Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Rnd 8 (Supp) - Boeing B-29 & B-50 (USA; SU/Russia) vs Lockheed C-130 (USA)

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Rnd 8 (Supp) - Boeing B-29 & B-50 (USA; SU/Russia) vs Lockheed C-130 (USA)

    Round 8 (Supplementary)

    Boeing B-29 & B-50 Superfortress (USA; SU/Russia)
    vs
    Lockheed C-130 Hercules (USA)




    Candidate #130 - Boeing B-29 & B-50 Superfortress (USA; SU/Russia)
    (*For tournament purposes, deemed to also include C-97/KC-97 Stratofreighter and 377 Stratocruiser, as well as Soviet Tu-4.)

    Service Intro - 1944
    Roles - bomber; tanker; weather recon; transport; command post; airliner; trainer; "mothership"; rescue & recovery; AEW; R&D
    Quantity Produced - 5,000 (approx.)
    User Nations - USA; Britain; SU/Russia

    For further info & some technical details, you can start with Wiki here:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_B-29_Superfortress
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_B-50_Superfortress
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing...tratofreighter
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing...tratofreighter
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_377_Stratocruiser


    B-29


    KB-50 (tanker version of B-50)


    C-97 freighter


    Stratocruiser (airliner)




    Soviet Tu-4 (reverse-engineered copy of B-29)




    Candidate #98 - Lockheed C-130 Hercules (USA)

    Service Intro - 1955
    Roles - transport; paratroop; medevac; bomber; gunship; S&R; maritime patrol; ECM & ELINT; clandestine ops; firefighting; weather recon; tanker
    Quantity Produced - 2,600 (approx.)
    User Nations - USA + more than 70 other countries

    For further info & some technical details, you can start with Wiki here:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_C-130_Hercules
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_WC-130
















    In this match, the C-130 is now up against the B-29/B-50 series. Both types have performed in a very considerable range of roles. Which aircraft do you think most deserves to win?

    Only one of these two candidates will make the second and final Supplementary Round!
    Which of them is the more significant and/or influential, in your opinion?

    Consider the criteria with care! You decide!
    64
    Boeing B-29 & B-50 Superfortress (USA; SU/Russia)
    35.94%
    23
    Lockheed C-130 Hercules (USA)
    64.06%
    41

    The poll is expired.

    Last edited by panther3485; 15 Apr 16, 11:52.
    "England expects that every man will do his duty!" (English crew members had better get ready for a tough fight against the combined French and Spanish fleets because that's what England expects! However, Scotland, Wales and Ireland appear to expect nothing so the Scottish, Welsh and Irish crew members can relax below decks if they like!)

  • #2
    As great an aircraft as the B-29 and it's offspring were, the Herc still holds the record for sheer endurance, utility and almost infinite adaptabilty.

    In the case of MOABs, the Herc even serves quite well as a bomber!

    Long after the bombers are gone, the Herc soldiers on all over the world. IMHO, it's quite possibly one of the finest designs ever.
    Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custodes? Who is watching the watchers?

    Comment


    • #3
      The B-29.
      In two missions, it ended a war and set the mark for the beginning of the era of nuclear deterrence, thereby influencing the lives of billions of people.
      Without the B-29, history would have been different.
      Talk about the most significant/influential multirole aircraft.
      "For once you have tasted flight you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards, for there you have been and there you will long to return"

      Comment


      • #4
        The Herky Bird!

        Pruitt
        Pruitt, you are truly an expert! Kelt06

        Have you been struck by the jawbone of an ASS lately?

        by Khepesh "This is the logic of Pruitt"

        Comment


        • #5
          The B-29 in this case has one feature in it's history that almost nobody would notice:

          It was a project of such complexity and scale that it forced the invention of a whole new means of project planning and scheduling. It was literally exponentially more complex than any aircraft built before it.
          Other nations at the time built ones and twos of aircraft that approached the B-29 in complexity but were unable to put such a plane in production.
          Convair failed with their rival B-32 to go the distance too. The Dominator was actually scaled back and many features that the B-29 had were dropped to simplify the B-32 enough to allow it to go into production.

          For the Soviet Union, the B-29 did the exact same thing. Without Tupolev reverse engineering it and in turn learning how to construct such a complex plane the Soviets might have fallen as much as a decade behind. For them, the Tu 4 / B-29 represents as much an opportunity to advance the science of complex projects as it did for the US.

          If it weren't for the B-29 and the science of project planning it helped in large part to create, the C-130 might not exist. It made a great many large complex programs to build stuff possible.

          Comment


          • #6
            B-29 for me.
            "In modern war... you will die like a dog for no good reason."
            Ernest Hemingway.

            Comment


            • #7
              The Herk, although the Enola Gay's flight over Japan was the single most significant mission ever undertaken by a bomber.
              Last edited by BELGRAVE; 15 Apr 16, 17:53.
              "I dogmatise and am contradicted, and in this conflict of opinions and sentiments I find delight".
              Samuel Johnson.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
                The B-29 in this case has one feature in it's history that almost nobody would notice:

                It was a project of such complexity and scale that it forced the invention of a whole new means of project planning and scheduling. It was literally exponentially more complex than any aircraft built before it.
                Other nations at the time built ones and twos of aircraft that approached the B-29 in complexity but were unable to put such a plane in production.
                Convair failed with their rival B-32 to go the distance too. The Dominator was actually scaled back and many features that the B-29 had were dropped to simplify the B-32 enough to allow it to go into production.

                For the Soviet Union, the B-29 did the exact same thing. Without Tupolev reverse engineering it and in turn learning how to construct such a complex plane the Soviets might have fallen as much as a decade behind. For them, the Tu 4 / B-29 represents as much an opportunity to advance the science of complex projects as it did for the US.

                If it weren't for the B-29 and the science of project planning it helped in large part to create, the C-130 might not exist. It made a great many large complex programs to build stuff possible.
                You swung my vote.
                TANSTAAFL = There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch

                Comment


                • #9
                  Had to go with the B-29 this time. Great plane that was far ahead of it's time.
                  My worst jump story:
                  My 13th jump was on the 13th day of the month, aircraft number 013.
                  As recorded on my DA Form 1307 Individual Jump Log.
                  No lie.

                  ~
                  "Everything looks all right. Have a good jump, eh."
                  -2 Commando Jumpmaster

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Of course, who can forget Aero Spacelines' conversion of the C-97 into the "Pregnant Guppy" and then into the "Super Guppy?"

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      B-29. More of them, flying earlier and dropping A-bombs, ending WW2 earlier.
                      How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic: http://grist.org/series/skeptics/
                      Global Warming & Climate Change Myths: https://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        The was tougher than the last couple of rounds, but the C-130 does it for me!

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          It's interesting to note that the B-29 program ran about double that of the Manhattan project in terms of total costs (almost $4 billion versus $2 billion). Development of the B-29 cost $2.9 Billion alone.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Don't get me wrong, I love the B-29. My Dad has a RB-50 model in his case that was an early object of awe for me. But as significant as the C-130? Nope
                            Will no one tell me what she sings?--
                            Perhaps the plaintive numbers flow
                            For old, unhappy, far-off things,
                            And battles long ago:
                            -William Wordsworth, "The Solitary Reaper"

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              In the grand scheme of things, how would history have been worse off: without the B-29...... or without the Herk?

                              Am I taking this too seriously ?
                              "For once you have tasted flight you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards, for there you have been and there you will long to return"

                              Comment

                              Latest Topics

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X