DOCSLIB.ORG

Boeing B-29 Superfortress

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Boeing B-29 Superfortress Boeing B-29 Superfortress Design and development Boeing began work on pressurized long-range bombers in 1938, in response to a United States Army Air Corps request. Boeing's design study for the Model 334 was a pressurized derivative of the Boeing B-17 Flying Fortress with nosewheel undercarriage. Although the Air Corps did not have money to pursue the design, Boeing continued development with its own funds as a private venture. The Air Corps issued a formal specification for a so-called "superbomber", capable of delivering 20,000 lb (9,100 kg) of bombs to a target 2,667 mi (4,290 km) away and capable of flying at a speed of 400 mph (640 km/h) in December 1939. It featured a pressurized cabin, all dual wheeled, tricycle landing gears, and a remote, electronic fire-control system that controlled four machine gun turrets. Boeing received an initial production order for 14 service test aircraft and 250 production bombers in May 1941, this being increased to 500 aircraft in January 1942. The first prototype made its maiden flight from Boeing Field, Seattle on 21 September 1942 Manufacturing the B-29 was a complex task. It involved four main-assembly factories: a pair of Boeing operated plants at Renton, Washington (Boeing Renton), and Wichita, Kansas (now Spirit AeroSystems), a Bell plant at Marietta, Georgia ("Bell-Atlanta"), and aMartin plant at Omaha, Nebraska ("Martin-Omaha" - Offutt Field). B-29 Superfortress General characteristics Crew: 11 (Pilot, Co-pilot, Bombardier, Flight Engineer, Navigator, Radio Operator, Radar Observer, Right Gunner, Left Gunner, Central Fire Control, Tail Gunner) Length: 99 ft 0 in (30.18 m) Wingspan: 141 ft 3 in (43.06 m) Height: 27 ft 9 in (8.45 m) Wing area: 1,736 sq ft (161.3 m²) Aspect ratio: 11.50:1 Empty weight: 74,500 lb (33,800 kg) Loaded weight: 120,000 lb (54,000 kg) Max. takeoff weight: 133,500 lb (60,560 kg) ; 135,000 lb plus combat load Powerplant: 4 × Wright R-3350 -23 and 23A Duplex-Cyclone turbosupercharged radial engines, 2,200 hp (1,640 kW) each Zero-lift drag coefficient: 0.0241 Drag area: 41.16 ft² (3.82 m²) Performance Maximum speed: 357 mph (310 knots, 574 km/h) Cruise speed: 220 mph (190 knots, 350 km/h) Stall speed: 105 mph (91 knots, 170 km/h) Range: 3,250 mi (2,820 nmi, 5,230 km) Ferry range: 5,600 mi (4,900 nmi, 9,000 km,[75]) Service ceiling: 31850 ft [24] (9,710 m) Rate of climb: 900 ft/min (4.6 m/s) Wing loading: 69.12 lb/sqft (337 kg/m²) Power/mass: 0.073 hp/lb (121 W/kg) Lift-to-drag ratio: 16.8 Armament Guns: eight or 10× .50 in (12.7 mm) Browning M2/ANs in remote-controlled turrets.[76] (omitted from Silverplate B-29s) 2× .50 BMG and 1× 20 mm M2 cannon in tail position (the cannon was later removed)[N 11] Bombs: 20,000 lb (9,000 kg) standard loadout The nose and the cockpit were pressurized, between fore and aft pressurized sections was a long tunnel over the two bomb bays so as not to interrupt pressurization during bombing. Crews could crawl back and forth between the fore and aft sections, with both areas and the tunnel pressurized. The bomb bays were not pressurized . Cockpit General Electric Central Fire Control system B-29 Guns The revolutionary General Electric Central Fire Control system on the B-29 directed four remotely controlled turrets armed with two .50 Browning M2 machine guns each. There were five interconnected sighting stations located in the nose and tail positions and three Plexiglas blisters in the central fuselag. Five General Electric analog computers (one dedicated to each sight) increased the weapons' accuracy by compensating for factors such as airspeed, lead, gravity, temperature and humidity. The computers also allowed a single gunner to operate two or more turrets (including tail guns) simultaneously. The gunner in the upper position acted as fire control officer, managing the distribution of turrets among the other gunners during combat The tail position initially had two .50 Browning machine guns and a single M2 20 mm cannon. Later aircraft had the 20 mm cannon removed,[30]and sometimes replaced by a third machine gun. Battle of Kansas The combined effects of the aircraft's highly advanced design, challenging requirements, and immense pressure for production, hurried development and caused setbacks. Changes to the production craft came so often and so fast that in early 1944, B-29s flew from the production lines directly to modification depots for extensive rebuilds to incorporate the latest changes. the B-29 project was unprecedented in Aviation history: from inception, to drawing board and mass production took three years, at a time when such a design should have taken five years just to become a prototype. Instead the engineering design, production and testing