Question for all the World War II experts on DU

Why did they use a B-29 instead of a P-38 to drop the A-bomb?

That's never been explained to me.

Not to mention range capabilities. Tinian is around 1500 miles from Hiroshima. The P-38 Lightning had a combat range of around 1300 miles. Lightnings were incapable of 3000 mile, round trip sorties.

Fat Man weighed 10,000 pounds and Little Boy weighed 8900 pounds. The P-38 was simply incapable of lifting such a large and heavy payload.

The B-29 was the only plane we had that could carry it.

Both bombs (there were two different types - different ignition systems) would have dragged a little fighter to the ground.

On edit,

here are mock-ups of the originals:

It would have been sitting on the bomb and not its own undercarriage.

After WWII, they started calling them fighters.

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_difference_between_pursuit_and_fighter_planes

What is the difference between pursuit and fighter planes?
In: Airplanes and Aircraft

fighter aircraft is general term for any aircraft that is designed to engage another aircraft in combat - pursuit aircraft are fighters designed for speed to be able intercept other aircraft such as intercepting bombers before they reach their target or "racing" to provide support - because pursuit aircraft have to be built to be faster than other aircraft, in the past they had to compromise agility and contolability for speed - modern jet fighters like the F-22 are capable of both speed and agility and therefore there is not enough difference to have a seperate catagory of pursuit fighter
the P-38 lightning of WWII was a very fast pursuit fighter, at least 2 are known to have hit the sound barrior in a dive (though they were destroyed doing so) but they were definitly not very agile with those twin props and booms - the peak of performance in pursuit fighters was the F-104 starfighter that was little more than a very large jet engine with short stubby wings and was incredibally fast - but it was very hard to control and fly and land - but it was designed to intercept russian bombers before they could reach the USA and it did that very well

The terms "pursuit" and "Fighter" were used by the US to describe aircraft types for the same role. The Army used the term "Pursuit", which was a term used by the british. The Navy used the term "Fighter" and the aircraft were assigned to fighter squadrons, known as VF (meaning Heavier-than-Air Fighter). Eventually, the Air Force adopted Fighter.

The designation was changed after WW2. What had been a P-51 during the Second World War was an F-51 when used in Korea.

The Navy & Marines used F.

http://www.brianberlin.net/uncle_wade_enola_gay.asp



"The Enola Gay is shown at Tinker Air Force Base in 1949 prior to being turned over to the Smithsonian Institution's air museum. In front of the B-29 are Capt. O.W. MacFarland, airdrome officer at Tinker; Col. P.W. Tibbetts, Pilot of the Enola Gay when it dropped the first atomic bomb; and Maj. Tom Ferebee, the bombardier on the historic flight over Hiroshima."

The B-29 was the biggest bomber we had at the time, and it could barely lift the A-bomb. And, while sometimes used for ground attack, the P-38 was not a bomber.

and it could never ever lift such a bomb into the air.

In fact the only planes capable of delivering it on our side were the American B-29 and the British Lancaster. The B-17, 24, 25, and 26 could not have carried much less a fighter like the P-38.

Moreover the range involved was quite far for the day (from Tinian to Japan) and beyond the range of any other allied bomber. (Remember they did have mid air refueling in those days either.)

Doug D.

Although this is the first I've heard of it

they did not have mid air refueling in those days - didn't happen until the Cold War - and your efforts to pick nits are preposterous.

Doug D.
Bachelor of Aerospace Engineering
Geogia Institute of Technology,

Private Pilot, Single Engine Land, FAA

How sloppy!

The thing had been done on an experimental basis, but it was not even close to operational status.

Wikipedia has an interesting article on it;

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

late 50s/early 60s - and 'Looking Glass' (which flew converted KC-135s).

Along with most of the other SAC aircraft - he was flying B-52s around the Dew Line when I was born. They radioed Thule with the news and Thule rang him up (since he was in the air) and let him know that he had another daughter . . . :)

you'll never forget it. I got the opportunity to do so back in 2004 on a "Bosslift" flight from Pensacola to McChord AFB.

