How do you think the war would have gone differently if massive amounts of Mosquitoes were used instead of conventional heavy bombers?


The Mosquito was 200 mph faster, more stealthy, could carry nearly the the same bomb load on long missions and 50% on short, put only two crew at risk, cheaper to build, capable of accurate strikes, and could double as a fighter after the strike. These are just a few advantages.


From Wikepedia

DH.98 Mosquito B Mk XVI

The definitive bomber version.
Mosquito P.R.34.

Data from Jane's Fighting Aircraft of World War II[172] and World War II Warbirds[173]

General characteristics

Crew: 2: pilot, bombardier/navigator
Length: 44 ft 6 in (13.57 m)
Wingspan: 54 ft 2 in (16.52 m)
Height: 17 ft 5 in (5.3 m)
Wing area: 454 ft2 (42.18 m2)
Empty weight: 14,300 lb (6,490 kg)
Loaded weight: 18,100 lb (8,210 kg)
Max. takeoff weight: 25,000 lb (11,000 kg)
Powerplant: 2 × Rolls-Royce Merlin 76/77 (left/right) liquid-cooled V12 engine, 1,710 hp (1,280 kW) each

Performance

Maximum speed: 361 kn (415 mph (668 km/h)) at 28,000 ft (8,500 m)
Range: 1,300 nmi (1,500 mi (2,400 km)) with full weapons load
Service ceiling: 37,000 ft (11,000 m)
Rate of climb: 2,850 ft/min (14.5 m/s)
Wing loading: 39.9 lb/ft2 (195 kg/m2)
Power/mass: 0.189 hp/lb (311 W/kg)

Armament

Bombs: 4,000 pounds (1,800 kg)

Avionics

GEE radio-navigation


Specifications (B-17G)
3-view projection of a B-17G, with inset detail showing the "Cheyenne tail" and some major differences with other B-17 variants
B-17G nose; National Museum of the United States Air Force.

Data from The Encyclopedia of World Aircraft[40]

General characteristics

Crew: 10: Pilot, co-pilot, navigator, bombardier/nose gunner, flight engineer/top turret gunner, radio operator, waist gunners (2), ball turret gunner, tail gunner[207]
Length: 74 ft 4 in (22.66 m)
Wingspan: 103 ft 9 in (31.62 m)
Height: 19 ft 1 in (5.82 m)
Wing area: 1,420 sq ft (131.92 m2)
Airfoil: NACA 0018 / NACA 0010
Aspect ratio: 7.57
Empty weight: 36,135 lb (16,391 kg)
Loaded weight: 54,000 lb (24,500 kg)
Max. takeoff weight: 65,500 lb (29,700 kg)
Powerplant: 4 × Wright R-1820-97 "Cyclone" turbosupercharged radial engines, 1,200 hp (895 kW) each

Performance

Maximum speed: 287 mph (249 kn, 462 km/h)
Cruise speed: 182 mph (158 kn, 293 km/h)
Range: 2,000 mi (1,738 nmi, 3,219 km) with 2,700 kg (6,000 lb) bombload
Service ceiling: 35,600 ft (10,850 m)
Rate of climb: 900 ft/min (4.6 m/s)
Wing loading: 38.0 lb/sq ft (185.7 kg/m2)
Power/mass: 0.089 hp/lb (150 W/kg)

Armament

Guns: 13 × .50 in (12.7 mm) M2 Browning machine guns in 8 positions (2 in the Bendix chin turret, 2 on nose cheeks, 2 staggered waist guns, 2 in upper Sperry turret, 2 in Sperry ball turret in belly, 2 in the tail and one firing upwards from radio compartment behind bomb bay)
Bombs:
Short range missions (<400 mi): 8,000 lb (3,600 kg)
Long range missions (≈800 mi): 4,500 lb (2,000 kg)
Overload: 17,600 lb (7,800 kg)

Two of the best !
But remember that the Mosquito was "natural " being made of wood !

One of the main missions of the Mosquito was to act as "pathfinder" for the British night bombing raids on Germany. Equipped with incendiaries, the Mosquito's would go in ahead of the main bombing force and bomb the intended targets. the resulting fires would guide the heavy bombers (Wellingtons) in. The Americans thought that, with the defensive armaments of the heavy bombers flying in formation, they could conduct daylight bombing raids over Germany with relative impunity. Not sure that was correct. In any case, I thinking ther Mosquito is a beautiful plane. The B17, not so much. Thank you for posting though. Now, for beauty, the Me 262 would be hard to beat.
Peter.

Agree the Mosquito is overlooked and underrated. Just not as familiar to Americans as our B-series bombers.

quote:

Originally posted by Peter:
In any case, I thinking ther Mosquito is a beautiful plane. The B17, not so much. Thank you for posting though.
Peter.

The 17 is too big to be beautiful but it has a great silhouette when directly overhead.

OK, let's focus. If the allies had sent a 2,000 plane Mosquito raid with 4,000 aircrew (considering the aforementioned advantages of the Mosquito) vs a B-17 raid of 1,000 planes and 10,000 aircrew with the same bomb load how would the results have been different? Perhaps better bombing accuracy and fewer aircraft and crew losses?

quote:

Originally posted by Bill/Oregon:
Agree the Mosquito is overlooked and underrated. Just not as familiar to Americans as our B-series bombers.

Probably cause it wasn't an american aircraft. Built of Sitka Spruce from the west coast of BC.

Grizz

The advantage of the B17 is range and the ability to carry bombs that the Mosquito could never even attempt. The B17 is beautiful. All those guns shot down more enemy fighters than any other allied airplane.

The advantage of the Mosquito is it's flexibility and speed. It had the best survivability of any aircraft in Europe. Besides nothing sounds better than two Rolls Merlins!

As much as I hate to say it, likely the best heavy bomber in the European theater was probably the Lancaster. It sounds even better with four Rolls Merlins.

I don't believe the mosquitos would have been very effective at fighting off German fighters while carrying a 4,000 pound bomb load. Sitting ducks unless they dumped the bombs in a field somewhere so they could defend themselves. Different aircraft for different purposes.

At high altitude they would have been too fast for any prop plane to climb and catch before they dropped their bombs. In fact they proved this in combat. As I pointed out originally after dropping their bombs they could have engaged as a fighter. My theory is that if massive hordes of these aircraft could have been employed rather than slow heavy bombers the war could have been prosecuted faster with less loss of life.

quote:

Originally posted by clowdis:
I don't believe the mosquitos would have been very effective at fighting off German fighters while carrying a 4,000 pound bomb load. Sitting ducks unless they dumped the bombs in a field somewhere so they could defend themselves. Different aircraft for different purposes.

quote:

Originally posted by Bobster:
At high altitude they would have been too fast for any prop plane to climb and catch before they dropped their bombs. In fact they proved this in combat. As I pointed out originally after dropping their bombs they could have engaged as a fighter. My theory is that if massive hordes of these aircraft could have been employed rather than slow heavy bombers the war could have been prosecuted faster with less loss of life.

quote:

Originally posted by clowdis:
I don't believe the mosquitos would have been very effective at fighting off German fighters while carrying a 4,000 pound bomb load. Sitting ducks unless they dumped the bombs in a field somewhere so they could defend themselves. Different aircraft for different purposes.

And the war would have been prosecuted even faster if the Allies had hit the Ploesti oil fields sooner.

You all are forgetting the reason the B-17 was designed and built as a fortress... namely self protection, groups in formation to fully defend themselves without fighter cover. Worked to a great extent when just facing fighters with its 11 or 12 fully maneuverable 50's, when facing both heavy fighters and flak losses became heavy. As great a plane as the Mosquito was it was a wholly different type of plane and the two can't be compared!

Phil

Well not really comparing planes but tactics. 10 crew and 12 MG's would not have been needed if 4-5 times the number of aircraft with 2 crew and 4 MG's could have more accurately delivered ordinance on target rather than a 98% miss rate. Then turned into an aggressor. But, this is hindsight as they say. Can you imagine the number of Mosquito's American industry could have built vs B17's or even B-24's? I would estimate at least 5 times fewer casualties and POW's plus tremendously more hits on target. Yes they were made predominantly from wood but would last long enough to complete the war.

I am a fan of the little bugger. As I used to teach my students in the CCW course, hits count, misses are noisy distractions. In this case it applies.