Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Rnd 9 (Supp) - DC-3/C-47 & LI-2 (USA: SU/Russia) vs B-29 & B-50 (USA: SU/Russia)

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

  • Rnd 9 (Supp) - DC-3/C-47 & LI-2 (USA: SU/Russia) vs B-29 & B-50 (USA: SU/Russia)

    Round 9 (Supplementary Final)

    Douglas DC-3 & C-47 Skytrain/Dakota + Lisunov Li-2 (USA; SU/Russia)
    vs
    Boeing B-29 & B-50 Superfortress (USA; SU/Russia)




    Candidate #76 - Douglas C-47* Skytrain/Dakota & Lisunov Li-2 (USA; SU/Russia)
    (*For tournament purposes, deemed to include all variants of this same basic airframe including the original US DC-3 passenger aircraft; as well as later Soviet/Russian & Japanese production.)

    Service Intro - 1936 (DC-3) and 1942 (C-47)
    Roles - airliner; general transport; VIP/liaison; paratroop; ambulance; search & rescue; glider & target tug; trainer; maritime patrol; photo recon; light bomber; carrier ops; gunship; ELINT & EW
    Quantity Produced - 18,000 (approx.)
    User Nations - USA + about 100 other countries

    For further info & some technical details, you can start with Wiki here:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douglas_DC-3
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douglas_C-47_Skytrain
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lisunov_Li-2
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Showa/Nakajima_L2D

















    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)



    So, in this match - the last of the supplementaries -
    you guys can decide whether our Final champion, the Douglas DC-3/C-47, ...
    ... would or would not still have won the crown ...
    ... IF it had come up against the Boeing B-29/B-50 Superfortress in the main tournament.
    What say you, my friends?

    Only one of these two candidates can win the Supplementary!
    Was the DC-3/C-47 justly awarded?
    Or should the B-29/B-50 have been the true winner?
    Which of them is REALLY the most significant and/or influential multi-role aircraft?

    Consider the criteria with care! You decide!

    54
    Douglas DC-3 & C-47 Skytrain/Dakota + Lisunov Li-2 (USA; SU/Russia)
    83.33%
    45
    Boeing B-29 & B-50 Superfortress (USA; SU/Russia)
    16.67%
    9

    The poll is expired.

    Last edited by panther3485; 23 Apr 16, 19:32.
    "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
    Just the development alone, and influence in future strategic bombers is enough for me... bringing WW2 to an end is another feather in its cap. B-29 for me.
    "In modern war... you will die like a dog for no good reason."
    Ernest Hemingway.

    Comment


    • #3
      Perfection in aerial design as opposed a test bed with gadgets added on?

      Still the C-47/DC-3 for me. Call me Purist, but I think any contemporary designer could have come up with the shape of a B29.

      But only Douglas could have designed the C-47.
      My Articles, ALMOST LIVE, exclusive to The Armchair!

      Soviet Submarines in WW2....The Mythology of Shiloh....(Edited) Both Sides of the Warsaw Ghetto
      GULAG Glossary....Who Really Killed The Red Baron?....Pearl Harbor At 75
      Lincoln-Douglas Debates

      Comment


      • #4
        The teeth of the B-29 had more to do with the payload than any salient feature of it as a design.
        My Articles, ALMOST LIVE, exclusive to The Armchair!

        Soviet Submarines in WW2....The Mythology of Shiloh....(Edited) Both Sides of the Warsaw Ghetto
        GULAG Glossary....Who Really Killed The Red Baron?....Pearl Harbor At 75
        Lincoln-Douglas Debates

        Comment


        • #5
          This is a tough one. I want to hear what people have to say before voting.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Biscuit View Post
            This is a tough one. I want to hear what people have to say before voting.
            We'll start with a copy-paste from another thread I didn't respond to in timely manner there, but will here.

            QUOTE:
            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.

            T. A. Gardner
            http://www.armchairgeneral.com/forum...09&postcount=5

            This post swayed me before and helps to sway me again, because ...

            As best I can recall, and I'll defer to other more knowledgeable aviation historians here, no other aircraft (of Human/Earthly origin and design) as been subject of both a High-Priority National reverse-engineering project AND also been so copied and placed into production by such Nation. Russia/Soviets gained a leap-frog of contemporary technology, beyond their current knowledge and skillsets, when they started to take apart a Boeing B-29.

            They aquired:
            1) The R-3350 18 cylinder radial engine with dual turbocharger, perhaps the epitome of radial/piston prop engine tech of that time.
            2) Proven high-altitude cabin pressurization tech, something Boeing had pioneered with the Model 307 StratoLiner (BTW, note the inter impact with the development of the B-17)
            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_307_Stratoliner
            3) A Proven Remote Control gun-turret system (also applied to the USA B-35 and B-36 designs)
            4) One of the longest ranged and highest payload 4-engined bomber designs of that era (1945 Mid-'40s)

            For the Russian aviation industries, this was a great leap forward. Which they then expanded into the Tu-85 beef-up of the B-29/TU-4
            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tupolev_Tu-85
            Which lead to the Tu-95 (how soon would such have occurred without the back copy of the B-29?).
            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tupolev_Tu-95

            The Boeing B-29 has a Unique Distinction(Honor) in being retro engineered and then copied, which results in ...

            VERY SIGNIFICANT
            VERY INFLUENTIAL

            OF ALL AIRCRAFT DESIGNS

            Not claiming any bias here, but TAG did get me reconsidering the earlier "bitch" I made that the B-29 should have been in the lists in place of the B-17.

