WWII buffs and/or aviation buffs: Would a B-24 plane take a lot of musclepower to

[raccoon]

deal with difficult conditions? I'm listening to UNBROKEN and got the impression that it did.

[Lithos]

1. Are you saying muscle power to fly in a damaged state?

The B-24 was a difficult plane to fly in the best of conditions and required a skilled pilot and crew. Any damage to the engines or control surfaces created a very difficult plane to fly.

The B-17 was a much better plane to fly, though it did require the pilot to turn on auto-pilot when certain control surfaces were damaged as it was the only way to handle the continual and difficult demands to keep flying.

[GP6971]

2. All I can say is that father's friend, a B17 pilot during WWII

and had nothing good to say about the B24. I think it was more the rivalry between the different squadrons personnel than anything else.

The B17 did have more self defense then the B24 though.

[Lurks Often]

3. You'll have to define "difficult conditions"

but in general it was a more difficult plane to fly. The B-24 flew farther, faster and carried a bigger payload then the older B-17, which first flew 4 years before the B-24. While it was a more modern and better design, it wasn't particularly well liked by the crews assigned to it, the pilots because it was harder to fly and the reminder of the crew because it wasn't nearly as robust at the B-17, which was famous for it's ability to take battle damage and still bring the crews back to base. Additionally, everything I've read indicates that the B-17 was an easy, forgiving* plane to fly.

Some more information about the B-24: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consolidated_B-24_Liberator




*In aviation terms, a "forgiving" plane is one that will generally allow piloting errors without becoming uncontrollable, stalling or going into a spin. Some other notable planes that were considered "forgiving" were the Douglas DC-3/C-47, the Ford Tri-motor and the British Fairey Swordfish

[Throck]

4. Loved the book and did supplemental reading.

All B24s were not equal, some were lemons. Also, 100% cable control, no hydraulics. They were beasts. Lots of maiden flight crashes.

The book goes into great detail about B24s. Movie didn't have enough time to do the book justice.

[AngryAmish]

5. A friend of mine was a B 24 pilot

God rest you, Joe. He got 3 missions before VE day then had to fly stateside to get ready to invade Japan.

Every year in August the usual assholes around here talk about dropping the bomb. My friend Joe figured Japan was a suicide mission and every day when he went to Mass he kept Truman in his prayers.

[Pholus]

6. George McGovern flew B24's.

I would recommend Ambrose's "The Wild Blue." Excellent story, including a lot of guilt McGovern felt about a stray bomb at the end of the war -- had a happy ending at least.

I believe he made a joke that you could recognize a B-24 pilot because the controls were so difficult to even maintain that their arms would become much more muscular than the other pilots'.

[bpj62]

7. Production

Last edited Sun Apr 2, 2017, 10:30 PM - Edit history (1)

The B-24 was the most produced 4 engine bomber of WWII. Over 18,000 were produced vs the 12,000 for the B-17. The B-17 was a better defensively armoured bomber in terms of weapons,. It was a tough airframe and it brought many crews home. It also enjoyed the press coverage that was located in England. The 8th Airforce flew almost as many B-24 as B-17. The 15th which flew out of Africa and then Italy flew B-24 almost exclusively. It really comes down to pilot preference as to which airframe was really better. My best friends father was a navigator on a B-24 and it got him through 25 missions with the 15th. He loved the plane except for landing because you couldn't see the landing gear because it was behind the nose.