Author Topic: B-29!! (Read 1794 times)

fdiron · « **Reply #15 on:** November 05, 2001, 12:34:00 AM »

I'm all for B29. Large bombload, high top speed, yet a very fragile plane. Was estimated that it took less damage to down a B29 than a B17. At least thats what Bob Morgan said (pilot of Memphis Belle and B29 pilot). Maybe perk the B29. 2400 were produced, not all during World War II though. The B29a model had 5 gun positions, the B29b had only 1 (tail gun).

gatt · « **Reply #16 on:** November 05, 2001, 01:05:00 AM »

Ok for the B-29 but *togheter* with an SM79: the best torpedo bomber of the whole war, with the best and reliable torpedo (Whitehead, built at Fiume) of the whole war. Even the LW had to buy it from Italy ... eheh, ehm ...

If we are going to get U-boat we will get convoys ...

P.S.: since Japanese pilots hunted down B-29s with 4x12,7mm the whole buff damage model will be redone. Even C.202s will be able to shoot down B26, B17 and Lancs! Enjoy!

<EDIT>: insert "probably" before "the best"

[ 11-05-2001: Message edited by: gatt ]

brady · « **Reply #17 on:** November 05, 2001, 01:34:00 AM »

The Cant Z. 1007 is a way better medieum buff than the S.M. 79 I don't get the fasination with the S.M. 79.

-tronski- · « **Reply #18 on:** November 05, 2001, 02:28:00 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by gatt:
Ok for the B-29 but *togheter* with an SM79: the best torpedo bomber of the whole war, with the best and reliable torpedo (Whitehead, built at Fiume) of the whole war.

I doubt it's better than the long lance?

B-29's ok, I doubt I'll have the perks to lose to fly it.

Tronski

Rendar · « **Reply #19 on:** November 05, 2001, 02:42:00 AM »

So what, you intend to torpedo the B-29 or something?

FDutchmn · « **Reply #20 on:** November 05, 2001, 03:20:00 AM »

Make the B29 a 200 point perk plane then ya can have my vote <G>

Flying Dutchman

Arlo · « **Reply #21 on:** November 05, 2001, 09:07:00 AM »

Whoa ... I wan't even considering the torpedo version but, yes ... that would be cool (although with the submarines being modeled as German U-boats, it probably would be nice if an Allied Atlantic based antisub plane would be modeled, for scenario purposes). I've seen more than one source that mentioned the SM 79 as one of the best (if not the best) medium bomber of the war (although that is an admittedly arguable point). I've seen sources say the exact same thing about the Cant Z1007.

I wouldn't fight the inclusion of either (although the 79 obviously has the attraction of having been used in Spain).

Back to the B-29 issue, though. Sure, why not? Given the already mentioned possibility of it being structurally weaker than the 17 (of course, the 17 was tough as nails) wouldn't it be kinda neat to lead a four ship formation of these in the game? (Or to hunt one for that matter).

Quote

Originally posted by gatt:
Ok for the B-29 but *togheter* with an SM79: the best torpedo bomber of the whole war, with the best and reliable torpedo (Whitehead, built at Fiume) of the whole war. Even the LW had to buy it from Italy ... eheh, ehm ... If we are going to get U-boat we will get convoys ...

P.S.: since Japanese pilots hunted down B-29s with 4x12,7mm the whole buff damage model will be redone. Even C.202s will be able to shoot down B26, B17 and Lancs! Enjoy!

Seeker · « **Reply #22 on:** November 05, 2001, 10:15:00 AM »

Did I miss something? I know subs will eventaully be moddeled, but where has the info come from that it will only be U boats?

*everybody* had subs.

I want a bloo one.

Arlo · « **Reply #23 on:** November 05, 2001, 10:20:00 AM »

Oops .... guess that was an assumption based on some of the postings made here (actually in jest). Guess we(I)need to see if HT and co. is just gonna make a "generic/everybody had em" sub or actually model a specific one. ShruG =0)

fdiron · « **Reply #24 on:** November 05, 2001, 01:45:00 PM »

Heres a neat little fact about the B29. More B29s were lost due to mechanical failures than due to enemy fire. One of the main reasons for this were the engines. The air intake for cooling the B29s engines were extremely inadequate. Combined with large amounts of magnesium instead of aluminum used in the construction of the B29s wing, this was a serious fire hazard.

Ripsnort · « **Reply #25 on:** November 05, 2001, 02:33:00 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by fdiron:
Heres a neat little fact about the B29. More B29s were lost due to mechanical failures than due to enemy fire. One of the main reasons for this were the engines. The air intake for cooling the B29s engines were extremely inadequate. Combined with large amounts of magnesium instead of aluminum used in the construction of the B29s wing, this was a serious fire hazard.

Yep the guy that designed the B29, chief engineer, died in his own B29, right near Boeing Field, because of an engine overheating, catching the wing on fire.

Yoj · « **Reply #26 on:** November 06, 2001, 12:51:00 PM »

The engine fire problems were the main reason for the Rev. to the B-29A, but overheating remained a problem with the plane until it was completely re-done into the B-50. Might be interesting to have the B-29 modelled with a need to manage engine temp - mess up and burn

Actually, I've been working on a B-29 restoration for the past four years now. Funny - I know more about the guts of that plane than about my own car.

- Yoj

Westy MOL · « **Reply #27 on:** November 06, 2001, 01:21:00 PM »

"Actually, I've been working on a B 29 restoration for the past four years now. Funny - I know more about the guts of that plane than about my own car."

Hi Yoj. They're doing the same in Hartford Ct at the New Enlgand Air Museum. You folks trading parts yet?

How is the one your working with along?

Here some info (old) on the NEAMs:
http://www.neam.org/58bwfeb01.html

Westy

Yoj · « **Reply #28 on:** November 06, 2001, 01:42:00 PM »

I heard - Boeing Wichita is doing one too. I'm not sure about parts trades, but there is a lot of that done. We actually traded some spares to the Imperial War Museum in Duxford in exchange for an upper forward turret (the four-gun mount).

And every time Fifi comes to town, we lock up things really tight.

Thanks for the link Westy. Also, Heavybombers.com keeps a pretty up to date record of all the existing B-17's, 24's and 29's.

- Yoj

Yoj · « **Reply #29 on:** November 06, 2001, 01:58:00 PM »

Oops - I see I didn't answer your other question

Its coming along slowly - like any volunteer job. The flight deck is completely restored. Flaps have been pretty well reconditioned, and most of the turrets replaced or at least made ready for installation.

I've been working on the electrical systems for the past year or so - gotten very good at reconditioning amplidynes and dynamotors. Done a small compressor and the nose gear retraction system, and I'm working on the lower aft turret controls now.

Much still to be done - there is a lot of skin that needs work since many wrong connectors were put in years ago. A replacement port wing outer section is almost complete, and will have to go on. Control cable rigging must be finished, new bomb bay doors fabricated and installed, major work done on the tail gunner position, and on and on. The other current job is rebuilding some of the aft section, where the plane had been converted to a tanker after the war - it has to be converted back so the lower aft turret can be installed correctly.

To be honest, I don't know if it will ever be finished (unless we can get more people and money), but its a worthwhile project.

Yoj