Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
???The B-36 did not used mass produced engines
Had the B-36 been used in Korea, been available for WWII, at the ranges there it could have carried an approx. eighty-thousand bomb load.
I think that would have had a far larger effect on those being attacked than that carried by the B-29, plus the fact that under normal circumstances it is harder to shoot down a larger aircraft with a greater number of engines.
The U.S. had developed a 42, 000 lb. bomb of which the B-36 could carry two.
Two of those would have devastated a large area, especially if used to support ground troops
???
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pratt_&_Whitney_R-4360
Over 18000 built, that's pretty mass production to me.
..the problem was engines at the time were lagging slightly behind in [airframe] development - a way to compensate for this were a six engine aircraft, which IMO was just utilizing the resources of the day to meet a requirement.
Making a bomber larger won't make it deliver iron bombs more accurately. So if you want to hit anything it will need to operate within range of enemy AA guns.
Gyroscopic effets, and a lot of inertia as well for six engined - six propelled -- aircrafts. Not the best.
I think the Me-323 was unpopular to its crew because of that.
Dropping eighty one-thousand pound bombs from one air craft, verses eight to twenty, makes accuracy less of an absolute need.
The Air Force learned fairly early on the jet stream screws truly high altitude bombing so they would not go any higher anyway.Fall 1944. U.S. 8th Air Force.
7% of bombs hit within 1,000 feet of aiming point.
Seems pretty clear to me. Lower bombing accuracy further by bombing from a higher altitude and it doesn't matter how many bombs you drop. They will all miss a factory size target.