pampa14's Aviation Click Bait

Great photos! The catapult extended the full width of the ship, and had sponsons on both sides. I've seen references to the port side sponson, so assumed that it launched aircraft to port, but now see they launced to starboard.

The first two ships completed without the hangar catapult, Ticonderoga and Hancock, briefly carried a Mark 37 5" director on the port sponson, as an alternative or supplement to the two Mark 37s on the island. This required a triangular cutout of the flight deck above, probably why it was a short-lived experiment. Subsequently a pair of quad 40mm mounts were installed on the former catapult sponson, and the two pairs of 5" guns on the port side were given local Mark 57 directors, though they likely operated mostly under control of the island Mark 37s.

 

The YB-40 was a derivation of the Boeing B-17, in which additional guns were added in hopes that these heavily-armed B-17s would be able to "escort" the other bombers, protecting them from enemy fighter attacks when beyond the range of friendly fighter escort. Changes included a remotely-controlled chin turret (which later became standard on the B-17G model), twin .50 caliber guns in the waist positions (instead of the single guns), an extra twin gun power turret behind what used to be the radio operator's gun position, and sometimes extra cheek guns in the nose. The bombs and bombardier were left behind, and extra ammo for the guns was carried. Even with the reduction in weight without the bombs, the added weight of guns and ammo made the aircraft heavier and slower. The program was made obsolete not only by its own failures, but by the appearance of long-range fighter escorts that could fill the role much more ably. Some photos of YB-40 can be found in the link below:

http://aviacaoemfloripa.blogspot.com.br/2011/02/boeing-yb-40-um-gunship-na-segunda.html


Hope you enjoy and thanks for visiting!

 

I think I read that there was a gunship version of the B-24 as well.

 

There was one prototype XB-41, only used for trials in the States. Similar to the YB-40 with a second dorsal turret and twinned waist guns.

 

I've seen those before, but the thing I like about your site is that they're all presented in one place and available in decent resolution. Keep up the good work,

 

I think the YB-40 was an admission that the idea of heavily armed bombers being able to fight their way through to the target, was a failure.

 

The need for long-range fighters was recognized by the AAF pre-war. In a memo to Frank Andrews dated 14 November 1939, Hap Arnold wrote that the idea that "fighter craft cannot shoot down large bombardment planes in formation has been proven wholly untenable. It has been demonstrated recently beyond a doubt that the best antiaircraft defense is pursuit aviation." [Steven McFarland: "To Command The Sky"]

However, the conventional pre-war wisdom stated that any fighter built large and heavy enough to carry sufficient fuel for long-range escort would have such poor performance that it would be noncompetitive in actual combat. This reasoning was not unique to the US and the performance of the Bf 110 as a fighter did nothing to dispel this line of reasoning. However, work was started on this problem prior to US entry into the war. It was not until fighter efficiency was improved through drag reduction that the percentage of gross weight devoted to fuel did not extract a prohibitive cost in fighter performance.

On 20 February 1942 [prior to any AAF missions in Europe] Arnold ordered the all-out development of auxiliary tanks for the P-38, P-47, and P-51 then under development. In June '43 Arnold, frustrated with slow development, ordered Barney Giles to have long-range escort fighters available in 6 months "...to get a fighter that can protect our bombers. Whether you use an existing type or have to start from scratch is your problem. Get to work on this right away because by January '44, I want fighter escort for all our bombers from U.K. into Germany."

 

Quite ironic that the Japanese also found out the hard way a few years before the American attempt, when the Imperial Japanese Navy forced through the production of the G6M1, an up-armored and up-gunned version of the G4M Betty bomber. The additional weight shifted the aircraft's center of gravity and also reduced it's speed and range. Luckily, the failure of the G6M1 was mitigated by the A6M becoming operational shortly thereafter.

