Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
the top speed of the B-17 was 287mph (462kph). The A6M2 had a top speed of 332mph (534.3kph) and would be able to catch it easily.
I think its worth remembering that the RAF B17C had a very difficult time in Europe and they had a lot of performance problems at very high altitude. IIRC it was the USAAF advisors in Britain recommending that the RAF should not use them in action as they were not ready.
So the headline performance numbers for the B17C may be one thing but in the real world they were very different.
That suggests no bomb load and minimal fuel load. Hardly typical combat conditions.
Economical cruise speed with typical bomb load is what counts.
How vulnerable were early model B-17s (C-Fs) in the Pacific when flying at 20-30K feet? While they may not be able to hit anything, when flying at top speed at altitude, couldn't they outrun Zeros? If so, they could be useful for reconnaissance and harassment.
The question was about C's and F's. These were early models and were probably very GOOD candidates for photo-recon at high altitudes and high speeds in the Pacific.
Factsheets : Boeing B-17C
provides a maximum speed of 323 mph at 25k' for the 'C' model.
Without knowing the details, I'd expect the raw performance of the B-17C wasn't so much of an issue as an evident need to make other combat-readiness modifications.
Wikipedia entry does seem to be generally consistent with your post:
List of Boeing B-17 Flying Fortress variants - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
"With the passage of the Lend-lease Act in 1941, the Royal Air Force began clamoring[citation needed] for use of the B-17. At that time, the Army Air Corps was suffering from shortages of the B-17, but [hesitantly] agreed to provide 20 planes to the RAF. Though the Army Air Corps did not consider the B-17C ready for combat, it was desperately needed in Britain. They were modified Boeing production B-17C, given the company designation Model 299T. The modifications were the addition of self-sealing tanks and replacement of the single nose gun with 0.5 inch Brownings.[1]
The twenty planes were placed immediately into frontline service as the Fortress Mk I.
In Britain, the plane performed unremarkably. By 1941 September, 39 sorties had made up 22 missions. Nearly half of the sorties were aborted due to mechanical problems. Eight of the twenty were destroyed by September, half to accidents. Their guns tended to freeze at high altitude and were generally unable to effectively protect the Fortresses. Their success as a bomber was also limited, largely because they were unable to hit anything from the altitudes at which they flew.
The first "C" series flew in July 1940; 38 were built. The eighteen remaining after twenty were transferred to the RAF were modified to the configuration used in the B-17D. However, one of these, B-17C 40-2047, crashed while being ferried from Salt Lake City, UT, to Mather Army Air Base, CA, on November 2, 1941."
I'd expect the D model might have been able to outrun the zeke at hi-altitude but lessons learned in RAF European service suggests (as above) may have meant they would fly operationally only at Zero accessible altitude. There are references in the literature citing successful IJN attacks on B-17D (and the more modified E's, although I have none at hand at the moment).
I am in the process of moving house so everything is in box's but the book I had in mind had a complete chapter on the early B17 in RAF service and the list of problems IIRC was a lot longer than outlined in Wiki
RAF service and the list of problems IIRC was a lot longer than outlined in Wiki
No, my question was... "How vulnerable were early model B-17s (C-Fs) in the Pacific when flying at 20-30K feet?" I believe the correct answer is: fairly invunerable, particularly with the E and F models. Japanese fighters/interceptors struggled at that altitude to keep up and defeat well defended and relatively fast heavy bombers. My intent, is to dispell the myth of early war Japanese aircraft invincibility and postulate that the Philippine-based USFAF B-17s could have dealt a decisive blow if they were not allowed to be destroyed on the ground.