B-17 Flying Fortress with twin nose guns, not a G-model

[Scott Rose]

I'd never seen this configuration before this picture, then I saw it in the Memphis Belle movie (wartime)
anybody have any more info?

[maxum96]

Impressive looking. I'm sure it was one of the many field mods done during the war. I've seen photos of all kinds of different setups for nose guns in pre B-17G's during the war that crews tried.

[Dan Johnson II]

I believe it was fairly common. Note no bombsite. I seem to recall reading that often 17s with this configuration flew wing on the lead ship to combat the head on stuff. Not sure how true that is. I saw it first in a book in grade school 50 some years ago now (Gasp!)

From the inside.

[Cvairwerks]

Dan: I would suspect that your photo is at least post 1947 based on the pad behind the gunner. Labeling as US Air xxxx wouldn't have happened until the service was established in Sept. of '47.

[Duggy009]

Quite a few aircraft were modified to stave off the frontal attacks by the Luftwaffe until the chin turret was added.
Here's B-17F 41-24527 of the 324th Bomb Squadron 91st Bomb Group. CAPT Robert K. Morgan pilot of the Memphis Belle flew at least one mission in this aircraft.

[Jim MacDonald]

Cvairwerks,

FWIW. I'm pretty sure the photo is WWII and the seat cushion reads:

U.S. AIR
CORPS

Mac

[Cvairwerks]

Mac: It's an interesting question, as it was the Army Air Corp from 1926 until late in 1941, then Army Air Force until split off in 1947. Inquiring minds want to know...

[JohnB]

A couple of points:

-The cushion must really read "US Air Corps" and not "US Air Force" if for no other reason all pre-"G" models were gone by 1947.

-If you look at the Champaign Lady thread, their new seat cushions also read "US Air Corps"...and they swear it's correct for their late "G". When I suggested here that it was incorrect, I was soundly voted down by members saying that the items were probably ordered before the USAAC was renamed. I disagree, in 1941 the USAAC would have had no way of knowing it would purchase so many B-17s so it clearly would not have placed orders for 13,000 sets of them. My guess is the contractor never bothered to change the marking stencil to read USAAF. The USAAF contracting official who accepted the goods either didn't care, was too busy to made a minor change to the contract to update the name or (my favorite tongue in cheek theory based on no proof whatsoever) was given a few bucks or a bottle of booze to look the other way so the contractor could save a few bucks by not making new stencils.

-As previously mentioned, many "F" models had twin guns in the nose piece, but few I've seen, seem to be as articulated or moveable as the ones shown here.

-What's up with the man posing with the guns in the top photo wearing a beret? I'm no uniform expert but the uniform looks more UK to me...note the shoulder epaulets and the was the top button of the shirt is fastened without a tie. Perhaps a shot of UK forces doing a visit to an American base?

Last edited by JohnB on Sat Feb 03, 2018 1:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.

[Duggy009]

Some more shots, right click & save as for details.

[Duggy009]

Regarding this photo.

A tankman of the 55th Royal Armoured Corps in the nose gun position of a B-17 Flying Fortress nicknamed "Martha the II" of the 381st Bomb Group during a visit to Ridgewell, 1 September 1943.'British Tank Men Visit "Flying Corps". Men of the 55th Royal Armour Corps, many of whom have fought in Libya with the 8th Army, were invited to an American aerodrome

Last edited by Duggy009 on Sun Feb 04, 2018 7:49 am, edited 1 time in total.

[gemmer]

Toggle ships. No Bomb sight. Armor slab below the guns.

[AG pilot]

Was that "armor" under the guns, or just something to keep the hot brass and links off the plexiglass? It does not look very thick.

[gemmer]

Was that "armor" under the guns, or just something to keep the hot brass and links off the plexiglass? It does not look very thick.

Single nose gun lead ships with the bomb sight didn't have anything to protect the sight and plexi glass from brass and links. Why would a toggle ship have that? It was armor to protect from head on attacks. Note the Brit sitting behind the guns and the protection the gunner would have. Compare the thickness to that of the exterior cockpit armor on 8th AF B-24s. Looks about the same to me.

[junkman9096]

As regards the "US Air...." on the pad in an early post. Check out that the guy on the wing is carrying a similar pad, marked "US AIR CORPS". Photo was taken in 1945.

[JohnB]

But why wasn't a change made? It seems simple enough.

I'm guessing it's one of my hypothesis...