# What's your favourite bomber?
**URL:** https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-your-favourite-bomber/339502
**Category:** In My Humble Opinion
**Created:** [January 11, 2006, 3:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-your-favourite-bomber/339502 "2006-01-11T15:58:49Z")
**Posts on this page:** 20
**Page:** 5
### Author:  [@Johnny\_L.A](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johnny_L.A)
#### Post date: [January 13, 2006, 2:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-your-favourite-bomber/339502/81 "2006-01-13T14:22:32Z")
> [@Declan](#):
>
> The Soviets only had to deal with one continental land mass, and up to the eighties , when the Eagle and Falcon started entering full up production, the most high tech aircraft on the Nato side was still the F-4 phantom.
The first flight of the F-15 Eagle was 27 July 1972. The first one to be delivered to the Air Force was on 14 November 1974. Three hundred sixty-five F-15As were built by 1978. The 48th Fighter-Interceptor Squadron was the first squadron to transition to F-15s, in January 1982. So while the first squadron transition wasn’t until the '80s, there were hundreds of them produced in the '70s.
The first flight of the F-14 Tomcat was 21 December 1970. VX-4 ‘Evaluators’ (NAS Pt. Mugu) received three F-14As in the Fall of 1972, and the first operational squadrons (VF-1 ‘Wolfpack’ and VF-2 ‘Bounty Hunters’, NAS Miramar) received their F-14s in the middle of 1974.
I’d say that the most high-tech aircraft the Soviets had to deal with on the NATO side was the F-14.
But those aren’t bombers, so they don’t count here. 😉
---
### Author:  [@Sailboat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sailboat)
#### Post date: [January 13, 2006, 5:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-your-favourite-bomber/339502/82 "2006-01-13T17:08:28Z")
> [@tomndebb](#):
>
> Actually, the Liberator had both a higher payload, a higher speed, and a longer range than the Flying Fortress. I have heard that the B-24 would burn faster, but I suspect that the proper weapon hitting the proper spot would not do either plane much good. The B-17 probably got most of its reputation just by being out in front of the public sooner (which is not intended to claim that its famew was unjustified).
You’re right about the Liberator. Furthermore, while the attempts to use the B-17 in high-altitude attacks on naval units pretty much all failed, the Liberators used for Long-Range ASW closed the Atlantic “air gap” to Doenitz’s U-boats and arguably made a critical contribution to the war all by themselves. ASW Liberators just dominated U-boats in the Bay of Biscay too.
But the B-17 looked sexier in a 1930s way, and deservedly earned an awesome reputation for survivability under heavy fire. Truly rugged (and I think more heavily armed). I’ve always had a soft spot for the Fortress that I didn’t have for the more efficient Liberators and Lancasters.
It’s hard to pick just one favorite though.
I am strangely partial to the [Blackburn Buccaneer](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackburn_Buccaneer) just for looks, with that sci-fi elevated tailplane and tail cone, and for its long “make-do” service to the underfunded RAF.
But for the business end of things, nothing says “you’re getting drenched in high explosive” like the B-52, baby. The bomb bay could carry many weapon configurations, but one that sticks in my mind is fifty-one 750 lb. bombs. That’s a bomb half again as big as the “standard” 500 pounder, and this monster can lug 51 of them intercontinentally.
Sailboat
---
### Author:  [@Johnny\_L.A](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johnny_L.A)
#### Post date: [January 13, 2006, 5:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-your-favourite-bomber/339502/83 "2006-01-13T17:22:42Z")
> [@Sailboat](#):
>
> while the attempts to use the B-17 in high-altitude attacks
Another point for the Lancs. They were successful in sinking _Tirpitz_ (_Bismarck_’s sister ship) with their Tall Boy bombs.
> [@Sailboat](#):
>
> But the B-17 looked sexier in a 1930s way… I’ve always had a soft spot for the Fortress that I didn’t have for… Lancasters.
I agree that the Fort looked sexier than the Lib; but I still think the Lancs look _just a little_ bit sexier.
> [@Sailboat](#):
>
> I am strangely partial to the [Blackburn Buccaneer](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackburn_Buccaneer) just for looks, with that sci-fi elevated tailplane and tail cone…
Looks like a Gerry Anderson design! 😉
> [@Sailboat](#):
>
> the B-52, baby. The bomb bay could carry many weapon configurations, but one that sticks in my mind is fifty-one 750 lb. bombs.
