B-29s over Germany

The P80 wasnt going to be combat ready untill summer 1945. The war was over by then.

As I mentioned before, once the US and Brits were on the ground in France, the clock was ticking for Germany. The B29's could have been flying their missions in the summer of 1944, and germany had to stop them with what they had available.

The Luftwaffe didnt have the fighters necessary to take them on untill late in the war when they would be of too little quantity flown by too few pilots of skill.

When Le May took over the B-29 force in the Pacific he found that bombing results from 30,000ft to be very poor, crews were exhausted flying at such heights, the Jet Stream caused enormous difficulties in formation flying and targetting and the bomb load greatly reduced to allow for fuel.

Hence he changed to operation to mid altitude night bombing.

Now the Generals running the 8th in England probably would not have been so flexible. So if daylight raids continued using the B-29 the Jet Stream would have caused as many problems over Europe as over Japan. Bombing results would also have (probably) been worse, given the greater cloud cover at 30,000ft over Europe.

On the plus side the Luftwaffe would have found it extremely difficult in intercepting the B-29 force at 30,000ft travelling at 350mph. Not only would intercept times be much shorter, but time to climb to such high altitude would have used so much more fuel. In addition the computer controlled guns on the B-29 were far more accurate than those of the manned ones on the B-17 and B-24. The German flak would have been impotent at that altitude. And of the current Luftwaffe fighters only the Fw 190D and Ta 152 had the performance to fight at such high altitudes. Not sure about the Me 262. The Me 109 fighter force would have struggled to make more than one pass at such heights.

To be sure a B-29 force operating over Europe would have lost more than the 350 B-29's lost over Japan, but certainly the losses would have been much less than the 6,000 odd B-17 and B-24 bombers lost over Europe.

PipsPriller said:

Now the Generals running the 8th in England probably would not have been so flexible. So if daylight raids continued using the B-29 the Jet Stream would have caused as many problems over Europe as over Japan. Bombing results would also have (probably) been worse, given the greater cloud cover at 30,000ft over Europe.

Click to expand...

Youve got to remember that the Jet Stream wasnt exactly a phenomina observed over Europe... it was over Japan. The jet stream argument is not really founded because bombers of the time were capable and did operate in the altitude where the jet stream was found... except in Europe it just wasnt present.

PipsPriller said:

On the plus side the Luftwaffe would have found it extremely difficult in intercepting the B-29 force at 30,000ft travelling at 350mph. Not only would intercept times be much shorter, but time to climb to such high altitude would have used so much more fuel.

Click to expand...

Most likely B-29s would be traveling at cruise. In the Pacific this was about 220 mph

backing up 2 postings; the Bf 109G-6/AS with MW 50 could fly over 35,000 ft and it was the result of wishes for a Höhenjäger against the P-51 in April of 44. The AS G-6 served till fall of 44 to be replaced by other G's, the G-10 being the fastest, so yes the 109 could kill a B-29 if needed.

you also forget the increased altitude performance of 128mm guns; no US or RAF bomber get get above the range of this very lethal wepaon in single or Zwilling mounts . . . .

DaveB.inVa said:

Youve got to remember that the Jet Stream wasnt exactly a phenomina observed over Europe... it was over Japan. The jet stream argument is not really founded because bombers of the time were capable and did operate in the altitude where the jet stream was found... except in Europe it just wasnt present.

Click to expand...

The only reason why it wasn't an observed phenomenona in Europe was because the bombers used in that Theatre ie B-17 and B-24, could not operate at those heights.

The Jet Stream did exist over Europe, it's known by the term 'Polar-front Jet Stream'. Like jet streams world wide it flows from west to east, with speeds ranging from 75mph to 295mph, dependant on time of year (winter is worst than summer) and height. Speeds of 150mph are commonly found at heights of 30,000ft plus - the day operating height of B-29's.

The following site gives an excellent diagramme of the Jet Stream flow over Europe. http://www.wunderground.com/global/EU_2xJT_Index.html

DaveB.inVa said:

Most likely B-29s would be traveling at cruise. In the Pacific this was about 220 mph

Click to expand...

I should have mentioned that the 350mph is IAS, not TAS.

The B17's often flew at 30,000 ft. The B24's had a lower ceiling thus never flew at that altitude.

Erich do you have any info on G-6/AS operations? I have info on the aircraft but limited on the operations.

