Official B-29 Doc Restoration Thread

Cubs2jets · **Joined:** Mon Jan 18, 2010 9:12 am **Posts:** 310

Sasnak wrote:

Matt Gunsch wrote:

Sasnak wrote:

Couple questions for the one(s) in the know:

Why have they not polished, and then eventually painted white, the area right above the cockpit? Is there something wrong with the metal that prevents it from being polished up like the rest of the airframe?

Also wondering whether there are plans to eventually add the 4 gun turrets to the airframe?

Ever work inside a polished metal plane after it has been sitting outside ? That is why it is painted white, it gets too hot inside and every little bit helps

Doc never had turrets installed, so it is correct the way it is.

Matt,

Yes, I see your rationale, but that can't be the reason they have chosen this route. If someone from "Doc" confirms this, then I'd suggest they go ahead and polish the skin to match and simply place a white tarp (of that same size) on top for the times that it sits outside at an airshow. That way, he can look his very best while still staying a bit cooler inside.

And not having turrets can be considered "correct" for this particular airframe, but having them could also be considered correct for a flying B-29, especially one that has the stated "Mission" that Doc does. They did track down a gentleman that had a complete "set" that they were considering, but cost was a factor in them not purchasing them.

Here's an idea: Buy the turrets and donate them to Doc, that should make you a substantial donor to whom they would listen about polishing the fuselage. It's a Win-Win!

C2j

marine air · **Posted:** Tue Aug 08, 2017 2:05 pm

I saw it not long after it had been moved into outside storage. At that time it had a perfect mirror finish but had only been outside several months. It sat outside for a few years. They will get it all done eventually with volunteer help. It is a daunting task. Their money has been on getting it airworthy and training flight crews.

Warbird Kid · **Posted:** Tue Aug 08, 2017 2:45 pm

I'd just like to see them replace the rear top observation dome. It looks crazed and brown.

b29flteng · **Posted:** Tue Aug 08, 2017 6:07 pm

The cockpit roof was painted white while it was in the military. The Doc folks painted as it was when it last flew in the airforce.

b29flteng · **Posted:** Tue Aug 08, 2017 6:09 pm

They have much more restoration work to do, little stuff. They made a huge step in getting it flying and now they need to fine tune the restoration.

Jesse C. · **Posted:** Wed Aug 09, 2017 8:44 am

Fifi has Turrets and she looks great. Doc does not and it still looks great! It is pretty cool to see two version of this bird. And I am sure they do not mind the weight savings of not having turrets on Doc.

As for the white roof, I am surprised it is not bigger and honestly, unless you are flying up there with Doc, who is going to see it on the ground? The drone photo folks, maybe? From the pics of Doc in China Lake, the white areas, both front and rear, appear to be much larger.

WIXerGreg · **Posted:** Wed Aug 09, 2017 11:13 am

I'm not sure where I saw it now but I swear there was a video a couple years ago where they were saying they had the turrets and would be installing them at some point after it was flying again.

CAPFlyer · **Posted:** Wed Aug 09, 2017 7:07 pm

Don't forget that the CAF routinely flies the B-24 and B-29 with windows and hatches open for airflow, but they're always the ones that either you don't see (on top) or are the ones you don't notice all the time (the FE window on the B-29).

While it's nice to have historical accuracy (and speaking of that, the lack of guns is probably more historically accurate for the vast majority of the B-29 fleet since all the ones that deployed to the Pacific ended up having most if not all turrets removed fairly early on in the bombing of Japan when Gen. LeMay changed to low-level bombing in 1944 and served most of the war and even into the Korean War without their turrets.

sandiego89 · **Joined:** Mon May 21, 2012 12:28 pm **Posts:** 1195

CAPFlyer wrote:

While it's nice to have historical accuracy (and speaking of that, the lack of guns is probably more historically accurate for the vast majority of the B-29 fleet since all the ones that deployed to the Pacific ended up having most if not all turrets removed fairly early on in the bombing of Japan when Gen. LeMay changed to low-level bombing in 1944 and served most of the war and even into the Korean War without their turrets.

CAP as a point of discussion it may be more correct to state that guns, sighting systems, ammo and some gunners were removed for some of the low level fire bombing raids, but I believe many of the actual turrets remained? The switch to low level was early 1945. Happy to be corrected, but I don't think actual turret removal was done much in the forward theatre bases such as Guam, Tinian and Saipan. There was a series of 300+ late production B-29-B's that left the factory without turrets, as did the Silver-plate aircraft of course.

