special ed
1st Sergeant
- 5,162
- May 13, 2018
If only the B-24s had P-39s available for long range escort.
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
And what about the 15th AF???!
And go read the post above yours!Ah yes, I wondered how long before that was brought up.
That would be the 15th Air Force that spent its war either doing fairly low level tactical bombing or attacking some of the most heavily defended targets in the Reich, The oil fields at Ploesti and the aviation factories at Wiener-Nuestad?
And as Eight Air Force losses dropped significantly by Jan 1945 as most of the mission was now over friendly territory, 15th Air Force missions were over hostile soil to the bitter end.
And they weren't asking for more B-24s either!!!!Curiously, their CoS was perfectly happy with the B-24 and didn't ask for more B-17's
As of December 1944 the USAAF plan was to end B-17 production at Boeing in April 1945, and Douglas and Lockheed in January 1946, the B-24 was already down to 2 open production lines, San Diego scheduled to finish in July 1945 and Ford in June 1946, with 2,952 B-17 and 5,588 B-24 outstanding on current orders. End April 1945 the B-17 lines were to remain open until November and December 1946, delivering another 2,054 B-17, the B-24 lines were to shut in July 1945, delivering another 601 B-24. Actual B-24 end of production June 1945, B-17 end of production July 1945.
More nonsense! READ Sinclair's post!However, the war developed and the plan by early 1945 became stop building B-17's and pay them all off from front line units, and build loads of B-24N's, B-29's and B-32's
Cancelled USAAF orders for VJ Day
Medium Bombers
B-24N - 5,168
Heavy Bombers
B-29C - 5,000
B-29D - 200
B-32 - 1,885
Great post G Geoffrey Sinclair .Now to where the USSBS is contradicted, the 15th Air Force figures say the B-17 dropped 104,877 tons of bombs January 1944 onwards, the B-24 192,113 tons, B-17 effective sorties from November 1943 onwards are 41,751, B-24 86,838. Even with the missing 1943 bomb tonnage it is clear the B-17 was carrying the heavier loads on average. The average bomb loads using the data in the "Target and Duty Sheets", which give a break down by bomb group, for the December 1943 to October 1944 period, noting the December 1943 figures do not include tonnage classified as jettisoned. For effective B-17 sorties December 1943 to October 1944 the average bomb load dropped was 5,400 pounds, for B-24 it was 4,690 pounds. These figures are a slight underestimate, as some sorties classified as effective have at least some of their bomb tonnage classified as jettisoned.
This is an important account. The problems of the B-24 with loss of an engine is really notable. On the raid to Dresden, Feb13/14, 1945, all of the engines on dad's aircraft gave trouble and he recalled that after takeoff, he flew all the way to the target and back feathering and restarting all engines. He recorded in his log book "All engines gave trouble"."The B-24 bomber one of the most difficult planes to fly during WWII. It was unpressurized, underpowered and prone to explode on takeoff. Unlike the B-17, the B-24 could not maintain altitude if one engine was lost. If two engines were lost, the plane would drop pretty much like a rock." B-24 NAVIGATOR HARRY FORNALCZYK
Defying the Flying Coffin: The Combat and POW Experiences of B-24 Navigator Harry Fornalczyk - Daedalians
by Gary Fullmer, Pioneer Flight Harry was born in Erie, Pennsylvania on September 9, 1923. As a typical young boy of that period, Harry managed to stay out of serious trouble but was very active in several unexplained happenings around his neighborhood. In his high school years, Harry excelled...www.daedalians.org
I would suggest some research and reviewing some of the other references mentioned in this thread!!!!
Some more than others!Escuadrilla: When it comes to WWII, we are all Armchair Aviators!
It had to be a pretty interesting ride!This is an important account. The problems of the B-24 with loss of an engine is really notable. On the raid to Dresden, Feb13/14, 1945, all of the engines on dad's aircraft gave trouble and he recalled that after takeoff, he flew all the way to the target and back feathering and restarting all engines. He recorded in his log book "All engines gave trouble".
It was. A deep penetration and the flight lasted 9 hours and 35 minutes. The Lancaster flew quite well on 3 engines. Crews often got back to England on 2. On the Op to Bottrop, Sep 27, 1944, after having been severely shot up by flak, "Andy" Anderson of 419 Squadron came back to England on 2 engines and landed with only one engine at the crash aerodrome at Woodbridge. He was awarded the DSO for his efforts.It had to be a pretty interesting ride!
That took years of hard work.Can we all agree though: the B-24 was an ugly aircraft! If pigs could fly, they'd look like B-24s.
Well it is often described as the looking like the crate the B-17 came in! But beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Adding the front turret did nothing for it aesthetically but was a vast improvement defence wise.Can we all agree though: the B-24 was an ugly aircraft! If pigs could fly, they'd look like B-24s.
And I think many contributors on this thread are well aware of the B-24N - the prototype carried serial number 44-48753, which indicates the contract was let in 1944.The 'single tail' B-24N was always intended as the definitive B-24.
It had been test flown in 1943 as the XB-24K, demonstrating superior handling, climb and speed - it cruised 30mph faster than a B-17 while carrying a much bigger bomb load.
It became a very substantial redevelopment of the basic B-24 into almost a new aircraft. Production was ramped up for commencement in mid 1945 at Willow Run, but the end of the war saw the order for 5,160 cancelled.
And I think some on here may (or may not) know that a number of B-24Ds were actually modified and a turret was installed in place of the glass nose.Well it is often described as the looking like the crate the B-17 came in! But beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Adding the front turret did nothing for it aesthetically but was a vast improvement defence wise.
"Originally, the Army Air Force intended the B-32 as a "fallback" design to be used only if the B-29 program fell significantly behind in its development schedule. As development of the B-32 became seriously delayed this plan became unnecessary due to the success of the B-29. Initial plans to use the B-32 to supplement the B-29 in re-equipping B-17 and B-24 groups before redeployment of the Eighth and Fifteenth Air Forces to the Pacific were stymied when only five production models had been delivered by the end of 1944, by which time full B-29 operations were underway in the Twentieth Air Force."