B-29s over Germany

[Marshall_Stack]

How do you think the B-29 would have fared if used in the European theater?

[Twitch]

I personally believe the B-29 would have done excellent in all ways.

Hey I grew up in St. Louis- Cleveland High on the south side.....

[Marshall_Stack]

Twitch,

If you mean Cleveland High School (if there is such a thing), then you are definitely from St. Louis (since that is the first question people ask). I grew up in North County and now live in Ballwin. I don't know why you would leave St. Louis for L.A. :-'

[syscom3]

I think the B29 would have been far harder to bring down than the B17, plus it could dish out more punishment to the Luftwaffe.

But in the end, the German "Wild Boar" tactics would take their toll.

[Erich]

wild boar tactics ? that is just night fighting which was fazed out in spring of 44. No doubt the B-29 turrets would not have been able to catch the Me 262 and also the R4M would of taken a terrible toll of which they did of US 8th and 15th heavies

[Udet]

The crews manning a formation of B-29s caught by the Bf 109 G-6/R6s of JG 1 and JG 11 covering the northern territory of Germany or by elements of either IV.(sturm)/JG 3 or II.(sturm)/ JG 300 would have had the same ultra violent death airmen manning B-17s and B-24s endured during 1944.

[FLYBOYJ]

I believe only later Luftwaffe fighters (Ta-152, Me-262, etc.) would of been the only ones delivering a decent challenge to the B-29. The Bf 109 G-6/R6 was an excellent bomber killer but over 25,000 feet with an aircraft that delivered it's bombs 100 mph faster and had a top speed 60-70 mph faster than the B-17 I doubt it could sustain a prolonged effective intercepts..

While there would of been canage on both side, those bombers that did get through were delivering and extra 12,000 pounds of bombs on to Germany - I think the out come would of been the same....

[syscom3]

Udet, you forget a couple of things.

1) The B29's flew nearly 100 mph faster than the B17's and B24's. The German fighters would have a tougher time intercepting them.

2) While the fire control system of the B29 was not perfect, it was effective. If the fighters were going to get within the range of the .50's, they were going to get hit. Moreover, head on attacks would have some reduced effectiveness just from the hi closing rates.

3) While no bomber is invulnerable, the B29 was one strong airframe. If taking down the B17 took some effort, taking out the B29 would require even more.

[Gnomey]

While I agree with your comments syscom, I would also agree with Erich and FBJ in that the B-29 would of suffered casualties (higher than the Japan raids) and it would of still been as stressful as it was the B-17 and B-24 crews, however with the extra tonnage being dropped by each plane they would of still been effective.

[syscom3]

No doubt the Germans would have found the right type of fighter to take down the B29.

And yes, they would have inflicted some punishment on the B29's.

But in another sense, the B29 was an example of the allies upping the "ante" in the bomber offensive which was straining the Luftwaffe to keep up. An airplane this big would require some fighters carrying heavy cannons, which probably would be hard pressed to defend and maneuver to safety if allied fighters came around.

I would think the B29 with its complex avioncs would be a perfect night time bomber.

[Twitch]

30 mms would bring down the B-29 just like they did all other heavies. It would simply take a few extra hits to do it from a gun platform capable of intercept at 33,000 feet. The original question of how B-29 would have fared would be easily answered by saying they would have done no worse than B-24/B-17s and probaly somewhat better. Simple.

[FLYBOYJ]

Originally Posted by Twitch

30 mms would bring down the B-29 just like they did all other heavies. It would simply take a few extra hits to do it from a gun platform capable of intercept at 33,000 feet. The original question of how B-29 would have fared would be easily answered by saying they would have done no worse than B-24/B-17s and probaly somewhat better. Simple.

Agree...

[syscom3]

Didnt the 30mm cannons of the axis powers have some low muzzle velocities? A hit by one would cause damage, but if they have to get in close, then the .50's from the -29's would be in range.

I would say that a single B29 flying alone would be vulnerable, a B29 squadron quite dangerous to attack, a B29 group/wing as almost suicidal to attack, and any number of B29's escorted by fighters as being invulnerable.

[Glider]

The Japs with aricraft that were nowhere nearly as well armed or effective as the Germans did quite well destroying a number of B29's. So to describe them as invulnerable is a little on the optamistic side.

I agree that the B29's would have doen a lot better than the B17/B24 but there are other factors that would assist. The B29's could fly higher making them more difficult to get at, plus they also flew faster making them more difficult to intercept in the first place. They were of course better defended, as to being more robust than a B17, I doubt that but the B17 was by common agreement the most robust Heavy Bomber so I don't consider that a slight of any kind.

[timshatz]

Good posts.