The "One a day in Tampa Bay" Bomber

[streakeagle]

I was born at the Mac Dill AFB hospital in Tampa, FL. Most years, Mac Dill hosted an Open House airshow and provided copies of its base paper, "The Thunderbolt", as a program. It would always include a history of the base which most certainly included its use for training WW2 crews, complete with photos of B-26s. In my early childhood, Mac Dill was covered in F-4 Phantoms that flew over my house daily. Later, it would transition to F-16s. But in the 8 years I served in the Navy, the Berlin Wall came down and the Soviet Union collapsed. Mac Dill became home of tankers, special forces, and a joint services command where high ranking officials of all branches could hang out on the beaches with all the hot chicks waiting to be caught by FBI agents monitoring their emails and embarrassed by the media. I miss the days of it being a base crawling with fighter pilots. As a training base near the Avon bombing park, you could see nearly any aircraft in inventory flying to/from Tampa. A-10s, F-15s, B-52s, C-5s, C-141s, F-111s... those were the days.

[earl1937]

Once again, you seem to be combining two entirely separate series of aircraft into a single series.  The only reason the B-26 Invader was ever called the B-26 instead of just being the A-26 was because the B-26 label was freed up by the retirement of the B-26 Marauder.  If it had been called the A-25 instead of the A-26 we'd be having a discussion about the B-25 Mitchell and the B-25 Invader being unrelated.

This has caused confusion ever since.

This will be my last comment on the B-26! There are a lot of things which connect the two aircraft, starting with engineers who moved from Martin to Douglas, common parts in both aircraft, common engines, common mission profile for both. I am sorry you guys don't see the connection, but I guess that is because you have decided in your own wisdom that these 2 great aircraft are not related. There was no transition training required, from one, the A-26 to the B-26 as normally required by the U.S. Air Force, when moving from one designated aircraft to another, but again, you probably did not that!
I appreciate your comments, but you really need to know what you are talking about before attacking someone who has made a post in the interest of educating the young guys in our great game.

[Saxman]

It's not education if you're posting incorrect "facts."

 

Even Wikipedia shoots this down in flames:

The B-26 was designed by a team led by Peyton M. Magruder. The A-26 was designed by Edward Heinemann, Robert Donovan, and Ted R. Smith. The design philosophy for the A-26 was also much more similar to the Mosquito in that the Invader was designed to be flown by a single pilot, unlike the Marauder which was a traditional crewed bomber design. It more or less makes the A-26 designed from the start as more of a heavy fighter than a bomber.

They may have shared the same engine, but a LARGE number of aircraft utilized the P&W R-2800, including the P-61. It doesn't mean that the Invader shares kinship with any of THOSE machines.

You've got it backwards, earl. YOU have decided that the two aircraft are related, when they're not.

[Drano]

Yeah Earl you've screwed the pooch on this one. Let it go bud. These planes are not remotely related to each other in their developement. The only thing commom to these two is they're both twin engine bombers and they have a bit of dihedral to the horizontal stab. The only thing they directly share is the B-26 designation but that's already been explained.

[Rich46yo]

Earl other then the fact they used the same engines you have been wrong about everything you have posted. There is always transition training when moving from one air frame to another. They dont just let you hop into a totally different airplane, even if you are already 2 engine certified. They were two very different aircraft with different mission requirements designed into them. The A-26 was an evolution from the A-20. They were attack aircraft.

But yes they both flew in the air.

This will be my last comment on the B-26! There are a lot of things which connect the two aircraft, starting with engineers who moved from Martin to Douglas, common parts in both aircraft, common engines, common mission profile for both. I am sorry you guys don't see the connection, but I guess that is because you have decided in your own wisdom that these 2 great aircraft are not related. There was no transition training required, from one, the A-26 to the B-26 as normally required by the U.S. Air Force, when moving from one designated aircraft to another, but again, you probably did not that!
I appreciate your comments, but you really need to know what you are talking about before attacking someone who has made a post in the interest of educating the young guys in our great game.

[Karnak]

There was no transition training required, from one, the A-26 to the B-26 as normally required by the U.S. Air Force, when moving from one designated aircraft to another, but again, you probably did not that!

I believe you are getting turned around by the labels again.  There was no transition training going from the A-26 Invader to the B-26 Invader because they are the same airplane.

How many pilots do you think transitioned from the A-26 Invader to the B-26 Marauder?  There were probably some who went from the B-26 Marauder to the A-26 Invader though, and they probably needed transition training.

B-26 Marauder = B-25 Mitchell, Wellington, Il-4, He111, Do217, G4M, Ki-67
A-26/B-26 Invader = A-20/Boston, Mosquito, Pe-2, Tu-2, Ju88, P1Y1, Ki-102

[Rich46yo]

Damn now I find out who Earl is. I dont take back what I said cause wrong is wrong but I take back the fact I said it. Plus he does! know an awful lot oabout WW2 aircraft.

The guy is the biggest gentleman in the game.

[earl1937]

Damn now I find out who Earl is. I dont take back what I said cause wrong is wrong but I take back the fact I said it. Plus he does! know an awful lot oabout WW2 aircraft.

The guy is the biggest gentleman in the game.

Thanks Rich! I went through B-26C training after flight school, 44.5 total hours, then went on to B-29's, RB-29C to be exact. Sorry these guys never, you included, didn't get my point about the "kinship" of the two great aircraft. What ever your opinion of my post, it was great aircraft and had the best RTB record of any war that it was in. The exception to that statement is its use in Vietnam!

[pipz]

had the best RTB record of any war that it was in. The exception to that statement is its use in Vietnam!

So what you are really saying is that it did not in fact have the best RTB record of any war that it was in.........   Just messin with ya.... 

[Puma44]

Damn now I find out who Earl is. I dont take back what I said cause wrong is wrong but I take back the fact I said it. Plus he does! know an awful lot oabout WW2 aircraft.

The guy is the biggest gentleman in the game.

Yeah, pretty sure Earl is the only one in this discussion who really knows what he is talking about.  What a great source of "been there, done that" info!  Great stuff Earl!  Keep it coming!

[Karnak]

Yeah, pretty sure Earl is the only one in this discussion who really knows what he is talking about.  What a great source of "been there, done that" info!  Great stuff Earl!  Keep it coming!

I respect Earl, but he is 100% wrong in this case.  The Martin plane and the Douglas plane are completely separate and independent designs.  He, like many others, is being hung up by the reused B-26 moniker.

[Krusty]

I have to agree here, as well.

Talking about the development of the B-26, its first combat, the training problems they had, is all about one plane. Then saying "this is the final version" -- it's just wrong. It's not semantics either. It's not misunderstanding. It's totally different planes. I might as well talk about the entire development and deployment of the B-17 then show a pic of a B-29 and say "This is the final version."

It would be the same thing. Totally different airframes, development, deployments, combat histories, etc....

[Drano]

Earl, I hope you don't feel what I said constituted an "attack" as that certainly wasn't my intent. I'm all about education about the planes and your posts regarding the different planes are truely outstanding. Really enjoy reading them. This one is another example of that but it jumped the tracks completely with that pic of the Invader at the end and describing it as the final version of the Marauder. (see what I did there leaving out the designations? Makes things clearer doesn't it?)

Now, if you'd made a post regarding the Douglas A-20 Havoc and finished with that pic and description I don't think you'd have gotten anyone to disagree with you (but then again some of these guys would argue whether the sky was blue! hehe). I know I wouldn't have. You could argue the Invader was developed by the same manufacturer, Douglas, with likely the same group of engineers that learned all the lessons there were to be learned from the Havoc and the much improved Invader was born from that. THAT I'd buy as I'm pretty sure that was exactly the case. These two planes--the Marauder and the Invader-- were definitely not born of the same tree. Now if you can find some information that says otherwise I'm all for learning something I didn't know. Hell any day I can learn something new is a better day.

[Karnak]

Yup, Havoc and Invader are definitely of a lineage.

[Rich46yo]

Thanks Rich! I went through B-26C training after flight school, 44.5 total hours, then went on to B-29's, RB-29C to be exact. Sorry these guys never, you included, didn't get my point about the "kinship" of the two great aircraft. What ever your opinion of my post, it was great aircraft and had the best RTB record of any war that it was in. The exception to that statement is its use in Vietnam!

Earl I never told you this but my favorite of YOUR missions are the B-26 ones. There was a time when I flew the bomber exclusively, I mean 100% of my game time. Get 10,000' of air under you and you can deliver 4,000 lb of ordinance at 300 mph. I cant think of another airframe that can make that statement. The A-20 sure but not level bombing and not so well defended.

Sure it had teething problems but the entire design concept behind the Marauder was sound.