Questions about B-29 operational range, VVS, VVS intercept capability if Operation Unthinkable happen. (2 Viewers)

[Warbringer]

I have a conversation about the VVS's ability to react and intercept the super fortresses if Operation Unthinkable right in 1945 if it is carried out, there are a few questions and want to ask you guys in here, if in the case if a strategic bombing will take place targeting important cities of the Soviet Union such as Moscow or Leningrad, what will be the VVS's ability to react?

- If this happened, where would the Allies start bombing, what bases would they have to fly thier B-29 and escort fighter to strategic bombings on Soviet cities, would they take off from Germany, France or was there a country closer enough to have an airport for the B-29 to take off from?

- From France or Germany to Moscow is quite a long way, is there any escort fighter capable of doing this mission, I think of P-47N and P-51D but am wondering about the amount of combat fuel it has.

- Can the Mig-3 or can any Soviet high altitude interceptors have the speed and ability to intercept the B-29 at 25,000 to 30,000 feet?

- I have seen some sources on the internet and Wiki mentioning the La-7's service ceiling of over 30,000 feet but I have not found any documents talking about its capabilities or speed at 30,000 feet (typically I find the La-7's top speed at 25,000 feet to be around 372mph.)

So my question is, was the La-7 or any Soviet fighter capable of competing with any Allied escort aircraft at 30,000 feet altitude and why?

- The Soviet Union also had a lot of captured German planes, do you guys think it would be able to intercept them?

 

[tomo pauk]

- Can the Mig-3 or can any Soviet high altitude interceptors have the speed and ability to intercept the B-29 at 25,000 to 30,000 feet?

The best hi-alt interceptors in the Soviet aresenal were the Spitfire IX and P-47. Also the P-63 might try, once a bit lightened (removal of gondolas & ammo, some armor?). MiG-3 in 1945 is as good as gone.

- I have seen some sources on the internet and Wiki mentioning the La-7's service ceiling of over 30,000 feet but I have not found any documents talking about its capabilities or speed at 30,000 feet (typically I find the La-7's top speed at 25,000 feet to be around 372mph.)

La-7 would've probably be as efficient as the Ki-84 (with a workable engine)? No great shakes, but nothing special? Soviet cannons were not that powerful, while B-29s sported heavy defensive firepower, and were without the sparkling performance at 30000 ft, so La-7 might be found lacking in this job.

- The Soviet Union also had a lot of captured German planes, do you guys think it would be able to intercept them?

Perhaps once or twice, until spare parts last on the D-9s? The Bf 109K-4 or G-10 might stand the chance, but again I'm not sure how good/bad was the state of spare parts for these.

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

The biggest problem VVS is going to have is that its planes are poorly armed for this task.

 

[GTX]

What about some Yak-3s?

 

[tomo pauk]

What about some Yak-3s?

Weak at high altitude, plus no heavy firepower.

 

[GTX]

They may not have been ideal but they would have been available and used.

 

[Snautzer01]

The biggest problem VVS is going to have is that its planes are poorly armed for this task.

Not worse than the japanese.

 

[GTX]

Does anyone know how many aircraft the Soviets captured from Germany? I am curious about the jets and if some of these might have been pressed into service if the need was there.

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

Not worse than the japanese.

Right, and the Japanese weren't noted for their ability to shred B-17s, much less B-29s.

 

[GTX]

I think the 20mm cannon used on many of the Soviet types in service at the time - Yak-3, Yak-9, LA-7 etc. After all, at least 1 B-29 was shot down in Korea by Yak-9s.

 

[GTX]

Also, I am sure some of the modifications such as LA-7s with tail rockets might have been rushed into service to deal with the threat if needed:

 

[tomo pauk]

I think the 20mm cannon used on many of the Soviet types in service at the time - Yak-3, Yak-9, LA-7 etc. After all, at least 1 B-29 was shot down in Korea by Yak-9s.

We can recall that Germans were eager to move to 30mm cannons and beyond, reckoning that even four 20mm cannons were not enough to reliably kill B-17s. German 20mm was firing a more destructive shell than the Shvak.
Soviets were also eager to install 37mm cannons on their ww2 fighters, again putting the effect on the target of the Svak in perspective - that is despite not having to deal with the bombers as sturdy as B-17s. Soviets moved on 23 and 37mm cannons just past ww2.

My point being that, despite some kills made with weak-ish weapons against the B-17s, Soviets would've been wrong in expecting that 1x 20mm and 2x 12.7mm (or two 20mm) battery will be efficient.

 

[Zmauky]

Well, at least all the effort that MiG OKB invested in the I-220 - I-225 series of high-altitude fighters would be profitable. And, I assume that Mikulin engines would become available (otherwise every thing went to Sturmoviks)
And maybe the first Sukhoi (at least Su-1) would have some role.
And the only ones that were operational (how much - that much) were the Yak-9PD.
Yak-9PD -- To deal with high-altitude German reconnaissance aircraft, this model was fitted with a two-stage, gear-driven supercharger and a single 20mm cannon.

