Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 37

Thread: Bail Out!..Would you survive in WW2? | Forums

  1. #1
    Senior Member MB_Avro_UK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    3,129
    Hi all,

    I seem to remember reading somewhere that the chances of Bailing Out of an RAF Lancaster Bomber was about 7%. The RAF Halifax had a slightly better average of 10%. The doors on a Halifax were slightly bigger?

    Any more information regarding WW2 aircraft?

    Best Regards,
    MB_Avro.
    Where is Europe? Can it be seen from England? I hope not.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  2. #2
    The Lancaster is a horrible example to use. It flew many missions at night and at low altitude. Some of the planes hit trees, power lines, etc. Crews of planes that were hit by AAA or night fighters would have little chance to bail out if they were at low altitude. There was also a problem that anyone trying to bail out of the side door could hit the large tail.

    The Lancaster was a good plane and it was tough, but if it was going down your odds of survival were poor.
    Zeus-cat

    Follow this link to my campaigns at M4T including the Editor's Pick "Straight From the Farm"
    http://www.mission4today.com/index.p...=search&sa=301
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  3. #3
    Senior Member Airmail109's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    9,376
    Yeah Id probably do what my Grandad did, be a dispatch rider dodge most of the action and sleep with as many women as I could.

    That or I'd have been a sniper.
    "We are only seeking Man. We have no need of other worlds. We need mirrors. We don't know what to do with other worlds. A single world, our own, suffices us; but we can't accept it for what it is. We are seaching for an ideal image of our own world" - Solaris
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  4. #4
    Most pilots (fighter pilots anyway) prefered to attempt a belly landing rather than to bailout. I believe that while both had their inherent risks, bailing out was seen as more risky and harrowing; and also that a pilot sometimes felt compelled to try to save his 'kite' if at all possible.

    In combat though, one didn't necessarily have any choice other than to try
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  5. #5
    See Middlebrook's classic: THE NUREMBERG RAID. The problem with the Lanc was not low altitude missions, which were a tiny fraction of its mission tally in Bomber Command, but awkwardly placed hatches compared to its stable mate, the Halifax, which were hard to reach in a crisis (esp for the pilot, the Lanc pilot was usually found in the wreck of his airplane). Middlebrook has more fascinating statistics (he was once an insurance man, and was used to using such data!) in THE BERLIN RAIDS about aircrew survival in the Merlin Lanc, Hercules Lanc, Stirling, Merlin Halifax, and Hercules Halifax. Ultimately, the Merlin Lancs gave their crews the best odds during the B of Berlin because they could cruise at over 20,000 feet. The German night fighters went after the easy pickings Merlin Halifaxes and the Stirlings which cruised several thousand feet lower. Airborne Darwinism.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  6. #6
    I'm good at survival. It's not that I'm skilled nor sensible, I guess I'm just lucky. Unfortunately, surviving is not always the most wanted choice.

    If I lived through a war, I guess that I'd survive some terrible danger against all odds, just to be a witness of something horribly awful for myself or my loved ones.

    As for the topic, statistics always seem a little silly in these cases. You survive or you do not, you just know it isn't likely, but giving exact numbers (7%, 10%) is just for those with an accountant heart.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  7. #7
    I understood that relatively few crew got out of a Lanc partly because of the main spar, which was quite an obstacle for the navigator and wireless operator to get past. But, as leitmotiv pointed out, they were less likely to be shot down in the first place.

    I thinks it's one of Middlebrook's books that says you were roughly twice as likely to get out of a Halifax, as opposed to a Lancaster.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  8. #8
    I once had a look inside the RAF memorial flight Lancaster. I was just wearing a suit and still found it hard to get around inside. Wearing a flying suit and airborne it must have been very, very difficult indeed.

    Cheers,

    P8.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  9. #9
    Senior Member LEBillfish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Posts
    6,520
    A lot of the issues I understand with bombers were, once they got out of control the G-forces simply were too difficult to overcome at times...Past that you could move freely somewhat, and once out dependant on where you ejected potentially clear.

    You'll not a lot of fighters pop the top as they roll over then tumble out (though probably more jumping) As otherwise you're having to climb out into an intense slipstream fighting it, and try to miss the tail section.....and wasn't it P-38 pilots that were supposed to walk the wing then jump?....Nuts.

    For myself, I most likely would of been fine as long as I landed out to sea.....Rubber dingy be da*ned, have it or not I could float for days

    -
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  10. #10
    WW2 bombers seem to have a reverse Tardis effect.

    What were the survival rates in a Hampden? Fewer crew, but very tight quarters. Ditto A20 series.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

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