What if lots of B-29-like bombers with glide bombs had attacked very well protected convoys?

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

I was just saying that there is a better case to be made for a better performance by the Germans with a submarine fleet for September 1939 to June 1940 than for wonder missiles launched from wonder aircraft in 1943. They could have tried lying, painting the same numbers on more than one submarine, it wouldn't need a massive increase in the number of submarines just an application to the war in the Atlantic starting on the day UK and France declared war on Germany/ Germany's invasion of Poland.
 
A b-29 could have operated from France and got up around Iceland and back. To do so they are needing to face interception from the UK, Faroe Islands and Iceland itself. All place with existing or build able airstrips for interceptors. If this sort of thing worked once then radar picket ships and land based radar will be tracking the bombers to augment intercept. What do the Germans escort these wonder planes with? The B-29 is challenging to intercept, but it can't go top speed to the middle of the Atlantic and back. Attacking closer to the UK to allow higher cruise speed ensures a cloud of interceptors going after the weapons and the bombers.
 
The B-29 was a poor performer compared to what Germany had on the drawing board in 1940, they just couldn't be bothered, preferring to build stuff that was much slower, short ranged and overweight with exactly the same engines.
 

Lying and painting false numbers weren't going to get them very far.

The Shipyards were mostly exposed and with it taking around a year from laying down to launch it didn't take daily surveillance to keep tabs on production.

Any major shift in production from historical levels would have been noticed and acted on. Many of the German subs available in Sept 1939 and the following year were MK IIs with 3 torpedo tubes and 2 realoads (5 torpedoes total) and barely enough range to get west of Ireland, stay for more than a few hours and then head home. Germans are not only going to need more boats, they are going to need more of the big boats.
 

The Germans were actually way ahead of the USA in terms of magnesium. Very far ahead. See this video "Americas iron giants".

The German were of course way behind in turbo chargers.

The Ju 288 spars were to be produced in one piece by forging.


The He 177 was meant to be in combat service in early 1942 and it was meant to be attacking shipping in 1942 with "Special Bombs" such as the Hs 293 and Fritz-X. Due to the delay of the He 177 the Do 217 had to be modified with extended wings so that the bombs could be launched from an altitude safe from anti aircraft.

Ernst Heinkel pushed for the He 177 to be converted to a 4 separate engine design in 1939. The paired engine arrangement was kept by the RLM/Luftwaffe only because of the dive bombing requirement created aeroelastic issues on 4 distinct engines in a steep dive. Many people though it a "mania" and irrational. At the time it was thought the Ju 88, also shoe horned into the dive bomber role, would have much more range than it actually turned out to have. When the Ju 88's range turned out to be a disappointment the He 177 was not ready because of the delays caused by the dive bombing requirement. Not just the engines but endless dive tests.

There was also a strong push to abandon the He 177 in favour of the Ju 288C at the time. The Ju 288C would have used the same DB610 engines as the He 177A5 but been 160kmh/100mph faster for the trouble. The Ju 288C could have been in service in around the same time.

The Ju 488 was a mixture of Ju 288 (tail) and Ju 388 parts. The BMW801TJ version was estimated to have a service ceiling of 48500ft. It is a 1945 aircraft but could have been a 1943 with standard BMW 801.



The Actual plan was to conduct raids against convoys using 'special weapons' from 1942. The Fw 200C using Lofte 7 bomb sight managed about a 50% hit rate per gravity bomb run from about 14000ft. The Fw 200 had some success, such as the attacks on convoy Faith. The He 177 (with 4 engines) would have had greater capability to attack convoys. For instance at 25000ft with Fritz-X (cruisers and battle ships)

As we know the bombers weren't ready till later in 1943.



Fritz-X seemed to be very reliable and accurate. CEP was 18 meters. Hs 293 had a lot more trouble in terms of reliabillity. I would say this was a quality control issues. Missiles must be incredibly thoroughly tested. I suspect that had raids commenced in 1942 the issues would have been resolved.

