GrauGeist
Generalfeldmarschall zur Luftschiff Abteilung
The B-19...it had a ridiculously long range and wasn't doing anything else during the war...
Air Force One candidates 1942-1944
- Thread starter Admiral Beez
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
GrauGeist
Generalfeldmarschall zur Luftschiff Abteilung
The B-19 was not a hotrod (135 mph cruise loaded), but it's ferry range of well of 7,000 miles was un-matched.
It's performance would have increased of course (speed-wise), if it were being used as a personnel transport instead of a bomber.
- Thread starter
- #24
Admiral Beez
Major
Nice choice. With friendly winds, the B-19's 7,710 mi (12,410 km, 6,700 nmi) range would allow for FDR to fly 7,500 miles direct from San Diego to Sydney, Australia. With the B-19, FDR could fly pretty much anywhere non stop, Washington to either Moscow or Hawaii? No problem.
B-19 is my pick. Check out these interior pics. Have the US government take the single prototype and modify it for luxury transport, pressurization and sound dampening, plus the most advanced wireless communications equipment of the time.
Shall we ditch the armament to compensate for this added weight? Perhaps more advanced four blade props can be used for more efficient fuel use. Since it can't be easy escorted, perhaps armament should be kept?
Last edited:
GrauGeist
Generalfeldmarschall zur Luftschiff Abteilung
Considering that the B-19 was capable of carrying a max. bomb load of 37,100 pounds with a max. takeoff weight of 162,000 pounds (crew, fuel, arms/ammo, etc.), I'd say certainly keep it's defensive armament.
Since it's primary load as AF1 is people, baggage and fuel, hauling defensive weapons and ample ammunition would be a cinch.
Since it's primary load as AF1 is people, baggage and fuel, hauling defensive weapons and ample ammunition would be a cinch.
- Thread starter
- #26
Admiral Beez
Major
I agree. My thinking at first was to retrofit some P-38s for super long range escorts, but no single pilot can keep alert over such distance. Then, there's multi-seat heavy fighters like the P-61, but that's no better than putting guns on AF1.
Let's hope the IJAF or Luftwaffe don't pull their own Operation Vengeance when AF1 is outside fighter range or in Yamamoto's case insufficiently escorted.
GrauGeist
Generalfeldmarschall zur Luftschiff Abteilung
The B-19's range meant it could fly a route that kept it well out of range of enemy intetceptors and as it approached land, be greeted by Allied escorts.
As far as pressurizarion goes, only the Executive cabin needed to be fitted, saving time and weight with the conversion.
As far as pressurizarion goes, only the Executive cabin needed to be fitted, saving time and weight with the conversion.
swampyankee
Chief Master Sergeant
- 4,031
- Jun 25, 2013
One rather obvious problem that Yamamoto had was that the US was reading his encrypted mail. One solution is that the schedule be tranmitted more securely, say by cable, not radio, or by a physical document sent ahead.
Using a unique aircraft also prevents other safety measures: it's more likely it's mis-identified as an enemy aircraft, and can't be disguised as yet another DC-4 or Constellation.
GrauGeist
Generalfeldmarschall zur Luftschiff Abteilung
Hard for the B-19 to be misidentified - it was one bigass aircraft with a wingspan that wouldn't be matched until the B-36 came along.
- Thread starter
- #30
Admiral Beez
Major
Interesting. How would that separation work? I'd think everyone on board would benefit from pressurization, otherwise the flight crew will be freezing and wearing O2 masks whilst POTUS is living it up in the back. Of course FDR being on wheels likely precludes a cockpit visit, but other staff might want to transit between cabin and flight deck. Was the entire interior of the B-29 pressurized, less the bomb bay?
T Bolt
Colonel
No it had three pressurized compartments. The cockpit which was everything forward of the bomb bay, The crew compartment which was just aft of the bomb bay, and tail gunners position.
The cockpit and the crew compartments were connected by a crawl tube running through the bomb bay with pressure doors at either end. there was no crawl tube to the tail gunners compartment. The only way for the him to get back to the crew compartment was for this two compartments to be de-pressurized.
swampyankee
Chief Master Sergeant
- 4,031
- Jun 25, 2013
P-38s were misidentified, so anything is possible.
Shortround6
Major General
Drawing of the B-29 showing pressure compartments.
There is not as much volume as one might think inside the Pressure cabins.
There is not as much volume as one might think inside the Pressure cabins.
On Wiki...
However, the Secret Service, after a review of the C-87's controversial safety record in service, flatly refused to approve the Guess Where II for presidential carriage.[2]
Would the Secret Service ever approve the President flying an "X" aircraft - a "flying laboratory?" Especially considering the XB-19 was under-powered until the Allisons were installed.
However, the Secret Service, after a review of the C-87's controversial safety record in service, flatly refused to approve the Guess Where II for presidential carriage.[2]
Would the Secret Service ever approve the President flying an "X" aircraft - a "flying laboratory?" Especially considering the XB-19 was under-powered until the Allisons were installed.
pinehilljoe
Staff Sergeant
- 752
- May 1, 2016
In American Warlords, by Johnathan W. Jordan, he describes the 3 week, 14,000 mile roundtrip to Yalta by FDR and the Joint Chiefs. FDR sailed to Malta from the US on USS Quincy, from Malta they took C-54s, Sacred Cow being one of them, to Saki Airfield near Sevastopal, with fighter escort. FDR flew in one aircraft and Marshall and King in another. The author described the road trip in a Packard Convertible from the airport to the Livadia Palace Black Sea Resort as the hardest part of the journey.
So to verge on being rude, I will reiterate the C-54 was the only choice for the Presidential airplane not only until 1944, but maybe even until 1947 and the introduction of the DC-6/C-118.
Why? Both the 3350 and the 4360 had some initial problems with either the engine itself or the propellers, or were needed for higher priority aircraft. And just as important, when it came to dispatch reliability neither engine could hold a candle to the R2800.
Why? Both the 3350 and the 4360 had some initial problems with either the engine itself or the propellers, or were needed for higher priority aircraft. And just as important, when it came to dispatch reliability neither engine could hold a candle to the R2800.
Shortround6
Major General
Jetcal may be correct. upon further reading the Connie had more engine troubles than I thought, enough that consideration was given to using R-2800s. While this might have worked from a power standpoint it need a bit more conversion work that appears at first glance. Like the Connie used 15ft 2 in props and any R-2800 used would have needed a different reduction gear to to properly drive such large propellers without excessive tip speed. Just sticking in four B-26 engines and props might not have worked?
vikingBerserker
Lieutenant General
I like the idea of the B-19, perhaps the version that was fitted with the Allisons.
If, if the AAC and Allison had really put some effort (Money and manpower) into the V3420 in 1938-1941 would it have been flight rated by 1942? quite possibly. I think it wold have been neat to see more aircraft powered by the 3420. but..........
No such luck. (Just think what could have happened if the V3420 was mature enough to replace the 3350 early in the program.)
