Author Topic: Radio Operator's Gun on B-17  (Read 3050 times)

Offline Ack-Ack

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 25260
      • FlameWarriors
Re: Radio Operator's Gun on B-17
« Reply #30 on: January 19, 2012, 08:44:31 PM »
They probably got rid of one of the waist gunners.  The radio man would be on radios until it got hot, then would run to the waist gun.  Once everything was clear, he'd switch back to the radios.

I'm not so sure they always removed a crewman, I think it might have been up to individual bomber crews or squadrons/groups.  

Just finished reading the war time memoirs of a radio man (George Webster; "The Savage Sky - Life and Death on a Bomber over Germany in 1944") on a B-17F and B-17G and he never mentioned losing a crew member when they got rid of the radio gun on the B-17F and kept their full compliment when they finally received their B-17G.  Besides his main job of manning the radio, his other duties included taking pictures, keeping a log, ensuring the bomb bay doors opened, making sure the bombs dropped, shuttling ammo around when the shooting started and acting as a medic if anyone got wounded.

ack-ack
« Last Edit: January 19, 2012, 10:28:16 PM by Ack-Ack »
"If Jesus came back as an airplane, he would be a P-38." - WW2 P-38 pilot
Elite Top Aces +1 Mexican Official Squadron Song

Offline Guppy35

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 20386
Re: Radio Operator's Gun on B-17
« Reply #31 on: January 20, 2012, 12:19:49 AM »
I'm not so sure they always removed a crewman, I think it might have been up to individual bomber crews or squadrons/groups.  

Just finished reading the war time memoirs of a radio man (George Webster; "The Savage Sky - Life and Death on a Bomber over Germany in 1944") on a B-17F and B-17G and he never mentioned losing a crew member when they got rid of the radio gun on the B-17F and kept their full compliment when they finally received their B-17G.  Besides his main job of manning the radio, his other duties included taking pictures, keeping a log, ensuring the bomb bay doors opened, making sure the bombs dropped, shuttling ammo around when the shooting started and acting as a medic if anyone got wounded.

ack-ack

It was late in the game when it was a 9 man crew.  There were certainly 10 man crews into 45 in the 15th AF.  But it got to be pretty standard in the 8th towards the end. 
Dan/CorkyJr
8th FS "Headhunters

Offline JohnnyHeelz

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 79
Re: Radio Operator's Gun on B-17
« Reply #32 on: January 20, 2012, 02:01:06 AM »
I'm not an expert but I would think that the 9 man crew was relevant to refurb'd 17's that incorporated a few remote control turrets?  (ie. B29 technology, 1945 +) Hence the need for one less. 

At the end of the day, the radio op was still the radio op, just without the gun.


Offline W7LPNRICK

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2050
      • Ham Radio Antenna Experiments
Re: Radio Operator's Gun on B-17
« Reply #33 on: January 20, 2012, 08:36:51 PM »
Most crews removed the gun.

ack-ack

Why?
WildWzl
Ft Bragg Jump School-USAF Kunsan AB, Korea- Clark AB P.I.- Korat, Thailand-Tinker AFB Ok.- Mtn Home AFB Idaho
F-86's, F-4D, F-4G, F-5E Tiger II, C-130, UH-1N (Twin Engine Hueys) O-2's. E3A awacs, F-111, FB-111, EF-111,

Offline Guppy35

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 20386
Re: Radio Operator's Gun on B-17
« Reply #34 on: January 20, 2012, 11:27:40 PM »
I'm not an expert but I would think that the 9 man crew was relevant to refurb'd 17's that incorporated a few remote control turrets?  (ie. B29 technology, 1945 +) Hence the need for one less. 

At the end of the day, the radio op was still the radio op, just without the gun.



There were no B17s that used remote control turrets like the B-29.

It came down to any number of things, including numbers, cost, usefulness etc.  If the job can be done with 9, why would you risk 10?  And while it was a 'good war', it still cost money.  You cut costs where you can.
Dan/CorkyJr
8th FS "Headhunters

Offline Raptor05121

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 486
Re: Radio Operator's Gun on B-17
« Reply #35 on: January 20, 2012, 11:28:59 PM »
so why dont we add it for the sake of giving us BUFFERS another gun?
InGame: xRaptorx of the ***Alchemists***

Quote from: dirtdart
To suggest things that do not meet this basic criteria is equal to masturbation.  It may feel good to you, will not produce any tangible results, and you may be embarrassed if you get caught. 

Offline Guppy35

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 20386
Re: Radio Operator's Gun on B-17
« Reply #36 on: January 20, 2012, 11:30:12 PM »
so why dont we add it for the sake of giving us BUFFERS another gun?


