Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 21

Thread: WWII bomber found in the English Channel

  1. #1
    Senior Member Fade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    /watch?v=TL01SReeOqE
    Posts
    10,783

    Default WWII bomber found in the English Channel

    WWII bomber found in the English Channel
    [*******#999999]By QMI Agency

    [/COLOR]A Dornier 17 that landed on a wet sandbank and quickly sank during the Battle of Britain, is so well preserved that they are going to restore it and make it into a museum piece (pic at link)

    http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/World/20.../15235511.html

  2. #2
    L O L A JCR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    disinformation central
    Age
    34
    Posts
    13,504

    Default

    Good thing, there is sofar no Dornier aircraft preserved, except Do-24s

  3. #3
    Senior Member deathil93's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Zionist Empire
    Posts
    1,884

    Default

    Very nice, would be a great museum piece, but as a flying display it would be even better

  4. #4
    Senior Member Steak-Sauce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Liberating Lingor
    Posts
    10,227

    Default

    Interesting find..

    However, either the article is wrong or they have found one of the 15 built Do-17 U-0 pathfinder aircrafts with additional radio equipment, which explains the fifth crew member (Do-17 bombers usually carried a crew of four).

    RIP to the killed.

  5. #5
    L O L A JCR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    disinformation central
    Age
    34
    Posts
    13,504

    Default

    From the sidescan images i'd say it is a Do 17Z, so it should be either from KG 2 or KG 76, at the time the only units still flying them.
    4 was standard crew but a 5th crewmember could be carried. Newsreel cameraman, staff officer or ground crewman getting combat flying time.
    A lot of possibilities.
    I have the KG 2 chronicle, have to check the date.

  6. #6
    Senior Member LineDoggie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    38S MB 3661/8351
    Posts
    31,151

    Default

    Umm, isnt this a War Grave?

  7. #7
    Senior Member Fade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    /watch?v=TL01SReeOqE
    Posts
    10,783

    Default

    Thats a good question, Linedoggie.

  8. #8
    L O L A JCR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    disinformation central
    Age
    34
    Posts
    13,504

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Linedoggie View Post
    Umm, isnt this a War Grave?
    Yes, but war graves are not totally protected. If they clear this up with the Volksbund and the two airmen get a proper funeral, it should be ok.
    I wonder how the property situation is. If it is within 3 miles of the british coast it is british, but otherwise the aircraft should still be german property.

  9. #9
    Senior Member SoSo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    2,629

    Default

    I'm surprised there aren't more of these preserved. As I understand, the "Flying Pencil" was pretty widely used. The Finnish air force flew this type too, so I have to wonder if there aren't some at the bottom of Lake Ladoga. If only they could be recovered!
    Last edited by SoSo; 09-03-2010 at 06:04 PM.

  10. #10
    Senior Member miguelencanarias's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Canary Islands, Spain
    Age
    44
    Posts
    3,612

    Default

    1.000 kg.? That would be only four 250 kg. bombs. What was the average payload for bombers (medium and heavy) during WWII?

  11. #11
    L O L A JCR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    disinformation central
    Age
    34
    Posts
    13,504

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by miguelencanarias View Post
    1.000 kg.? That would be only four 250 kg. bombs. What was the average payload for bombers (medium and heavy) during WWII?
    Not even that.
    The early Do 17 was limited to SC 50s internally except for short range missions, as was the Ju 88. But the Junkers at least could carry larger bombs externally.
    The only one of the early trio of bombers that could carry SC 250s internally was the He 111.
    Usual loadout of the Do 17s were 10 50 kg bombs. It was however possible to carry a single 250 or 500 kg bomb externally.
    But the Do 17s were only used for a specialty role by that time anyway, as "hedge hoppers", very low flying intruder or anti-ship missions, often alone or in small formations.
    The Dorniers were very stable aircraft down low, maybe a heritage from the flying boat experience of the company.

    Btw, the Spanish had a single early "flying pencil" dornier in a Museum but scrapped it in the 70s, I think

  12. #12
    Senior Member Zoomie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    The Last Frontier
    Posts
    5,254

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by miguelencanarias View Post
    1.000 kg.? That would be only four 250 kg. bombs. What was the average payload for bombers (medium and heavy) during WWII?
    B-25 Mitchell Medium Bomber: 6,000 lb (2,700 kg)
    B-17 Flying Fortress Heavy Bomber: depending on range, 4,500 lb (2,000 kg)-17,600 lb (7,800 kg)
    Wellington Medium Bomber: 4,500 lb (2,041 kg)
    Lancaster Heavy Bomber: 14,000 lb (6,300kg)
    Heinkel He 111 Medium Bomber: 5,512 lb (2,500 kg )
    Heinkel He 177 Heavy Bomber: 13,227 lb (6,000 kg)

  13. #13
    Senior Member nemowork's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    1,441

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by miguelencanarias View Post
    1.000 kg.? That would be only four 250 kg. bombs. What was the average payload for bombers (medium and heavy) during WWII?
    German bombers were never very good at carrying large loads, they made the bad mistake early on of having the bombs loaded vertically in the bomb bays so that there was a maximum length and size of bomb they could carry internally.

  14. #14
    L O L A JCR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    disinformation central
    Age
    34
    Posts
    13,504

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nemowork View Post
    German bombers were never very good at carrying large loads, they made the bad mistake early on of having the bombs loaded vertically in the bomb bays so that there was a maximum length and size of bomb they could carry internally.
    The RAF used the same system in 1939 except for the Wellington

  15. #15
    Senior Member Steak-Sauce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Liberating Lingor
    Posts
    10,227

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nemowork View Post
    German bombers were never very good at carrying large loads, they made the bad mistake early on of having the bombs loaded vertically in the bomb bays so that there was a maximum length and size of bomb they could carry internally.
    Not every German bomber, though. Especially later models like the Do 217 M-1 were quite able to deliver large "presents". However, a main weakpoint of the German bomber concept was the fact that every bomber should be able to dive - even the He-177! Afaik, Heinkel himself was pretty pissed about it.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •