Boeing B-17 Fortress in RAF Coastal Command Service
ISTR that the US air Force wanted a B17 only bomber force in Europe?
I would go along with B17....because (allegedly) it was akin to flying a 4 engine Cub 
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: 26000 to 28,000 lightyears from the galatic centre
Age: 77
Posts: 195
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A google came up with the following:
http://www.taphilo.com/history/WWII/...production.pdf.
Semms the B24 killed many more crew than the B17 in accidents.
Nealy did the same for for my Pop as well, as he ended up in the Irish sea when a constant speed unit ran away and the wing came off in a training accident after VE day. Seems that the high aspect rato wing of the B24 was not up to the job required.
Cheers ***
Just been corrected by Dad, It was a Mk 8 Lib and the failure was the electronic control of the turbo supercharging system. Resulting in a complete engine failue and Dad thinks large parts of the engine entered the cockpit when it blew up.
http://www.taphilo.com/history/WWII/...production.pdf.
Semms the B24 killed many more crew than the B17 in accidents.
Nealy did the same for for my Pop as well, as he ended up in the Irish sea when a constant speed unit ran away and the wing came off in a training accident after VE day. Seems that the high aspect rato wing of the B24 was not up to the job required.
Cheers ***
Just been corrected by Dad, It was a Mk 8 Lib and the failure was the electronic control of the turbo supercharging system. Resulting in a complete engine failue and Dad thinks large parts of the engine entered the cockpit when it blew up.
Last edited by orionsbelt; 10th May 2010 at 18:18.
Crikey - my memory didn't fail me. Good find orionsbelt...
Well worth a read.
The extensive use of the B-24 is inconsistent with the blunt fact that it is
the most extravagant killer of any airplane in the AAF. Since Pearl Harbor
through September 1944, B-24 accidents in the U.S. have resulted in 2,188
fatalities. In the first 9 months of 1944, B-24’s did only 6% of total flying
in the U.S. but accounted for 26% of all fatalities. They flew 5% less than
B-17’s but had 105% more fatalities and 85% more wrecks.
Had the B-24 had as good accident rate as the B-17 during the period 7
December 1941 through September 1944, there would have been a saving
of 230 aircraft wrecked, 904 lives, and approximately $60,000,000.”3
the most extravagant killer of any airplane in the AAF. Since Pearl Harbor
through September 1944, B-24 accidents in the U.S. have resulted in 2,188
fatalities. In the first 9 months of 1944, B-24’s did only 6% of total flying
in the U.S. but accounted for 26% of all fatalities. They flew 5% less than
B-17’s but had 105% more fatalities and 85% more wrecks.
Had the B-24 had as good accident rate as the B-17 during the period 7
December 1941 through September 1944, there would have been a saving
of 230 aircraft wrecked, 904 lives, and approximately $60,000,000.”3
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Norway
Posts: 147
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
B-17 vs. B-24
L.T. and flight, this from a close family friend who "was there":
"A very interesting web site [PPRuNe], but I could not enter comments since I was not signed-up. I would prefer answering to you, anyway. As for the commentaries, I had not heard before of the Brits flying B-17s for any purpose, so that was news to me. However, the discussion as to the mission for which the B-17 was designed, there is no question it was designed as a long-range bomber. The Army Air Corps Chief was Major General Benjamin Folois from 1931 to 1935 (I actually had the privilege of knowing him) was the person who initiated the development of the B-17, which saw the light of day in 1935. The B-24 came along in 1939. Those were very lean years for the American military right up to Pearl Harbor. There are no technical reasons why the B-17, which I have flown, could not accomplish the missions assigned to the Coastal Command. They may have flown U. S. coastal patrols - I have not researched the item - but I know first-hand that the B-24D was used for that purpose as my bomb group, 491st (B-24), was formed from a cadre of coastal patrol officers and men. The type of back-and-forth banter on the web site is fun but very esoteric and speculative - that is why it is fun, but illustrates how history is sometimes re-written.
There were several comments that I found particularly interesting. Comments #10 ("PASIR") AND #11 (Jetex Jim) are generally true. A good part of Comment #14 ("Tornadoken") is BS, but stated as a certainty, and reads like the author was a college professor. Comment #18 ("Mr. Fish") is amusing and reminded me of similar stories. It was a common story when I was in England in WW-II about a Martin B-26 crew cruising around the cloud-filled skies of England when they spotted a Mosquito flying below and in front heading in their same direction. It was well-known to all of us that the Mosquito was the fastest twin-engine aircraft around, so the Yanks decided to have fun. "Cruising" around England was common in order for crews to get more flight time. We went to England with minimum of experience. So the crew of the B-26 decided to have fun. They dove the hell out of the plane, behind and approaching the Brit. By the time they reached the Mosquito, they were pushing ahead at a high-speed, whereas the Brit was just cruising. Just as they reached the Mosquito, and still out of view of Brit pilots, the "Marauder" pilot feathered both engines and went sailing by the Mosquito. I doubt that ever happened, but it illustrates how these stories get told, revised and live-on forever.
There is some truth in the circumstances. When I was flying P-51s, we were encouraged to get extra flying and engage in mock dog fights because we had so little time in the aircraft. I had ten hours in the P-51 when I reported for duty with the Second Air Division Scouting Force. One "cloud-filled skies" day I was tooling around and did spot a Spitfire below and in my front going in the same direction, just as with the B-26/Mosquito. Having at least the grand total of 11-15 hours in the P-51, "fighter pilot" Bill decided to jump the Spit. Mistake! As I dove down on his tail to get into a good mock firing position, the Spit pilot - who obviously saw me coming like any real fighter pilot - just pointed his nose straight up, full-throttle obviously, and climbed. I quickly went after him and stalled out in a short time as the Spit continued to climb happily into the heavens. At least that is a true story."