I have photos I got when I worked at Edwards showing the BUFF carrying AMG-109s and AGM-86s. The AGM-109s were shown in a rotary launcher in the bomb bay. Sweet.
---
### Author:  [@633squadron](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/633squadron)
#### Post date: [January 13, 2006, 6:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-your-favourite-bomber/339502/84 "2006-01-13T18:32:29Z")
> [@OttoDaFe](#):
>
> And while I’m aware that I’m violating the definition of “bomber” as used in this thread, I’m still going to nominate the [Speedy-D](http://www.warbirdalley.com/sbd.htm) (aka “Slow but Deadly”). It was obsolescent by the time the US entered WWII, but it did win the Battle of Midway among others. And it is pretty well documented that pilots preferred it to its successor, the SB2C (“Son of a Bitch, 2nd Class”).
AKA Dauntless. I loved this one, and it’s one of the models I built. I did B-52, B-24, B-25, Dauntless, and Avenger. NOT B-17. Hmmm. But I’ve had the chance to actually walk through a Fort. Yipe! MUCH smaller than films or TV shows make it out to be. I can not for the life of me figure out how Jimmy Stewart could deal with it.
---
### Author:  [@633squadron](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/633squadron)
#### Post date: [January 13, 2006, 6:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-your-favourite-bomber/339502/85 "2006-01-13T18:36:01Z")
> [@Sailboat](#):
>
> I am strangely partial to the [Blackburn Buccaneer](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackburn_Buccaneer) just for looks, with that sci-fi elevated tailplane and tail cone, and for its long “make-do” service to the underfunded RAF.
And I am strangely partial to the [A-7 Vigilante](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A-5_Vigilante). Not very distinguished, well-designed, or effective, but was configured to deliver its payload out the end of the aircraft. Somehow, taking a “dump” on the enemy is fitting…
---
### Author:  [@Johnny\_L.A](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johnny_L.A)
#### Post date: [January 13, 2006, 6:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-your-favourite-bomber/339502/86 "2006-01-13T18:39:05Z")
I was in the pattern with a B-24 once. I was returning from a training flight in an R-22. The traffic pattern for helicopters is lower than that for fixed-wing aircraft at VNY, but the Lib was at my altitude. I had to make a 360 for spacing. Beautiful aircraft. But I still like the Lanc and the Fort. 😉
---
### Author:  [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)
#### Post date: [January 13, 2006, 6:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-your-favourite-bomber/339502/87 "2006-01-13T18:40:34Z")
> [@](#):
>
> the [A-7 Vigilante](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A-5_Vigilante).
Or A-5 as the case may be.
A-7 was the Corsair II from LTV (still hanging onto the Vought name at the time).
---
### Author:  [@mangeorge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mangeorge)
#### Post date: [January 13, 2006, 7:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-your-favourite-bomber/339502/88 "2006-01-13T19:01:33Z")
I know nothing about warplanes. I hate what they do, but appreciate their abilities. 😕
I too like the B-25. I just like the way it looks. Kinda brawny, I guess.
If jets count, it’s hard to not like the ol’ B-52. I’ve seen them (well, their contrails) in action.
I like the DC-3. Does that count? There is a bomber version. Right?
Peace,
mangeorge
---
### Author:  [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)
#### Post date: [January 13, 2006, 7:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-your-favourite-bomber/339502/89 "2006-01-13T19:15:27Z")
The [B-23 Dragon](http://www.wpafb.af.mil/museum/outdoor/od28.htm) was based on the DC-3, but with a different fuselage.
---
### Author:  [@Bosda\_Di\_Chi\_of\_Tricor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bosda_Di_Chi_of_Tricor)
#### Post date: [January 13, 2006, 7:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-your-favourite-bomber/339502/90 "2006-01-13T19:25:20Z")
Genties & Ladlemen, I give you a wonderous Might-Have-Been:
[The Mixmaster Class Experimental Bomber](http://www.daveswarbirds.com/usplanes/aircraft/mixmastr.htm)
Yes, they built it. 🆒
---
### Author:  [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)
#### Post date: [January 13, 2006, 7:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-your-favourite-bomber/339502/91 "2006-01-13T19:33:51Z")
> [@OttoDaFe](#):
>
> Regarding the B-17, I recall seeing a picture (which, of course, I can’t find online) of a B-17—flying, I believe, out of North Africa—which was rammed by a German fighter. The picture shows a diagonal slash that almost severed the fuselage just aft of the waist guns.
[Third one down.](http://www.daveswarbirds.com/b-17/fuselag2.htm)
---
### Author:  [@Survey1215](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Survey1215)
#### Post date: [January 13, 2006, 7:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-your-favourite-bomber/339502/92 "2006-01-13T19:35:23Z")
I’ve always been partial to the [A-26 Invader](http://www.military.cz/usa/air/war/bomber/a26/a26_en.htm), I think largely b/c I got a chance to crawl around in one at an airshow when I was a tot. The eight nose-mounted machine guns made it especially cool as I recall.
A thread in December pointed me to [this eBay auction](http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/WWII-Douglas-A-26C-Invader-Low-Reserve_W0QQitemZ4595363600QQcategoryZ63678QQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem) where one could purchase an A-26, but my quickly amended Christmas wish list was ignored.
---
### Author:  [@casdave](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/casdave)
#### Post date: [January 13, 2006, 8:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-your-favourite-bomber/339502/93 "2006-01-13T20:22:33Z")
How about the P61 Northrop Black Widow.
Started off as the first purpose built night fighter, but also used to carry a bomb load for intruder operations, it was as big as quite a few medium bombers, had a huge range and carried the most sophisiticated ariborne radar of WWII.
Very heavy weaponry, check out the MG turret above the cockpit, don’t need many strikes from those to take the enemy.
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Northrop\_P-61.jpg](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Northrop_P-61.jpg)
[http://www.cbrnp.com/profiles/quarter2/p-61\_euro.htm](http://www.cbrnp.com/profiles/quarter2/p-61_euro.htm)
[http://www.xs4all.nl/~fbonne/warbirds/ww2htmls/northrp61.html](http://www.xs4all.nl/~fbonne/warbirds/ww2htmls/northrp61.html)
---
### Author:  [@Rocketeer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rocketeer)
#### Post date: [January 13, 2006, 8:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-your-favourite-bomber/339502/94 "2006-01-13T20:46:49Z")
> [@Malacandra](#):
>
> I did see one once - it must have been in the 70s - and it was just as impressive as you’d think; low beat-ups over the runway and steep jet-fighter style climbs and rolls. You can well believe that at altitude there wouldn’t be a fighter that could stay with it. A fantastic machine for 1950s technology, I mean, we were still using biplane bombers an eyeblink earlier.
I saw one once at Abbottsford (I think). It came in low over the runway, then they pointed the nose up and hit the afterburners. There didn’t appear to be any increase in speed at all 😉 but things sure got a lot noisier. 😃
---
### Author:  [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)
#### Post date: [January 14, 2006, 1:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-your-favourite-bomber/339502/95 "2006-01-14T01:51:14Z")
> [@Declan](#):
>
> Not us , we use the P-3 orion thats been rebadged, the Nimrod in question was RAF doing the CNE airshow in Toronto , and went into lake Ontario.
>
> Declan
I’m familiar with the P-3 because my brother was in them most of his career. Wish he could talk about it.
About a year prior to the Toronto crash we had a Canadian Nimrod at the Dayton Air Show. Most impressive flying I’ve ever seen from a large aircraft. I think my low-time pilot remarks were something like: NO F@#$ing WAY !!! They were REALLY pushing it. They had to have bruises from the stick shaker. I go to Oskosh every year and it’s not unusual to see a new 130 or C-17 get sideways turning final.
---
### Author:  [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)
#### Post date: [January 14, 2006, 2:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-your-favourite-bomber/339502/96 "2006-01-14T02:11:59Z")
> [@casdave](#):
>
> How about the P61 Northrop Black Widow.
>
> Started off as the first purpose built night fighter, but also used to carry a bomb load for intruder operations, it was as big as quite a few medium bombers, had a huge range and carried the most sophisiticated ariborne radar of WWII.
>
> Very heavy weaponry, check out the MG turret above the cockpit, don’t need many strikes from those to take the enemy.
>
> [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Northrop\_P-61.jpg](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Northrop_P-61.jpg)
>
> [Northrop's Lethal Spider: The P-61 Black Widow Part One: The European Theatre](http://www.cbrnp.com/profiles/quarter2/p-61_euro.htm)
>
> [http://www.xs4all.nl/~fbonne/warbirds/ww2htmls/northrp61.html](http://www.xs4all.nl/~fbonne/warbirds/ww2htmls/northrp61.html)
YES. That was actually going to be my first pick but I couldn’t find reference to it’s spectacular payload capacity. 6,400 lb external payload is twice the payload of a Mitchell B-25. When painted all black it’s the meanest kid on the block. It also has beautiful lines in the air. One of my favorite planes at the local museum (which is worth a couple of days if people like that sort of thing).
To me, this was the A-10 of WW-II only it had more style.
---
### Author:  [@Argent\_Towers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Argent_Towers)
#### Post date: [January 14, 2006, 2:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-your-favourite-bomber/339502/97 "2006-01-14T02:51:55Z")
I don’t know what kind of person could have a “favorite” war machine designed specifically for dropping explosives on other humans and killing them.
(The Myasishchev 3M.)
(Who knew the Soviets could design such badass looking bombers?)
---
### Author:  [@Robot\_Arm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robot_Arm)
#### Post date: [January 14, 2006, 5:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-your-favourite-bomber/339502/98 "2006-01-14T05:45:45Z")
> [@Johnny L.A.](#):
>
> I was in the pattern with a B-24 once. I was returning from a training flight in an R-22. The traffic pattern for helicopters is lower than that for fixed-wing aircraft at VNY, but the Lib was at my altitude. I had to make a 360 for spacing. Beautiful aircraft. But I still like the Lanc and the Fort.
Wait a second. You did a 360 for spacing?
In a helicopter?
---
### Author:  [@St\_Ides](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/St_Ides)
#### Post date: [January 14, 2006, 5:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-your-favourite-bomber/339502/99 "2006-01-14T05:57:34Z")
> [@633squadron](#):
>
> Yeah. W007! :eek: Looking at it, I can feel my teeth rattling.
>
> Of course, that _must_ be a Photoshop image. but who cares!
It’s a little more than just photoshopped. It’s a painting by an artist named Dru Blair. [Here’s his website](http://www.drublair.com/). Obviously, it’s one of his most famous, and is featured on his front page. The proper name for it is “Power”. If you tak a look through his catalogue, you’ll find it, and a close-up that show just how much detail the man puts in to his art.
> [@Magiver](#):
>
> About a year prior to the Toronto crash we had a Canadian Nimrod at the Dayton Air Show. Most impressive flying I’ve ever seen from a large aircraft. I think my low-time pilot remarks were something like: NO F@#$ing WAY !!! They were REALLY pushing it. They had to have bruises from the stick shaker. I go to Oskosh every year and it’s not unusual to see a new 130 or C-17 get sideways turning final.
Wasn’t a Canadian Nimrod, as our anti-sub is the [CP-140 Aurora](http://www.airforce.forces.gc.ca/equip/cp-140/intro_e.asp). (Basically a modified P-3 Orion) It must’ve been a British Nimrod. Althoug from what I hear, the pilots of those Auroras are pretty crazy. I know at one of the air cadet “graduations” they were doing low passes, and at the end when everyone threw their hat up, one was low enough that a hat hit it (broke the cap badge in half!)
---
### Author:  [@Declan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Declan)
#### Post date: [January 14, 2006, 7:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-your-favourite-bomber/339502/100 "2006-01-14T07:11:25Z")
> [@Magiver](#):
>
> .About a year prior to the Toronto crash we had a Canadian Nimrod at the Dayton Air Show. Most impressive flying I’ve ever seen from a large aircraft. I think my low-time pilot remarks were something like: NO F@#$ing WAY !!! They were REALLY pushing it. They had to have bruises from the stick shaker. I go to Oskosh every year and it’s not unusual to see a new 130 or C-17 get sideways turning final.
I can’t claim that we never had one Nimrod in service , we did borrow a B-47 from strategic air command , to test out orenda engines for the Avro Arrow, so borrowing a Nimrod for testing purposes can’t be ruled out. Then again the Nimrod was always at various airshows up in Ontario , its possible that people just assume that its Canadian air force.
Declan
[Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-your-favourite-bomber/339502.md?page=4)
[Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-your-favourite-bomber/339502.md?page=6)