Whoa kid, you better watch how you talk to me. I apologize that you get angry when you are wrong.
Lets see, which very heavy bomber had this catastrophic problem:
That would be the B-29.
B-32:
"In service, the B-32 had numerous deficiencies. The cockpit had an extremely high noise level and the instrument layout was poor. Bombardier vision was rather poor. The aircraft was overweight for the available engine power, the mechanical subsystems were inadequate, and there were frequent
engine fires caused by a faulty nacelle design."
http://home.att.net/~jbaugher2/b32.htmlAbout the B-29:
"The most common cause of maintenance headaches and catastrophic failures was the engine. Though the Wright R-3350 would later become a trustworthy workhorse in large piston-engined aircraft, early models were beset with dangerous reliability problems, many caused by demands that the B-29 be put in operation as soon as possible. It had an impressive power-to-weight ratio, but this came at a heavy cost to durability.
Worse, the cowling Boeing designed for the engine was too close (out of a desire for improved aerodynamics), and the early cowl flaps caused problematic flutter and vibration when open in most of the flight envelope. The 18 radial cylinders, compactly arranged in front and rear rows, overheated because of insufficient flow of cooling air, which in turn caused exhaust valves to unseat."
EDIT/
http://www.scripophily.net/beaicobaiprg.html/EDIT
The cowlings have a fairly similar shape:
I doubt that the B-32's engine fire problems would have been that much smaller than the ones experienced with the B-29. The cowlings were fairly similar and the same basic engines were used in both aircraft. As the B-32's wing was of course different than B-29's wing so I don't know if it needed 90 secs to burn though but when an engine catches fire a stop watch would be the last thing I would be looking for...