How difficult were B29's to maintain?

mustangdriver · **Posted:** Sun Dec 02, 2007 12:51 am

JDK wrote:

mustangdriver wrote:

JDK wrote:

mustangdriver wrote:

The version they made had the tail made in the english system and the rest made in the metric system. When they tried to join the two halves, they did not fit. Also they copied the boeing logo in the rudder pedals.

Mmmm. I'd like a source on that. Sounds to me like some comforting American invented myths. Front end didn't match the back end? That's a bar-tale.

You mean like when the F-86 waxed the MIG time and time again in a two plane air expo, and the Russian paper headlines read, "Mig comes in 2nd place, while American Sabre comes in next to last in air expo"

Yes. The latter has some propaganda credibility, but it all comes under the 'our enemies are stupid' heading. IIRC, you couldn't come up with an original on that. Whose / which Sabre was it, BTW?

If it makes you feel good, it's probably a myth. Real history's usually uncomfortable.

They would get MiG rather than Mig/MIG, if it were in western print though.

As to the front end not fitting the back end because it was made in different systems of measurement... That's flat not true. 1. You've gone past the points I made about the internal lack of sense in your statement, and 2. I'd buy all sorts of fit problems, but not 'front to back' because it's too major, and it's also not how the B-29 or Tu-4 are made.

I've read a bit about the type, and I don't recall that. I doubt it'd be missed in all other accounts, eh? I've read and seen what newspaper and TV reporters make of facts like changing from Imperial to Metric, and that kind of incorrect simplification for the audience happens all the time.

There are worthwhile mainstream TV programes on aviation. They are few and far between, and it doesn't sound like the one you saw is a member of that small club.

I may be wrong - often am, but I'd like that to be by a reliable source with proofs.

Cheers,

As for the F-86, I don't know the serial number or group it belonged to, but Hoover flew it.

JDK · **Posted:** Sun Dec 02, 2007 12:56 am

Going back to the original question:

muddyboots wrote:

...but I always wonder just how much they cost, and whether we couldn't have kept island hopping until we were within B17 and B24 range--with the Japanese well hammered down as it almost was when the 29's started their thing, couldn't we have simply grabbed a couple of empty islands nearer the Japanese mainland, and flown fron them?

This is in the Wiki page discussion, and raises an interesting comparason point:

Quote:

According to Wheeler[1], the commander in charge of bombing Europe was initially pleased to see the new developments, but lost interest because of the expence and time needed to retool existing airfields for the B-29—he did not consider the retooling worth the trouble because his B-17s and B-24s were quite up to the task of bombing Europe. If you have a source that proves otherwise, however, feel free to share it. It's very easy to be in error when making negative categorical statements. Ingoolemo talk 02:14, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

[For 'retool' I think he means 'expand / rebuild']

Remember Roosevelt had agreed to Churchill's insistence on 'Germany First' and the ETO getting , in many cases, the pick of equipment. The B-29 was one case where they didn't.

mustangdriver · **Posted:** Sun Dec 02, 2007 1:01 am

I always thought it was interesting how they flew the '29 to Europe first to try and fool the axis. I never did hear if that worked at all.

Second Air Force · **Posted:** Sun Dec 02, 2007 1:21 am

JDK,

It will take me a while to dig up the article written by the 40th Group engineer, but I think he mentioned the rolling mag check being practiced in his Squadron. His main point of information was that it was so stinking hot and humid while simply taxiing to the runway that the temps would be at redline before the throttles were all the way up. I believe a scheme was developed to tow the airplanes to the runway where they would crank 'em up just prior to takeoff time, but that had to be abandoned as impractical.

mustangdriver,

That English tour was performed by YB-29 41-36963, later used by the 462nd Group as "Hobo Queen". The Germans had photos in the newspapers sometime after she arrived in England, so I guess it worked to some extent. I wonder if any other Allied pre-production bombers ever made it into combat?

Scott

B-29 Super Fort · **Joined:** Wed Sep 01, 2004 11:12 am **Posts:** 871

Second Air Force wrote:

B-29 Super Fort,

Which 58th Wing Bomb Group was your father in? He was involved in the most trying period of B-29 operations--the conditions in India and China were absolutely brutal on the 3350. A 40th Group flight engineer recalled that on a hot day in India the temps were pegged before even starting the takeoff roll, and that after a time his Aircraft Commander told him to quit telling him the engine parameters because there wasn't a thing they could do to cool 'em down anyway.

Scott

Hi Scott,

My father flew in the "Georgia Peach" a B-29 of the 468th Bomb Group, 793rd Bomb Squadron. According to my father, the conditions as you have described were primitive and brutal flying from their base in China. The conditions weren't much better when they were based in Kharagpur, India. They were credited with the first land-based bombers to attack mainland Japan (Yawata steel works complex) .

