Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Fighters, Bombers and Recon Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Modify the B-17 into night bomber/low altatude streak bomber?
45-Shooter    2/14/2013 3:55:59 PM
Given the multiple lines of debate; B-17 Vs Lancaster Vs Mossy, I post the following question; To convert the B-17 from a day bomber into a night/streak bomber, remove the top, bottom and chin turrets, remove the waist and cheek guns and gunners, relocate the flight deck to just behind the bombadier's space so that there is onlythree or four crew! Install large spinners on the props and install a single 20 mm auto-cannon on a flexible "X" bow mount in the plexi nose. Reduction in frontal area, weight and increases in streamlinning make flight both much faster and much more efficient! Since there is room for four 4,000 pound MC bombs in the bomb bay, the shakles should be modified to hold those four heavy bombs if the larger shakle does not fit now. Otherwise eight 2,000 pound bombs should be the standard load. Given the 210-220 knot cruising speed of the Mossy required to make the placard range, the new faster B-17N/S should offer more of everything that makes the Mossy so neat?
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22   NEXT
45-Shooter    Just two points:   2/24/2013 11:19:55 PM

A Mark 84 Ed Heinemann SLICK 2000 pounder is 129 (10 feet and 9 inches) inches long and  18 inches in the barrel diameter to give you an idea of what a modern 2000 pounder  IS.

How does this relate to the short and fat WW-II 2000 pound bomb that is ~23" in diameter!
23" what! your own source shows it was nearer 34"wide and 7' 10" long cant you even read your own sources!
The 2,000 pound bomb is ~23" in diameter! 
no wonder you think it can carry 2000lbs if you think that is 23"
Now I get it! You think the last bomb to the right on the bottom row is a 2,000 pounder? Well that is the 4,000 pound bomb as shown by the labels at the bottom of the page! So, YES, the 2000 pound bomb is about 23" OD and the 4000 pound bomb is 34.25" OD! 

Barrel diamenter gives a clue dont you think? the b17 fuse doest taper its a ovloid it was the racks that tappered and the max width was the bottom bay opening tappering in to the top of the bay
Wow! I never knew that the Fuselage on the B-17 does not taper? 
I assumed we were talking vertically as i thought even you knew that the bomb bay cestion was parrarell sorry for assuming you had a ounce of sense
 Well no, the Fuse cross section does not taper from top to bottom, it is round until it gets to the "Turttle back" behind the pilot's wind screen. The bomb racks them selves are mounted on a slight incline so that should a bomb hang up, a not uncommon occurance, the ones above would still fall out, even if the hit the one stuck below!
 
I would like to hear/read about your attempts to measure that image and scale the bombs on that page!

 
Quote    Reply

45-Shooter    Just two points:   2/24/2013 11:43:00 PM

B writes:
A Mark 84 Ed Heinemann SLICK 2000 pounder is 129 (10 feet and 9 inches) inches long and  18 inches in the barrel diameter to give you an idea of what a modern 2000 pounder  IS.

 Shooter wrote:
   How does this relate to the short and fat WW-II 2000 pound bomb that is ~23" in diameter!
OBNW writes.
23" what! your own source shows it was nearer 34"wide and 7' 10" long cant you even read your own sources!
He is obviously wrong! Go measure it yourself!
The Heinemann bomb is that 10/1 skinny tail-spinner developed for the Skyhawk. Guess what WW II bomber could carry it?  A Lancaster. That is why the bomb was mentioned.
You are also wrong! Ed's bomb design related to the A-4 was an 8/1 L/D Ratio bomb, 19" OD, counting fire retardent and 151" long including the tail cone and fins. ( which do not lengthen the bomb! The fins that is!) See Janes Air Launched Weapons #19 page ? It does not hAVE PAGE NUMBERS!
 
 

As for the left eight fall paths on a B-17, two fall paths in ONE bomb-bay not two as Stuart claims. Left and right separated by a catwalk.
The ONE bomb bay has four racks in it. Two on each side of the catwalk down the middle! The catwalk divides the single bay into two halves, left and right side, each of which has two bomb racls that can hold up to 34-42 bomb shackles.
Stuart, the B-17 had ONE bomb bay and TWO racks The racks could have two serials stacked. Learn to COUNT.    
Boy did you miss this one by a mile! See above. One bay split into left and right halves, each with two racks, for a total of four racks and upto 42 shackles!
 
 

B.

Better check those plans you claimed to have earlier!

 
Quote    Reply

45-Shooter    Just two points:   2/24/2013 11:52:24 PM

As for the left eight fall paths on a B-17, two fall paths in ONE bomb-bay not two as Stuart claims. Left and right separated by a catwalk.
 