And as for the armament, it is no coincidence that the MiG-15 had a 37 mm cannon (perhaps not the most ideal for pursuing fighters, but in Korea against the B-29... so that's what they were designed for). However, I have no doubt that the 37 mm gun (which was in the Yak-9T - not to mention the 45 mm from the Yak-9K) would have been crammed into the high-altitude PD variant.

 

[Shortround6]

Part of the question is not if the VVS can shoot down a few B-29s. The Question if if they can shoot down enough to make the Americans/allies stop.

The Japanese did shoot down B-29s, but not enough to make the Americans stop sending them.

The later LA-7s got three 20mm guns but they are synchronized (not firing at book speed) and they used the 96-98g shells which were not the German mine shell. HE content was around 6-6.5g. Tomo is quite right about the lack of firepower for bringing down big bombers.
Please note that the LA-9 shifted to four 23mm guns at the end of 1946. Soviets were well aware of the lack of firepower of their earlier fighters.
The 23mm cannon fired 175g projectiles.

AS far as service ceiling goes.
That is the altitude at which a service airplane, in good condition, can still climb 100fps (or metric equivalent) while flying level (no bank). The ability to even fly in formation is several thousand ft lower. Ability to do combat maneuvers is several thousand ft below that.

Service ceiling of bombers pretty useless most of the time. It was possible to get a B-29 off the ground at 140,000lbs. It didn't stay at 140,000lbs for very long burning about 100lbs of fuel per minute in long climb.
You can also find speeds and fuel burn for weights of 80,000-90,000lbs (bombs gone and a lot of fuel gone) that are really remarkable for a WW II bomber. The Soviets (and others) needed to hit them on the way in. Once they had dropped 12-20,000lbs of bombs altitude and speed could change significantly. B-29s out of formation and running light could cruise (using a lot of fuel) at over 350mph at 35,000. May not have a been a smart choice depending on conditions but trying to chase one with a fighter who's engine peaked in the teens was not not going offer much chance of success.

And in 1945-46 the B-29s had a fair amount of blind bombing aids (night bombing) and trying to even find B-29s (hot turbos?) in a none radar equipped fighter at night?

 

[Howard Gibson]

I have a conversation about the VVS's ability to react and intercept the super fortresses if Operation Unthinkable right in 1945 if it is carried out, there are a few questions and want to ask you guys in here, if in the case if a strategic bombing will take place targeting important cities of the Soviet Union such as Moscow or Leningrad, what will be the VVS's ability to react?

Given the Soviet airforce's focus on low-altitude combat, they would get the crap bombed out of them. There would a crash program to build two-stage superchargers to be installed in fighters armed with multiple cannons. These would come into service and the USAAF/USAF would start losing bombers.

The Mustangs and Thunderbolts were successful because the Germans failed to supply high-octane fuel and two-stage superchargers. The Soviets will need a couple of years to correct this mistake, and then long range escort fighters will cease to be effective.

Germany was developing technology that would have stopped allied bombing, but they were conquered on the ground before they could deploy it. Russia would be way tougher.

 

[Shortround6]

Russia had a major problem in 1945-46.
It was the Western Allies that were supplying the fuel for the Western Lend Lease aircraft. It was also the Allies that were supplying a large part of the Tetra ethyl lead to allowed the Russian fuel to get into the 95 octane range. How much stuff they had stockpiled and how long it would last?

2nd problem is that it is only around 330-350 miles from Tehran to Baku. Given several months to deploy (like you would need to move a number of B-29s anywhere in the summer/fall of 1945) the Soviets were be facing heavy bombing from air bases in Iraq-Iran and given the amount of rail, road and barge infrastructure that that existed for the Lend Lease supply route/s building the bases would not be overly hard.

Russia had some very good scientists and engineers. They had a rather crappy/spotty infrastructure to supply certain materials in large quantities.

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

The Mustangs and Thunderbolts were successful because the Germans failed to supply high-octane fuel and two-stage superchargers. The Soviets will need a couple of years to correct this mistake, and then long range escort fighters will cease to be effective.

Without Lend-Lease, and with infrastructure messed up by war, that's a tall ask.

 

[EwenS]

Russia had a major problem in 1945-46.
It was the Western Allies that were supplying the fuel for the Western Lend Lease aircraft. It was also the Allies that were supplying a large part of the Tetra ethyl lead to allowed the Russian fuel to get into the 95 octane range. How much stuff they had stockpiled and how long it would last?

2nd problem is that it is only around 330-350 miles from Tehran to Baku. Given several months to deploy (like you would need to move a number of B-29s anywhere in the summer/fall of 1945) the Soviets were be facing heavy bombing from air bases in Iraq-Iran and given the amount of rail, road and barge infrastructure that that existed for the Lend Lease supply route/s building the bases would not be overly hard.

Russia had some very good scientists and engineers. They had a rather crappy/spotty infrastructure to supply certain materials in large quantities.

But remember the legacy of the Anglo -Soviet occupation of Iran in 1941. The Tripartite Treaty Alliance of Jan 1942 between Iran, Britain and USSR called for withdrawal of British & Soviet troops within 6 months of the end of hostilities. Sept 1943 the Big Three confirmed their commitment to Iranian independence.

