Most Overrated aircraft of WWII.....?

[FLYBOYJ]

1) It was in limited use in the Pacific until the end of 1942 then used as armed transports

And you state that after a google search?

2) yes, I should have said Europe not the England (slip of the keyboard).

Good on you

3) B-17 systems was very much obsolete before WWII - do your homework on the B-17 structure. The systems, flight controls, defenses were all top of the line in 1938 and well surpassed by 1942.

There you are totally full of it - the B-17 structurally and system wise was compatible if not superior to anything operated during the era - corrugated wing structure covered with aluminum skin, the same constriction used on the P-38 and many other WW2 combat aircraft.

4) B-17 was definitely a medium bomber - just because you put balls on the queen does not change the original AAC specifications followed by Boeing when designing the B-17

It wasn't a medium bomber - it competed against a medium bomber on the initial contract competition (B-18). Compare the bombload of the B-17 to other medium bombers of the period (B-18. B-23. B-25)

5) the 15th AF had serious talks with the 8th AF to swap out the 5th BW's for B-24 groups that were inbound to the 8th.

Show us your reference for that!

6) I noticed you did not disagree that RAF Bassingbourne was called the Country Club by the press !

Because it was too stupid to comment on!

That's the difference between being a B-17 historian vs being a B-17 fanboy, when you read several thousand combat reports, S-3 reports, accident reports, unit reports, engineering reports you learn how to find the truth vs somebody that only watches 12-o'clock high reruns.

And I guess you're neither!

 

[FLYBOYJ]

I have 4 B-17 books published, a 5th book on the way and a 15th AF war diary

What have you done

Are they in comic book form or a coloring book?

I suggest you curtail your attitude your your lifespan on this forum will be short!

 

[SaparotRob]

A B-17 Fanboy? Moi?

 

[GrauGeist]

Try reading slowly and enunciating the words - the B-17 really (again note the word really) was only used by the 8th AF in England.

1) There was 35 x B-17 units in England
2) There was 6 x B-17 units in Italy.

Majority of the B-17 units (really used) was over England

Don't be a Karen

Well, look at you go...and calling me a Karen.
First rule of internet: "calling names is a clear indication that one's argument lacks substance:.

Second rule of internet: "be sure that the person you're calling names lives far enough away that they won't find you and kick your ass..."

Now, in regards to the B-17, it was used in the ETO, MTO, PTO and North Atlantic.

The Fleet Air Arm used their Fortress in ASW duties, accounting for 11 U-Boats sunk.

I could go on, but I fear that without pictures and using too many words, I'd lose you along the way...

 

[pbehn]

Famous picture of B-17s in England or Italy

b 17 pearl harbor - Bing

Intelligent search from Bing makes it easier to quickly find what you’re looking for and rewards you.

www.bing.com

 

[SaparotRob]

I have very fond memories of watching a new TV show called "12 O'Clock High" with my Dad when I was a child.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

I have very fond memories of watching a new TV show called "12 O'Clock High" with my Dad when I was a child.

It was a great show - I learned everything I need to know about the B-17 from that show!

This was my favorite episode - I swear the model for the nose art was Ann Margret!

 

[Schweik]

Famous picture of B-17s in England or Italy

b 17 pearl harbor - Bing

Intelligent search from Bing makes it easier to quickly find what you’re looking for and rewards you.

www.bing.com

View attachment 646639

That was shot down over Helsinki by Väinämöinen Lemminkäinen flying a Gloster Gamecock during the battle of Ei Tapahtunut. He had just previously shot down a Spitfire a Bf 109 and two P-51s prior to attacking this ungainly, helpless bird, thus tying his record of five for a single sortie set the previous night while shooting down B-17s while on a long range mission over Seattle. This record was smashed of course during his VE day attack of the flyover in New York, where she shot down 40 B-17s.

I'm sorry I'll go away now.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

That was shot down over Helsinki by Väinämöinen Lemminkäinen flying a Gloster Gamecock during the battle of Ei Tapahtunut. He had just previously shot down a Spitfire a Bf 109 and two P-51s prior to attacking this ungainly, helpless bird, thus tying his record for a single sortie.

I'm sorry I'll go away now.

I wish I can give you bacon as well

 

[drgondog]

Try reading slowly and enunciating the words - the B-17 really (again note the word really) was only used by the 8th AF in England.

1) There was 35 x B-17 units in England
2) There was 6 x B-17 units in Italy.

Majority of the B-17 units (really used) was over England

Don't be a Karen

You may be a flaming asshat, but I'll have to ponder more on the probability.

Couple of points. If you believe what you just stated and pose that you have written several books on the B-17, my first question is a.) how old are you?, b.) were your 'books' actually published and intended for adult consumption?, c.) were coloring books included?

1) It was in limited use in the Pacific until the end of 1942 then used as armed transports

The reason that B-17 BG assignment to all theatres was the extremely high priority to ETO/MTO for USSTAF and the task of destroying the LW and German industy base.

2) yes, I should have said Europe not the England (slip of the keyboard).

Brainfart from eating too many crayons.

