on 7/11/2008 1:37 AM Bertie the Bunyip said the following:
Rich Ahrens wrote in
. net:

on 7/10/2008 7:46 PM Bertie the Bunyip said the following:
gatt wrote in
news:212qgk.ete.19.1 @integratelecom.com:

B-17?


Well, the Avro Lincoln was probably a good bit heavier than the 17,
and also probably the Lancaster, but I think maybe the Focke Wulf 200
was a bit bigger than either. It certainly had more range, though
probably not the payload of even the 17.
The postwar Avor Tudor is the only other giant taildragger I can
think of that might be in competition wiht those. I can't think of
any Russian aircraft that might be in contention, but if anyone could
have, it would have been them!
Like, say, the Petlyakov Pe-8? AKA the TB-7? It was the only
four-engine bomber the Soviets had during WW II. Its max takeoff
weight was 35,000 kg vs a bit less than 30,000 kg for the B-17. 39
meter wingspan vs 32 meters. A photo:

http://www.aviation.ru/Pe/8/Pe-8.jpg



Hhmm, never even seen that. I've never really looked much at Soviet
airplanes from that era. I must have a rummage around..

Geez, I managed to out-trivia you for once? Shocking...

Among the Pe-8's features were hand-operated machine guns in the rear of
the inboard engine nacelles. It also had a single compressor above the
bomb bay, driven by an auxiliary engine, which fed air to the engines
via a huge duct in each wing in place of superchargers. So strictly
speaking it was a five-engine beast!