Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Although there were issues with the engines they were rectified by the war's end - the effectiveness of the aircraft is more than evident as it was the first mainstay in the Strategic Air Command and was used during the Korean War, something you keep ignoring - the Lancaster, while a well serving platform was an obsolete weapons system when compared to the B-29 in almost every category.
!!!
You said the engine issues were rectified by wars end...I said they weren't. The re-engined A/C didn't have the fires but they did have crankcase oil leaks. Problems not rectified just a new set of problems. Teething problems..yes I don't think there has ever been an A/C engine built that didn't have teething problems.
In actuality the losses were minimal - I think around 4 or 5 were loss, several others were damaged beyond repair. In 1953 there were some daylight raids but by then the UN had full aerial superiority.
According to some info I found it was 16 to fighters, 4 to FLAK, 14 to other causes
The B-36 was on the drawing board since the early 40s and was never intended to be a "stop gap." It's purpose was to be able to bomb Europe from the US. It just so happened that after WW2 there was a need for it and the rest is history.
It doesnt matter that the engines didnt have all their bugs worked out untill after the war.
The fact remains that the 20th AF could put several hundred B29's in the air.
Even at those numbers you're looking at 20 B-29s for 20,000 sorties and dropped 200,000 tons (180,000 tonnes) of bombs and that was over 3 years - overall you're looking at less than 10% loss rate!!!]According to some info I found it was 16 to fighters, 4 to FLAK, 14 to other causes.
Again FALSE - the B-29 was NEVER a STOP GAP - it was a specific weapons system deployed for a specific mission. The B-36 almost got CANCELLED with no thought of it actually replacing the B-29!!!!I didn't say the B-36 was a stop gap I said the B-29 was a stop gap until the '36 came on line.
And there was never a large radial engine built that didn't leak - If it didn't leak it had no oil in it!!!!You said the engine issues were rectified by wars end...I said they weren't. The re-engined A/C didn't have the fires but they did have crankcase oil leaks. Problems not rectified just a new set of problems. Teething problems..yes I don't think there has ever been an A/C engine built that didn't have teething problems.
And there was never a large radial engine built that didn't leak - If it didn't leak it had no oil in it!!!!
No Sh*t
I have read that chapter on many occasions and it had nothing to do with B-29 operations in the post war years - directly from the article;As far as the B-29's employment by SAC yes it was a "stop gap" measure until SAC could get what it really needed, a truly "Intercontinental Bomber". That was the B-36. Yes the B-36 was almost canx'd and so was the B-29 program. Read the Wikipedia B-29 article again and the comment about the "Battle Of Kansas"
And there was never a large radial engine built that didn't leak - If it didn't leak it had no oil in it!!!!
The guy I worked part time for in Mojave Ca, had one for a while. there was always tons of oil underneath it. When he started it you better not be toward the rear or you were going to get an oil shower!I have heard that each C-124 engine had a 50 gallon oil tank to support it. I'm so old C-124s were still used by the guard. I think there are some C-124s out over the Pacific still trying to get home against a 25 kt headwind! If they would only turn around.
You missed the point.