I think he is refering to the fact that the B17 had two vertical racks true! in each side of the bay so it had 1 bombbay split into two by the cat walk and each of these sides had a vertical rack No, each side had two racks, one on the inside attached to the cat walk at the bottom and two on the outside attached to the fuse side wall on the outside, for a total of FOUR Racks! to hang bombs on but of course in his world these dont take up much room, I also like the fact that he thinks the racks that tapered towards each other were somehow the distance apart equal to the diameter of the fuslarge
 Not at all. I have stated many times that the racks were closer together at the top than at the bottom. I have also posted dimentions of the distance between the inside and outside racks. If you look at a blueprint, or scale drawing, it is easy to see that the bay is just over 8' wide and the cat walk is 4-5-6" wide depending on which model plane it is! So take your worst case scenario and subtarck 6" from 8' to get 7'-6" divided by two to find that the widest part of the split bomb bay is 3'-9" wide at the bottom!
 
Is there anyone here who still thinks that a 2'-10" diameter bomb will not fit into a gap 3'-9" wide?

 
Quote    Reply

Belisarius1234    If the gap is not uniform and the claimed    2/25/2013 12:10:29 AM
measurement is WRONG?
 
Same bullship, different day, Stuart. 
 
B.
 
 
Quote    Reply

oldbutnotwise       2/25/2013 3:11:35 AM
Source for your sizings of the bomb bay please and dont say you measured it because that has zero credibility
 
you convienly measure only the bomb diameter are you fitting the ail fins after they are dropped? how abou clearece betwee bombs and racks?
 
how bout the fact that the manual says you have to remove the shackles that hold a 2000lb BEFORE you can drop any bomb stored above it doe that raly sound like thier is loads of space in there?
 
face it stewie you are wrong the B17 never carried a 4000lbs internally nor did it ever carry more than 2x 2000lbs internally, enough evidence has now been provided to make this case, you however have only provided a unsupported set of measurements as an argument hat it did, the burden of proof is with you
 
Quote    Reply

oldbutnotwise       2/25/2013 4:16:00 AM
Not at all. I have stated many times that the racks were closer together at the top than at the bottom. I have also posted dimentions of the distance between the inside and outside racks. If you look at a blueprint, or scale drawing, it is easy to see that the bay is just over 8' wide (needs source) and the cat walk is 4-5-6" wide depending on which model plane it is!(source as my info does not indicate a change in this between models)
 
cat walk might be 6" but then you need to add another 4" for the frame, then 2x 4" for the racks for the bombs and another 2" for mounts and another 2x2" for the frames
 
 So take your worst case scenario and subtarck 6" from 8' to get 7'-6" divided by two to find that the widest part of the split bomb bay is 3'-9" wide at the bottom!
so we are down to 3' based on your unconfirmed numbers, how thats at the bottom of the bay any bombs mounted here will foul the bomb bay doors, by the time you move up a couple of feet to clear he doors you lose even more width and you only have 2" to play with and tats not including any clearence allowance 
 
Is there anyone here who still thinks that a 2'-10" diameter bomb will not fit into a gap 3'-9" wide
 
I think the answer is EVERONE but you, in fact can you povide a SINGLE person that actually agrees with your claim? one? is that a lot to ask? one single person on the whole internet that agrees with you? one person in the millions online that holds your claim to be true? 
 
 
Quote    Reply

Belisarius1234       2/25/2013 8:05:03 AM
 
That would be what I hear?
 
Me rolling on the floor laughing at a fool.
 
B.
 





B writes:

A Mark 84 Ed Heinemann SLICK 2000 pounder is 129 (10 feet and 9 inches) inches long and  18 inches in the barrel diameter to give you an idea of what a modern 2000 pounder  IS.



 Shooter wrote:

   How does this relate to the short and fat WW-II 2000 pound bomb that is ~23" in diameter!

OBNW writes.

23" what! your own source shows it was nearer 34"wide and 7' 10" long cant you even read your own sources!



He is obviously wrong! Go measure it yourself!


The Heinemann bomb is that 10/1 skinny tail-spinner developed for the Skyhawk. Guess what WW II bomber could carry it?  A Lancaster. That is why the bomb was mentioned.



You are also wrong! Ed's bomb design related to the A-4 was an 8/1 L/D Ratio bomb, 19" OD, counting fire retardent and 151" long including the tail cone and fins. ( which do not lengthen the bomb! The fins that is!) See Janes Air Launched Weapons #19 page ? It does not hAVE PAGE NUMBERS!

 
 

As for the left eight fall paths on a B-17, two fall paths in ONE bomb-bay not two as Stuart claims. Left and right separated by a catwalk.
The ONE bomb bay has four racks in it. Two on each side of the catwalk down the middle! The catwalk divides the single bay into two halves, left and right side, each of which has two bomb racls that can hold up to 34-42 bomb shackles.
Stuart, the B-17 had ONE bomb bay and TWO racks The racks could have two serials stacked. Learn to COUNT.    
Boy did you miss this one by a mile! See above. One bay split into left and right halves, each with two racks, for a total of four racks and upto 42 shackles!
 
 

B.
Better check those plans you claimed to have earlier!

 
Quote    Reply

45-Shooter       2/25/2013 9:48:06 PM

 
That would be what I hear?
 
Me rolling on the floor laughing at a fool.
 
