Doolittle Raiders

[Daver1963]

Did you know the P51 was designed by a German who worked for Messerschmitt. HS

According to this bio of Edgar Schmued on Wikipedia that is an urban legend.

An urban legend has grown up about Edgar Schmued, possibly related to his German origins, claiming he had once worked for Willy Messerschmitt and that the Mustang was heavily influenced by the Messerschmitt Bf 109. Neither claim is true but the urban legend persists.[4] Just as familiar is the notion that the abortive Curtiss XP-46 was the basis of the P-51 design.

 

[Daver1963]

The Memphis Belle is the B17 we saw a summer back.

Can you imagine climbing into that ball turret and hoping that it will not get damaged which would prevent the turret from aligning just right so you could climb back out?

When we were on the B17 it was just after sunrise and it was already hot and humid. It was miserable being in the plane aka oven. I would think in England it would not have been so bad but in the Pacific it most have been really bad. Course, I don't know how the laundry and engine crews worked in ships in the South Pacific...

Later,
Dan

I spent 4 summers (1989-92) in England. They ranged from mild to hot. Sometimes within the same week it could go from blustery cold to hot. I would think that even in mild temperatures with all the gear they had to wear to survive at altitude that on the ground it could be unbearable. I think I've read where the ball turret gunners didn't get into them until they had to. Why be in there with all the risk entailed on take-off or landing?
However, there were multiple cases of the ball turrets being stuck combined with landing gear that wouldn't come down.

 

[houstonscott]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edgar_Schmued

It is true. Always was.

HS

 

[aczlan]

Edgar Schmued - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
It is true. Always was.

Ummm, did you read the page you linked to?

An urban legend has grown up about Edgar Schmued, possibly related to his German origins, claiming he had once worked for Willy Messerschmitt and that the Mustang was heavily influenced by the Messerschmitt Bf 109. Neither claim is true but the urban legend persists.

Aaron Z

 

[bcp]

Not many remember that the Mustang has a British origin.
North American P-51 Mustang

"The Mustang was conceived, designed and built by North American Aviation (NAA) in response to a specification issued directly to NAA by the British Purchasing Commission. The prototype NA-73X airframe was rolled out on 9 September 1940, 102 days after the contract was signed and, with an engine installed, first flew on 26 October.

The Mustang was originally designed to use the Allison V-1710 engine, which had limited high-altitude performance. It was first flown operationally by the Royal Air Force (RAF) as a tactical-reconnaissance aircraft and fighter-bomber (Mustang Mk I)."



Or that there was a dive bomber version called the Apache.
North American A-36 Apache

"The North American A-36 Apache (listed in some sources as "Invader", but also called Mustang) was the ground-attack/dive bomber version of the North American P-51 Mustang, from which it could be distinguished by the presence of rectangular, slatted dive brakes above and below the wings. A total of 500 A-36 dive bombers served..."



Or that there was a twin engine version.
North American F-82 Twin Mustang

"The North American F-82 Twin Mustang was the last American piston-engine fighter ordered into production by the United States Air Force. Based on the P-51 Mustang..."



Or that Piper developed a turboprop version.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piper_PA-48_Enforcer

"It was the ultimate development of the original World War II North American P-51 Mustang."

Bruce

 

[turnkey4099]

Not many remember that the Mustang has a British origin.
North American P-51 Mustang

"The Mustang was conceived, designed and built by North American Aviation (NAA) in response to a specification issued directly to NAA by the British Purchasing Commission. The prototype NA-73X airframe was rolled out on 9 September 1940, 102 days after the contract was signed and, with an engine installed, first flew on 26 October.

The Mustang was originally designed to use the Allison V-1710 engine, which had limited high-altitude performance. It was first flown operationally by the Royal Air Force (RAF) as a tactical-reconnaissance aircraft and fighter-bomber (Mustang Mk I)."



Or that there was a dive bomber version called the Apache.
North American A-36 Apache

"The North American A-36 Apache (listed in some sources as "Invader", but also called Mustang) was the ground-attack/dive bomber version of the North American P-51 Mustang, from which it could be distinguished by the presence of rectangular, slatted dive brakes above and below the wings. A total of 500 A-36 dive bombers served..."



