What aircraft is this?

[Medvedya]

I found this on another site - a Liberator perhaps?

[me262]

looks weir that pic, it is real or is a montage?

[MacArther]

Looks like a late war Lancaster with the bottom opened up to make room for a .50 cal to counter Shrag Musika instilations on night fighters.

[FLYBOYJ]

IT'S THE BELLY OF A B-24D!!!!!

[evangilder]

Are you sure, Joe? That looks pretty narrow. Plus the B-24s had retractable ball turrets.

[toffigd]

I'd also say that's a B-24D. These little windows on the right - looks like a Liberator.

[BlackWolf3945]

Due to excessive weight some USAAF units removed the ball turrets from their B-24s and replaced them with hand-held gun mounts. This field mod started around the time the B-24J was in service and became standard at the factories beginning with the B-24L.

Here's a larger version of the photo from above, taken from the Library of Congress website. I'm almost certain that the photo shows a B-24, although I don't know if this is a field mod or a factory gun mount. I'm leaning toward it being a mod, as this is a single mount and I believe that the ships coming from the factory in this configuration had a twin mount. Not totally sure on this though.


Click for larger image

This is the caption that accompanied the photo, although it's advisable to keep in mind the fact that many of the captions which accompany the photos on the LOC site are incorrect and/or misleading...

United States Army air force gunner Sergeant William Watts of Alexandria, Louisiana, training machine gun on the enemy during a aerial fight with German planes somewhere in the European war theater. Behind him may be seen the legs of another gunner operating his weapon from the side of the plane.


Here's a shot of a B-24 'Mickey' ship with its radar dome retracted. I believe that the open hatch toward the rear of the fuselage is one of these gun positions, although, again, I don't know if this was a mod or a factory job.


Image source: unknown web


Fade to Black...

[evangilder]

Well, I sit corrected. Sure doesn't look like a comfortable position to be in for shooting though!

[Aggie08]

Definitely not. Very uncomfortable, but by comparison I wouldn't think the ball turret would have been much better.

[syscom3]

I know in the SW pacific in 1941/42, the belly turrets were removed because the windows of the turret would get splattered with mud on takeoff, and become useless.

[FLYBOYJ]

I think a few of the Ploesti Radiers were configured this way....

[DaveB.inVa]

Thats what they called the Tunnel Gun. They were installed in the door behind the ball referenced in Wolf's picture. They were installed from the factory in late B-24C's and early D's. I dont know of them being installed factory in L or M models though. They probably were depot or field installed in those cases.

Beginning with the 77th D the tunnel gun was replaced with the same Bendix periscopically sighted gun that B-17's had. The periscope sighting and all its effects were horrible and production reverted back to the tunnel gun after 287 Bendix periscopically sighted turrets. The Sperry ball turret came a long soon thereafter.

[HealzDevo]

It looks a bit like one of those big guns off the AC-130 or that AC-46 used, only firing through the floor. An early test for a fixed wing gunship perhaps?

[Aggie08]

It doesn't look like the gunner has a very good field of view, did he have a bigger window near where the camera was situated??

[the lancaster kicks ass]

well most instalations like this we just as much to put off attackers than actually shoot anything down, if you're attacking the underside and you get what i'm assuming will be a few bursts of a .50cal coming at you you're gonna think twice about attacking!