4 missiles per target is a very good return. I would assume 8:1 was good since you need to allow for training rounds.



Long range interception worked when there was enigma decrypts. Else it didnt work so well hence attempts by Britain to develop an AWACS type aircraft.





Ive got a lot of information on this because I have Friz Trenkle;s books. Basically there were about 5 allied attempts at jamming only the 4th (partially) and 5th attempt likely worked. They did so because the allies captured a missile at Foggia The 4th attempt likely worked only sometimes because the Germans had added a single in flight frequency change and it couldn't be tracked easily. Often the jammers started jamming each other rather than the missile. The final plan jammed all frequencies simultaneously and only worked because the allies had the command codes from the captured missiiles and were able to spoof it with false commands rather than jam it

The Germans had contingency plans in the case of allied jamming but they never detected jamming, in part due to the loss of a sniffer aircraft and in part due to a case of sabotage on the first occasion the allies used jamming. The core of multiple coaxial wires had been cut in carrier aircraft and the missile malfunctions were blamed on this as this weakened the signal.

There were several backup plans
1 kits had been stocked to change the kehl Strasbourg frequency radically to make the allied jammers obsolete. The kits doubled wavelength.
2 The "B" in the Hs 293B meant it was prewored to work of wire spools in the wings. Hollow bobbins of insulated piana wire that flaked of.
3 An FM based system had been developed to replace the AM modulated system in case of jamming
4 The Kogge-Bigge system developed for surface to air missile could be used. This use a 24.5cm directional radio beam that was hard to jam since it was directional and impulse modulated.
So the allies might have success but counter moves were expected.

Surely laying smoke might obscure part of the convoy but the warships laying the smoke themselves would not be able to hide? They would be lucrative targets.

The real problem was inteception and lack of escorts.
 
Last edited:
I don't mean to sound rude or condescending but is your friend 15 years old? I mean come on, this was the type of "debate" I used to hear back in middle school study hall ca. 1970 from self proclaimed experts of the that age group.

In partial response to your first paragraph regarding smoke screens, all I can say is that it is not vested in any sort of reality as to how sh!t works in real life.

As to your question "I wonder has there ever been an attempt to hide a ship by a smoke COVER."... Seriously? One word/name... Tirpitz.

That's just one small example, I won't even go into the ridiculous thought of the United States giving up on the ETO i.e. Britain.
 
Greetings Koopernic and Thank you for your response,

I guess I will start by saying that I try to answer these sort of questions by staying as close as possible to what was actually in use/available during the war rather than possible weapon systems or industrial capacities. That said, I really don't see Germany producing a heavy bomber early in the war that is significantly better performing than the HE-177. The one obvious change would be to build a four engine version eliminating the problems with the coupled engines. This is no different than the genesis of the Lancaster and seems well within reach at the time. Sure, there were planes on drawing boards of exceptional performance but how many of these were ever actually flown. All one has to do is to look at the Bomber B program to realize how difficult it is to develop aircraft that promise sizable performance and technological leaps.

The range required to carry out such an anti shipping campaign in the mid-Atlantic would also require a HE-177 derivative to possibly trade bomb load for fuel. Originally, I thought such a longe range plane could carry two HS-293 or Fritz-X weapons, but I think its more likely one to allow for extra fuel capacity. One plane, one bomb seems pretty inefficient. On paper, the HE-277 seems more capable, but then again its on paper. I also, don't see the German industrial base being capable of a sizable project such as the HE-277, let alone a next class up B-29 equivalent. The HE-277 also relied on the BMW 801E, which as I understand it was not widely used, nor available until 1943(?). So, based on what was realizable at the time, its pretty much a four engine HE-177 without the better performance at high altitude.