If not, the P-38 could carry all up a 4,000lb pay load; empty a P-38 weighed 12,800lbs. "Little Boy" weighed 9,700lbs.

It's always math when talking weight ratio of payload to aircraft size to engine capacity.

Where have I heard that before?

Every now and then DU is at risk of descending down that slippery slope into decorum and interpersonal respect. Posters like you save us from that horrid fate.

This enabled it to reach high altitudes. It also had the capability of caring very heavy payloads over a long range. Most advanced aircraft of its time.

Of course, the crews had to be bundled up in heavy winter clothing (why do you think they had those fleece-lined bomber jackets?), and they had to be breathing from oxygen masks so they didn't pass out and die up there.

I'd say weight was the big determinant - the B-29 was the only aircraft capable of carrying the first nuclear weapons - they were incredibly heavy.

The P-38 was a much-smaller plane that couldn't tote a bomb the size and weight of the first A-bombs. And it might not have had the range -- I'm note sure.

So shouldn't that be flying from Japan to Japan?

Kind of like how, say, French Indochina was French territory, but it wasn't France.

(Also, "Japan" and "the Home Islands" are pretty much synonymous when you're talking WWII.)

But here's a :kick: anyway.

I'll bet you fall for that "Apollo landing" malarkey, too.

...when they bombed Pearl Harbor?:shrug:

They were modified for marine duty. Or "Marinated" as it was called back then.

:crazy:

It was the JAPANESE who bombed Pearl Harbor and they didn't use FW190's either.

:crazy:

:thumbsup:

They simply refueled the FW-190s in-flight

never operational but still.

http://www.damninteresting.com/the-only-nazi-aircraft-carrier

:banghead:

:rofl:

Harbor..."

:rofl:

You mention using a P-38, a fighter, to drop an atomic bomb.

Actually, the ability for a fighter aircraft to carry a nuclear payload was built right into aircraft design for years, starting in the 50's when nuclear payloads could be scaled down.

The "Century Series" of USAF fighter-bombers were oversized for fighters, but were intended to be used as nuclear strike aircraft. The whole concept of dogfighting was pretty much getting written off, so a small and nimble fighter wasn't considered crucial so long as it could drop the big one. A few were even built to carry nuclear air-to-air missles....so no need to be agile, when you can vaporize a few square miles of sky from far away.

Totally off the point, but kinda interesting what they were building and why.

the B-36. Had 6 pusher prop engines and 4 jet turbines. They were operational in the 50s. The cargo version(only 1 built)was the XC-99 which was based at Kelly AFB in the early 50s.

The triple deck C-124 was designed to haul B-36 engines worldwide. Had clamshell nose doors and internal ramps that lowered to the ground...and an elevator for palletized cargo aft toward the tail.

but there were reliability issues with that aircraft, so it became "Two turning, two burning, two smoking, two joking, and two engines not accounted for."

Clip from the movie "Strategic Air Command" with Jimmy Stewart;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3wvEzhyY9F4

Cool plane. Too early for its own good.

Most excellent!

Used to see that thing flying low over San Antonio (loc. of Kelly AFB) when I was a kid.

Turns out, it wasn't all that low -- just huge.

(wondering how many people will get THAT one...)

:P

We called it a "John Wayne" when I was in the Navy.

Good one!

google is my friend. :)

the smaller P-38, and the larger P-51.

I still have the one I got in Basic!

:P

The hardpoints of a P-38 are only rated for one ton.

And the bomb bays of the B-17 and B-24 were too small and the payloads too light. The B-17 was only dropping a couple of tons of bombs on Berlin per plane, per mission. 8 500-pound bombs.

You needed something big to carry the weight at the proper altitude and for the correct range.

:woohoo:

by my latest count. :hi:

fighter. The P-38 is most famous for shooting down the airplane Admiral Yamamoto was in.

yes, it is that simple