Or that there was a twin engine version.
North American F-82 Twin Mustang

"The North American F-82 Twin Mustang was the last American piston-engine fighter ordered into production by the United States Air Force. Based on the P-51 Mustang..."



Or that Piper developed a turboprop version.
Piper PA-48 Enforcer - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"It was the ultimate development of the original World War II North American P-51 Mustang."

Bruce

I'm surprised that no one mentioned that the original had a "camel back" (I think that was the term) until that was replaced with bubble canopy. That changed it from a "run of the mill" fighter into what I consider to be the most beautiful fighter plane of the war.

My vote for the ugliest bomber"? The Lancaster. No style at all.

The British were "not impressed" with the first batch of them due to the engine. the engine change made the difference.

Harry K
Harry K

 

[dmccarty]

I spent 4 summers (1989-92) in England. They ranged from mild to hot. Sometimes within the same week it could go from blustery cold to hot. I would think that even in mild temperatures with all the gear they had to wear to survive at altitude that on the ground it could be unbearable. I think I've read where the ball turret gunners didn't get into them until they had to. Why be in there with all the risk entailed on take-off or landing?
However, there were multiple cases of the ball turrets being stuck combined with landing gear that wouldn't come down.

Yes, I don't think the gunners did not get into the ball until they had too. I don't think anyone could have stayed locked into that one position for very long. I have read of the ball gunners who could not get out of the turret and the plane had to land on its belly. Not a good way to go having hours to ponder being crushed to death.

While England can get hot it is for a short time period unlike the Pacific and GA. I mention GA because the Eighth Air Force was formed in Savannah before heading to the UK. The day I was on the B17, I was wearing shorts and a cotton shirt, but it was so hot and humid I was drenched in sweat just walking around inside the aircraft. Those guys had to be miserable in their wool and leather flying suits. They cooked on the ground and froze in the air... The metal skin is just a wee bit thicker than aluminum foil which does not bode well for stopping flak, rockets, machine gun and cannon fire.

Having said that the B17 could really take a beating. Read about the most decorated flight crew in WWII in their B17 number 666, Wings of Valor II- Jay Zeamer and Joseph Sarnoski. A shorter write up is on Wikipedia, Old 666 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. I have always read history and used to read fiction but I gave up on fiction for the most part because reality is stranger than fiction. History is full of impossible events. If I wrote a fictional account about a pilot nobody wanted to fly with, who gathered a Black Sheep crew together, who then made an unflyable aircraft fly even though it was number 666, and that this plane and crew went on to do great things, who would believe the story?

If anyone is traveling on I95 through Savannah, the 8th Air Force museum is worth a stop or two. We have been twice and we still have some displays and movies I would like to see.

Later,
Dan

 

[zzvyb6]

4 surviving WWII Doolittle Raiders make final toast | Deseret News

 

[RobertN]

Have had interesting trips to USS Hornet CV-12, and saw the presentations on the Doolittle Raids from USS-Hornet CV-8. Was interesting talking to WWII vets who flew from USS-Hornet CV-12, Phil Sea, and Boxer. CV-12 is bigger than CV-8 was(even before CV-12's angle deck conversion). They flew F4U-1 bentwing Corsair(my favorite plane) in WWII and Korea, and later Cougar/Panther jets in Korea. They said it must have been something to launch the larger bombers from CV-8's straight deck.

I have always like the Mustang's. But if I had to be in a plane in that era, I think I would prefer the Corsair. By the end of the war it was as fast, and could take a lot more punishment. It was also more versatile, from fighter to attack. Production of Mustang, P38 etc ended as soon as WWII ended. F4U1 production continued thru the end of Korean War. It turned out to be the most versatile and hard hitting of the WWII fighters. Also took out a few Mig's. Interestingly, the last known combat with Corsairs or Mustangs was Mustang VS Corsair in "Football" war in Honduras, with Corsair shooting down Mustang.

 

[DieselnHooters]

4 surviving WWII Doolittle Raiders make final toast | Deseret News

Doolittle raiders...outstanding dignified representatives of the greatest generation

We remember

 

[RobertN]

From USS-Hornet site
The Doolittle Raid - WORLD WAR II - Aircraft Carrier USS Hornet Museum

 

[RobertN]

It is pretty amazing they got airborne and on their way. Heavy seas, first time bombers like this tried to take off on aircraft carrier, on original narrow straight deck carrier.

Those guys were amazing.

USS Hornet (CV-8) Revealed As Doolittle Raid Carrier (1945) - YouTube
Doolittle Raid Launch Footage (1942) - YouTube

 

[houstonscott]

Doolittle raiders...outstanding dignified representatives of the greatest generation We remember

Outstanding mission. Symbolic. Frankly the "greatest generation" stuff is overrated and is dubious at best. HS

 

[2LaneCruzer]

Outstanding mission. Symbolic.

Frankly the "greatest generation" stuff is overrated and is dubious at best.

HS

Why would you say that?

 

[houstonscott]

Why would you say that?

Because it's not true. It's the title of a book nothing more, and demeans others, in the military since, who really stepped up in greater numbers, and faced action longer and harder, most for years longer. HS

 

[2LaneCruzer]

Because it's not true. It's the title of a book nothing more, and demeans others, in the military since, who really stepped up in greater numbers, and faced action longer and harder, most for years longer. HS

Have you read the book? I have, and will state up front that it is misleading. The author used the book as a liberal vehicle to castigate America for the perceived inequities experienced by women and minorities during the war and in our armed services. While they may have been real to an extent, they pale in comparison to the inequities (read "crimes against humanity") others were suffering and against which we were fighting.

The term "Greatest Generation" is not just about how long and how hard they fought...it's about 50 million people who died worldwide as a direct result of the war. It's about evil and inhumanity on a scale that is almost inconceivable, perpetrated by modern governments that perverted science and history for their own evil purposes...but even more important, it's about how a whole generation in this country joined together with a resolve...an effort and determination that was apparent and pervasive in the cities, towns, governments, schools, movie theaters and kitchens of every home and institution in America. It was about sacrifice and hard work on an unimaginable scale...even children contributed through scrap and paper drives; buying war stamps at school, doing without new clothing, shoes, butter, sugar, etc. It was about housewives saving tin cans and cooking oil for the war effort and recycling their aluminum cookware; it was about doing without tires and gasoline and beef that we might win as a unified and determined nation.

It was about young men and women volunteering by the millions to join up for the effort; many to be deployed and never return again. It was about giving that extra effort on a national scale that has not been seen before or since. It was about working together with a unity and determination that was palpable; victory was on their minds constantly and relentlessly and they believed in their cause with an abiding faith in God and the unequivocal knowledge that we would prevail. That's what it was about.

 

[bubbacuse77]

Have you read the book? I have, and will state up front that it is misleading. The author used the book as a liberal vehicle to castigate America for the perceived inequities experienced by women and minorities during the war and in our armed services. While they may have been real to an extent, they pale in comparison to the inequities (read "crimes against humanity") others were suffering and against which we were fighting.

The term "Greatest Generation" is not just about how long and how hard they fought...it's about 50 million people who died worldwide as a direct result of the war. It's about evil and inhumanity on a scale that is almost inconceivable, perpetrated by modern governments that perverted science and history for their own evil purposes...but even more important, it's about how a whole generation in this country joined together with a resolve...an effort and determination that was apparent and pervasive in the cities, towns, governments, schools, movie theaters and kitchens of every home and institution in America. It was about sacrifice and hard work on an unimaginable scale...even children contributed through scrap and paper drives; buying war stamps at school, doing without new clothing, shoes, butter, sugar, etc. It was about housewives saving tin cans and cooking oil for the war effort and recycling their aluminum cookware; it was about doing without tires and gasoline and beef that we might win as a unified and determined nation.

It was about young men and women volunteering by the millions to join up for the effort; many to be deployed and never return again. It was about giving that extra effort on a national scale that has not been seen before or since. It was about working together with a unity and determination that was palpable; victory was on their minds constantly and relentlessly and they believed in their cause with an abiding faith in God and the unequivocal knowledge that we would prevail. That's what it was about.

