Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
The mission planners still have 10k lbs to play with so adapting the mission to allow penetration altitude prior to entry into enemy airspace should be no problem.Some data on the B-29 range versus payload can be found here:
http://www.alternatewars.com/SAC/B-29_Superfortress_SAC_-_19_April_1950.pdf
There's no doubt that the B-29 had impressive specs, but in 1944 it was very underdeveloped and the engines were not reliable at prolonged high power, yet to operate over Europe the B-29 would have to climb quickly to cruise altitude of 25 to 30,000 ft and use much more fuel than the SAC mission data suggests. For a mission against Berlin, and carrying a 20,000lb bomb load, I would suggest that TO weight would be 130,000 lbs. Service ceiling at this weight is about 30,000 ft and time to climb to 20,000ft would be about 45 minutes so form-up and climb to cruise would have to be done outside of Luftwaffe flak and Luftwaffe controlled airspace. Formation Cruise speed would be about 275 mph and average cruise altitude would be between 25 and 30,000 ft. These speeds would be higher than previously encountered by the Luftwaffe but neither the average speed or altitude would have been beyond the reach of the Fw-190
It doesn't matter how good a plane was in WWII, if you only had 25 of them, you made no difference to the war effort
Beg to differ, old boy! Thinking of 4 FTS in Habbaniyah which, with 64 aircraft (9 fighters and 55 "bombers"), effectively repulsed and ended the Iraqi Revolt in May 1941. Ok, it wasn't 27 aircraft but it's a similar order of magnitude (or minitude if you prefer).
Wow another very old thread resurrected!
But B-29 *formations* in fact were quite interceptable by Japanese fighters. Not as easily as B-17/24 formations, but still, it happened all the time, kind of weirdly ahistorical to discuss how Japanese fighters couldn't intercept B-29's or only with extreme difficulty. Formation speeds were in the mid 200's-mph, not at the plane's nominal maximum speed. Joe
I agree. WW2 was a continuing upgrade to weapons often to counter enemy upgrades and it occurred amazingly fast, and quite equally. Germany would would have had to counter the B-29 and would apply technology to do so. The B-29 would certainly have added complexity to the problem of attacking lumbering bombers. Increases in speed and altitude was probably a geometric increase in complexity for the defense, not only affecting power but of maneuverability and endurance. Another mile or two of altitude and a 25%+ reduction in exposure time would be a significant challenge to defensive forces. The added altitude would have little affect on the bomber in that they were flying straight and level at 20-25k and were also flying straight a level at 30-35k. It was the maneuvering fighters that was impacted. It would have applied more stress to an already stressed war machine.
Wow another very old thread resurrected!
But B-29 *formations* in fact were quite interceptable by Japanese fighters. Not as easily as B-17/24 formations, but still, it happened all the time, kind of weirdly ahistorical to discuss how Japanese fighters couldn't intercept B-29's or only with extreme difficulty. Formation speeds were in the mid 200's-mph, not at the plane's nominal maximum speed. And while altitudes started out as high as 30k ft, the bombing was too inaccurate from that high, so the altitudes were progressively reduced, even in daylight bombing, except for the nuclear attacks. Lone F-13's (photo-recon B-29's) were difficult for Japanese fighters to intercept, because not as loaded down and could use the plane's max speed and altitude capabilities. Likewise the nuclear attacks were conducted by a few planes at high altitude, and by that time, August 45, the Japanese weren't usually bothering to try to intercept lone or small groups of B-29's they assumed were recon planes. But B-29 formations were intercepted all the time, and over Germany would also have been, without any super-duper advancements in German fighters, and there would have been the same problem of what the bombers could hit from 30k ft.
Why was the speed limited? The need to maintain a tight formation or the need to conserve fuel? Once can immagine that an increase to maxium cruise speed to over 300mph would be beneficial but would only be required for about the last 150 miles before the enemy coast was reached.
If so the 'planners' may have made a grim calculation weighing up losses against bomb load versus greater fuel for greater speed.
I believe Greg's point is, 25 fighters won't make a difference against a 1,000 bomber raid escorted by 800 fighters.
Doing maximum damage to the enemy the over a shorter period of time might result in less crew being lost overall.I not sure Curtis LeMay would tend to the crew survival side!
Save fuel, moreover save engines and therefore save airplanes from operational losses: the B-29's engines were not very reliable circa late 1944-early 1945, got better in the final months of the war, but prolonged operation at high power, besides takeoff when unavoidable, might well have increased total losses beyond any tactical benefit. And just the nature of formation flying: that is, if a formation changes direction, the planes on the outside of the turn have to throttle up relative to those on the inside, which creates a limitation on the average speed if there is to be margin to maneuver, catch up if straggling for some reason, etc. Also, again the proposed idea is a combination of high speed and altitude when it was shown in the actual campaign in late 44 early 45 that 30k ft bombing altitude didn't work well in terms of accuracy or engine strain even at realistic cruising speeds.Why was the speed limited? The need to maintain a tight formation or the need to conserve fuel? Once can immagine that an increase to maxium cruise speed to over 300mph would be beneficial but would only be required for about the last 150 miles before the enemy coast was reached. If so the 'planners' may have made a grim calculation weighing up losses against bomb load versus greater fuel for greater speed.
Actually, the great "Killer" of B-29's and their crews in 1944 1945 WAS NOT JAPANESE FIGHTERS NOR JAPANESE AA, but the Curtiss-Wright corporation!
Thanks to wartime secrecy, even today most people don't realize what a flying disaster World War II B-29's were.
Curtiss-Wright produced the R 3350 Engines that still had a lot of "Bugs" in them. The standard "accident sequence" was that one of the R 4450's would catch on fire, and since the casing of the engine was magnesium-it would burn at white hot temperatures thereby causing the wing spar to heat up and fail OR the gas in one of the wing tanks to explode, either way the B-29 went down in a hurry and often the crew did not have a chance to bail out.
One of the problems was that Curtiss-Wright had very poor "quality control" procedures at their engine factory and if I recall correctly, several Curtiss-Wright executives were prosecuted by the War Department and went to federal prison for fudging inspection and test data on some of the 3350's used on the B-29's.
Finally, the "Bugs" were worked out of the R 3350's and they became fairly reliable engines, so much so that in the post-war era of the 1950's they powered prop airliners like the DC-7's and Lockheed Connies. Matter of fact, R 3350's were even installed on the AD-1`Skyraiders of Viet Nam War fame.
Interestingly enough, the SINGLE MOST EXPENSIVE WORLD WAR II project undertaken by the U.S. Government WAS NOT the Manahttan [atomic bomb] Project. The Manhattan Project was only #2 in terms of expense. The most expensive project was development and manufacture of the B-29! Too bad Curtiss-Wright failed their part of the B-29 project so abysmally. That might explain that while Curtiss-Wright is still around today, they have very little to do with aviation (at least compared to their World War II activities.)
.......even today most people don't realize what a flying disaster World War II B-29's were.