(Posted here with permission. Bless all those who served, who survived, and those who didn't).
Cheers,
Tom
"A very interesting web site [PPRuNe], but I could not enter comments since I was not signed-up. I would prefer answering to you, anyway. As for the commentaries, I had not heard before of the Brits flying B-17s for any purpose, so that was news to me. However, the discussion as to the mission for which the B-17 was designed, there is no question it was designed as a long-range bomber. The Army Air Corps Chief was Major General Benjamin Folois from 1931 to 1935 (I actually had the privilege of knowing him) was the person who initiated the development of the B-17, which saw the light of day in 1935. The B-24 came along in 1939. Those were very lean years for the American military right up to Pearl Harbor. There are no technical reasons why the B-17, which I have flown, could not accomplish the missions assigned to the Coastal Command. They may have flown U. S. coastal patrols - I have not researched the item - but I know first-hand that the B-24D was used for that purpose as my bomb group, 491st (B-24), was formed from a cadre of coastal patrol officers and men. The type of back-and-forth banter on the web site is fun but very esoteric and speculative - that is why it is fun, but illustrates how history is sometimes re-written.
There were several comments that I found particularly interesting. Comments #10 ("PASIR") AND #11 (Jetex Jim) are generally true. A good part of Comment #14 ("Tornadoken") is BS, but stated as a certainty, and reads like the author was a college professor. Comment #18 ("Mr. Fish") is amusing and reminded me of similar stories. It was a common story when I was in England in WW-II about a Martin B-26 crew cruising around the cloud-filled skies of England when they spotted a Mosquito flying below and in front heading in their same direction. It was well-known to all of us that the Mosquito was the fastest twin-engine aircraft around, so the Yanks decided to have fun. "Cruising" around England was common in order for crews to get more flight time. We went to England with minimum of experience. So the crew of the B-26 decided to have fun. They dove the hell out of the plane, behind and approaching the Brit. By the time they reached the Mosquito, they were pushing ahead at a high-speed, whereas the Brit was just cruising. Just as they reached the Mosquito, and still out of view of Brit pilots, the "Marauder" pilot feathered both engines and went sailing by the Mosquito. I doubt that ever happened, but it illustrates how these stories get told, revised and live-on forever.
There is some truth in the circumstances. When I was flying P-51s, we were encouraged to get extra flying and engage in mock dog fights because we had so little time in the aircraft. I had ten hours in the P-51 when I reported for duty with the Second Air Division Scouting Force. One "cloud-filled skies" day I was tooling around and did spot a Spitfire below and in my front going in the same direction, just as with the B-26/Mosquito. Having at least the grand total of 11-15 hours in the P-51, "fighter pilot" Bill decided to jump the Spit. Mistake! As I dove down on his tail to get into a good mock firing position, the Spit pilot - who obviously saw me coming like any real fighter pilot - just pointed his nose straight up, full-throttle obviously, and climbed. I quickly went after him and stalled out in a short time as the Spit continued to climb happily into the heavens. At least that is a true story."
(Posted here with permission. Bless all those who served, who survived, and those who didn't).
Cheers,
Tom
Last edited by Trolltuner; 16th May 2010 at 19:29.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: London
Posts: 311
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Chandelle Article - First Fortresses: 90 Sqdn RAF
One of Robert Craig Johnson's Articles from 2005 (how I miss his articles) republished in PDF format with Permission in May 2009.
Chandelle Article - First Fortresses: 90 Sqdn RAF and the Boeing Bomber
Chandelle Article - First Fortresses: 90 Sqdn RAF and the Boeing Bomber
Last edited by Opssys; 20th May 2010 at 16:58.
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: london
Posts: 379
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
B-17 Origins
Supportive industrial biography R.J.Serling, Legend & Legacy, the Story of Boeing and its People, St.Martin's Press,1992,P.34: "before WW2 B-17 was considered to be primarily a defensive weapon; its future role in strategic bombing...wasn't clearly defined yet." P.29: It was designed to 1934 Army Spec 98-1800 (1 ton warload, 2,000 miles, >200 mph) envisaging an order for 20. US' tiny post-Depression Army was for garrison duty in the island chains to its territories (colonies) of Panama Zone and Philippines. Funding for more awaited events of May,1940.
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Norway
Posts: 147
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
tornadoken
Interesting post, thanks. The author, Robert J. Serling, just passed away a few days ago at age 92. He was the older brother of Rod Serling who created Twilight Zone.
Cheers,
Tom
Interesting post, thanks. The author, Robert J. Serling, just passed away a few days ago at age 92. He was the older brother of Rod Serling who created Twilight Zone.
Cheers,
Tom
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: London
Posts: 311
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry Chaps and Lassies
Feather #3 spotted my stupid error of inserting the wrong link. Whilst I have updated my original post to be safe here it is :
Chandelle Article - First Fortresses: 90 Sqdn RAF and the Boeing Bomber
I as punishment for this I shall now read the first 8 Chapters of the IATA AHM with my eyelids held open by matchsticks.
Chandelle Article - First Fortresses: 90 Sqdn RAF and the Boeing Bomber
I as punishment for this I shall now read the first 8 Chapters of the IATA AHM with my eyelids held open by matchsticks.
