Consolidated XB-41

Home > Fact Sheets > Consolidated XB-41

CONSOLIDATED XB-41

Posted 6/26/2009 Printable Fact Sheet

Photos

Consolidated XB-41. (U.S. Air Force photo)
Download HiRes

The XB-41 and XB-40 projects were developed to test the escort bomber concept. Because there were no fighters capable of escorting bomber formations on deep strike missions early in World War II, the Air Corps authorized tests for heavily armed bombers to act as escorts and protect the bomb-carrying aircraft from enemy fighters. Both the XB-40 and XB-41 projects were failures for a variety of reasons -- they were unable to effectively defend other aircraft, the were too slow to keep up with formations returning from bombing missions, they were too heavy, and the basic flight characteristics were changed drastically by the added drag and center of gravity changes introduced with the additional turrets.

The XB-41 was modified from an early production model B-24D (S/N 41-11822) and included 14 .50-cal. machine guns mounted in pairs in a Bendix chin turret, two Martin power turrets on the dorsal (top) fuselage, a belly turret, left and right waist positions, and a tail turret. The XB-41 was completed in late 1942 and testing was done in early 1943. Flight tests were very disappointing and the XB-41 project was quickly canceled.


Type Number built/
converted Remarks
XB-41 1 (cv) B-24D converted to bomber escort

TECHNICAL NOTES:
Armament: 14 .50-cal. machine guns
Engines: Four Pratt Whitney R-1830-43 Twin Wasp radial engines of 1,250 hp each
Maximum speed: 289 mph at 25,000 ft.
Cruising speed: 200 mph
Range: 3,100 miles
Service ceiling: 28,500 ft.
Span: 110 ft. 0 in.
Length: 66 ft. 4 in.
Height: 17 ft. 11 in.
Weight: 63,000 lbs. (maximum gross weight)
Crew: Nine
Serial number: (B-24D-CO): 41-11822

Very interesting John. I knew there was an up-gunned B-17 but I never heard of this version of a B-24.

Geo

The whole escort bomber concept was flawed from the get-go. Even if they could have stayed with the bombers all the way out and back, there couldn't have been enough of them to cover the whole formation, and they would never have been in the right place at the right time. With no speed advantage they couldn't "rove" the formations as a fighter could, and they were as easily shot down as the bombers were. A whole formation of them would have been a rude surprise for the Luftwaffe, but it wasn't in the cards.

Looking at this photo, several things stand out to me.

Of the two top turrets, the forward one is mounted on a raised and faired platform compared to
to rear one. That, and the chin turret I'm certain created quite a bit of drag over the standard airframe.
Note also the support under the fuselage aft of the rear edge of the wing, indicating that the center of
gravity on this thing is waaay off. I'm guessing with the additional drag, weight, and off balance
condition, this thing must have been a beast to fly.

At least the XB-40 made it into theater before being dropped.

In what seems like a giant "DUHHHHHHHHHHH" moment for me, a while ago I found what appears to be a ridiculously obvious reason for the XB-41's development. I also appear to be the only person who has dug enough to find this.

The whole purpose of the B-40 was the ability to fly unnoticed in formations of B-17's, only to surprise the living hell out of enemy fighters with their firepower. This was actually a BRITISH idea that they pushed the U.S. hard on; then, when the AAF finally got them developed, didn't want to have anything to do with them as they had completely given up on daytime bombing. The U.S. forged ahead and developed a number of proposals for large, armed "convoy escort" aircraft, including versions of the B-29 and B-32 for which I have drawings.

Anyway, the reason for the development of the XB-41 was obvious: To have a heavily armed, convoy escort version of the B-24 flying with formations of B-17s - or vice versa, B-40's flying escort with B-24s - would make them totally obvious to attacking fighters. Of course! Thus my "DUHHHHHHHH" moment.

"Convoy escort" versions of several larger aircraft were at least discussed, including the B-26 Marauder and the P-61. Neither of these aircraft would ever have been able to dogfight worth a hoot, so it is a good thing we came up with long-range fuel tanks for fighters.

Respectfully submitted,

AlanG