were being undertaken simultaneously, with all of the expected and unexpected problems. at the end of 1943, although almost 100 aircraft had been delivered, only 15 were airworthy. The basic design of the B-29 was sound, but significant shortcuts had been taken in the rush to get it into service, causing numerous defects and quality problems. o The biggest headaches were caused by the new R-3350 engines, which were constantly overheating. the uppermost five cylinders (every 25 hours of engine time) and the entire engines (every 75 hours). This problem was not fully cured until the aircraft was fitted with the more powerful Pratt & Whitney R-4360 "Wasp Major" in the B-29D/B-50 program, which arrived too late for World War II. o Other problems arose with defective pressure seals around the cockpit windows and sighting blisters, which needed precise fitting to avoid leakage. o Also causing problems were the sighting systems (four analog computers) for the remote controlled defensive armament, as well as the turrets themselves. o Then came electrical failures, caused by faulty Cannon plugs, which supplied connections throughout the ten miles (16 km) of wiring in each B-29. o Sub-standard glass in the cockpit transparencies meant the pilots had problems due to the distortion. o A minor "beef-up" was found to be needed on the wing structures o When General Arnold visited the Wichita Plant on 11 January 1944 he wanted 175 combat ready B-29s for the XX Bomber Command. As he was shown around the assembly lines he picked out the 175th fuselage section and signed it commenting: "This is the plane I want. I want it before the First of March. When he discovered two months later that no B-29s were actually combat ready, and that some had been sitting waiting for parts for two months or more Arnold was livid. o This prompted an intervention by General Hap Arnold to resolve the problem, with production personnel being sent from the factories to the modification centers to speed modification of sufficient aircraft to equip the first Bomb Groups in what became known as the "Battle of Kansas". This resulted in 150 aircraft being modified in the six weeks between 10 March and 15 April 1944. Specialist USAAF ground crew and technicians were called in from all over the country and 600 workers were pulled from the Wichita assembly lines. Subcontractors were told to stop all work on non-B-29 components until they had fulfilled their commitments o With the thermometer often reading below zero the 1,200 technicians who had gathered at the Wichita factory and the Modification Centers were being asked to modify each bomber inside and out. Firstly the wings needed to have some of the plating removed, the required "beef-ups" were added then each piece of skin riveted back in place. At the same time the cowl flaps, which controlled airflow through and around the troublesome engines, were being modified. Each piece of glass installed in the nose had to be pulled out and replaced with new distortion free panes. After that the pressurization had to be rechecked: 75 B-29s in total needed new glass. Internally every electrical plug had to be removed, disassembled and resoldered - a total of 586,000 connections in completed aircraft, plus those on the assembly lines and in wiring harnesses ready for installation. A lot of the work was being done in the middle of the frequent snow- storms: it was so cold crews could only work for 20 minutes at a time, with most of the jobs requiring delicate handling Operational history In September 1941, the Army Air Forces plans for war against Germany and Japan proposed basing the B-29 in Egypt for operations against Germany as British airbases were likely to be overcrowded. Air Force planning throughout 1942 and early 1943 continued to have the B-29 deployed initially against Germany, only transferring to the Pacific after the end of the war in Europe. By the end of 1943, however, plans had changed, partly due to production delays, and the B-29 was dedicated to the Pacific Theater. Operational history China A new plan implemented at the direction of President Franklin D. Roosevelt as a promise to China, called Operation Matterhorn, deployed the B-29 units to attack Japan from four forward bases in southern China, with five main bases in India, and to attack other targets in the region from China and India as needed. Keep China in the war holding down Japanese forces. The Twentieth Air Force was formed in April 1944 to oversee all B-29 operations.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • LESSON 3 Significant Aircraft of World War II
