If the U.S.Army Air Corps had no B-17's at the outbreak of WWII?

[bob44]

Against the targets flying at 15000 ft, the accuracy of 88s is maybe an order of magnitude greater than vs. targets flying at 25000 ft. They will spend less shells per hit or damaged bomber, meaning barrels will be less worn. So the guns will remain accurate for longer time. The time gun has against target jumps, again, by an order of magnitude, it can also engage the bombers that are moving away from the gun. The bomber flying at 15000 ft will be slower than one flying at 25000, again making the gun crew to have better aim on them, and providing even more time. The defending fighters will spend less time fuel per kill, with less time spent to return in fray once rearmed refueled. The bomber crews showered with Flak fragments will be anything but efficient.

Now this an interesting thought. Low altitude bombing, fighter escort could stay low as well. No P38 high altitude problems, Allison P51's could work, P40's could work here.
But I doubt a slow, heavy 4 engine bomber would work, at low altitudes, in daytime, over Germany for the reasons above.
If no B17's in 1939, there would have been another 4 engine heavy in use. Considering the bomber crowd.

 

[tyrodtom]

26 July 1941. U.S.A.F.F.E. (U.S. Armed Forces Far East) command formed in Philippines.
.....Four B-17 heavy bomber groups were main effort of the Philippine military build up. They were to provide muscle in support of U.S. diplomatic brinksmanship with Japan. The Japanese Government chose to preempt U.S. military build up by seizing Luzon (northern Philippines) before our heavy bombers were in place.

If U.S. Army Air Corps have no long range heavy bombers then historical military build up in Philippines won't work. I don't doubt President FDR will find another way to get us into WWII but the historical method won't work.

So moving our military assets within our own territory ( the Phillippines was a US commonwealth in 1941) is a good enough excuse for another country to attack the US in your estimation Dave?

 

[davebender]

So moving our military assets within our own territory ( the Phillippines was a US commonwealth in 1941) is a good enough excuse for another country to attack the US in your estimation Dave?

The morality of diplomatic brinksmanship is best left to another discussion.

The only point I'm trying to make is that B-17 heavy bombers were essential to how we entered WWII historically. No B-17s could change the entire course of the war from December 1941 onward by delaying U.S. entry into the war by several months.

 

[tomo pauk]

Now this an interesting thought. Low altitude bombing, fighter escort could stay low as well. No P38 high altitude problems, Allison P51's could work, P40's could work here.

It also gives the defender the opportunity to commence attacks from higher altitude, both on bombers and their escorts. The P-47 would posses no advantages in combat taking place at 15000 ft, the Fw-190 was a great fighter, even in ETO in 1944, under 20000 ft.

But I doubt a slow, heavy 4 engine bomber would work, at low altitudes, in daytime, over Germany for the reasons above.
If no B17's in 1939, there would have been another 4 engine heavy in use. Considering the bomber crowd.

+1
The bombing attack at enemy (enemy as a whole land) was the top priority for the USAF, fighter defence of the USA being second, and army support 3rd.

 

[davebender]

U.S. Army Air Corps Level Bomber Procurement.
39 x B-17B. 1939.
38 x B-17C. 1940.
42 x B-17D. 1941.
512 x B-17E. 1941.

24 x B-25. 1940.
40 x B-25A. 1941.
120 x B-25B. 1941.
1,620 x B-25C. 1941.
2,290 x B-25D. 1941.

201 x B-26. 1940.
139 x B-26A. 1941.

63 x A-20. 1940.
143 x A-20A. 1940.
999 x A-20B. 1941.
948 x A-20C. 1941.

U.S. Army Air Corps CAS Aircraft Procurement.
168 x A-24. 1941.


Looking at historical numbers I don't think Army support was anywhere near third priority for the U.S. Army Air Corps. I suspect we had more VIP transport aircraft then CAS aircraft during 1942.

 

[tomo pauk]

You've listed A-20s under bomber procurement. The list lacks A-25 AAF was trying to get, along with A-36.

 

[Aozora]

26 July 1941. U.S.A.F.F.E. (U.S. Armed Forces Far East) command formed in Philippines.
.....Four B-17 heavy bomber groups were main effort of the Philippine military build up. They were to provide muscle in support of U.S. diplomatic brinksmanship with Japan. The Japanese Government chose to preempt U.S. military build up by seizing Luzon (northern Philippines) before our heavy bombers were in place.

If U.S. Army Air Corps have no long range heavy bombers then historical military build up in Philippines won't work. I don't doubt President FDR will find another way to get us into WWII but the historical method won't work.

Japanese plans didn't depend on whether or not there was a build up of B-17s in the Philippines - Pearl Harbor would still have been attacked on December 7 and the Japanese would still have invaded Malaya and the Philippines. The main thing the Japanese feared was a preemptive strike on their Taiwanese and Fomosan airfields by McArthur's B-17s - they were highly relieved when that didn't happen, and instead they were able to destroy over half the B-17s in the first series of air attacks. Historians still can't figure out why McArthur refused to launch the B-17s when there was a golden opportunity

 

[davebender]

A-20 was a short range level bomber. That's why I listed it with the other level bombers.

 

[Jack_Hill]

B-17 or any, strategy called for heavys.
Night and day carpeting, killing German moral and industry, allied understood it quickly.
I guess whatever the planes may be.

 

[davebender]

That's the way things turned out but it's not what American and British bomber barons planned. During 1939 they expected to find and hit factory size targets with a high degree of accuracy while shrugging off enemy air defenses.

 

[Jack_Hill]

If I understand exactly what you wrote Dave, not anyone could agree more than I.
Do you mean "tactics" accurate strikes could be much more efficient than carpeting ,thus saving many lifes ?
Out there, we (s/e industrial plants) took big civilians kicks, we do not complain, allieds did good job, all of us knowing crews did their best and technology was not at her best this time. But for accuracy....

 

[MikeGazdik]

Even though there were aircraft that may have filled the roll, I don't they they would have been as effective as the B-17. It was one of those "right things at the right time" machines that is hard to explain. I agree that the B-24 was a better weapon, but it seems as if the mission was evolved around the capabilities of the Fortress. Without a doubt, the USAAC would have had to meet the need with another aircraft but I think there would have been a great delay in when that could have happened. In my mind the U.S. may not have been able to have a substantial heavy bomber force a full year and a half of when history shows they were an impact in the war.

 

[Shortround6]

A-20 was a short range level bomber. That's why I listed it with the other level bombers.

It was intended to take part in the land battle. A plane does NOT have to be a dive bomber in order to be a CAS aircraft.

ALL of these planes had four .30 cal guns for strafing plus their bomb loads.

In 1938 the Army decided that ALL future attack planes should be twin engine. This rather went out the window when they needed a lot of planes quickly and navy dive bombers (already in production) could be procured with a minimum of delay even if they were not exactly what was wanted.

A-20s in 1939-40-41 were NOT intended to be level bombers and NOT intended to be issued to "bomber" units.