Historically Britain complied, withdrawing from 2 March 1946, but the Soviets delayed until May citing security concerns from various ethnic groups on their southern border with Iran.

And look at where the Lend Lease routes from the Gulf to USSR were and note the mountainous terrain of most of the country. Note particularly where Tehran is.

Iran crisis of 1946 - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

If in this scenario diplomatic relations have broken down so far that the West is at war with the USSR then the Soviets are going nowhere, probably even pushing further south, down that LL aid route. You are note going to be building more airfields there. And anywhere else gives major supply problems.

And there were not many air bases in Iraq in 1945. In 1941 there were just 2 RAF bases. Shaibah near Basra in the south & Habbaniya West of Baghdad. By the early 1950s the RAF was also flying from airfields at Baghdad, Mosul, Basra, & Ser Amadia. So if you want bases there in the desert virtually everything needs to be shipped in.

And are the Soviets just going to sit there and let you do that? I don't think so.

 

[Geoffrey Sinclair]

The scenario is presumably the USSR and Western Allies meet in Germany in May 1945 and immediately start snarling at each other, so the US Army in Europe does not fall from 68 divisions to 12 by end 1945, composed mostly of new recruits lacking unit training, with similar reduction in air power and other allied forces. Then war breaks out over the occupation of Japan, or Austria etc. in late 1945 and the new front lines remain largely static.

There will be famines in Europe and probably Japan. Allied forces will be needed in Iran, and will probably be ejected from most of China and Korea. Türkiye having declared war against the axis in 1945 will probably find itself dragged in

The number of B-29 capable airfields in Europe will be in the single digits at best, Japan 0 unless urgent work is done. The Red Air Force will have the numbers and experience to be a much more effective opposition than the Luftwaffe and continue to be into 1946 at least, it would help the Red Army seek to ensure the few B-29 airfields are pushed back as far as possible. Maybe try for interceptions near the bases during climb and descent.

Distances,
Copenhagen Moscow 970 miles
Berlin Moscow 1,000 miles
Oslo Moscow 1,020 miles
Narvik Moscow 1,080 miles
Strasbourg Moscow 1,350 miles
Athens Moscow 1,390 miles
P-47N, P-51D, Mosquito, P-61 available for insertion and withdrawal cover. The P-47N at 25,000 feet in theory to 1,000 miles radius at 215? mph IAS. Lots of B-17, B-24, Lancaster etc. to deal with targets closer to Western Europe but that would require a major effort to move the units and their supply system from Britain and southern Italy.

Tokyo Vladivostok 660 miles, far east USSR could be near isolated supply wise if the trans Siberia rail system could be kept cut.

In terms of intercepting B-29 raids the USSR air defence system had not been tested, radar coverage was limited and would be hit by the full suite of jamming the allies had developed. This would make tracking and intercepting night raids difficult. Loran would be available as a navigation aid. Once the campaign is going the western allies can launch raids from North Cape to Iran, seriously stretching any defence system.

The Red Air Force was geared to fight below 20,000 feet, changing that to 25,000 feet or higher would be a lot of work and only sustainable if the USSR is making the equipment. Both sides would have to do a lot of adjusting, the western allies would do better at this, the USA was about the only country that could have remained at war in 1946 without major problems, the USSR also had the problem it was unpopular with the countries in Europe it occupied, even the Japanese preferred USA to USSR.

 

[Shortround6]

And there were not many air bases in Iraq in 1945. In 1941 there were just 2 RAF bases. Shaibah near Basra in the south & Habbaniya West of Baghdad. By the early 1950s the RAF was also flying from airfields at Baghdad, Mosul, Basra, & Ser Amadia. So if you want bases there in the desert virtually everything needs to be shipped in.

And are the Soviets just going to sit there and let you do that? I don't think so.

Like I said, there were railroads and truck roads that carried over 4 million tons of supplies to Russia in that area. It wasn't easy but it seems like maybe it was easier than basing B-29s in China and trying to supply them over the mountains?

It is also only about 600 miles from Bagdad to Baku and about 900 miles from Damascus to Baku.

Granted Baku is only one target.

But the idea that the Allies had only one route to bomb Russia from in 1945-46 is a mistake.

The Soviets ability to do a lot also depends on how far the Allied bases are from Soviet air bases.
Soviet ability to do long range raids sort of sucked, even in late 1944 and 45. They did some, just enough to keep the Germans on their toes. But until very near the end of the war the primary Soviet long range bomber was the IL-4, which had the basic ability of a Wellington with Pegasus engines.
The 2nd widest used "heavy bomber" was the B-25.
They were phasing in the TU-2 in late 1944 but they used it for short range bombing, mostly. The Crews were not trained for long range missions, maybe they could have been in the months between VE day and this scenario starting.
But the TU-2 only carried about 3300lbs inside the bomb bay. And flying beyond the range of it's escorts would have been suicidal in daylight against Allied fighters and flying at night probably would not have gone well either.