Mr. Glider, back to you:


[QUOTE "I am afraid that you are basing your assumption on the Allies using no nounce when it comes to tactics, i.e. that the only escorts are with the bombers. If I was planning a raid you can be sure that I would have the TA152 bases covered from the moment that the bombers are likely to appear. As the bombers approached there would be escorts well in front of the raid at an altitude to intercept the fighters on the way up.
Getting to altitude would be the major issue and you would be harried every step of the way. Even if the planes did make it to altitude they would have been harried and delayed and as a result ineffective."

Let´s not lose the ground here, be reminded that what we have here is a hypothetical scenario for discussion -"what if"-, and the sole thing I find funny about this sort of debating is when it can be realized there are guys predicting some sort of undisputed superiority of allied planes which did not see action in the ETO, the B-29 in this case, while attempting to minimize German planes proved in battle.

Now Glider, you have an opinion too low on me if you believe i believe escort fighters flight right by the side of the bombers, so I have nothing further to comment regarding the way fighter escort was provided.

Countless times the Bf 109 G-6s and Fw 190 As climbed to combat altitude during 1944, a time when the escorts where in action in large numbers. Combat records prove German pilots reached altitude even with escorts sweeping air space well ahead the bombers to "clear the path."

I do not see any clear reason to believe the Ta 152s would have not been able to climb to altitude.

You are right when you say getting to altitude is critical issue in the 1945 scenario though; in fact, the majority of the victories scored by the fighters of the USAAF -during the entire war- were precisely attained by diving upon German fighters which were in the climbing mode.



QUOTE: "You are also assuming that the B29 would be very high, there is no reason why they should be. Over Japan they came down to achieve better bombing concentration, there is no reason why this wouldn't have been done over Germany. The high altitude was for cruising."

Am I? Not necessarily Glider. I was merely suggesting that whatever altitude the B-29 was capable of flying there would be a German fighter capable of intercepting it.

So if B-29s fly quite below their "super-altitude" -as it was frequently done in the PTO, due to poor bombing accuracy- then the debate as to how combat would progress above 40,000 ft is pointless.

That would also shatter the silly arguments of the allies saying the "Ta 152 was a response to the potential deployment of the B-29 in Europe."

If the B-29 comes down to 25,000 ft, then all fighter models available for the Luftwaffe are comfortably capable of intercepting it.

QUOTE: "By the way no one has addressed the question I have put twice now. If the allied forces were able to catch so many of the Me262's why would they not be able to destroy the slower 152?"

I will address it now. I have a juicy collection of guncamera footage, included are the films of 14 Me 262s in fact getting hit by USAAF fighters.

Before you counter-strike is that i tell you: I know what the value of guncamera footage as evidence in a debate is.

It´s amazing to discover that 13 jets -out 14- appear at very low altitude, with the undercarriage down. Only 1 jet is hit while flying, meaning it did not get hit while trying to land, although the plane is fliyng at very low altitude.

The rest of the jets are flying so low, that in some cases you can clearly see trees, some cars and trucks.

I have told this to Erich, and tell it again: i put into serious doubt 60% of the alleged "jet kills" claimed by allied pilots.

That my doubts might mean nothing? True, but there´s plenty of evidence here and there to doubt what the allies claim.

That a number of jets got hit and shot down is true Glider, so what? Does that prove the propeller fighters of the allies were "more than capable of dealing with it?"



QUOTE: "Then your 10-14 TA152's get to the bombers and attack. The 190 and 109 sufferred significant losses to the bomber defences, the losses were exagerated significantly by the bomber crews but the German loss reports confirmed that they were still high."

This is another part which deserves a somewhat deeper scrutiny Glider.

Try to answer this question:

Have you noticed when reading history of airwarfare over Europe in WWII, only German pilots "fear" the defensive fire of enemy bombers?

Whether flying in the west or east, ONLY German fighter pilots were "terrified" about enemy defensive gunners. Yes, when the IL-2M reached service "German fighters found the rear gunner as a real nasty surprise."

So the rear gunner on the IL-2 was "fearsome", while the rear gunners on the Stuka or Me 110´s were "not a problem", same in the case of the Me 410, with the remote controlled MG 131s, "unreliable devices".

In the west, the superb, lethal allied gunners shooting down countless German fighters.

Have you read any report of British pilots during the Battle of Britain fearing the defensive armament of He 111s, Do 17s and Ju 88s? Although I am sure you are an honorable man who will not lie, let me give the response: NO, YOU HAVE NOT.

The RAF had no losses when intercepting German bombers over England in 1940?

