ArtKramr wrote:

ubject: Night bombers interception in Western Europe in 1944
From: Guy Alcala

As Chris points out, both the B-25 and B-26 were so used, in the PTO, MTO,
and ETO
(not the B-25), in the early stages. High loss rates led to the move to
medium

The B-26's were used on the deck with terrible results and were almost
instantly pulled up to 10,000 feet.

That "instantly" took several months in the MTO and the PTO. It took two
missions, both to Ijmuiden, in the ETO, with the second mission suffering 100%
losses (1 a/c aborted and was the only one to return).

After that the B-26 were the only mediums
used in the ETO replacing the slower, shorter range, smaller bombload B-25's.

As I stated, the B-25s were never used in the ETO; the B-26s didn't replace
them. The only time that one replaced the other in any theater was in the PTO,
where the B-25 replaced the B-26. As to speed and range, we've been through this
before. Speeds of the B-25 and B-26 models used in the MTO and ETO were
comparable, a couple of mph either way, with the difference so small as to be
lost in individual a/c variations. The B-26 and B-26As used in the PTO and the
early B-26Bs used in the MTO were faster than the contemporary B-25s, but that
changed once the long wing came in on the B-26B-10 and subsequent models.

As to range, the B-25C and later models were longer-ranged than the B-26,
although the B-26 and B-26A were longer-ranged than the B-25 up through the 'B'
model. Hardly surprising, as the B-26 (all models) had normal max. internal fuel
of 962 gallons, while the early B-25s only had 670 gallons. But from the B-25C
and D models on, the B-25 carried 974 gallons internally, vice the B-26's 962.
Combined with its smaller, less thirsty engines, the B-25 (C and later) range was
better than the B-26. The B-26's normal max bombload was greater, by 1,000 lb.
(4,000 vs. 3,000).

The B-26 rendered the B-25's obsolescent.

Tey were both ordered out of the same design competition, and the B-26 was
removed from production before the B-25 was, which says a lot about about which
was considered more valuable to the war effort. If that's being rendered
obsolescent in your book, then most a/c would be happy to be obsolescent. Of
course, with the coming of jets they were both obsolescent, as were all
piston-engined a/c, but that's a different matter entirely.

Guy