            I'll use another post to explain more on why I'm voting B-29 over the DC-3/C-47

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by G David Bock View Post
              " ... Not claiming any bias here, but TAG did get me reconsidering the earlier "bitch" I made that the B-29 should have been in the lists in place of the B-17. ... "
              I completely agree that the B-29 should have been in this campaign from the start-line (as should the Avro 504).
              That said, it would not necessarily have been the B-17 that had to be removed to make room for the B-29. IIRC I had some dozen or so aircraft types - at least - that could potentially have been booted off the list to make room for the 504 and 29; the B-17 perhaps being one of them; but all of this would have been open for discussion during the working-up phase prior to the tournament.
              "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!)

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by panther3485 View Post
                I completely agree that the B-29 should have been in this campaign from the start-line (as should the Avro 504).
                That said, it would not necessarily have been the B-17 that had to be removed to make room for the B-29. IIRC I had some dozen or so aircraft types - at least - that could potentially have been booted off the list to make room for the 504 and 29; the B-17 perhaps being one of them; but all of this would have been open for discussion during the working-up phase prior to the tournament.
                Yes, I should have been more involved back then, will keep in mind for future contests.

                Comment


                • #9
                  It's likely and probable to expect that the DC-3/C-47 will win out again. It is running ahead in the poll at this time and it does carry a lot of subjective and emotional esteem with many. I myself find this pairing a very close call, almost coin-toss.

                  The Main claim to fame of the DC-3 was that it set a template for economical and efficient air transport/airliner of mid 1930s tech and made air passenger service profitable on a larger scale. There were limits for where that could go with twin-engine tech of the times, the Curtiss C-46 (with R-2800 engine's compared to the DC-3's R2000) basicly showing the limits for then.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curtiss_C-46_Commando

                  Douglas' later design, the DC-4/C-54 is likely the more "influential" on future airliner and air transport designs. Especially encouraged by fact that post WWII, there were hundreds of paved runways around the world, which weren't there a decade earlier when the DC-3 appeared. That the DC-3/C-47 could operated efficiently and economically from none paved runways had a lot to do with it's long service life, especially in the "developing" and remote parts of the world.

                  The DC-3/C-47 also wins for longest list of "multi-roles" of any aircraft, so it's place as winner in the main contest is well earned.

                  As a side note, many of the technologies and production systems/methods being developed and proven with the Boeing B-29 were also employed in Northrup's B-35 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northrop_YB-35 and the Convair B-36 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convair_B-36_Peacemaker

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Something I'd like to add to the B-29 story that I feel is unique.

                    The Tibbets command formed to drop the bomb, (the 509th composite Group), were unique for many reasons, but the aircraft that was to be christened Enola Gay was selected right off the production line specifically for the atomic mission. tibbets and co wanted no "Monday morning" bomber for this most important of missions, so selected one of the production line that was constructed on a day (Wednesday) when the likelyhood of Mondayitis was small to nothing in the bombers construction.

                    This is quite unique, and remains so to my knowledge to this day. The atomic mission to hiroshima remains the only sortie ever flown where the crew picked their own machine for it.

                    I often wondered whether Col. Paul tibbets, in naming this machine after his mother, realized what his mother's name would be forever associated with in anti-nuke circles. Would a modern bomber crew do the same thing?

                    I still voted for the c-47 as the racehorse of the two. The 29 was a brute of a thing by comparison. The Skytrain was full of character, where the Boeing was simply a workhorse with a great looking saddle, IMHO.

                    Drusus
                    My Articles, ALMOST LIVE, exclusive to The Armchair!

                    Soviet Submarines in WW2....The Mythology of Shiloh....(Edited) Both Sides of the Warsaw Ghetto
                    GULAG Glossary....Who Really Killed The Red Baron?....Pearl Harbor At 75
                    Lincoln-Douglas Debates

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      C-47 was just a practical machine, nothing more.
                      "In modern war... you will die like a dog for no good reason."
                      Ernest Hemingway.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Without the B-29, there would have been no atomic bombs on Japan.
                        These bombs ended a war that otherwise would have lasted several months longer.
                        It simultaneously marked the beginning of the policy of the nuclear deterrence. It was the B-29 that made this possible.
                        "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


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Drusus Nero View Post
                          Perfection in aerial design as opposed a test bed with gadgets added on?

                          Still the C-47/DC-3 for me. Call me Purist, but I think any contemporary designer could have come up with the shape of a B29.

                          But only Douglas could have designed the C-47.
                          Aesthetics was not part of the poll in defining which had significance and influence. You've just wasted a vote.
                          "In modern war... you will die like a dog for no good reason."
                          Ernest Hemingway.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Love the 130 but the follow ons of the B29 was the start of true Trans-Atlantic flight and trans Continental. What the DC3 was for the start of passenger service the Stratocruiser and C97 was the next step. Looking at the interior of the Stratocruiser makes me wish for the good old day. What leg room and comfortable seats. An aisle that you can pass someone in. Yep! the good old days of air travel.

                            B29 for me, DC3 still for the overall win.
                            "Ask not what your country can do for you"

                            Left wing, Right Wing same bird that they are killing.

                            you’re entitled to your own opinion but not your own facts.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              In a bit of irony, I attended our local airshow yesterday, and much to my surprise I saw this pair on the tarmac...
                              Attached Files
                              Don't waste your time always searching for those wasted years...

                              Comment

                              Latest Topics

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X