The first true Strategic bomber

May I know what is the first true strategic bomber planes in use? And when and where it was used...

 

That depends really. The term "Strategic-bomber" relates more to the task performed that the aircraft itself, and as such could relate to almost any aeroplane that performed a non-tactical bombing mission, which would put it as a Great War type. As for exactly which type and when, I'm really not sure.

Of course if you mean the first effective Strategic-bomber that opens up a whole other discussion, since it is difficult to say the least to define when aircraft became effectively capable as strategic bombers.

 

I believe the first effective strategic bomber woud be the Gotha. However as Simonr said its up for debate.

 

Agreed. The Gotha would have to be considered the first effective strategic bomber, although IMHO it wasn't all that effective.

 

For its period of time it wasnt all that bad. But if u consider it in WW2 standards then thats a different story.

 

ray234 wrote planes, otherwise the answer might have been the German airships which flew their first mission over London on August 9, 1915. The Russian Ilya Mourometz V flew a mission on February 15, 1915, bombing a target in East Prussia. I don´t know the details, however, and can´t say anything about whether this mission can be regarded as strategic or not. Anyway, Ilya Mourometz aircraft continued to bomb targets in Germany and Lithuania, completing more than 400 missions. Another early strategic bomber was the Italian Caproni Ca-3, operational by 1916. The German and British bombers came later, so I guess the first strategic bomber most likely is either the IM V or the Ca-3.

 

I'll post on the other Forum since we have a member with a truly impressive electronic database at his disposal...

 

Just to add to my previous post :

I believe the first Italian aircraft to be designed with strategic bombing in mind was the Caproni Ca-1. But, since Italy didn´t enter the war until 1916, I believe it was the Ca-3 which was first used in this role. The first strategic bomber to see action was probably Sikorsky´s Ilya Mourometz.

 

I think that it's not only the plane which makes the bombing offensive effective, but a combination of suitable planes and a good tactic (and the amount of the planes of course...).

 

Well, the first 'true strategic Bomber'
It would need the range to able to reach at least the majority of the largest threatening neighbour (unless your neighbour is Russia!).
Which means France for England & Germany, Germany for France, and either for Italy. Poland for Russia.
It would need a useful bombload (4,000lb+?)

So that would give us...
The HP Heyford??

 

Perhaps the Caproni Ca-4 came close, with a bomb load of 3195lbs. I´ve tried to find out its range, but all sources only give the endurance which was of 7 hours. Max speed was 87mph, so its combat range couldn´t have been more than about 250 miles. Still, it should have been quite capable of reaching quite a few targets in Germany and most of Austria.

 

odly , but in the air & space magazine from the smithsonian they name the Ca 3 as the first strategic bomber

 

The Ca-3 might very well be the first effective strategic bomber. It would depend on how we define an effective strategic bomber though. What should we set as the minimum bomb load, or the minimum range ?

 

At least 10,000 pounds bombload, I'd suggest, with a range of at least 1,000 miles. I'll let one of the Europeans do the metric conversions.

 

Haven't you just ruled out the B-17 with that bombload/range requirement?

This is a genuine question - I am not sure!!

 

WRT Bombload, yes... infact it would be quite impressive for any WWII type to carry that much that far.

I'd set the requirements as a bit more modest personally, I'd say for a continental bomber 2,000lbs (roughly 900Kg) and 500 miles (800 Km) range (Equating to a 250 mile combat radius).

 

2,000lb seems a little light for an 'effective' strategic bomber, IMHO.
I'd be more swayed by around 4,000lb, and a combat radius of 300-400 miles, if possible.

So what would fit this bill?

The Caproni Ca-4 seems to...

 

I picked 2,000lbs because the experiences of mainly the US in Europe showed that a direct hit by a 2,000lb bomb was sufficient to damage almost any industrial target, smaller bombs were simply not powerful enough to tackle heavy industry.

So if you can carry a 2,000lb bomb you can damage almost any target. Get enough planes with a 2,000lb bomb each and you have a strategic air force.

I think a 250 mile combat radius would be enough to consider an aircraft a strategic bomber since you'll be able to seriously inconvenience the industry of most nations from an adjacent nation, OK the USA and the Soviet Union / Russia are notable exceptions.

Bigger bombloads and greater range would make your aircraft more effective, true, but to me the bare minimum would be 2,000lbs and 500 miles.

 

...however, most bombers which could carry 2,000lb of bombs usually did so by means of multiple small bombs (4x500lb, for example). See the Stirling for an outragious example of this philosophy.

I think that most bombers capable of carrying a 4,000lb load could potentialy carry a whole 2,000lb bomb...

Maybe we should narrow the specifications down to an aircraft that could normally carry at least one 2,000lb bomb?

 

The Stirling was a result of Bomber Command's misguided views of the air war.

Most Great War bombers carried their bombs externally on racks so were not hampered by considerations of bomb-bay size (either that or the bombs were carried internally and were the size of oversized grenades), so a plane with a 2,000lb maximum load should be quite capable of carrying a 2,000lb bomb.