B-17 forward guin positions

[zxcv]

It looks to me like the B-17 had more forward guns than people to fire them.
According to my count there were two men in the forward compartment
(bombadier and navigator).

Looking at pictures of the B-17F Memphis Belle I see four guns, each in a
separate loophole in the nose of the plane.

Looking at pictures of B-17G's I see 2 cheek guns and the chin turret.
Another picture shows the bombadier's area and he has a cheek gun position
and controls for the chin turret.

Did they switch to whatever gun had a target in range?

[Guy Alcala]

zxcv wrote:

> It looks to me like the B-17 had more forward guns than people to fire them.
> According to my count there were two men in the forward compartment
> (bombadier and navigator).
>
> Looking at pictures of the B-17F Memphis Belle I see four guns, each in a
> separate loophole in the nose of the plane.
>
> Looking at pictures of B-17G's I see 2 cheek guns and the chin turret.
> Another picture shows the bombadier's area and he has a cheek gun position
> and controls for the chin turret.
>
> Did they switch to whatever gun had a target in range?

Yes. The bombardier normally manned the nose gun(s) (flexible or later turret),
while the nav. manned the cheek gun(s), switching from side to side as
appropriate. Oh, and trying to keep his nav. log up to date, recording kill
claims, etc.

Guy

[M. H. Greaves]

If the a/c had a chin turret, the bombardier used this but wouldnt be able
to if he was on the bomb run, they were controlled via a yoke that could
swing out of the way when he needed to be concentating on the bombsight..
"Guy Alcala" > wrote in message
. ..
> zxcv wrote:
>
> > It looks to me like the B-17 had more forward guns than people to fire
them.
> > According to my count there were two men in the forward compartment
> > (bombadier and navigator).
> >
> > Looking at pictures of the B-17F Memphis Belle I see four guns, each in
a
> > separate loophole in the nose of the plane.
> >
> > Looking at pictures of B-17G's I see 2 cheek guns and the chin turret.
> > Another picture shows the bombadier's area and he has a cheek gun
position
> > and controls for the chin turret.
> >
> > Did they switch to whatever gun had a target in range?
>
> Yes. The bombardier normally manned the nose gun(s) (flexible or later
turret),
> while the nav. manned the cheek gun(s), switching from side to side as
> appropriate. Oh, and trying to keep his nav. log up to date, recording
kill
> claims, etc.
>
> Guy
>
>

[Guy Alcala]

"M. H. Greaves" wrote:

> If the a/c had a chin turret, the bombardier used this but wouldnt be able
> to if he was on the bomb run, they were controlled via a yoke that could
> swing out of the way when he needed to be concentating on the bombsight..

Sure, but on the bomb run the fighters tended to be noticeably absent, not
wishing to be shot down by their own flak. And most bombardiers from 1943 on
served as "Toggliers" (I've always thought this should be "toggeliers"),
dropping on the lead. There were typically only four Nordens in a whole heavy
bomber group formation: group lead, deputy lead, and the high and low squadron
leads (the last three in case the group lead a/c was shot down or otherwise
unable to do his job). By 1944, at least in the 8th, they often trained a
gunner as togglier to drop the bombs in the non-lead a/c, or occasionally the
nav would do so if no bombardier was aboard.

Guy

[Cub Driver]

> "Toggliers" (I've always thought this should be "toggeliers")

It's not in the dictionary, so I reckon you can spell it any way you
like!

I always assumed it came from the French, but the OED says of "toggle"
that its origin is unknown.

Sounds like a case for Emmanuel Gustin!


all the best -- Dan Ford
email: (requires authentication)

see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com
and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com

[Steve]

In article >,
Guy Alcala > wrote:
-
-served as "Toggliers" (I've always thought this should be "toggeliers"),
....

-Guy
-

I'll put in another plug for 'http://www.91stbombgroup.com' here.

In their 'Stories from the 91st' section, they use both 'togglier' and 'toggleer.'

It's a website well worth spending time on.

A little excerpt from 'Stories from the 91st', '35 Missions' - a contemporaneous log
from a navigator:

#26 November 5, 1944, target Frankfurt, Germany. PFF mashalling yards. Flight
time 6:37 hours, on oxygen 4:00. Bomb load: 6 - 1,000 S.A.P. Was very jittery on
this one. Flew spare and naturally we had to go down in the low squadron which was
a good thing. The high got hell shot out of them. Mickey operator was killed in
High Squadron. Flak was moderate to intense and accurate in spots. They were
shooting visual. We hit target. 26,000 feet. 35 below zero. Had several holes in
plane "Naturally!". I had to drop bombs today, toggleer went nuts.



Steve

[M. H. Greaves]

Thats interesting; you'd have thought that every bomber would need a Norden,
because what if by PURE chance the four lead bombers were shot down!?,
another bomber would have to take the lead and surely each bomber had a
responsibility to make sure the bombs were "in the pickle barrel"!? and not
hit any civilian targets such as shools, hospitals and the likes.
The R.A.F. did what was called area bombing, everything was hit in the
general vicinity; whereas the U.S.A.A.F., did daylight precision bombing,
aimed at hitting THE target and thats all.
How could this be done without a bombsight?
"Guy Alcala" > wrote in message
. ..
> "M. H. Greaves" wrote:
>
> > If the a/c had a chin turret, the bombardier used this but wouldnt be
able
> > to if he was on the bomb run, they were controlled via a yoke that could
> > swing out of the way when he needed to be concentating on the
bombsight..
>
> Sure, but on the bomb run the fighters tended to be noticeably absent, not
> wishing to be shot down by their own flak. And most bombardiers from 1943
on
> served as "Toggliers" (I've always thought this should be "toggeliers"),
> dropping on the lead. There were typically only four Nordens in a whole
heavy
> bomber group formation: group lead, deputy lead, and the high and low
squadron
> leads (the last three in case the group lead a/c was shot down or
otherwise
> unable to do his job). By 1944, at least in the 8th, they often trained a
> gunner as togglier to drop the bombs in the non-lead a/c, or occasionally
the
> nav would do so if no bombardier was aboard.
>
> Guy
>

[M. H. Greaves]

Its a word based on the bombardiers job; I.E. toggling the bombs out.
"Cub Driver" > wrote in message
...
>
> > "Toggliers" (I've always thought this should be "toggeliers")
>
> It's not in the dictionary, so I reckon you can spell it any way you
> like!
>
> I always assumed it came from the French, but the OED says of "toggle"
> that its origin is unknown.
>
> Sounds like a case for Emmanuel Gustin!
>
>
> all the best -- Dan Ford
> email: (requires authentication)
>
> see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com
> and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com

[M. H. Greaves]

Guy, can you provide a link to the website!??
"Steve" > wrote in message
...
>
> In article >,
> Guy Alcala > wrote:
> -
> -served as "Toggliers" (I've always thought this should be "toggeliers"),
> ....
>
> -Guy
> -
>
> I'll put in another plug for 'http://www.91stbombgroup.com' here.
>
> In their 'Stories from the 91st' section, they use both 'togglier' and
'toggleer.'
>
> It's a website well worth spending time on.
>
> A little excerpt from 'Stories from the 91st', '35 Missions' - a
contemporaneous log
> from a navigator:
>
> #26 November 5, 1944, target Frankfurt, Germany. PFF mashalling yards.
Flight
> time 6:37 hours, on oxygen 4:00. Bomb load: 6 - 1,000 S.A.P. Was very
jittery on
> this one. Flew spare and naturally we had to go down in the low squadron
which was
> a good thing. The high got hell shot out of them. Mickey operator was
killed in
> High Squadron. Flak was moderate to intense and accurate in spots. They
were
> shooting visual. We hit target. 26,000 feet. 35 below zero. Had several
holes in
> plane "Naturally!". I had to drop bombs today, toggleer went nuts.
>
>
>
> Steve

[Cub Driver]

>The R.A.F. did what was called area bombing, everything was hit in the
>general vicinity; whereas the U.S.A.A.F., did daylight precision bombing,
>aimed at hitting THE target and thats all.

