Comments by "Keit Hammleter" (@keithammleter3824) on "Lancaster Bomber: The Incredible Ability of the Dambuster’s Heavy Bomber" video.

  1. : Yes, I've heard that story, but.... And just where were the RAF going to get that extra bomb from?
    4
  2.  @mybluebelly  : It's not as simple as that. In WW2, especially in Britain, aircraft design was not that well engineered. The Lanc was really a delivery platform for about the same weight as the B17. But experiment showed that with overloading it 100%, it could still, JUST, get off the ground and eventually climb, IF the pilot had nerves of steel, made no mistakes, and the engines were in perfect tune. There were a lot of take-off accidents due to the overloading. The Brits were prepared to wear that, the Americans not. And the limits of what a B17 could do were more accurately known.
    2
  3. Why was the Lanc so "successful"? Well, when it's an all-out war, and the only large 4-engine bombers you have is the Lancaster and the Hallifax, then it jolly well has to be forced successful, doesn't it? How do you define success? If success is lots of missions flown, then the Lanc was successful. If success is crippling the German war effort, the Lanc was nothing like as good as the B-17.
    1