    LESSON 3 Significant Aircraft of World War II ORREST LEE “WOODY” VOSLER of Lyndonville, Quick Write New York, was a radio operator and gunner during F World War ll. He was the second enlisted member of the Army Air Forces to receive the Medal of Honor. Staff Sergeant Vosler was assigned to a bomb group Time and time again we read about heroic acts based in England. On 20 December 1943, fl ying on his accomplished by military fourth combat mission over Bremen, Germany, Vosler’s servicemen and women B-17 was hit by anti-aircraft fi re, severely damaging it during wartime. After reading the story about and forcing it out of formation. Staff Sergeant Vosler, name Vosler was severely wounded in his legs and thighs three things he did to help his crew survive, which by a mortar shell exploding in the radio compartment. earned him the Medal With the tail end of the aircraft destroyed and the tail of Honor. gunner wounded in critical condition, Vosler stepped up and manned the guns. Without a man on the rear guns, the aircraft would have been defenseless against German fi ghters attacking from that direction. Learn About While providing cover fi re from the tail gun, Vosler was • the development of struck in the chest and face. Metal shrapnel was lodged bombers during the war into both of his eyes, impairing his vision. Able only to • the development of see indistinct shapes and blurs, Vosler never left his post fi ghters during the war and continued to fi re.
    [Show full text]
  • Bendheim Senior Thesis Department of History, Columbia University
    INCENDIARY WARS: The Transformation of United States Air Force Bombing Policy in the WWII Pacific Theater Gilad Bendheim Senior Thesis Department of History, Columbia University Faculty Advisor: Professor Mark Mazower Second Reader: Professor Alan Brinkley INCENDIARY WARS 1 Note to the Reader: For the purposes of this essay, I have tried to adhere to a few conventions to make the reading easier. When referring specifically to a country’s aerial military organization, I capitalize the name Air Force. Otherwise, when simply discussing the concept in the abstract, I write it as the lower case air force. In accordance with military standards, I also capitalize the entire name of all code names for operations (OPERATION MATTERHORN or MATTERHORN). Air Force’s names are written out (Twentieth Air Force), the bomber commands are written in Roman numerals (XX Bomber Command, or simply XX), while combat groups are given Arabic numerals (305th Bomber Group). As the story shifts to the Mariana Islands, Twentieth Air Force and XXI Bomber Command are used interchangeably. Throughout, the acronyms USAAF and AAF are used to refer to the United States Army Air Force, while the abbreviation of Air Force as “AF” is used only in relation to a numbered Air Force (e.g. Eighth AF). Table of Contents: Introduction 3 Part I: The (Practical) Prophets 15 Part II: Early Operations Against Japan 43 Part III: The Road to MEETINGHOUSE 70 Appendix 107 Bibliography 108 INCENDIARY WARS 2 Introduction Curtis LeMay sat awake with his trademark cigar hanging loosely from his pursed ever-scowling lips (a symptom of his Bell’s Palsy, not his demeanor), with two things on his mind.
    [Show full text]
  • USSBS Kyushu Airplane Co., Report No. XV.Pdf
    ^ ^.^41LAU Given By U. S. SlIPT. OF DOCUMENTS 3^ THE UNITED STATES STRATEGIC BOMBING SURVEY Kyushu Airplane Company CORPORATION REPORT NO. XV (Airframes) uV Aircraft Division February 1947 \b THE UNITED STATES STRATEGIC BOMBING SURVEY Kyushu Airplane Company (Kyushu Hikoki K K) CORPORATION REPORT NO. XV (Airframes) Aircraft Division Dates of Survey: 13-15 November 1945 Date of Publication: February 1947 \A/, -, APfi 8 ,947 This report was written primarily for the use of the United States Stra- tegic Bombing Survey in the preparation of further reports of a more comprehensive nature. Any conclusions or opinions expressed in this report must be considered as limited to the specific material covered and as subject to further interpretation in the light of further studies conducted by the Survey. FOREWORD The United States Strategic Bombing Survey was establislied by the Secretary of War on 3 November 1944, pursuant to a directive from the late President Roosevelt. Its mission was to conduct an impartial and expert study of the effects of our aerial attack on Germany, to be used in connection with air attacks on Japan and to establish a basis for evaluating the importance and potentialities of air power as an instrument of military strategy for planning the future development of the United States armed forces and for determining future economic policies with respect to the national defense. A summary report and some 200 support- ing reports containing the findings of the Survey in Germany have been published. On 15 August 1945, President Truman requested that the Survey conduct a similar study of the effects of all types of air attack in the war against Japan, submitting reports in duplicate to the Secretary of War and to the Secretary of the Navy.