 

Essex herself was completed without the hangar catapult. She had a single H2 and never got the H4s that the rest of the class did. There were two in storage for her at Puget Sound Naval Shipyard but the war ended before she made it back for a second overhaul, and they cancelled the install with theend of the war and put her in mothballs "as is."

Hancock and TIconderoga were DESIGNED with a third Mk 37 in mind, but the units were never shipped. Finally, my research into the Essex class has Lexington receiving the first Mk 57 directors (one on March 30 and the second April 8, 1945). Intrepid received two in May, but those are the only months I have reports for. Lexington's Mk 57s were installed on the island and Mk 63s sorta in the gallery you're talking about, as this sketch from Puget Sound Naval Shipyard shows. I have a very basic, incomplete page on the Mk 63 system here for those that aren't familiar with it. The Navy was going with a mix of Mk 57 and Mk 63 systems when the war ended.

 

I share with you a few photos of a Vought F4U Corsair carrying a bomb guided by radar ASM-N-2 Bat. The photos and a small report can be viewed at the link:

http://aviacaoemfloripa.blogspot.com.br/2011/02/f-4u-corsair-testando-bomba-guiada.html


Hope you enjoy and I count on your visit!

 

Throughout 1944-45 8 Group PFF 'Light Night Striking Force' dropped large numbers of 'Cookies' on Berlin and other targets in Germany. Mosquito B.XVIs were used and sometimes would fly to Berlin, drop their 4000lb bomb, return to base in East Anglia to be 'turned around', loaded with another Cookie, and return to Berlin with another crew......

Anyhow, I took these pics this afternoon. The 4000lb is an MC ( HC survivors are very rare - the casings rust very quickly ) and the aircraft is a B.35 which is basically a pressurized B.XVI. The bulged bomb-bay is clear....

 

From 1942 to 1955, the Brazilian Air Force operated a total of 87 examples of Curtiss P-40 in different variants. To learn more about the use of the Curtiss P-40 in the Brazilian Air Force, visit the link below where you will find a full report and pictures of the P-40 in Brazilian colors.

http://aviacaoemfloripa.blogspot.com.br/2011/02/p-40-em-cores-brasileiras.html


Hope you enjoy and thanks for visiting!

 

The following post presents some photos of examples of P-38 Lightning captured by the Regia Aeronautica and the Luftwaffe during WW2. All photos can be viewed using the link:

http://aviacaoemfloripa.blogspot.com.br/2011/02/p-38-lightning-capturados.html


Hope you enjoy and thanks for visiting!

 

IIRC, the last photo is not of a "captured" Lightning, but one acquired post-war and flown bu 4 Stormo/4 Aerobrigata.

 

The Yokosuka MXY-7 Ohka was a rocket powered human-guided anti-shipping kamikaze attack plane, using as a platform, the bomber Mitsubishi G4M Betty. The following link shows a report and some photos this weapon, employed by Japan towards the end of World War II:

http://aviacaoemfloripa.blogspot.com.br/2011/02/uma-bomba-kamikase.html


Hope you enjoy and thanks for visiting!

 

The GI's called them "baka bombs", baka being the Japanese word for idiot.

There's one on display at the National Museum of the US Air Force in Dayton...

http://www.nationalmuseum.af.mil/factsheets/factsheet.asp?id=526

Note that the museum's description no longer uses the word baka. More PC revisionism?

 

Did it ever?

 

Yes, but it appears that I can't prove it. A search of the museum's website no longer finds the word baka.

I grew up in Dayton and have been to the museum many times since its earliest days. That's where I learned the word.

 

The Wayback Machine has the webpage going back to 2007, and it was hasn't been in any of the listings for that year, so if it was mentioned on the webpage, it isn't a relatively "current" change.

Since you have been to the physical museum, perhaps you had seen it on the description placard?
On second thought, nix on that the current one makes no mention of the Baka Bomb nickname either.

This has been in use, since at least, 2006.

The fiddlersgreen.net website incorrectly attributes this to the Smithsonian.