Yes many stateside trainers and post war aircraft were with out turrets, but it may be that many/most served in the Pacific with turrets.

Also the guns, turrets, ammo and gunners returned for Korea.

phil65 · **Posted:** Wed Aug 30, 2017 11:04 am

I thought only the tail gun/cannon was installed during Korea.

Phil

sandiego89 · **Joined:** Mon May 21, 2012 12:28 pm **Posts:** 1195

phil65 wrote:

I thought only the tail gun/cannon was installed during Korea.

Phil

If I recall correctly with the return to medium altitudes for the B-29, and the MiG threat in Korea, that most of the B-29's used in the conventional attacks in Korea had all the top and bottom turrets/guns/gunners as well as the tail position. I'll try to pull out some references, but a google search does show pictures of B-29's in Korea with the fuselage turrets installed with guns mounted, and a few articles.

CAPFlyer · **Posted:** Wed Aug 30, 2017 3:46 pm

sandiego89 wrote:

CAP as a point of discussion it may be more correct to state that guns, sighting systems, ammo and some gunners were removed for some of the low level fire bombing raids, but I believe many of the actual turrets remained? The switch to low level was early 1945. Happy to be corrected, but I don't think actual turret removal was done much in the forward theatre bases such as Guam, Tinian and Saipan. There was a series of 300+ late production B-29-B's that left the factory without turrets, as did the Silver-plate aircraft of course.

Yes many stateside trainers and post war aircraft were with out turrets, but it may be that many/most served in the Pacific with turrets.

Also the guns, turrets, ammo and gunners returned for Korea.

My understanding is that the full turrets were removed and the holes patched over. As the turret was designed to be removed as a complete unit for servicing in the field, it would be more expedient to remove the whole thing and save several hundred pounds each as the guns and ammunition were only about 1/3 to 3/5 of the total weight of the turret from what I've read. I've found a few pics online of the aircraft with the turrets removed in theater, but it seems that late war B-29 operations in the Pacific are something that still isn't widely indexed on the WorldWideWeb.

menards · **Joined:** Wed Jan 04, 2012 12:46 pm **Posts:** 539

CAPFlyer wrote:

sandiego89 wrote:

CAP as a point of discussion it may be more correct to state that guns, sighting systems, ammo and some gunners were removed for some of the low level fire bombing raids, but I believe many of the actual turrets remained? The switch to low level was early 1945. Happy to be corrected, but I don't think actual turret removal was done much in the forward theatre bases such as Guam, Tinian and Saipan. There was a series of 300+ late production B-29-B's that left the factory without turrets, as did the Silver-plate aircraft of course.

Yes many stateside trainers and post war aircraft were with out turrets, but it may be that many/most served in the Pacific with turrets.

Also the guns, turrets, ammo and gunners returned for Korea.

My understanding is that the full turrets were removed and the holes patched over. As the turret was designed to be removed as a complete unit for servicing in the field, it would be more expedient to remove the whole thing and save several hundred pounds each as the guns and ammunition were only about 1/3 to 3/5 of the total weight of the turret from what I've read. I've found a few pics online of the aircraft with the turrets removed in theater, but it seems that late war B-29 operations in the Pacific are something that still isn't widely indexed on the WorldWideWeb.

There are a few sources that stated a stripped down B29 void of turrets, guns, ammo, armor plate, etc etc etc and flying lite could out climb and effectively out run a Zero. If this was true at the time...then why have them?

k5083 · **Posted:** Mon Apr 30, 2018 1:02 pm

Here are a couple of Pacific combat vet B-29s being used as stateside trainers in 1947 (at Keesler, I believe as ground instruction airplanes). Not trying to make a definitive statement on turrets vs. not, just a couple of data points.

Quote:

There are a few sources that stated a stripped down B29 void of turrets, guns, ammo, armor plate, etc etc etc and flying lite could out climb and effectively out run a Zero. If this was true at the time...then why have them?

I'm sure they could, but they weren't facing Zeros. The question is could they outrun a Ki-45, N1K2-J, Ki-61 or Ki-44. Not to mention several pre-production Japanese fighters that the U.S. couldn't count on not reaching operational status before the war would end.

August

Thomas_Mac · **Posted:** Wed Nov 07, 2018 3:59 pm

From the Doc Friends Facebook today

Warbird Information Exchange

Official B-29 Doc Restoration Thread

Who is online