Joe

Bill Greenwood · **Posted:** Sun Dec 02, 2007 12:36 pm

Re, the tail not matching the nose. There is a pretty funny cartoon on the wall at QG Aviation in Ft. Collins like that. There are two skilled handyman carpenter types jointly working on building a Indian style wooden canoe. The canoe is suspended on two saw horses. The master builders are in the middle working back to back, a yard apart, but each facing away from the other. Zeke says "almost got her finished", as he looks over the last coat of varnish drying on the bottom of the stern at his end. "Yep", answers Zack as he proudly looks at the last coat of varnish drying on the upturned bow at his end.

T33driver · **Posted:** Sun Dec 02, 2007 1:55 pm

Journey of the Giants, The Story of the B-29 "Superfort" by Gene Gurney (published in 1961) is a great read and is very frank about the troubled development and fielding of the B-29. It does make the point about how the hurried production and testing threatened it's acceptance by the Army Air Force at all. IIRC the 8th AF passed on it due to all it's problems. Looks like Amazon has the book.

Obergrafeter · **Posted:** Sun Dec 02, 2007 6:47 pm

The Battle of Kansas. Heard about it my whole life. Do any of those books say how much $ was spent on these problems that for what I have heard never were resolved.

Second Air Force · **Posted:** Mon Dec 03, 2007 8:22 am

Ober,

I think I have seen a dollar figure for all the mods that had to be done at the four Kansas bases. I'm on my way out to do my BFR, if I have time when I get home I'll try to look it up. It was a staggering amount of time and money, I do know that.

Scott

wendovertom · **Posted:** Mon Dec 03, 2007 11:45 pm

Gary, are you going to chime in here?? I have really nothing to add that has not been said - ie - it was a cool plane but a real challenge to keep in the air - but I do know that with engine improvements it became a lot less of a challenge to maintain. The "Silverplate" version the 509th used had a really good track record as I recall - but then these were high priority planes and got the best of the best in parts and attention.

Tom P

retroaviation · **Posted:** Tue Dec 04, 2007 9:03 am

wendovertom wrote:

Gary, are you going to chime in here??

Well, I was just going to see what everyone else had to say about it first. I personally don't know what it took to maintain B-29's back in the War, but I have a fair idea. I was told that they had a minimum of six guys assigned to each airplane. A couple of engine guys, an airframe guy (sheet metal repairs, etc.), a supercharger expert, and a couple of guys to take care of the guns. I don't know if that was true for each squadron, but that's what one of the former mechanics told me he had on "his" airplane. I can say, however, that there are times that six guys is nowhere near enough to work on it. I just can't imagine the horrid conditions that those poor folks had to work in so that they could launch their airplanes the next day. Truely amazing.

On another note, one thing that most folks don't know is that Vic Agather, the person responsible for getting our B-29 out of China Lake (and FIFI's husband) was also one of the Big Kahunas for the Battle of Kansas and getting those early B-29's ready for combat. I'll see if I can get Neils Agather to give me better details on this because I don't want to screw it up by getting the facts wrong. It's a quite interesting story.

Gary

Jack Frost · **Posted:** Tue Dec 11, 2007 7:05 pm

I went through the USAF B-29 Transition Training at Randolph AFB in May-June of 1954 when it was pretty hot on the ground and at low altitudes. On some takeoffs the F/E would have to ride the primer switches to keep the CHT at or below redline. Right after liftoff we'd level off until we reached climb speed of 205 mph. We'd cruise at 195 mph.

The nacelle design insured a hot running engine when the front cylinder exhaust collector ring was positioned AHEAD of the cylinders the air was trying to cool! The commercial installations later corrected this.

b29flteng · **Posted:** Tue Dec 11, 2007 7:51 pm

When flying out of Midland with FIFI (or any other very warm place), the temps would climb above the flight manual limits for T/O on the ground (do not start your takeoff run when CHT is above 170 degrees). Through flight testing we found the temps would reach maximum allowed as we reached the end of the T/O run and started to climb. Of course the cowl flaps are WFO on the ground but as you start the takeoff you must close them down to 15 degrees as they will cause a severe buffet of the elevators. At the reduced weight we operate with, we could reduce power back to climb power and the temps would drop fairly quickly. Interesting about using the primer, I've never heard of it before.

JDK · **Posted:** Wed Dec 12, 2007 3:23 am

Jack Frost wrote:

The nacelle design insured a hot running engine when the front cylinder exhaust collector ring was positioned AHEAD of the cylinders the air was trying to cool!

Interesting. In a much earlier generation, it was a pretty standard on the Bristol Mercury setup on Lysander, Blenheim, Gladiator et al.

Jack Frost · **Posted:** Wed Dec 12, 2007 12:51 pm

To b-29flteng,

<Interesting about using the primer, I've never heard of it before.>

The theory was that pumping some more fuel into the combustion chambers would help cool things down a little and it seemed to help. We weren't flying them at real heavy weights so what little loss in performance wasn't noticed although some of the takeoff rolls were pretty long, especially the first one of the afternoon training session. I guess the only ones on board who could tell were the experienced IP and instructor F/E. We were the greenhorns! There was a windmill not very far beyond the end of 17R at Randolph that we looked at quite often.

Warbird Information Exchange

How difficult were B29's to maintain?

Who is online