Most Dangerous Position on a Bomber....?

[MP-Willow]

Ok all you the YB-40 was a gun platform that could not really keep up with the B-17s after they dropped bombs. Most of its weight came from the extra armor and amunition. It had some 32 more boxes and that is not all of it. As for improvments to the B-17G the chin turret was carried over to the production Gs.

home.att.net/~jbaugher2/b17_12.html this site has some good info about the program. It did have some flights but the slow speeds on return trip and the tail heavy problums along with the fact that the ships really were not that much better at killing fighters just killed the project.

That is a lot from a guy who is not a great fan!

 

[Lightning Guy]

I was just making the point that the B-17 itself never carried that much armor for anyone but the pilots (excluding the YB-40). In general, crew members on a B-24 were better protected.

 

[the lancaster kicks ass]

the B-24 could take allot more damge than a B-17, then again, so could a tiger moth...............

 

[cheddar cheese]

considering B-17's were stronger than lancs, that really doesnt say a lot about the lancaster does it

 

[Lightning Guy]

I wouldn't say the B-24 could take more damage than a B-17. The B-17 was quite possibly the toughest airframe in the war. That being said, crew armor on the B-24 was much improved. As an example, the Martin upper turret on the B-24 had a 3/8in steel plate mounted in front of the gunner that moved with him wherever he turned. Neither the Sperry nor Bendix upper turrets on a B-17 were so well protected.

 

[the lancaster kicks ass]

the turrets on the B-17 were tiny though, there was no room for armour for it..............

 

[cheddar cheese]

tiny turrets = harder to hit

 

[MP-Willow]

The B-17 was in need of being replaced as the B-24 was to do that, but production was needed for both. Also I think boeing would not have let the B-17 go.

Now here is a thought for a position the radio man or gunner on a Grumman TBM

 

[Erich]

hope this image comes out but it is from our data base on Sturmgruppen actions against US heavy bombers. This is the rear of a B-24 getting peppered by Luftwaffe 2cm and 3cm rounds after the tail gunner position has been knocked out. As I had said earlier by July of 44 the tail position was usually the first to get cloberred as most of the Luftwaffe day fighter attacks were now from the rear. once the tail position was no longer active, a German fighter could easily sit behind the tail and blast away without any interference except and Allied escort.

 

[Erich]

continuation................the Fw 190A-8 pilot made his attack from the right side of the bomber and shot out the right inner-engine and hit the tail section, this section of cine film shows the tail getting eliminated and the left inner engine being struck. Another pic I have of the same incident shows the attack completing down the left wing with strikes against the the left outboard engine with the result that the B-24 drops off to the left and explodes.............pretty terrifying

 

[Maestro]

A picture like this one ?

 

[Lightning Guy]

And granted the B-24's tail didn't have the armor to withstand that but it was more likely to stop machine gun rounds or flak splinters than a B-17.

C.C. Tiny turrets doesn't mean smaller, more difficult to hit people (and protecting the person is the reason for armor anyway).

M.P. I would say the radio man had the worse spot of the two as the turret on a TBM was equipped with bullet-resistant class.

 

[plan_D]

That's actually a very good picture, Erich. Even if it is tiny. Attacking the tail must have still be risky buisness for the Germans, after all coming straight at you, the tail gunner had an easy target.

The B-17 could take a lot of damage, Lanc. I think the pictures of the damage sustained by returning bombers shows how tough they were.

 

[Lightning Guy]

That's a great pic Maestro. I think that damage was caused by flak though and a direct hit from an 88 would do that to just about any airplane.

 

[Erich]

interviews from Luftwaffe pilots confirm that if the cowling mg's were still installed tha they would use these to take out the tail gunners position due to the longer range of the 13mm's over the cannons. once the tail gunners was removed then the cannons were used to finish the job. maestro's photo is indeed from a flak burst hitting the bomb load but must admit that when a Sturm Fw 190 attacked with the heavy 3cm Mine shells the same effect happened. the 3cm round created such terribl carnage within the aluminum skin that it must of been pure hell for those crew members who lived through a company front attack.

two cents worth........

Erich ~

 

[Erich]

continuation and sorry again for the small pic. This is another photo from the one I posted above........... ashould of posted this before as it is out of order.

will look to see for another and different scenario against the B-24's.........

back soon

 

[the lancaster kicks ass]

i can't make it out, what is it??

 

[Erich]

the right wing fuel tank has been hit by a Mine shell. As I said the pics are out of order, and this is probably number 3 in a series of 8 pics. The cine film goes fairly fast and we had to spot shot the film to get in sequence to determine just where the German rounds were landing. Sorry to say my data pics are not coming up like I had intended.

 

[the lancaster kicks ass]

i'm sorry i stil can't make out either pic...........................

 

[Erich]

another pic out of order, plain to see the right inner engine has exploded and vaporized in the smoke before the German pilot fires off on the tail gunner and other wing