B29's

[Red Leader]

I've just noticed that 2 versions of The Enola Gay were produced. The markings on the tails are different.
Was this intentional? Or an error? Or were there 2 different tail markings within the plane's history?
Anyone know?

[BSteinIPMS]

Here's a partial answer, RL, and anyone with further information is encouraged to correct what I've written below.

Corgi B-29 AA31803 shows "Enola Gay" as she was marked during the Hiroshima mission on 6 August 1945 with a false "Circle R" marking spuriously showing her to be assigned to the 6th Bomb Group.

The earlier Corgi B-29, #48901, shows "Enola Gay" as she was repainted immediately after the atomic mission with the proper 509th Composite Group insignia of a "Circle Arrow" painted on the fin/rudder, with the tip of the vertical fin painted red.

http://www.freewebs.com/444thbg/enolagayphotos.htm

I don't believe she carried the red fin tip on the Hiroshima flight:

http://www.nasm.si.edu/museum/garber/enola/enolagay.jpg

http://www.nasm.si.edu/events/pressroom/releases/081803.htm

The name of the pilot's mother, "Enola Gay", was painted on immediately before the mission.

[Red Leader]

Thanks BStein! Very informative.
The B29's one of my favourites. Great looking aircraft and well done by Corgi!
I notice Enola Gay is missing some gun turrets. Were these removed on the mission for weight reasons? I know the Lancasters were modified with guns removed on the dambusters raid.

[BSteinIPMS]

The four gun turrets were removed from the 509th Composite Group aircraft for several reasons:

1. To save weight.
2. The remote-controlled sighting system was always maintenance-intensive and problematical.
3. At that stage of the war the defensive armament was somewhat redundant for aircraft flying singly. The Japanese usually didn't bother with B-29s flying by themselves. Although they knew these aircraft were conducting weather and photo reconaissance flights, the Japanese preferred to husband their remaining fighter strength for the massed bomber formations when these appeared.

Here's the book for you if you want to read more:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/1574888595/qid=1096289648/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_10_1/026-4900596-7517205

[Agent X20]

This was obviously before any kind of video cameras/screens or anything, but how did the gun sighting work on what would be a quickly moving smallish target...?

One man per turret or what....???

[BSteinIPMS]

Good questions, Agent. :)

The remote sighting stations were manned by several gunners (see links below) who used mounted and gymballed gyro-stabilized lead-computing sights. Only the tail turret had its own gunner, and the others were remotely operated by (usually) two gunners in the waist and one situated in the forward upper astrodome.

More interesting information here:

http://www.acepilots.com/planes/b29.html

“At altitudes of 30,000 feet, manned gun turrets were impractical and Sperry developed retractable, periscopically directed, electrically powered turrets for the B-29. The normal crew of twelve included a pilot, co-pilot, bombardier, navigator, flight engineer, radio operator, radar operator, and five gunners. The first seven guys occupied the forward pressurized cabin. Four gunners were in the rear cabin, and the poor tail gunner was trapped in his own little pressurized pocket in the tail for the duration of the flight.”

B-29 gunners' own accounts

http://www.southernoregonwarbirds.org/b29b.html#lyled

"In the B-29 there were four full and one part-time (the bombardier) gunners. Each controlled a different set of 50-caliber guns. The bombardier controlled the forward guns and the tail gunner the tail guns. I was CFC (Central Fire Control) and controlled the upper aft guns, and there were two side gunners. Each of us controlled our special (primary) sets of 50-caliber guns but there were secondary options under which any one gunner could take over the guns of as many as two other gunnery positions, in case of battle damage and/or casualties.

In CFC you sat in a swivel chair, called the barber chair, just aft of the center of the aircraft in a plexiglass "bubble" or "blister" sticking up above the top of the fuselage. I had a full, unobstructed view of the top of the aircraft, the wings and the engines, and all the sky above them. The two side gunners sat in the same pressurized compartment but below me to the right and left, looking through side "blisters". The side gunners also served as "scanners" in flight, keeping a steady eye on the engines.

In operation I sat in the "barber chair" and snuggled my face up into a gun sight. The sight was mounted on a pedestal attached to the chair and could pivot up and down, while the chair swiveled right and left. With one hand I moved the gun sight and operated a trigger while with the other I cranked a range finder knob. The gun sight image that I looked through consisted of a central red dot or pipper surrounded by a ring of red dots. I tracked by keeping the pipper centered on the target (no lead) and estimated range by twisting the range knob until the red dots in the outer circle just framed the target. Information on the position and rate at which I aimed the sight and the chair, and moved them up and down and right and left, and on the position of the range knob, was fed into the aircraft fire control electronics and the remote turret guns then automatically tracked the target, with the proper lead."

[Agent X20]

Its most probably still on the top secret list... thanks for that I did do a search and came up with very much the same....

[BSteinIPMS]

Here she is, installed at the new Udvar-Hazy Center of the Smithsonian Institution, located out at Dulles Airport in Washington, D.C.:

http://www.airliners.net/open.file?id=540591&WxsIERv=Qm9laW5nIEItMjktNDUtTU8gU3VwZXJmb3J0cmVzcw %3D%3D&WdsYXMg=VVNBIC0gQWlyIEZvcmNl&QtODMg=V2FzaGluZ3RvbiAtIER1bGxlcyBJbnRlcm5hdGlvbmF sIChJQUQgLyBLSUFEKQ%3D%3D&ERDLTkt=VVNBIC0gVmlyZ2luaWE%3D&ktODMp=TWFyY2ggMTYsIDIwMDQ%3D&BP=0&WNEb25u=TWlndWVsIFJlbGF5emU%3D&xsIERvdWdsY=NDQtODYyOTI%3D&MgTUQtODMgKE=IkVub2xhIEdheSIgb24gZGlzcGxheSBhdCB0a GUgTmF0aW9uYWwgQWlyIGFuZCBTcGFjZSBNdXNldW0u&YXMgTUQtODMgKERD=MTA4MA%3D%3D&NEb25uZWxs=MjAwNC0wMy0yNA%3D%3D&ODJ9dvCE=&O89Dcjdg=&static=yes

http://www.airliners.net/open.file?id=485010&WxsIERv=Qm9laW5nIEItMjkuLi4gU3VwZXJmb3J0cmVzcw%3D% 3D&WdsYXMg=VVNBIC0gQWlyIEZvcmNl&QtODMg=V2FzaGluZ3RvbiAtIER1bGxlcyBJbnRlcm5hdGlvbmF sIChJQUQgLyBLSUFEKQ%3D%3D&ERDLTkt=VVNBIC0gVmlyZ2luaWE%3D&ktODMp=RGVjZW1iZXIgMjcsIDIwMDM%3D&BP=1&WNEb25u=S2VuIENoZXVuZw%3D%3D&xsIERvdWdsY=NDQtODYyOTI%3D&MgTUQtODMgKE=VGFpbCB2aWV3IG9mIFRoZSBFbm9sYSBHYXkuI ChTdGV2ZW4gRi4gVWR2YXItSGF6eSBDZW50ZXIp&YXMgTUQtODMgKERD=MTA5NQ%3D%3D&NEb25uZWxs=MjAwNC0wMS0wNw%3D%3D&ODJ9dvCE=&O89Dcjdg=&static=yes

[Martin Bull]

Thanks for the info, BStein - I'd always idly wondered how the B29 remote sighting worked and hadn't been bothered to go look it up ! :o

[Red Leader]

Hey Bstein!
Am I reading correctly? Your last response was written in the first person!!
Are you saying that you are an ex crew member of a B29? Did you fly in them in action???!!!

[Agent X20]

Come on bit of cut and paste there.... :D :D :D

[Red Leader]

Well it's bout time we didhave a real WW11 Veterand fler on here Agent. Would be a most welcome addition to the forum!!!!

[raff]

I think you'll find it was a quote.
But I know Bob has a few flying hours under his belt from another arena. ;)

raff

[raff]

[QUOTE=BSteinIPMS]Here she is, installed at the new Udvar-Hazy Center of the Smithsonian Institution, located out at Dulles Airport in Washington, D.C.:

Nice to see Bob. One of my regrets was just missing her at the Aviation museum on the Mall by a couple of days... she was in transit to Dulles. Hopefully she will be safe there from the attentions of the pc brigade!

raff

[Red Leader]

And a ver well informed quote too!!
Anyone remember watching that docu a few years back of that team trying to fly one off the tundra that they'd discovered!!
Was it Greenland or Iceland??
Anyway I have recollections that sadly they failed! Is it still there stranded?

[Seafire47]

As far as I remember they were almost ready to fly it out when it caught fire and was destroyed. There may some wreckage left, but I think that's all. :(

[Agent X20]

feul leakage rear of plane caught fire and that was it..

[Red Leader]

What a crying shame!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[BSteinIPMS]

Agent's right. The aircraft was taxying for takeoff when the gasoline-driven APU in the rear fuselage tipped over and started a fire. Toast.

[PH-LKK]

Sorry if this has been covered before, but what is the bulge under the fuselage, right under where the mainspar is located? It's on Corgi's model, and I can see it in the photos. Is this a weather-radar enclosure?

[BSteinIPMS]

Interesting question, PH-LKK. The dome housed the navigation/bombing radar, similar in concept and application to the British H2S radar seen in the ventral housing of the Lanc and Halifax.

http://home.att.net/~jbaugher2/b29_3.html

“The B-29 carried an AN/APQ-13 radar bombing/navigational aid set. This set was developed jointly by the Bell Telephone Laboratories and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology Radiation Laboratory. It was manufactured by Western Electric, which was in those days the manufacturing arm of the Bell System. The radar antenna for this unit was housed inside a retractable 30-inch hemispherical radome located between the bomb bays and protruding below the fuselage a couple of feet when extended. Later in the war, the AN/APQ-7 Eagle radar unit was used. The Eagle antenna was mounted in a wing-shaped housing installed underneath the forward section of the fuselage. The unit was also devised by Bell Labs and MIT, and was manufactured by Western Electric.”

http://www.ww2guide.com/b29ops.shtml

Radar / Navigation

"AN/APQ-13 (H2X) radar enclosed in a 30" radome X-Band Bombing Radar "Mickey" manufactured by Bell The AN/APQ-13 radome was located at the bottom of the fuselage, between the bomb bays. On airplanes with modified bomb bays (such as SB-29's etc.) often the radome would be moved forward in the lower forward turret position. The latter was of course deleted.
AN/APQ-7 EAGLE 3 cm radar better target definition this wing shaped antenna in a housing installed underneath the forward sction of the fuselage. It spanned 17 ft, had a 31" chord and was about 8" thick weighing nearly 1,000 pounds. X-BAND Search & Bombing Radar "Eagle Mk.1"; manufactured by Western Electric
AN/APN-4 LORAN (LONge RANge) radar navigation system manufactured by Philco. 1.950 MHz. consisted of two units each about 1 ft x 2 ft by 2.5 ft. One unit was the power supply while the other contained the oscilloscope display tube, timing circuits and receiver. Together they weighed about 80 pounds. By 1945 the APN-9 came into use at an amazing weight reduction - it only weighed 40 pounds.
The oscilloscope screen was about four inches in diameter and would display a station master and associated slave signal from about 1500 miles over water and 600 miles over land. With practice a fix could be determined in about three minutes. As an example, the minimum error for navigating the 1400 miles to Japan from Tinian was about 28 miles. With two successive fixes ground speed, drift, and ETA could be determined. The relative simplicity of LORAN and the fact that it could be used regardless of weather made it invaluable as an navigational tool until the aircraft arrived over Japan when airborne radar provided a more accurate fix. For some unknown reason the Japanese either never tried or failed to jam any of the LORAN systems.
By the end of World War II there were 75 standard LORAN stations serving the needs of aircraft and vessels in operation with over 75,000 receivers in use.
AN/APN-9 LORAN (LONge RANge) radar navigation system manufactured by RCA; replaced AN/APN-4
AN/APG-15B gun laying radar fire control in tail radome S-Band Tail Gun Radar 2000 yard range."

[PH-LKK]

Somehow I know you'd know the answer. Thanks Bob!

[raff]

I actually liked the TU-4 ... yeah I know ...but it was still a B-29.
IMHO the Soviet markings and subtle variations in the metallic finish made it a very nice model.
I remember an article in the old "Flying Review" entitled "The guy who gave Ivan the bird" about the pilot who flew a B-29 into the USSR after a raid on Japan had gone wrong. The Russians used that as a pattern for their duplicate and I believe he was given some grief for letting them get their hands on one. Strange that despite the fact that all they had to do was copy it, it was still a dismal failure.
The new "Atomic Tom" looks good too ... December release [allegedly].

raff

[Seafire47]

raff,

I think that "all they had to do was copy it" rather simplifies the task! Imagine having to completely dismantle a B-29, producing manufacturing drawings of absolutely everything as you go along, analaysing everything to figure out what materials it was made of. And then there's the production processes. Don't forget that the Soviet Union's industrial technology was well behind the West's (after all their country had been devastated by the war). Boeing had trouble getting the B-29 into service and they weren't trying to build someone else's jigsaw without the picture! :)

Seafire

[raff]

raff,

I think that "all they had to do was copy it" rather simplifies the task! Imagine having to completely dismantle a B-29, producing manufacturing drawings of absolutely everything as you go along, analaysing everything to figure out what materials it was made of. And then there's the production processes. Don't forget that the Soviet Union's industrial technology was well behind the West's (after all their country had been devastated by the war). Boeing had trouble getting the B-29 into service and they weren't trying to build someone else's jigsaw without the picture! :)

Seafire

Good points all, [I was over simplifying]... but the article suggested that they were also very much aided by drawings etc. "acquired" by their agents in the US.
It still can't have been easy, but it seems that the main problem areas were with the systems and power plants, and were caused by poor quality control rather than technical ability.
Whilst I agree that the Soviets did indeed lag behind the West in many areas of technology, IMHO the gap wasn't so wide in aircraft developement, especially if one thinks of the quality of the aircraft and power plants used on the later Yaks and Lavochkins. Most of the production capacity had been evacuated well out of reach of the Luftwaffe and their technical capability had also been greatly enhanced by this time by the many German engineers they "inherited" at the end of the war. Certainly they didn't seem to have the same problems with the "Derwent" powered Mig-15 a few years later!

raff :)

[ForkTailedDevil]

I think I'll just tack a response on the end of this thread since its about B29s.....
Any thoughts on the Washington? I've been considering getting one but wanted to know about the general collectability of the model as they don't turn up on ebay that often. Whats the looks, build quality (dodgy turrets, begging like a dog etc) like

[Agent X20]

Havent seen one of those for a while... tis an okay model if you are into B29's.. nothing special though.... silver paint and RAF roundels... best you can do is go and visit Mr Tricatus' site..