So it pretty much follows this direction Glider:

(a) The defensive armament on German planes is "useless", "weak" or "unrealiable", and apparently there is no record whatsoever of allied pilots expressing "fear" or ,say, "fretting" about German defensive fire. Not at all. Ever.

(b) The defensive armament fitted to either the heavies of the USAAF or to VVS bombers was "superb": only the most accurate, reliable and lethal machine guns (not to mention the fact allied gunners "were out of this planet and did a great job").

Can you detect any strange smell here Glider? Isn´t it bloody bizarre?

Let me finish my reponse to this particular point by saying German losses in 1943 to heavy bombers were within the acceptable and sustainable.

For each German fighter lost to the defensive fire of heavy bombers -my sources vary when giving the number- at least 5.8 bombers will be destroyed by the fighters.

You have to believe this, if long range escorts do not appear in 1944, the war ends first for the USAAF.



QUOTE: "To a bomber there isn't a massive difference in the attacking plane is coming in at 460mph of the TA152 or the 410mph of the FW190A. Can I ask what losses you expect to suffer in your 10-14 planes when attacking say 2-300 B29's.

Your observation that 190 Mustangs would be left behind and totally outclassed is optamistic at best. The TA152 was an exceptional plane without doubt, better than almost anything in the air, quite probably, but 190 vs 10 without loss. The TA152 may well have sufferred no losses to allied aircraft but when did they attack 190 Mustangs?"

This was another hypothetical scenario Glider. If such a thing was attained by German fighters in 1944, why couldn´t the Ta 152 do it?

I digress, the Ta 152 was not going to do anything that could change the outcome of the war; that can not take away from it what it attained: the models of allied fighters which met it in the air were uncapable of dealing with it.

Finally, you are right when affirming the VVS was of an inferior quality; the Ta 152s of the stab./JG 301 flew against the soviet Yaks in numerical disadvantage similar to that experienced when fighting against the USSAF. they emerged victorious there.

Cheers!

Let me see if I can summarize Udets post.

1) The German fighters would be able to climb to altitude to intercept the bombers.

I agree but it would get progressively harder to do each week that pass's by. Even with Ta-152's, there were not going to be enough of them to change the outcome. The Ta-152 was one heck of a plane, but it required one heck of a pilot to take full advantage of its capabilities. And great pilots were in short supply for the Luftwaffe.

2) German defensive guns were just as effective as the allied defensive guns?

Well, any gun shooting at someone is bound to be unnerving. But the B17 and B24 could reasonably be able to put five .50's on most rear facing area's of the planes. The B29 would be able to put six .50's in the same direction with the bonus that it was CFC directed and had a better probability of hitting something.

3) The altitudes the B29 flew over Japan were dictated by the fact that Japans defenses sucked big time at night. High altitudes were maintained during the day and low altitudes during the night. A hypothetical B29 force in the ETO would fight at 30K, just like the B17's. The existing German fighters would be more than capable of fighting the B29 at any altitude it flew at.

4) It doesnt matter how many Me262's were available because they didnt really shoot down many bombers to begin with. Look at the numbers. 3000 B17's and B24's flying from England and Italy and very few shot down. By the time the Me-262's would have finally been armed with the rockets, the war was cming to an end and there werent any pilots left to fly them. remember that the engine reliability was getting worse and the normal attrition rate of the pilots from non combat accidents was going to deplete the force any way you look at it.

5) The B29 was not a wonder weapon that was invulrnerable. It was a big improvement over the B17 and b24, and it would have complicated Luftwaffe efforts to stop them.

6) If the B29's flew night only missions, then the Luftwaffe would basically have nothing that could stop them.

'ang on, this seems a little odd to me, you're discussing the hypothetical use of the B-29 over Europe correct? but you're still discussing the Luftwaffe in it's run down, on it's last legs 1945 state for the most part, is it not reasonable to assume that if the point is reached where it is felt the B-17 and B-24 are no longer doing a good anough job and the B-29 is needed then it is probable that the war has gone on longer than 1945 (which it really had to to get the B-29 in Europe in the numbers you're talking anyway) and the war is going pretty well for the Jerry, which also means they'd still be capable of producing more planes to a better quality? you're using a hypothetical situation with one variable, where in fact if you change that one variable (B-29 or no B-29) a lot of other things change too, does that make sence to anyone else?

and besides the way i see it is that the B-29 would make little difference, a bomb dropped is a bomb dropped no matter what plane delivered it, there'd be fewer B-29s so that counters their higher payload to a point where roughly the same tonnage is being dropped, so it flies higher and faster? firstly not when she's bloody full, secondly that famed central fire system wasn't famed for it's reliability and lastly no matter what a bomber can do a fighter can follow, especially the German ones, they would still get shot down..........

