I think we have reached a point in the discussion where two things are matched together:
One aspect: The significant superiority of P-47/P-51 operating at high altitude in the fighter role.
The other: The B-29 beeing able to defend itselfe by high cruise alt / cruise speed and superior self defense.
I agree with the first but do question the second aspect. The Luftwaffe was able to deal with the B-17 / B-24 but it was not able to deal with the escorts in the same place.
I have seen little to convince me that the B-29 would change anything here. It would have been as vulnarable to Fw-190 in a head on firing pass as was the B-24.
I tend to agree. I don't really believe the B-29 would somehow miraculously resist 30mm Mk108 or 103's in a head on pass by Me 109s or Fw 190s simply by virtue of higher altitude and speed as well as improved armament and computing sights.
The Luftwaffe get´s beaten as historically or even more while the devastation on the ground is likely beeing larger but less precise and efficient.
You likely would see a change in production priorities from G-6 to GM-1 boosted Bf-109G5 high altitude fighters and maybe some Bf-109H-1 beeing converted from -G5 airframes as an interim measure long before the advent of the Ta-152H (they have been operationally tested in France 1944, while production was to begin in mid 1944 before beeing cancelled in favour to lower alt variants).
Is the P-51B/D really that superior to an GM-1 boosted Bf-109G5 or Bf-109h?
Good question. The more important question is whether there would be more or less chance to shoot the much faster B-29s down at 30,000 feet when still escorted by the Mustangs. I personally think the 51 and 109G-6AS and -10 were close enough to the Mustang that the fight at 30K would be virtually the same as at 20K.
The next question is what does the Fw 190A7 and A8 do to gain enough time to get to say 32-35K to get into position to make a single diving head on pass and keep going down when the escort is in the area. Both of them would have been at a serious disadvantage at those altitudes.
I suspect the net effect of the B-29 arriving in the ETO in Spring 1944 would have been to first determine if the B-29s planned operational altitudes and bombloads would have been adequate given the problems experienced in the engines in PTO.
The second question would be how to allocate the existing Mustang/Lightning target escort force. B-29s operating at higher speeds and altitudes would dilute the existing coverage even more in the critical April-May timeframe.
Last - how does it truly affect the LW priorities for fighter aircraft. The G-5 and G-6 were already being handicapped with cannon gondolas (at 25K) - what would the issues be at 30K? That is another 4-5 minutes of climb and high fuel consumption just to reach bomber altitude, meaning less time to engage and/or chase if the intercept prediction is off. The Fw 190A8 was already in trouble at 25K with the BMW801.
If the B-29s failed operationally at high altitude and forced back to 25-28K like the Forts, then intercept challenges are still higher for the LW just because of speed. The 51 escort should be even more effective for having longer engagement in escort duties with improved cruise speed to and from target.
For the same reasons the P-47D should be able to perform more target escort duties - perhaps to Hamburg, Brunswick, Schweinfurt radius. At 200kts cruise for the B-29, both the P-47 and P-51 no longer have to throttle back and 'ess' to stay with the bombers.
If the latter point is true the escort potential over target for 8th AF dramatically expands much earlier in 1944 to virtually every active group in 8th FC excpet for Munich to Leipzig and Berlin ranges when only 51s and 38s can go all the way.