B.
Better check those plans you claimed to have earlier!
Just one more time; Better check those plans you claimed to have earlier!
Most are of the same training manual drawing that has round tubes for the bomb racks. It is a preproduction version of a contractual training manual. The other drawing is from Flight magazine and has numerous defects as stated right on the drawing! See the second PP in the article top right! http://www.flickr.com/photos/mister_seahorse/3196054120/">http://www.flickr.com/photos/mister_seahorse/3196054120/ Note how the walkway is several feet above the CL of the bomb bay and the six inch wide plank is much wider than the space between the bomb racks?
Now about the width of the bomb bay; http://www.the-blueprints.com/blueprints-depot/ww2planes/ww2-boeing/boeing-b-17f-flying-fortress-3.gif&imgrefurl=http://www.the-blueprints.com/blueprints/ww2planes/ww2-boeing/4370/view/boeing_b-17f_flying_fortress/&h=1105&w=1000&sz=178&tbnid=Pr04HeWD_0MdYM:&tbnh=86&tbnw=78&zoom=1&usg=__4nSB6_IF50fzV-1yF8HLw-GHtik=&docid=OzNFtPEFzZlDGM&hl=en&sa=X&ei=iyAsUcbZIq_8yAGxm4H4BQ&ved=0CDwQ9QEwAw&dur=0" target="_blank">http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.the-blueprints.com/blueprints-depot/ww2planes/ww2-boeing/boeing-b-17f-flying-fortress-3.gif&imgrefurl=http://www.the-blueprints.com/blueprints/ww2planes/ww2-boeing/4370/view/boeing_b-17f_flying_fortress/&h=1105&w=1000&sz=178&tbnid=Pr04HeWD_0MdYM:&tbnh=86&tbnw=78&zoom=1&usg=__4nSB6_IF50fzV-1yF8HLw-GHtik=&docid=OzNFtPEFzZlDGM&hl=en&sa=X&ei=iyAsUcbZIq_8yAGxm4H4BQ&ved=0CDwQ9QEwAw&dur=0">http://www.the-blueprints.com/blueprints-depot/ww2planes/ww2-boeing/boeing-b-17f-flying-fortress-3.gif&imgrefurl=http://www.the-blueprints.com/blueprints/ww2planes/ww2-boeing/4370/view/boeing_b-17f_flying_fortress/&h=1105&w=1000&sz=178&tbnid=Pr04HeWD_0MdYM:&tbnh=86&tbnw=78&zoom=1&usg=__4nSB6_IF50fzV-1yF8HLw-GHtik=&docid=OzNFtPEFzZlDGM&hl=en&sa=X&ei=iyAsUcbZIq_8yAGxm4H4BQ&ved=0CDwQ9QEwAw&du" target="_blank">http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.the-blueprints.com/blueprints-depot/ww2planes/ww2-boeing/boeing-b-17f-flying-fortress-3.gif&imgrefurl=http://www.the-blueprints.com/blueprints/ww2planes/ww2-boeing/4370/view/boeing_b-17f_flying_fortress/&h=1105&w=1000&sz=178&tbnid=Pr04HeWD_0MdYM:&tbnh=86&tbnw=78&zoom=1&usg=__4nSB6_IF50fzV-1yF8HLw-GHtik=&docid=OzNFtPEFzZlDGM&hl=en&sa=X&ei=iyAsUcbZIq_8yAGxm4H4BQ&ved=0CDwQ9QEwAw&dur=0
Check this copy of the blue-print to find the measure of the bomb bay!
So much for your claims! On my screen, the plane is 243 MM wide tip tp tip and the bomb bay is 21.7 MM! Acording to this source, the span of the B-17 is 103'-9". 103.75 divided by 243 is 0.42695 and that times the width of the bay at 21.7 mm in the drawing is 9.25'! WOW, I was right after all!

 
Quote    Reply

Belisarius1234    Liar.   2/25/2013 10:35:08 PM
You shouldn't be that stupid, Stuart. Don't you KNOW that people can tell at a glance that you never did what you claimed? 
 
B.
 
 
Quote    Reply

oldbutnotwise       2/26/2013 3:02:02 AM

Firstly from that drawing you can only measure the bomb bay door nothing else,you have no way of determining the actual bombbay size so this whole post is irrelavent, if this is the best you can do then what is the point of posting?
 
now the drawing of the internals of the bay, you may note that it is a artist impression and no measurements ca be thus taken either to support or discalim any side of this argument, if you look at the loading charts previously suuplied you will see that the 2000lbs is mounted too low
 
see the attached pic of a B17 with 1000lbs (note that aircraft has had its outside racks removed)http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y168/cazmodel/b17_bombbay_creative.jpg" />
 
here with 500lbs loaded, see how little space there is
 
anyway the bottom line is that tier is NO documentation to say that 4000lbs were even tried to be carried internally and NO documentation to say more than 2x 2000 were carried internally so all your measurements mean nothing as it looks like it never happened (if, and I say if as you have yet to provide solid evidence that it was possible size wise, they could fit does not mean they could be carried, as the shackles were only rated to 2000lbs I have also been informed that the vertical supports would not have taken 4000lbs point loaded)
 
Quote    Reply
PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22   NEXT



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics