    Reply

giblets       2/12/2013 6:10:35 PM
 
hopefully link works this time. 
 
Quote    Reply

45-Shooter       2/12/2013 10:14:23 PM
Shooter, really not sure why you are trying to prove, but thanks for showing that the Mossie could actually take the 4,000lb bombs much further than Berlin, which it regularly did.
The published range of 1,500 miles is the round trip distance and does not count reserves. using standard figures to compute "Radius of Action" that works out to a true range of about 600 miles there and 600 miles back. The other 300 miles just disapiers in the take off, form up and landing to say nothing of the reserve.
 
As for the 8,000lbs of bombs to Berlin, possible in theory, but never done, in fact the furthest it was ever taken was Nienburg.
 
Quote    Reply

Belisarius1234    You measure useful time of flight under burden.   2/13/2013 12:00:46 AM
 
As usual instead of BS, it is useful to have data.
 
Doing fuel calculations gives a useful flight time of 10 hours with drop tanks a 270 knots @ 19000 lbs burden. About 2700 nautical miles or just enough reach to make it as far as the WW II Polish frontier from spots from east Anglia.
 
B.
 
Quote    Reply

oldbutnotwise       2/13/2013 3:36:47 AM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Edweirdo/Maximum_reported_B-17_%26_B-24_bomb_loads </div>">
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Edweirdo/Maximum_reported_B-17_%26_B-24_bomb_loads </div>">
So the Mossie regularly did this mission, and the B-17 never did (though it did take 4,500lb to Poland, 1,500miles reported, it's longest mission of the war), Bomb Berlin?
Berlin was closer than Marienburg (now Malbork, Poland), and as the RAF bombed Danzig (now Gdansk) with Lancs with 12000lbs loads in 42 it hardly compairs does it (they are about 30 miles apart)

What about the shuttle missions to Russia?
They were shuttle missions ie land in russia so the full distance was less than a return flight to UK
 
Quote    Reply

45-Shooter       2/14/2013 11:26:03 AM

Manual.......
  As usual instead of BS, it is useful to have data. You never know how true that is!
 
Doing fuel calculations gives a useful flight time of 10 hours with drop tanks a 270 knots @ 19000 lbs burden. About 2700 nautical miles or just enough reach to make it as far as the WW II Polish frontier from spots from east Anglia.
B.
1. To get to 715 Gallons of gas, you have to put the "Long range tank" in the bomb bay. See pages 20-25 of the manual above.
2. The GPH from the charts is 72 GPH at 210 Knots and after alowing for Starting, Warm up, Taxi and take off, there is 683 gallons left. Climb our takes another 31 gallons to reach 25,000', leaving just 652 gallons left to accomplish cruise to the target, return to base, reserves, landing and taxi to parking and shut down! Given that the reserve is a MINIMUM of 45 minutes at most economical speed, IE 72 GPH @ 210 Knots, Reserve is 57 gallons. You would send your plane out to bomb someplace with out a reserve? So holding 57 gallons for reserve plus 32 gallons landing, taxi and shut down, you have 563 gallons to fly the rest of the mission. Since there is a tank in the bomb bay and the bomb load is thus restricted, you have to burn much the same load of gas on the way out as on the way in. Say 60% going in and 40% going home to base? That is 338 gallons to get you there at 72 GPH, equals 4.7 hours at 210 knots, or 1,133 miles Radius of Action to the target! Total Range 2,266 miles.
3. Using the 452 gallons availible in internal tankage required to lift the 4,000 pound cookie, shortens this number tremendiously! Work out the numbers for your self, but be sure to save the house keeping fuel and reserves out of your "Range Cruise" comps!
Thank you for posting the pilots manual. It was so much fun to read and I am so sorry it disputes your calcs above!:-)

 
Quote    Reply

oldbutnotwise       2/15/2013 8:25:56 AM
shooter you are aware that the speed quoted are in knots NOT MPH?
 
220kts = 253 mph
 
Quote    Reply

Belisarius1234    See what I told you Shooter?   2/15/2013 8:44:31 AM
http://www.freewebs.com/flyboy1966/mossie.bmp" height="233" width="359" />
 
Drop tanks, Shooter. They are called DROP tanks. READ the manual AGAIN.
 
B.
 
 
Quote    Reply

oldbutnotwise       2/15/2013 9:25:30 AM
shooter you are aware that the speed quoted are in knots NOT MPH?
 
220kts = 253 mph
 
Quote    Reply
PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38   NEXT



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics