The B-36 Over Korea

[ACarey]

Thoughts on the role the B-36 could have played in the Korean War as a conventional bomber instead of the B-29?

[hbtcoveralls]

Probably just as completely ineffectual as the B-29. There wasn't anything strategic to hit in Korea. No large towns, railroads, factories etc. China was off limits. Tactical bombers in the medium range (B-26) or fighter/bombers (F-51 F-84, F-80, F-9, F-4U) were what was needed and used. A B-36 could have flown a very long way to deliver a large load of bombs, but what would have been worth the trip?
Tom Bowers

[The Inspector]

The B-36 was also promoted as 'a very long range nuclear bomber' and flying one near Korea would have had NORKOR, China, and the Soviets screaming in the court of world opinions about the 'running dog Yankee capitalists escalating their illegal attacks against simple people by threatening them with nuclear devastation'

[ACarey]

Yes, such an action may have started a protest or two at the UN. Would have been interesting seeing them carpet bomb CHICOM positions.

[JFS61]

I always thought the B-29's Korean War service was best summed up by the story of a bored crew from the 92nd Bomb Group, who (finding nothing better to do), began chasing an enemy motorcycle courier down a road dropping sticks of bombs one at a time until they eventually managed to drop one on top of the poor schmuck's head.

Who knows, maybe if they had had a B-36 they might have nailed him on the first pass.

Last edited by JFS61 on Sat Aug 18, 2012 7:41 pm, edited 1 time in total.

[ACarey]

I always thought the B-29's Korean War service was best summed up by the story of a bored crew from the 92nd Bomb Group, who (finding nothing better to do), began chasing an enemy motorcycle courier down a road dropping sticks of bombs (one at a time) until they eventually managed to drop one on top of the poor schmuck's head.

Who knows, maybe if they had had a B-36 they might have nailed him on the first pass.

Wonderful story!