Well said Sir

 

[dmccarty]

Is the WWII generation better/greater than say the Civil War generation? Which generation suffered more both in money and blood? It surely was not the WWII generation. Not even close. The US was never threatened with invasion in WWII though the general population may never have realized it. The Civil War generation was invaded with the destruction that usually follows such an operation. The number of US dead in the US Civil War is still more than the combined number of KIA of EVERY war the US has fought since then. The US population in the 1860's was much smaller than in the 1940s so almost everyone had a family member or friend killed or wounded in the Civil War.

What did the WWII generation suffer in comparison? Why are they somehow better than the Civil War generation? Are the vets from Viet Nam somehow less worthy of admiration than the WWII generation? Heck no. They fought a longer war against an enemy that was just as cruel as the Japanese and Germans. How about the Forgotten War aka Korean War vets? The US had DIVISIONS wiped out by the Communist Chinese in a war that soon reverted back to trench warfare.

Of course the greatest generation, was the generation that founded this country. How can the WWII generation even compare? The Revolutionary War generation were Traitors to the King. Rebels in those days where usually killed if they lost the war. The men who signed the Declaration of Independence signed their death warrants if they lost the war and they knew it. The people who supported the rebellion put their lives and property on the line against the worlds most power country, a country that was already occupying many of the major cities and enjoyed strong support in the colonies. The rebels were putting everything on the line against an enemy that could land a very power army at will along the coast. The founding generation fought and won, by the skin of their teeth, a long and hard war that put the country deeply in debt with no real way to pay off the debt. At the end of the war, the US had no military power, deep debt, no industry, a sorta unified people in a large undeveloped land mass with a non friendly colony to the north, a UK enemy that controlled the sea lanes which were needed to support the economy, and hostile natives to the west. Somehow, the Founding generation survived against great odds a created a great nation.

Yet, the WW II generation is The Greatest? Bovine Scat.

The WW II Generation did not have to make a decision to fight unlike previous generations. They were attacked and they responded. The Japanese gambled that the US would not fight and they lost the bet. ******, the strategic looser, declared war on the US. What was the WW II generation to do? NOT fight against a country that made a huge blunder by declaring us the enemy? Was the Greatest Generation NOT going to fight the Japanese? Pearl Harbor, and ******'s stupid decision, allowed the WW II Generation to unite, where as prior to 12/1941, the US was deeply divided over getting involved in China or Europe. The isolationist movement in the US was very strong prior to 12/1941, and of course the large German and Italian populations, did to want to go to war with their old home countries. Pearl Harbor and Hitlers declaration of war ended the isolationist movement and pro Axis support in the US. The WW II generation was attacked and responded. They did great things, hard things and they suffered, but they did not have to make the difficult decision TO fight. Other generations had to make the decision to fight and suffered far more than the WWII generation while doing more difficult and greater things.

The WWII Generation did what needed to be done but they were not The Greatest.

Later,
Dan

 

[houstonscott]

Some military facts;

In WWII 85% were drafted, forced if you will, to serve, only 15% volunteered.
In Vietnam it was reversed, with 85% volunteering and only 15% were drafted.
Today all 100% are volunteered.

In WWII the overall average for time in combat was 14 days. Remember also the ground campaign in Europe was 10 months. D-day to VE day.

Pilots in WWII only flew 25 missions then rotated home. My son, an Apache pilot flew 6-8hrs everyday 6 days a week with one day to switch from nights to days or back, for 15 months straight, then home for a few months and back to do it again for 12 months second tour.

In Vietnam if you went at all, you were only required to do one year, all other second tours were voluntary.

In Iraq, you served 15 months continuous in combat. Most but not all got one 15 days leave during that 15 months. Some served as many as seven 15 or 12 month tours.

Many Navy vessels operate one whole year at sea without pulling in anywhere, today. Those people normal work day is 6hrs on 6hrs off, for that whole year, no breaks.

I know who the greatest military generation is, and its today's.

HS

 

[DieselnHooters]

Interesting facts HS but you are looking at it in an America-centric way, WW2 involved more than America Germany and Japan, it was indeed a world war. Now look at it from a british perspective, or russian, chinese, canadian, australian or dozens of other countries and run some numbers again.