The B29's would not have been deployed to Europe untill late spring at the earliest. And they wouldnt have been in large numbers untill the fall of 1944. Thats based on actual production rates. And it wasnt untill early 1945 that production really was beginning to ramp up.

The 8th and 15th AF campaign was not going to just stop because the B29 was going to be available in the future. The B17's and B24's (and Lancs) would have continued "business as usual" as the B29's groups joined them.

Its true that the CFC was not the most reliable of devices, but it did work well enough.

Lanc, you have to look at the "macro" sense of the airwar. The B29's would complicate German intercepts of the groups, and although not invulnerable, they were a magnitude better than the B17's, B24's and Lancasters. And the germans would need to get ever more effective fighters deployed in quantity to match them. Some German fighters would always get through and shoot down there fair share of the -29's, but they in turn would suffer their own loss's.

Lanc is very coorect in my eyes. A bomb dropped is a bomb dropped, and it doesn't matter from whoms AF of the Allies. Since this is all a big what-if scenario the question probably should of been started as to when the B-29 was to be introduced and was it to replace the existing US ETO bomber arsenal ?

without a doubt the Me 262 with R4M's would of been up as well as the TA 152H finally meeting US a/c on the TA's terms none of this mid-low altitude crap that it was not suited for though it did perform in excellent manner proven through the JG 301 veteran accts. The Ta during the late months is still marvelled today with the overly long wingspan and the cockpit pushed further back of the huge Jumo behind the edge of the wings. elongated the a/c was but it sure did it's thing when put into action. No doubt the Ta also woud of been armed with the R4M which would of been nothing for the field techs to accomplish.
As to Syscoms comment about B-29's attacking at night and no German response as to a/c, the same day fighter configs that I mentioned would of been used at night, as kommando Welter was already in action and the twin seater 262 would of been able to attack with it's full arsenal advantages. We may well have seen the first useage wide scale of R4M's or similiar rocket weaponry used at night and beleive it or not a Ta 152 variant was being mocked up for night combat.
As the Ta 152H's of III. gruppe and Stab./JG 301 had performed several high altitude cover ops for II./JG 301 Doras on the Ost front it is easily apparent the Ta 152H would of been a contender against the B-29 and the assorted Stangs and Jugs to proteect them

this is a death card of one particular Stab./JG 301 pilot, a most accomplished one at that flying in combat in April of 45 at low altitudue with an RAF Tempest. While slowly getting the upper hand "Sepps" supercharger seized (or at least this is what seemed apparent to the personell watching from the ground), and his Ta from the low altitude fell like a stone, Sattler being killed. He and the other Stab members hoping they would face P-51's at 30,000 plus feet an operation that never occured . . .

I didn't realize that there was a two seat version of the ME 262. Was this to be used for night fighting? I didn't think there was a two seat version since they said they trained pilots with the instructor on the wing as the pilot went through some of the controls. If they had a two seat version it makes sense that they would have used some for training.

I can tell you for fact that JG 7, KG 51 and 54 had two seat trainers. Kommando Welter had the B-1a/U1 for night fighting equipped with Neptun 218 radar and the typical back seat radio operator. Yes at least 1 craft, red 12 was used on missions and this particular craft shot down 1 Mossie confirmed in spring of 45. Kommando Welter DID not have two seaters for training

back to the topic I would imagine that Ta 152H's with R4M's would of made up a wild display and tactics would evolved similair to firing like the Me 262's and a porpoise like attack, something to throw of the tail gunners posisiton or sighting requirements stabilizied within the B-29. In time weaknesses would of been found like in all a/c

Sabre pilots found it almost impossible to stop MiG-15 attacks on daylight B-29 missions over Korea when escorting. Considering the speed difference between Allied escorts and Me 262s in 1945, Schwalbes would have done considerable damage to B-29 bomber formations.

But they didnt. Because the war was over before it could happen.

The Germans had to stop the B17/24/29 and Lanc's with what they had, not what was on the drawing boards.

