Warbird Information Exchange

Just a quick question? Was the tail turret on the B-23 was it a single mount or a twin like the B-17? Was it a a single 30 caliber or a single 50 caliber, or twins?

I've always heard that it was the B-18 that "won" the competition after the B-17 prototype crashed. The Air Corps placed a substantial order for B-18s, but was still impressed enough with the Fortress to order a few more for evaluation.

In 1934, the United States Army Air Corps put out a request for a bomber with double the bomb load and range of the Martin B-10, which was just entering service as the Army's standard bomber. In the evaluation at Wright Field the following year, Douglas showed its DB-1. It competed with the Boeing Model 299 (later the B-17 Flying Fortress) and Martin Model 146. While the Boeing design was clearly superior, the crash of the B-17 prototype (caused by taking off with the controls locked) removed it from consideration. During the depths of the Great Depression, the lower price of the DB-1 ($58,500 vs. $99,620 for the Model 299) also counted in its favor. The Douglas design was ordered into immediate production in January 1936 as the B-18.

The Douglas B-23 Dragon was a twin-engined bomber developed by Douglas Aircraft Company as a successor to (and a refinement of) the B-18 Bolo.

One of the B-17's biggest limitations was its bombload, and the small bombay. That was because it was originally designed to meet a set of specs intended for a twin-engine design.

On 8 August 1934, the U.S. Army Air Corps (USAAC) tendered a proposal for a multi-engined bomber to replace the Martin B-10. Requirements were that it would carry a "useful bombload" at an altitude of 10,000 feet (3 km) for ten hours with a top speed of at least 200 miles per hour (320 km/h).[9] They also desired, but did not require, a range of 2,000 miles (3,200 km) and a speed of 250 miles per hour (400 km/h). The Air Corps were looking for a bomber capable of reinforcing the air forces in Hawaii, Panama, and Alaska.[10] The competition would be decided by a "fly-off" at Wright Field in Dayton, Ohio. Boeing competed with the Douglas DB-1 and Martin Model 146 for the Air Corps contract.
...
At the fly-off, the four-engine Boeing design's performance was superior to those of the twin-engine DB-1 and Model 146, and then-Major General Frank Maxwell Andrews of the GHQ Air Force believed that the long-range capabilities of four-engine large aircraft were more efficient than shorter-ranged twin-engined airplanes, and that the B-17 was better suited to their doctrine.[16] His opinions were shared by the Air Corps procurement officers, and even before the competition was finished they suggested buying 65 B-17s.

....but DB-2 thru DB-6 remain a mystery.

Thank you so much for re-calibrating me on the evolution of mid-to-late 1930's bomber development.

Old Timers Disease has shown its ugly head again!

DB-4 was a proposed bomber version of the DC-4E.

Is that the only surviving B-23 restored with a bomber nose? I know the NMUSAF eventually plans to put theirs back in military configuration.SN