3) B-17 systems was very much obsolete before WWII - do your homework on the B-17 structure. The systems, flight controls, defenses were all top of the line in 1938 and well surpassed by 1942.

Ah an airframe structures Expert. We can chat. As to defenses, 1938 armament was clearly Inferior to the task to be faced in ETO and major strides were made to improve - with power turrets and computing gunsights. Quick test - name other heavy bombers that match up? B-29, yes. But B-24 slightly inferior.

4) B-17 was definitely a medium bomber - just because you put balls on the queen does not change the original AAC specifications followed by Boeing when designing the B-17

Ohh, dirty talk and glib remarks. I sense a keyboard warrior in sunglasses and 50 mission hat with a stub of a cigar as you fight for control of a hostile 'ether'.

Name a medium bomber with range, defensive armament and bomb load comprable to 5,000 pounds at 600 mile combat radius.

5) the 15th AF had serious talks with the 8th AF to swap out the 5th BW's for B-24 groups that were inbound to the 8th.

So, what. The fighter threat in MTO was less severe for the lower ceiling capable B-24, so slightly less bomb load/but greater range was appealing to Eaker and Twining.

6) I noticed you did not disagree that RAF Bassingbourne was called the Country Club by the press !

That's the difference between being a B-17 historian vs being a B-17 fanboy, when you read several thousand combat reports, S-3 reports, accident reports, unit reports, engineering reports you learn how to find the truth vs somebody that only watches 12-o'clock high reruns.

So, what? And BTW someday when you learn to spell Bassingbourn (no 'e') you may graduate to student - level one. Is that above or below 'B-17 Fanboy'.

 

[Greg Boeser]

So, the Army's own findings are irrelevent. From a study by the AAF Operations and requirements Division, Spring 1944

... it would be desirable to increase B-17 production and decrease that of the B-24, because the former airplane is a much more effective combat weapon.

 

[Greg Boeser]

It is true, that with the introduction of the B-29, General Doolittle envisioned reclassifying B-17s and B-24s as mediums, and discontinuing the B-25 and B-26.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

3) B-17 systems was very much obsolete before WWII - do your homework on the B-17 structure. The systems, flight controls, defenses were all top of the line in 1938 and well surpassed by 1942.

I have 42 years of aviation experience (maintenance, flight ops and quality assurance) and am well aware of how the B-17 is constructed. Structure, flight controls and some systems were pretty generic for aircraft of that era. By this and other dribble you have stated on this forum, I'm wondering what kind of aircraft experience you have besides generic books and possibly a commercial flight or two????

 

[FLYBOYJ]

It is true, that with the introduction of the B-29, General Doolittle envisioned reclassifying B-17s and B-24s as mediums, and discontinuing the B-25 and B-26.

100% true! It took the B-29 to OFFICIALLY make that happen

 

[GrauGeist]

We should also take into consideration that when one creates a webpage (like in war Thunder, for example), it's referred to as "publishing" once it's set to the server.

As far as a medium bombers go, the B-17 was the undisputed champ, with a max. loadout of 17,600 pounds (using internal and external racks) and of course, a reduced range.

Meanwhile, the B-24 (which we must assume is still a "heavy" according to some authorities) carried a staggering 8,000 pounds at max. load at short distances.

But if course, we shouldn't let numbers get in the way of a good story. Right?

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

Don't be a Karen

And likewise, don't be a douche. If you disagree, great. Disagree agreeably and everyone can get along. Be a douche, well, when you buy the boat you get the leaks.

 

[pbehn]

So, what? And BTW someday when you learn to spell Bassingbourn (no 'e') you may graduate to student - level one. Is that above or below 'B-17 Fanboy'.

That's the funny thing about names, especially in UK , you either know or you dont and its right or its wrong, there are no rules in place at all.

 

[drgondog]

I have 4 B-17 books published, a 5th book on the way and a 15th AF war diary

What have you done

Puleeze dont leave us hanging in breathless anticpation. Enumerate the titles and publishers that you are showcasing to present expertise. Don't hold back - we will bask in your glory.

Did you infer, or use suggestive language.

 

[Deleted member 79357]

I have 5 B-17 books published -- what have you done ?

What are those books?

Definitely not comic books -- something with big words that Fanboy would not be able to comprehend


Book 1

Book 2

B-17 Book 3

 

[Deleted member 79357]

And you state that after a google search?

Good on you

There you are totally full of it - the B-17 structurally and system wise was compatible if not superior to anything operated during the era - corrugated wing structure covered with aluminum skin, the same constriction used on the P-38 and many other WW2 combat aircraft.

It wasn't a medium bomber - it competed against a medium bomber on the initial contract competition (B-18). Compare the bombload of the B-17 to other medium bombers of the period (B-18. B-23. B-25)


Show us your reference for that!

Because it was too stupid to comment on!

And I guess you're neither!

Oh fanboy should be renamed karen

The only person calling others insulting names (or stupid) is this little fanboy

so when you lose an argument or somebody does not like what you claim (even when proven wrong 30 years ago) you threaten to goto your mommy as the big bad B-17 researcher has hurt your petty little feelings.

Waaaaaaaaaaa !

Suck-it up