Maybe cause those lazers on the 17s are plenty good already? :)
Dan/CorkyJr
8th FS "Headhunters

Offline Selino631

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1493
Re: Radio Operator's Gun on B-17
« Reply #37 on: January 21, 2012, 02:20:03 AM »
really? the B-17 is already pretty good, it doesn't need the additional m2
OEF 11-12

Offline EskimoJoe

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4831
Re: Radio Operator's Gun on B-17
« Reply #38 on: January 21, 2012, 02:45:17 AM »
so why dont we add it for the sake of giving us BUFFERS another gun?

Why? The simple fact that 999000 would become 1000000.
Put a +1 on your geekness atribute  :aok

Offline Ack-Ack

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 25260
      • FlameWarriors
Re: Radio Operator's Gun on B-17
« Reply #39 on: January 21, 2012, 05:09:26 AM »
Why?


It was basically useless.

ack-ack
"If Jesus came back as an airplane, he would be a P-38." - WW2 P-38 pilot
Elite Top Aces +1 Mexican Official Squadron Song

Offline Raptor05121

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 486
Re: Radio Operator's Gun on B-17
« Reply #40 on: January 21, 2012, 08:10:02 PM »
really? the B-17 is already pretty good, it doesn't need the additional m2

yes huh
InGame: xRaptorx of the ***Alchemists***

Quote from: dirtdart
To suggest things that do not meet this basic criteria is equal to masturbation.  It may feel good to you, will not produce any tangible results, and you may be embarrassed if you get caught. 

Offline Guppy35

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 20386
Re: Radio Operator's Gun on B-17
« Reply #41 on: January 21, 2012, 10:10:38 PM »
To go back to the 9 man crew bit.  I found an interesting comment in a book by a B17 Ball Turret gunner with the 457th BG called "Dead Engine Kids".  It's his diary written at the time.  They got to England in mid summer 44 having trained as a 10 man crew, and were switched to a nine man crew before they went into combat at the end of August 44.

Quoting a couple entries

"We're losing Galloway and Ward.  Because of their "Mickey" training they're going to Alconbury and be sent to fly with Group lead crews.  We'll have Ted Braffmen, a navigator trained to use a G-Box.  Ozenburger moves from the waist to nose where he'll operate the chin turret and  drop the bombs when he is told.  Braffmen will navigate with the G-Box and Dead Reckoning.  Most navigation is done by the group leader.  Braffmen will try to keep track of where we are just in case"

"We lost our bombardier and navigator to a radar squadron so one of the enlisted men has to toggalier.  He's the one who will toggle out the bombs instead of the bombardier when we're over the target.  We're flying nine man crews now.  The toggalier doesn't have to know how to use the bomb sight because all the ships toggle their bombs when the lead ship does.  The lead bombardier does the calculating for the entire group or squadron"

Dan/CorkyJr
8th FS "Headhunters

Offline AirLynx

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 142
Re: Radio Operator's Gun on B-17
« Reply #42 on: January 23, 2012, 05:54:40 PM »
OK, what about the option of 12 or 13 guns?

One option has the staggered waist guns and 12 guns, and the other has 13 guns?

Offline SectorNine50

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1331
Re: Radio Operator's Gun on B-17
« Reply #43 on: January 23, 2012, 06:02:58 PM »
OK, what about the option of 12 or 13 guns?

One option has the staggered waist guns and 12 guns, and the other has 13 guns?

But then we come to the question of; why?

Wouldn't you rather resources be spent on creating new planes and updating old ones rather than taking the time throwing an arbitrary 13th gun on an existing bomber that already has 12 guns and can defend it's self very well as-is?

EDIT:
I guess I just see it as somewhat trivial for the amount of time it would probably take to implement it.  But as per usual, that's completely up to Hitech & Company.
« Last Edit: January 23, 2012, 06:06:48 PM by SectorNine50 »
I'm Sector95 in-game! :-D

Offline TheMercinary60

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 230
Re: Radio Operator's Gun on B-17
« Reply #44 on: January 23, 2012, 10:27:31 PM »
But then we come to the question of; why?

Wouldn't you rather resources be spent on creating new planes and updating old ones rather than taking the time throwing an arbitrary 13th gun on an existing bomber that already has 12 guns and can defend it's self very well as-is?

EDIT:
I guess I just see it as somewhat trivial for the amount of time it would probably take to implement it.  But as per usual, that's completely up to Hitech & Company.

i also think it would be nice to have the option, when i first started playing back when i was what most would call a squeaker i was rather confused by the lack of that 13th gun, now ive grown to be accustomed to it but i still say give us the option, if we want to be that much heavier and easier to hit let us. not saying im demanding it right away but sometime in the future it would be nice
Formally Merc flying with the 99th Blue Lagoon Bandits
I wish people would use the wish list forum to post their brilliant ideas, and be smart enough to not post all their stupid ones.

But I am under no disillusions of my wish ever being fulfilled.

HiTech - in response to davidwales