Boeing B-17G-30-BO Fortress 42-31931 ...

[Mark Allen M]

Looks to be some type of experimental gun setup going on.

According to J Baugher's database:

Boeing B-17G-30-BO Fortress 42-31931 (MSN 7045) Boeing Aircraft Corporation, Seattle, WA 3Jan44. Accident landing at Boeing Field, WA 3Jan44. Experimental without top turret glazing. McChord Field, Tacoma, WA 23Jul44. Spokane Field, WA 25Jul44. 20th Ferrying Group, Berry Field, Nashville, TN 30Aug44. 1st EEL, Hanscom Field, Bedford, MA 1Dec44. 902nd Base Unit (Base Complement), Orlando AAB, FL 19Jan45. 903rd Base Unit, Pinecastle Field, FL 23Jan45. Damaged landing at Pinecastle Field 7May45. 4000th Base Unit, Air Materiel Command, Wright Field, Dayton, OH 30Jun45. 4148th Base Unit, Hensley Field, Dallas, TX 2Aug45. 4000th Base Unit, Air Materiel Command, Wright Field, Dayton, OH 7Aug45. To Reconstruction Finance Corporation, Storage Depot No.41, Kingman Field, AZ for storage and disposal 5Dec45. War Assets Administration. Sold to Wunderlich Contracting Company, Jefferson City, MO Jul46; scrapped.

[mike furline]

Unfortunately not posted on-line yet. https://catalog.archives.gov/id/41120004

[K5DH]

Interesting test mule. No mounts for cheek guns (the nose looks like it came from an "F" model) and the waist gun windows have been skinned over. Was that top turret operated remotely? I can't imagine they'd have a gunner directly exposed to the slipstream at 30,000 feet! Or is the caption wrong, and maybe the turret covers were removed for some kind of photo opportunity?

[phil65]

Not to hijack the thread, but we all know that they added extra guns to the B-17 and came up with the YB-40, that turned out to be a dud. Did they ever think about going in the other direction and stripping it down to just the pilot and co-pilot and maybe the tail gunner. I mean what do you need a navigator for, just follow the other planes. What do you need to bombarded for, when the lead ship drops its bombs, you toggle the switch. Kind of like a big Mosquito I guess. What are your thoughts ?

Phil

Last edited by phil65 on Fri Aug 23, 2024 2:54 pm, edited 1 time in total.

[sandiego89]

Not to hijack the thread, but we all know that they added extra guns to the B-17 and came up with the YB-40, that turned out to be a dud. Did they ever think about going in the other direction and stripping it down to just the pilot and co-pilot and maybe the tail gunner. I mean what do you need to navigator for, just follow the other planes. What do you need to bombarded for, when the lead ship drops its bombs, you toggle the switch. Kind of like a big Mosquito I guess. What are your thoughts ?

Phil

While the strip down would be attractive from a crewing perspective, it would make the B-17 dead meat to air intercept in much of the European theatre. The only things the B-17 had going for it defensively was ruggedness and multiple defensive guns (and more were added in later version). The B-17 was never going to be fast or operate high enough to benefit much from stripping. The B-29 did benefit, but mainly as it could operate higher and faster than many of the possible threats it faced.

The toggle on command and navigator deletion sound attractive, but many ships did get detached from their main formation, "lead" often had to get switched, and finding your back home in notorious European weather could get dicey without a nav.

As for the original post, i just wonder if the turret glazing/fairing have just been removed, but I cant fathom why.

[sandiego89]

Not to hijack the thread, but we all know that they added extra guns to the B-17 and came up with the YB-40, that turned out to be a dud. Did they ever think about going in the other direction and stripping it down to just the pilot and co-pilot and maybe the tail gunner. I mean what do you need to navigator for, just follow the other planes. What do you need to bombarded for, when the lead ship drops its bombs, you toggle the switch. Kind of like a big Mosquito I guess. What are your thoughts ?

Phil

While the strip down would be attractive from a crewing perspective, it would make the B-17 dead meat to air intercept in much of the European theatre. The only things the B-17 had going for it defensively was ruggedness and multiple defensive guns (and more were added in later version). The B-17 was never going to be fast or operate high enough to benefit much from stripping. The B-29 did benefit, but mainly as it could operate higher and faster than many of the possible threats it faced.

The toggle on command and navigator deletion sound attractive, but many ships did get detached from their main formation, "lead" often had to get switched, and finding your back home in notorious European weather could get dicey without a nav.

As for the original post, i just wonder if the turret glazing/fairing have just been removed, but I cant fathom why.

[Ken]

By the end of the war in Europe, B-17 crews had bombardiers replaced with "toggliers". You'd think they'd let the Nav do it, or remote it to the pilots, but the argument of men to man all of the gun positions may be the answer.

Ken

[Mark Sampson]

Perhaps that's so, but OTOH I recall reading that by 1945 B-17s were flying with only one waist gunner. (Should have asked my father, a waist gunner, about that.)
Back on-topic, I don't understand these exposed guns either. Maybe they'd removed the plexi from the top turret, and the chin turret covers, for maintenance. But then why bother to photograph it?

[martin_sam_2000]

Interesting test mule. No mounts for cheek guns (the nose looks like it came from an "F" model) and the waist gun windows have been skinned over. Was that top turret operated remotely? I can't imagine they'd have a gunner directly exposed to the slipstream at 30,000 feet! Or is the caption wrong, and maybe the turret covers were removed for some kind of photo opportunity?

Early “G”’s rolled off the line looking very similar r to this and then went to mod centers to have later style equipment added. As the war progressed some of the later designs were incorporated into the production line but mod centers were always a part of B-17 production.

[Pogmusic]

It also doesn't have the Cheyanne tail turret. So, it must be headed to a mod center.?