That was the idea, certainly, but in the end the USAAF did about the
same as the RAF: it bombed cities, including the schools and hospitals
you mentioned. Take note of the March 1945 fire-bombing of Tokyo.

Shucks, sometimes the USAAF didn't even hit the right country. See
"The Day We Bombed Switzerland", for example. (That was B-24s, not
17s, to be sure :)

Precision was a promise in the 1930s that wasn't realized until the
1990s.

all the best -- Dan Ford
email: (requires authentication)

see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com
and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com

[Steve]

In article >,
M. H. Greaves > wrote:
-Guy, can you provide a link to the website!??
->
-> I'll put in another plug for 'http://www.91stbombgroup.com' here.
->
-> In their 'Stories from the 91st' section, they use both 'togglier' and
-'toggleer.'
->
-> It's a website well worth spending time on.
->

Did I screw up the formatting? I'll try it again:

http://www.91stbombgroup.com/

See if that works any better.

Steve

[Guy Alcala]

"M. H. Greaves" wrote:

> Thats interesting; you'd have thought that every bomber would need a Norden,
> because what if by PURE chance the four lead bombers were shot down!?,
> another bomber would have to take the lead and surely each bomber had a
> responsibility to make sure the bombs were "in the pickle barrel"!? and not
> hit any civilian targets such as shools, hospitals and the likes.

By early 1943, the 8th AF had gone over to the lead bombardier system,
bombardiers chosen for their accuracy who were (often) assigned to study certain
specific targets in advance. The biggest difficulty in accurate high altitude
bombing was in seeing and identifying the target. The 8th decided that bombing
by group (for smaller targets, by squadron) was the way to go, as it provided
better target coverage and best compensated for the inevitable errors, and they
found that four bombardiers with bombsights, widely spaced within the formation,
provided adequate redundancy. Offhand, I don't know of any missions where
everyone with a bombsight was shot down, but if it ever happened, most likely
that group would stick with another group in its wing and drop on their bombs (3
groups normally flew together in a combat wing until reaching the I.P. at which
point the groups spaced themselves into trail to bomb). There might also be a
pathfinder a/c, equipped with H2X, G-H, Micro-H, etc. in addition to the visual
bombardier lead a/c. After the first few groups had bombed, the target was
generally so covered by smoke that the target couldn't be seen in any case, so
we tried to pick multiple aim points (or multiple targets) to spread the bombs
around, and also to take advantage of the (predicted) winds so that the aim
points would be visibile. It often didn't work out that way.

>
> The R.A.F. did what was called area bombing, everything was hit in the
> general vicinity; whereas the U.S.A.A.F., did daylight precision bombing,
> aimed at hitting THE target and thats all.
> How could this be done without a bombsight?

The lead a/c had the bombsights, everyone else just toggled when they saw the
leader's bombs (or their smoke markers).

Guy

[M. H. Greaves]

yep, thets fine ta!
"Steve" > wrote in message
...
> In article >,
> M. H. Greaves > wrote:
> -Guy, can you provide a link to the website!??
> ->
> -> I'll put in another plug for 'http://www.91stbombgroup.com' here.
> ->
> -> In their 'Stories from the 91st' section, they use both 'togglier' and
> -'toggleer.'
> ->
> -> It's a website well worth spending time on.
> ->
>
> Did I screw up the formatting? I'll try it again:
>
> http://www.91stbombgroup.com/
>
> See if that works any better.
>
> Steve
>

[ArtKramr]

>Subject: Re: B-17 forward guin positions
>From: Guy Alcala

>> Thats interesting; you'd have thought that every bomber would need a
>Norden,
>> because what if by PURE chance the four lead bombers were shot down!?,

We put up 56 B-26's in every formation. Each had a Norden and behind each
Norden was a trained Bombardier-Navigator MOS 1035.


Arthur Kramer
344th BG 494th BS
England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany
Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer