The B29 Superfortress

Non-naval discussions about the Second World War. Military leaders, campaigns, weapons, etc.
Steve Crandell
Senior Member
Posts: 954
Joined: Wed Feb 05, 2014 7:05 pm

Re: The B29 Superfortress

Post by Steve Crandell »

marcelo_malara wrote: Fri Dec 23, 2022 2:59 pm
Steve Crandell wrote: Fri Dec 23, 2022 4:57 am From reading this thread I would tend to get the impression that the B-29 was a complete failure, and I don't believe that was the case.
Far from that Steve, but it was a novel and advanced machine that had its troubles, may be a consequence of rushing her into service.
That was my impression as well, but apparently not that of many of the posters here. Oh well; we all have our own opinions. :)
Byron Angel
Senior Member
Posts: 1651
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2011 1:06 am

Re: The B29 Superfortress

Post by Byron Angel »

The reliability of the B29 improved by an order of magnitude between its introduction into operational service in 1944 and the Korean War.
Read the web articles posted and feel free to draw your own conclusions on that score.

If you should run across any references that run counter, please post; I'd be thrilled to read them.

Happy Xmas,
Byron
Byron Angel
Senior Member
Posts: 1651
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2011 1:06 am

Re: The B29 Superfortress

Post by Byron Angel »

For an interesting sidelight to the R3350 debate, go here - https://www.enginehistory.org/Piston/Wr ... seHx.shtml

I bumped into this investigating TBF Avengers. The R2600 was another radial engine designed and manufactured by Wright Aeronautical that exhibited severe design and manufacturing faults.

Amazing what you can stumble across on the interweb!

B
User avatar
wadinga
Senior Member
Posts: 2467
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 3:49 pm
Location: Tonbridge England

Re: The B29 Superfortress

Post by wadinga »

Hi All, (and Happy New Year),

William Green in Famous bombers of WWII suggests some of the problems with B-29 engines was down to climbing hard at maximum boost for lengthy periods with full bomb loads to the thin air needed for long range and "safe" bombing altitudes for daylight raids. Running at war emergency rating of 2,300 hp for so long exacerbated any in-built shortcomings. Bombing accuracy from such altitudes proved to be poor anyway and there were unexpected environmental problems like encountering the jetstream.

Reliability was improved somewhat by changing tactics and switching to lower altitude night bombing which exploited radar and pathfinder techniques from the European Theatre and overwhelmed the the inadequate Japanese night fighter capability. On a Tokyo raid of May 25th 1945 26 out of 502 B-29s were lost, only a few to the defences, but the overall loss rate at this time was as little as 1.9%.

On VJ Day the USAAF had 2,132 Superfortresses on hand and had commenced a development programme for the B-50, an enhanced version with 3,000hp Pratt & Whitney R-4360 radials, which flew after the war as a strategic bomber, reconnaissance and tanker aircraft.

Green mentions the interesting story of three wartime B-29s forced to land in Soviet territory due to fuel shortage, which were "sequestrated" by the authorities and subsequently copied to create the Tupolev Tu-4. He wryly observes "imitation is the sincerest form of flattery". :cool:

All the best

wadinga
"There seems to be something wrong with our bloody ships today!"
dunmunro
Senior Member
Posts: 4394
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2005 1:25 am
Location: Langley BC Canada

Re: The B29 Superfortress

Post by dunmunro »

The use of magnesium alloys in the R3350 was problematic and when the engines caught fire, they were nearly impossible to extinguish.

Here's a very good book written by USAAF General Haywood Hansell, who commanded the B-29s when they were attempting daylight precision bombing against Japan:

http://ibiblio.org/hyperwar/AAF/Hansell/index.html

The Official history:

http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/AAF/V/index.html
Post Reply