Could Removing Air Gunners From WWII Bombers Really Have Saved Lives?

[wuzak]

View: https://youtu.be/j7xOGCLqZD4?si=eudks0mOGbwBjFF1

 

[wuzak]

There may have been some advantage in removing some of the guns.

For example, RAF bombers at night probably didn't need the upper and forward turrets, but the rear gunner was quite valuable, even if only as an observer.

For the USAAF, the bombers may have been able to get away without the waist gunners.

The combat boxes would have limited any speed gains by removing any of the turrets.

 

[pbehn]

Removing them is one thing, not designing them in there in the first place is another. There were definite advantages to bombers moving faster either by day or night but simply removing guns doesnt change much. Even removing the whole turrets on a Lancaster still leaves you with all structure, lift and fuel capacity that they needed.

 

[Frog]

It would have saved the gunner's live when the bomber was shot down.

 

[Geoffrey Sinclair]

The Avro Lancaster could do 287 mph, the Lancastrian was a transport version with the turrets removed and aerodynamic fairings used in their place and did around 315 mph with 10% better fuel economy, the Avro York was a transport with the Lancaster wings and engines with a new fuselage with twice the cubic capacity, top speed 298 mph. The two stage Merlin Lancaster VI is reported as capable of 345 mph with the front and mid upper turrets deleted.

Lancaster Military load weights, Fixed / Removable
261 / 179 / Front turret (FN.5A) Guns and ammunition (2,000 rounds)
320 / 179 / Mid Upper turret (FN.7) Guns and ammunition (2,000 rounds)
370 / 490 / Rear turret (FN.20) Guns and ammunition (6,000 rounds)
240 / 0 / Turret hydraulic systems
105 / 0 / Ammunition boxes, tracks and mountings for rear turret

 

[Frog]

As a kid already attracted by planes, I strongly memorized the EC-121 because of the one that was shot down off the NK coasts in 1969 and had made the headlines (a Navy one).

 

[33k in the air]

For example, RAF bombers at night probably didn't need the upper and forward turrets, but the rear gunner was quite valuable, even if only as an observer.

The mid-under gunner, in those few aircraft which had some kind of ventral gun installed, was also quite helpful.

For the USAAF, the bombers may have been able to get away without the waist gunners.

In the second half of 1944 some B-17 groups started carrying only one waist gunner, while some B-24 groups removed the ventral ball turret.

 

[Alan Stevens]

Paul W. Tibbets found when he tested a B-29 without turrets that there was a considerable increase in performance in top speed, climbing rate, and max ceiling.

That led him to the Silverplate modifications on 509th B-29s which came from the factory without turrets except the tail turret.

 

[EwenS]

Paul W. Tibbets found when he tested a B-29 without turrets that there was a considerable increase in performance in top speed, climbing rate, and max ceiling.

That led him to the Silverplate modifications on 509th B-29s which came from the factory without turrets except the tail turret.

Bell Atlanta built 311 stripped B-29B (only armament was radar controlled guns in the tail) between Jan & Sept 1945, interspersed on its production line with ordinary armed B-29. In WW2 most of these went to the 315th BW and were equipped with the AN/APQ-7 Eagle radar. This Wing targeted Japan's remaining oil facilities.

315th Bomb Wing (VH) and Northwest Field, Guam, WWII

Web page for the 315th Bomb Wing, Northwest Field, Guam during World War II.

www.315bw.org

Boeing B-29B Superfortress

The majority of the Silverplate B-29 came from the Martin Omaha production line. The last 8 produced post war came from the Boeing Wichita plant.