Re: B-17, B-24, B-29, or Lancaster?
The B24 actually did more to win the war in all theaters than the 17, but the 17 got all the "press...."
The 24 had better range and payload, and speed was slightly better too, the only thing the 17 had was operating altitude, and was slightly (arguably) better at taking damage (but then again the 17 was RARELY used at treetop or wavetop height where it COULD face REAL flak like the 24 did pretty routinely though....)...but the 17 was also considered "prettier," so it got all the photo ops....
The 24 not only dropped more tonnage in the ETO than the 17, it also was instrumental in the Battle of the Atlantic both as a patrol bomber and in the Bay of Biscay Anti Uboat offensive...
In the Pacific it replaced the 17 pretty early, and both the USAAC B-24s and the Navy PB4Ys sunk almost as much Japanese shipping as our subs...
And the 24 was considered as the 17s replacement, and probably would have been if the war started a year later....as it was, we had both in production, so we kept them both and they ended up complimenting each other pretty well....
Finally, after the war the 17 was dropped from inventory pretty quickly, but the 24 soldiered on for a while, and the Privateers for QUITE a while longer..
Taking nothing away from the Fortress and what it did....
The B-24 had a better record and was the better plane....
__________________
The problems we face today are
there because the people who work
for a living are outnumbered by those
who vote for a living.
|