Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: AirLynx on January 17, 2012, 06:18:55 PM
-
I would like to have the option to load the radio operator's .50 cal. on the B-17.
Some G models had the gun whereas others did not.
I see no reason why it shouldn't be added.
EDIT: A link to some information on the radio operator's duties:
http://www.azcaf.org/pages/crew/radio.html (http://www.azcaf.org/pages/crew/radio.html)
-
+1 I have always wondered why they dont have it...
-
Most crews removed the gun.
ack-ack
-
We have a late B-17G with a Cheyenne tail turret and staggered waist guns. The radio gun was not present on the majority (all?) of those.
-
There is some information about the gun positions here:
http://northstargallery.com/aircraft/b17/about.htm (http://northstargallery.com/aircraft/b17/about.htm)
It's not specific, but it implies that the removal of the radio gun was one of the last modifications.
-
Later model Gs did not have the radio room gun because it was found to be ineffective.
-
Now if we had the F and no Radio gun, I'd be more inclined to support. If I recall correctly, the G model only had them at first out of factory but were removed when they arrived at the field. They did not install them at the factory very shortly after, and started coming in without them. The F's had them, but prior to the G's introduction, they started to remove them because of they were ineffective.
Now, wish for the F model with a radio gun. :D That get's a +1 from me. :x
-
Count the guys in this B17G crew picture.
9 of em. Guess which gunner position was eliminated? :) The gun was essentially ineffective, and removing one guy from the crew helped in any number of ways, including how many guys might be lost if a 17 went down. So in combat the radio operator used one of the waist guns.
(http://i152.photobucket.com/albums/s199/guppy35/Training17.jpg)
-
Count the guys in this B17G crew picture.
9 of em. Guess which gunner position was eliminated? :) The gun was essentially ineffective, and removing one guy from the crew helped in any number of ways, including how many guys might be lost if a 17 went down. So in combat the radio operator used one of the waist guns.
(http://i152.photobucket.com/albums/s199/guppy35/Training17.jpg)
I love that picture, can I use it as my background?
-
I don't think that they removed the crew member-- I think the wop just doubled up as a gunner. When they took out one of the guns, they lost one of their responsabilities.
-
I don't think that they removed the crew member-- I think the wop just doubled up as a gunner. When they took out one of the guns, they lost one of their responsabilities.
Originally the B-17 crew was 10 men. Pilot, Co-Pilot, Bombardier, Navigator, Top Turret/Engineer, Radio-op/Gunner,Ball Turret Gunner.Right Waist,Left Waist.Tail Gunner
Later it was reduced by one man when the radio room gun position was gone so it was a 9 man crew.
-
I love that picture, can I use it as my background?
Feel Free :aok
-
Does that mean they didn't have a radio anymore?
-
Does that mean they didn't have a radio anymore?
That's what i was thinking-- they still needed someone to keep communications going, right?
-
+1 because more fire power is alway welome :rock :airplane:
-
That's what i was thinking-- they still needed someone to keep communications going, right?
You don't generally need a radio operator when you are under attack, hence why it was an ineffective gun position.
When things are clear, then yes the radio operator listened for course changes etc.
-
This is from North Star Gallery:
The B-17G entered service with the Eighth and Fifteenth Air Forces in late 1943. Camouflage paint was deleted from production B-17Gs starting in January of 1944. B-17Gs were delivered in natural metal finish and the Cheyenne tail gun modifications were also incorporated. These tail gun mountings also had a reflector gunsight instead of the previous ring and bead. With this installation, these B-17Gs were five inches shorter than the earlier versions. On later production versions, it was necessary to stagger the waist gun positions so that the two gunners would not get in each other's way. On the last production batches the radio compartment gun was not installed.
The link to the page:
http://northstargallery.com/aircraft/b17/about.htm (http://northstargallery.com/aircraft/b17/about.htm)
First, I don't see anything about one of the crewmen being removed.
Second, in the last sentance, it says that the radio gun wasn't removed until the last production batches.
Third, it says that later production versions had the staggered waist guns and the last models had the radio gun removed; implying that the staggered waist guns came before the removal of the gun.
-
How many pictures of 9 man B17 crews do you want me to post before you believe me?
Not like I just started researching this stuff yesterday ya know :)
Just opened the wartime 447th History on my shelf. 14 crew pics of 9 men crews in the first few pages I looked at. You want to see em?
-
How many pictures of 9 man B17 crews do you want me to post before you believe me?
Not like I just started researching this stuff yesterday ya know :)
Put your hands in the air and back away from the squeekers.
-
You want to see em?
Well I would... But for a completely different reason. I find photos like these to be awe inspiring. Seeing the guys, many of them looking so young. Knowing what they lived through, but not really ever knowing it, if you get my meaning.
If you have them scanned, I would love to see them. But don't trouble yourself if you don't already have them scanned. :salute
-
How many pictures of 9 man B17 crews do you want me to post before you believe me?
Here is a link to the B-17G specifications. The crew is nine men, but the radio operator is one of them.
http://www.boeing.com/history/boeing/b17.html (http://www.boeing.com/history/boeing/b17.html)
I believe that the missing crew member is the navigator.
-
That was my understanding, too. I thought they did away with the guy in the nose.
The radio operator actually does a lot, I thought. Keeps planes in formation, keeps them on target, radio direction finding equipment would be in here as well, and so forth. They removed the gun, but not the person, was what I recall.
-
I just looked through a few dozen documents, I see some B-17G's retained the Radio Gunner, however the majority do not.
After reviewing as much as I could, Twice I ran across this:
Thirteen .50in calibre guns- two each in chin, upper, ball and tail turrets, one each in nose cheek positions and waist windows. Also a single gun in the radio compartment, deleted during August 1944 by combat units and later from production a/c.
I see evidence of this as July/August built aircraft have the Radio gun deleted, even straight out of the factory.
I hope this can clarify.
-
That wasn't the question anymore Butcher :)
We know that gun was gone. Which crew member did they remove?
-
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.
-
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.
This seems the most probable, because even when the radio gun was installed the radioman was on the gun during attacks; so why not just make his new "battle station" one of the waist guns?
-
Am I talking to myself here?
<Smacks everyone for not paying attention>
I never said they removed the radio operator. They removed the gun. The Radio op if needed would operate one of the waist guns. NOW PAY ATTENTION!
There are two ways at least that it was done removing a crew member.
One was to remove one of the gunners generally one of the waist gunners. Either the single waist gunner operated both guns if things weren't too hot, or the radio op would operate one of them if things were hot.
The other was to remove the bombardier and replace him with one of the gunners, who was then known as the "Toggalier". This was even done on some 10 man crews as the bombardier became unnecessary unless flying in the pathfinder or lead planes. The rest of the bombers dropped when the lead birds dropped so it wasn't necessary to have a highly trained bombardier in the nose. They just needed someone to push the button at the same time and to man the nose guns.
They did not remove navigators as they were more vital to the crew should they have to leave formation due to damage etc. A well trained navigator was far more valuable at that point then a well trained bombardier.
Any questions? :)
Now let's review what we've learned so far. Below is a typical 10 man B17F crew. Note 4 officers, 6 enlisted men. Officers were Pilot, Co-pilot, Nav and Bombardier. Gunners were enlisted men, including the radio operator. We can deduce from this photo that they had a full crew including a radio operator who no doubt had the radio room gun on the F model.
(http://i152.photobucket.com/albums/s199/guppy35/DottieB17F.jpg)
Now lets return to our original photo of a 9 man crew. What do we see? 4 officers, 5 enlisted men. What can we deduce? They are short a gunner and still have both a bombardier and navigator. This would then suggest that there is no radio room gun. As for the folks mentioning when the gun was removed during production, please keep in mind that is not an indicator of when they started removing the gun in the field.
Any questions? :)
(http://i152.photobucket.com/albums/s199/guppy35/Training17.jpg)
-
2 more 9 man crews, again with 4 officers so a bombardier and Nav. Only 5 enlisted gunners.
(http://i152.photobucket.com/albums/s199/guppy35/9crew1.jpg)
(http://i152.photobucket.com/albums/s199/guppy35/crew92.jpg)
-
Looks pretty crystal to me. Awesome pics btw :cheers:
-
Kinda bone chilling actually. We all think its so fun, especially to be able to get to fly a B-17 but for them I can't imagine how many of them begged to get out of that silver coffin. Of those pictures posted, there has to be a few men who died in a very horrible way.
<S> to all our lost servicemen.
-
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
-
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.
-
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.
-
Most crews removed the gun.
ack-ack
Why?
-
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.
-
so why dont we add it for the sake of giving us BUFFERS another gun?
-
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? :)
-
really? the B-17 is already pretty good, it doesn't need the additional m2
-
so why dont we add it for the sake of giving us BUFFERS another gun?
Why? The simple fact that 999000 would become 1000000.
-
Why?
It was basically useless.
ack-ack
-
really? the B-17 is already pretty good, it doesn't need the additional m2
yes huh
-
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"
-
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?
-
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.
-
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
-
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
One option is this, I'm sure through the different productions of B-17G's (early and late) there was a different ammo load, with or without the 13th gun.
(Reason I say because I don't know the exact ammo count so bare with me). The B-29 has two different ammo loads - why not make it so
one can choose either the 13th gun or without? And whatever ammo count goes different for both setups?
Reasonable to me.
-
One option is this, I'm sure through the different productions of B-17G's (early and late) there was a different ammo load, with or without the 13th gun.
(Reason I say because I don't know the exact ammo count so bare with me). The B-29 has two different ammo loads - why not make it so
one can choose either the 13th gun or without? And whatever ammo count goes different for both setups?
Reasonable to me.
exactly what im getting at, again im not saying right now but it should be something to look at in the future. i dont THINK it would take much, then again i know nothing of code but still using the one we have now as a template, it shouldnt be much harder
-
Here is probably one reason
http://www.pacificwrecks.com/aircraft/b-17/41-2446/guns/radio/radio-gun-ring.html
That seems pretty clear to me that the gunner isnt going to see much.
He has a giant tail in the way of his 6.
He has a doesnt have a very good field of fire.
With a superior top turret there is no need to carry an extra gun that prolly just gets in the way
-
But then we come to the question of; why?
Two main reasons:
#1. One more .50 cal in a single plane and 3 more in a formation certainly can't make defence harder.
#2. This would get a little bit of the modeling work done in case HTC ever decides to add E and/or F model B-17s.
One option is this, I'm sure through the different productions of B-17G's (early and late) there was a different ammo load, with or without the 13th gun.
(Reason I say because I don't know the exact ammo count so bare with me). The B-29 has two different ammo loads - why not make it so
one can choose either the 13th gun or without? And whatever ammo count goes different for both setups?
Reasonable to me.
:O You read my mind on that one Butcher