I agree that Germany was the world leader in magnesium production at the start of the war, however, that quickly changed. While Germany did lead the world in the ability to forge large scale magnesium parts, it did not maintain its lead in the use of magnesium throughout aircraft parts, etc. This can be seen in a couple ways. First, in simple production quantities:



You can see that in 5 years, US production of magnesium has eclipsed Germany by several fold. Secondly, I recently read a research paper that did chemical analysis on aircraft parts in the war and unsurprisingly the US parts had nearly twice the magnesium content in the alloys than those from Europe making them stronger and lighter. (If I can track it down I will post.) The B-29 required high levels of magnesium in all its parts in alloys to be possible. Germany may have been the leader in 1938, but it certainly didn't have the resources to support that level program.

I have some more thoughts, but need to organize them better before I reply.

Kk
 
If I recall, in 1944, there were several types of mines that the USN developed and were deployed by the USN & USAAF (B-29's). They wreaked havoc on Japanese shipping. While they weren't glide-bombs or cruise-missiles, they were quite deadly. Some said it would have been able to end the war totally on it's own without firebombing raids, had it been implemented earlier.
 


It's clear the Germans had a good ability to forge aluminium and magnesium in a press. There are many ways of course to make use of magnesium. Casting or Casting as an alloy. The Northrop XP-56 was made almost wholly of Magnesium alloy and its claimed that the TIG "Tungsten Inert Gas" welding process was developed for it.


Famously beams of magnesium were used to suspend the German inverted V12 engines.


I suspect that the US perfected a way of making magnesium alloy crank cases for radial though the Germans clearly appreciated its benefits, Elektron (alloy) - Wikipedia
Magnesium of course was also used in incendiary ammunition and bombs.

The He 277 grew out of the He 177A7. The He 177A7 had a larger wing than the He 177A5, was pressurised (around the existing fuselage) and was to use the DB613 engine (which was two paired DB603). Much like the Airbus A330/A340 the wing was designed to handle either 2 engines (eg Jumo 222E/F or DB613) or 4 equally distributed engines. With 4 engines it was known as a He 277. It was given twin tails to handle the extra torque. By then everyone was sick of paired engines and the He 177A7 never went far and the He 277 came out of it.

The BMW 801E and BMW 801F were more or less completely new engines built around the same planform for producing around 2600hp. They never entered production but some of the components such as precision heads cast in a vacuum made it onto the BMW801TS of the Fw 190A9 which also featured improved supercharger impellor. The engines was capable of 2000hp probably 2200hp. The turbo charged versions the BMW801TJ was good for 1900hp with BMW 801TJ2 (fixed turbo bugs) and BMW801TQ improvements on top. I wouldn't think a He 277 would need a BMW801E or F though it could lift more fuel if so equiped.
 
Last edited:

That Germany will not produce a heavy bomber with higher performance than the He 177 is right, but that performance came at a heavy price; the He 177 was a dud and although fitting it with separate nacelles might have created a more reliable aircraft, you have to remember that the four nacelle engined He 177, the He 274 and He 177B (not the He 277, which although planned was never built) prototypes did not begin construction until 1943, so getting them into production from then was virtually impossible, as it turned out. It was by no means "well within reach at the time".

Although the He 274 V1 was completed by July 1944, persistent Allied air raids precluded any form of production at the plant in Toulouse - in March 1944, it was struck by an RAF night raid and in June 1944 it was struck by a US daylight raid. By the time the He 274 V1 was rolled out, the Allies had a foothold in France following D-Day a month earlier and the Germans instructed that the prototype be destroyed, but this wasn't completed and it was eventually repaired by the French post war. The He 177B was also delayed by Allied bombing.

Frankly, any thought that the Germans might be able to develop a better version of the He 177 after 1943 is laughable and just not going to happen. If Germany wanted a suitable bomber in the class of the B-17/B-24 or the Lancaster/Halifax (not saying those aircraft didn't have issues, the Halifax was a dog of a thing in development and took two years of messing around with its basic design to get rid of some nasty handling characteristics) it needed the He 177 to be without the troubles it suffered from right from the beginning. It wasn't - it proved itself too much of a headache in service and was never going to step up beyond mediocrity in action because of this - Steinbock was a disaster and the 87 aircraft raid against railway yards west of Moscow, while a successful attack, was a bit like throwing a sand bag at a dam that's just burst - the Soviet army was inexorably making its way toward Germany.

Let's also not forget that He 177 development was abandoned following the introduction of the Emergency Fighter Programme in early July 1944, which meant that Heinkel had to concentrate on developing a jet fighter (He 162 and so on).
 
Last edited:
Thank you again for your answers.

K Koopernic
According to Wikipedia, the B-29s cruise speed is 220 mph. Would it run 342 mph, within 5 minutes it would go 28 miles! At 220 mph, it still does 18 miles. How much time would the missile operator need for selecting the target, launching and aiming? It must happen very fast, otherwise the bomber is miles off!
The bomber must fly low for operating the Hs 293. Against this, carrier fighters need no special climbing performance.
For biologists: "Zitterochen" is electric ray, not stingray.
The Junkers Ju 288 originated from the "Bomber B" program. This meant a medium bomber, although in the end (C-version) it used the same engines as the He 177. For the latter's range I read 5.600 km, while the Ju 288 sported only 2.600. Also, the Ju 288 C was ready for troop testing only in April 1944 (but discontinued anyway). For a longe-range Ju 288 service-ready in late 1943, you need a further variation of the scenario.
I already stated the Fritz X was not an option in the North Atlantic weather conditions.
Interesting picture: If there is a convoy underway from west to east, and the wind usually blows from west, for launching the fighters the carriers need to turrn into the opposite direction, what would slow down the convoy as a whole...

P pbehn
"Over the convoy" means in AA range. No option, maybe only by hiding in the clouds and using the tv-guided Hs 293.
The region where you live is not moving.
Burning oil rags, and the following ship runs directly into the smoke. Interesting idea.
Detecting the bombers is one thing, getting them is another.
Did I say the US would give up GB? No way! I say this scenario is not suitable to cut GB from supplies.
You use to live under an overcast consisting of crap? Hopefully you don't live in a sewage treatment plant!

N NevadaK
Surely you need escort carriers also against U-boats. But what if combined Air-sub-attacks are performed?
The Mosquito was a well-performing aircraft. It was fast, but not fast enough and not persistent enough to hunt and catch bombers over long distances and vast areas. Also, its radar did not reach enough to perform this task. The Mosquito would get some of the bombers, but not in numbers.

Peter Gunn
Yes, sometimes my friend is a difficult person. But he is a specialist for engines and materials science, so he knows things which I don't.
The Tirpitz in her fiord harbour also was a stationary target.
For the thesis the US would give up GB, see above to PBehn.

If I missed any argument, please tell me.

Regards, RT
 
If your friend is an engine and materials specialist he should be able to provide some proper details that arent from dodgy Luft46 fantasy type websites.

What range is this attack supposed to take place, remember your flying into the prevailing winds so still air range will not be the practical range.

Whats the weather going to be like the Atlantic even in summer is stormy and regulary overcast. Todays weather 16th July at 12.00 shows a lot of overcast Atlantic Cloud Map with moderate 30 kmh winds. Clouds over the sea are generally not the individual cute fluffy white things you see in cartoons they are grey dreary and stretch for 100s of miles without convenient gaps to jump out from. Looking at the forecast a convoy doing the North Atlantic Great Circle Route will be in clear skies Sunday afternoon

How does the Luftwaffe get accurate up to date weather reports theres no point sending out the bombers if the cloud is 10/10ths at 1,000 feet/300meters. By 1943 the Germans were only getting weather reports from U Boats and every time they transmit they risk a Destroyer or plane appearing having tracked it via HF/DF which virtually every naval and civillian vessel afloat had by 1943 plus the Atlantic was ringed with listening stations explicitly listening for U Boat wireless traffic.

How many aircraft are on the raid I dont know much about the guidance system but I know a problem with 1st and 2nd generation guidance systems was the small number of available frequencies. No use if your guidance sends your missile left and does the same thing to another missile 2 miles away.

Convoys in 1943 were often 50 or 60 strong but sometimes up to 100 vessels and even at the height of the Wolf Packs no large Atlantic convoy was ever completely destroyed.

How many missiles to sink each target not every missile will hit even Exocet and Harpoon when first introduced had a 50% hit ratio which is why they were nearly always launched in pairs.

If you look at the Cloud Map I have linked to the British Isles are rather annoyingly in the way for most routes into the Atlantic unless you suddenly manage to fit B29 sized airfields into South Western France or North Western Norway. Flying over the British Isles means you get intercepted by Spitfires, Mosquitos, P47s, P38s Beaufighters because Chain Home will see your bombers before they get to the North Sea coast of the mainland. Single aircraft can sneak through un noticed but a big formation of B29 sized aircraft is going to stand out like a lighthouse at midnight and will have every fighter pilot in Britain chomping at the bit to add a big shiny kill badge to his plane.

Finally I have read the B29 project cost more than the Manhattan Project and the V2 project combined where does Germany find the money, materials and the factories to build hundreds of B29 analogues and what doesnt get built in its place.
 
Greetings RT, I admire your enthusiasm for this thread. Here are some additional thoughts regarding this proposal. As stated earlier, I am basing my thoughts on technologies and weapons systems that were realizable in 1942-1943. From the German side that means either FritzX or HS-293 in combination with an HE-177 variant. In this case, a four engine version as was proposed early in the development of the project. While this aircraft didn't exist, it was historically possible and doesn't rely on the development of a "what if" aircraft. Under that assumption we are looking at an HE-177 with two underslung HS-293 guided missile/bombs. The deployment of these requires direct visual observation and a steady and level flight path in the same flight direction as the weapon. Can be launched as far away as 8.5 kilometers (28,000ft) at an altitude of 6.5 Kilometers (16,000ft) Clean, the HE-177 has a cruise speed around 250mph, with underslung weapons would be less.

Here are the factors that lend me to think that such a weapon system would fail in its intended purpose:

1) Base Locations: Unlike submarine pens which could be hardened to a degree that were essentially impregnable, this would require several well developed air bases to support anti shipping bomber squadrons. These bases would need to be located well outside of the southern England air umbrella. While it would be nearly impossible to find locations outside of bomber coverage, it would be crucial to be outside of the fighter umbrella. Otherwise the bomber fleet would be needlessly exposed during assembly and return to base. Withdrawing eastward would be of little value as it adds range, so really the only sensible location to base these operations would be in southern France/Bay of Biscay.

2) Flight Path: Any flight path would need to skirt the air coverage of fighter squadrons based in England. This would force a dogleg flight path that added miles to the mission. The most realistic path would require 1500 miles one way to meet the southernmost North Atlantic Convoy routes. Assuming navigation error, wind adjustments and so forth a squadron would need to have fuel for a search of say a 300 mile diameter once on the scene. In bad weather, the searchable area would shrink significantly.

3) Weather: Someone has mentioned this already, but the weather in the North Atlantic is far less than optimal and looking at how the weather in Northern Europe affected the air campaign it would be reasonable to assume that 30%-40% of missions would be negatively impacted by weather. (Keeping in mind that the HS-293 requires LOS for targeting)

4) Counter Measures:
a) Radar Jamming - this did not occur until 1944 so lets not consider it here.
b) Fighter Interdiction - The flight path shown in the image below skirts the range of the P-38 lighting, but not the range of the Mosquito FB with drop tanks. Mosquitos based on SW England would have at least 4 hours flight coverage of the bomber force at which time the bombers have exceeded the range of German escort fighters.
c) Fighter Interdiction 2 - The flight path would be fully covered by long range Mosquito fighters converted from PR Mosquitos. This would require removing camera equipment for an armaments package of equal weight. Again, these would be engaging an unescorted bomber stream.
d) Radar Guided Fighter Intercept - This requires the allies following up on tests that mounted land based model radar on ships. Using the most common model this has a range of 60 miles. (This is the biggest technological jump in what I'm proposing, however, this was tested and proved feasible in 1940.) These would be stationed along the flight path and guide fighters to intercept.
e) Convoy Routing - This is the easiest and most effective counter measure. Allies would assign convoys to the most northern routes outside of the range of the anti shipping squadrons, you can't hit what you can't get to.
f) Visual Camouflage - Smoke and other devices don't have to totally hide a vessel, they need to hide it enough that you can't gauge the range. Smoke would make it very difficult for glide bombs to be effective at the limits of their range. In conjunction with bad weather, the bombers would be forced to get as close as possible to carry out an attack.
g) Proximity Fuzing - The closer the bomber has to get, the more it is in range of AA with proximity sizes. The weaknesses in the HS-293 system is the need for the bomber to fly straight and level towards the target. This would open it up to antiaircraft fire and most effectively radar guided fuzing. (This should not be overlooked)

5) Irreplaceable Losses - Lets assume that this campaign begins with 500 bombers and each mission loses 5% for a variety of reasons. Assuming a 500 plane mission that would take you down to 475 plans. But, you would have lost those crews as well given Germany's inability to do air sea rescue far out in the Atlantic. 5% is a relatively low number for unescorted bomber attacks. In five such missions, the fleet would be reduced by 20% +/-. That is unsustainable and the fleet would be ineffective in as few as 20 missions.

It just doesn't work out from a technological standpoint, from a geographical standpoint, or from an attrition standpoint. Here's a quick graphic I put together to help illustrate.

Kk
 
I read a long time ago about someone posing a scenario of German bombers attacking convoys west of Ireland. The bombers would take off from France.
 
Romantic Technofreak said:
According to Wikipedia, the B-29s cruise speed is 220 mph.
Click to expand...


Manuals for the B-29 and B-29A are here: B-29 and P-61 Flight Manuals

A recommended long range cruise for a B-29 at 120-130,000lbs was 200-205mph I.A.S. at 20,000ft that is 267mph true.

to "cruise" at 220mph the B-29 has to be either running light or low (5,000ft ?) or both. The B-29 could cruise at over 300mph at 20,000ft although the fuel burn was high and still be running a bit below max continuous.

Wiki is not a great source on simple airplanes. On something as complex as a B-29 it is nearly useless. Manual has 9 pages of range charts and that is just to get the crew started.
 
I think the simple fact that the Germans didn't try mass attacks on convoys demonstrates that the Luftwaffe of WW2 thought itself incapable of successfully performing massed attacks on convoys in the Atlantic. Germany was unable to field a bomber with the performance of the Lancaster, B-17, or B-24, let alone the B-29, so if we're granting Germany such an increase in industrial capacity and engineering capability, it's perfectly fair to give the same bonuses to the Allies.

So, the USN and RN will install APS-20 in TBM's or, better, AD's, and the RAF gets to install it into Lancasters, and the USAAF in B-17s.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

BF-100 with radial engines (like BMW 801)?
Replies
5
Views
1K
Admiral Beez
A
PT-19A B-29 testbed
Replies
2
Views
544
Lucio
German artillery what-if: going all-in with gun-howitzers past 1935
2 3 4
Replies
63
Views
3K
Shortround6
S
M
How Would You Like To Ride Here?
Replies
9
Views
739
Dimlee
E
Range of CR.42AS with 2×100kg bombs?
Replies
2
Views
703
elbmc1969
E
Menu
Log in
Register