B-17 forward guin positions

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?

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

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

"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

"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

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

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

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

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

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