• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

B-17

rich

New Member
It's an ad from 1943, but I have no idea if it's anything but propaganda....

ff.jpg
 

navvet

New Member
The information in the ad was pure truth. That it was published during wartime may be reason to label it "propaganda", however it also helped keep the morale up in a situation that few Americans desired to continue(they would have preferred peace to war). Taking pride in well built products may seem a bit vain, but the circumstances justified the publicity.
 

pipvh

New Member
The tail gunner being "suddenly imperiled" is something of an understatement under the circumstances... :shock:
 

Silver Dollar

New Member
pipvh said:
The tail gunner being "suddenly imperiled" is something of an understatement under the circumstances... :shock:

The statement should include a clean pair of shorts and a clean flight suit. This is definitely a true ad. The only wrinkle in the claim was that up to the B17 F, did have a weak spot if a fighter attacked dead head on and level. When they built the G with the chin turret, they ironed out that wrinkle. The other thing that helped out was the box formation with the concentration of guns. If you attacked head on, another set of guns on another 17 would get you. The tighter the box, the better your chances. Still, a B17 could take a ton of punishment and still get home.

I was also told another story which I'm not sure how true it is. If it was true, then the B17 in question needs to be on Amazing Stories. The story was told by a tail gunner who in the middle of firing at fighters felt the aircraft get hit with a big shudder. He then felt the plane losing altitude. All the while, he stayed right at his post scared out of his wits but trusting the pilot to get the plane down safely. Since his radio was dead, he figured the electical system or the radio was shot out. He felt the pilot whipping the plane back and forth which he thought was evasive action. Finally, he felt the pilot bring the plane down although a bit bumpy. When the plane stopped he got out of the tail turned toward the front of the aircraft and saw THERE WAS NO FRONT OF THE AIRCRAFT. The big shudder he felt was the aircraft coming apart. The tail, with it's huge horizontal stabilizers flew to the ground and landed!! Talk about needing a clean pair of shorts. :shock: :shock: :shock:
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
I've often wondered how much damage was done to bombers flying in the box formation that was incurred by other USAAF planes. I'm sure that being sprayed with .50 cals would be very unlikely to down a plane but how many of the bullet holes in those planes were done by their own side ?

Dave
 

rich

New Member
navvet said:
The information in the ad was pure truth. That it was published during wartime may be reason to label it "propaganda", however it also helped keep the morale up in a situation that few Americans desired to continue(they would have preferred peace to war). Taking pride in well built products may seem a bit vain, but the circumstances justified the publicity.

Good points well made, thanks.
 

Silver Dollar

New Member
JACKET_ HEAD said:
I've often wondered how much damage was done to bombers flying in the box formation that was incurred by other USAAF planes. I'm sure that being sprayed with .50 cals would be very unlikely to down a plane but how many of the bullet holes in those planes were done by their own side ?

Dave

You ask how many were done by their own side? The answer is LOTS. After talking to a lot of veterans, they say when planes are going those speeds, it's hard to tell one from another, especially a P51 from a ME 109 or even a Spit if you can't see the wing outline. And that didn't even take into consideration the fear factor.
There was an Italian aviator by the name of Giulio Douhet who said that a group of bombers were impossible to stop and fighters would be useless. That's true if you were using Peashooters or biplanes. The ME's and the FW's proved him way wrong. The thing about the box formation wasn't that it was so well armed that fighters couldn't take out a bomber but with all those potential guns on you, it made it much more difficult to train your own guns on them. At all those crazy angles deflections and what not, it was a wonder you could hit anything anyhow. Believe me, a good pilot with good gunnery skills can do a lot of damage to a boxed in bomber. Same thing with a good waist gunner with attacking fighters.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
I was actually thinking more of one B-17 or Liberator to another in the box formation. Gunners following German fighters and then suddenly tracking past another bomber.

Although once fighter escorts came onto the scene it would seem pretty obvious that Identification Friend or Foe would be a nightmare for all parties.

Dave
 

Silver Dollar

New Member
I see what you mean Dave. I'm almost sure that some gunners managed to hit other B17s. The thing is you'll never know where the shooting is coming from. If you saw Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade, you saw Sean Connery shoot off the tail of his own aircraft. That used to happen alot until they devised the interupter system which shut off the guns when they were trained on parts of your own aircraft. The poor top turret gunner hopefully wouldn't chew off his own tail .
 

Swing

New Member
JACKET_ HEAD said:
I've often wondered how much damage was done to bombers flying in the box formation that was incurred by other USAAF planes. I'm sure that being sprayed with .50 cals would be very unlikely to down a plane but how many of the bullet holes in those planes were done by their own side ?

Dave

There wouldn't have been any spraying. Gunners were taught to shoot in bursts.

I have no doubt that bombers had holes put in them by other planes in their formation. But, gunners also had a certain area of the sky they were responsible for, and probably avoided shooting anywhere other than their area (so as to not hit friendlies). In reality, the guys with turrets were probably the only ones that had a chance of hitting anything... the nose and top turrets shooting forward, the ball and tail covering low and behind. Between the primitive sights, having to manually move the gun, and the angles they were dealing with, I doubt many waist gunners actually hit anything.

~Swing
 
Top