Over 1,000 Me 262s were built by the end of the war, they weren't used in the best way but they did their fair share of damage. The USAF abandoned B-29 daylight bombing in Korea because of the threat posed by MiG-15s and while it wasn't as fast, the Me 262 with heavy cannon and rockets would have been effective against the Superforts. Jagdverband 44 was active till the last days of the war when the rest of the Luftwaffe had ceased to exist.

1000 were built, but how many qualified pilots were there? And how many allied aircraft were lost to them?

This was a case of the Luftwaffe finally figuring it out when it was so late, it accomplished nothing.

The scenario is if the B29 was deployed to the ETO at the earliest practical date, what could the Germans have done in reality, to stop them? Would the various models of the -109 be able to handle them? What about the -190 variants? Would any of the twin engined fighters have enough performance to make a difference?

Would any of those planes be even more vulnerable to the escort fighters thus accomplish little?

Was the German flak good enough to stop them?

The scenario is if the B29 was deployed to the ETO at the earliest practical date

Click to expand...

this is the issue that still poses a problem for me, you say it's late 1944 for the sake of argument yes? and you say that's based of production figures, well, hang on, wasn't all that production going out to the pacific? and it was needed in the pacific they weren't going to divert them to Europe at that time whilst -17s and -24s were out there, unless of course the -29 was really needed badly, if it is needed badly then something has gone right for the Germans and in this hypothetical situation, i dunno, perhaps they captured half of russia and forced them to sign a ceasefire, either way that's irrelivant, it will suffice to say things are going well, they have plenty of raw materials and plenty of pilots, the allied bombing is getting us nowhere, that is the only senario in which in 1945 the B-29s would be diverted from the PTO as i see it, now if things are going well and the jerries know the -29's coming what're they gonna do? produce and put pilots in shedloads of -152s and -262s, and they'll be up waiting for the -29's in large numbers, yes some will get through, but many more will get taken down, and suddenly this becomes very expensive for the yanks........

now what if we say the practical arrival of the -29 isn't until early '46 perhaps? when a lot more factories are producing large enough numbers for Europe (more would be needed over Europe than the pacifc i think we can agree on that) but again for the americans to think that -17s and -24s weren't sufficient anymore would lead one to assume that the war's going well for jerry again, and if we're talking '46 we're talking about some pretty scary kit coming from the germans, some of which was purpose built to take out the B-29...........

sys you say i need to look at the "macro" sence of warfare, i put it to you that you need to look at the macro sence of your sanareo, and realise that other things will change other than the introduction of the B-29, it is not the singular variable in what is in all honesty pure speculation...........

There is plenty of evidence from the Werknummern that at least 1.732 Me-262 have been assembled or worked to a state to receive Werknummern in ww2 (+16 Me-262 after VE-day). This doesn´t meen that 1.700 have been deployed to the Luftwaffe, of course.
The numbers deployed are matter of debate, so I will try to summerize the lower end of the line (the higher is matter of speculation, so I leave it).
At least 173 Me-262 have been lost due to enemy actions (including combat, AAA, mid air collisions, downed at take-off/landing, strafing, bombing and so on).
224 Me-262 have been lost to accidents (53 of them cannot bee associated with an event).
Ergo at least 400 Me-262 must have been be deployed to the Luftwaffe as the lowest possible number. If we take into account that a number of planes survived the war and that the numbers of losses is a low one (only caunting those to be associated with a known event), I feel justified to say that at least 600 Me-262 have been deployed to the Luftwaffe during ww2, with a good number of them beeing bombers and training / test planes. The high end of the probable numbers is unknown but I don´t believe in the often quoted 1433 planes figure.
There were still enough fighter pilots in the Luftwaffe to use those tools. Several Luftwaffe units should receive Me-262 or He-162 at the end of the war. Arguably, the average german fighterpilot at the end of the war lacked training, but in opposition to this new tactics have been utilized for jets quite early. Fuel was more a matter of concern.
The advent of the B-29 over Germany would surely have a serious impact. If we just replace the B-17 with B-29´s (not widening the timeframe) we would probably see an increase in losses for the Luftwaffe and (arguable) a decrease in losses for the 8th USAAF over europe. Anyway I would exclude a substantial change. The heavy AAA would still share a good deal to the B-29 as to any other bomber and the Me-262 would still be attributed with many high altitude interceptions from mid march 45 on. I rather see an acceleration of jet importance for the Luftwaffe high command in this scenario cause they are a proper answer. An early advent of B-29 could cause a sooner fighter deployment of the Me-262. The outcome wouldn´t change either: Soviet troops capturing Berlin and end ww2 in europe. Germany bombed.