    [Show full text]
  • Air Force Next-Generation Bomber: Background and Issues for Congress
    Air Force Next-Generation Bomber: Background and Issues for Congress Jeremiah Gertler Specialist in Military Aviation December 22, 2009 Congressional Research Service 7-5700 www.crs.gov RL34406 CRS Report for Congress Prepared for Members and Committees of Congress Air Force Next-Generation Bomber: Background and Issues for Congress Summary As part of its proposed FY2010 defense budget, the Administration proposed deferring the start of a program to develop a next-generation bomber (NGB) for the Air Force, pending the completion of the 2010 Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) and associated Nuclear Posture Review (NPR), and in light of strategic arms control negotiations with Russia. The Administration’s proposed FY2010 budget requested no funding specifically identified in public budget documents as being for an NGB program. Prior to the submission of the FY2010 budget, the Air Force was conducting research and development work aimed at fielding a next-generation bomber by 2018. Although the proposed FY2010 defense budget proposed deferring the start of an NGB program, the Secretary of Defense and Air Force officials in 2009 have expressed support for the need to eventually start such a program. The Air Force’s FY2010 unfunded requirements list (URL)—a list of programs desired by the Air Force but not funded in the Air Force’s proposed FY2010 budget—includes a classified $140-million item that some press accounts have identified as being for continued work on a next-generation bomber. FY2010 defense authorization bill: The conference report (H.Rept. 111-288 of October 7, 2009) on the FY2010 defense authorization act (H.R.
    [Show full text]
  • Gene Banning Collection Donated to PAHF — Edward Trippe
    Spring 2021 www.panam.org NEWSLETTERCLI OF THEPP PAN AMER HISTORICAL FOUNDATION From The Chairman, Gene Banning Collection Donated to PAHF — Edward Trippe... Volunteers Help Retrieve, Catalogue and Preserve Historic Materials By Doug Miller his story goes back decades to a Ttime when a new Pan Am pilot named Gene Banning became fascinated with the growing empire of Pan Ameri- can World Airways. His interest soon grew into a studied pursuit and then a life-long passion. The COVID-19 virus has stressed us all, but as I write this letter, Spring and Fast forward decades, to the 1990’s. Now a return to normal life are both in sight. retired, Captain Banning had amassed I hope that our extended PAHF fam- a trove of historic Pan Am materials, ily and friends have survived and are not only his own but those of colleagues such as George Price, Bill Seeman and healthy. As we look ahead, and I know Capt. Banning, courtesy Univ. of Miami I speak for many, we will be happy others. The material in his collection Special Collections to turn the page and return to some was instrumental in helping Banning to author what has become one of the very from Mrs. Banning’s residence. The col- semblance of normalcy — whatever the lection was temporarily stored in a space ‘new norm’ is for each of us. best books ever written about “the world’s most experienced airline”: ‘The Airlines of at the AWARE store in Miami. Remembering Stephen Lyons, Pan American Since 1927’. (Paladwr Press; When it was time to downsize AWARE’s Producer for Across the Pacific Maclean, VA; 2000).
    [Show full text]
  • 4. FIRE AWAY Toward the End of World War II, the Allied Forces
    4. FIRE AWAY Toward the end of World War II, the Allied Forces shifted tactics from the relatively ineffective high-altitude precision bombing of military targets to low-altitude firebombing of urban areas. This new form of bombing involved dropping a combination of high-explosive bombs to break windows and incendiary bombs to start fires. Over the span of eleven days in the summer of 1943, British and American forces bombed Hamburg, Germany, multiple times in a campaign codenamed “Operation Gomorrah.” During the night of 27 July, a combination of weather conditions and concentrated bombing produced a firestorm that sucked all the oxygen out of the lower atmosphere, produced winds up to 150 mph and temperatures around 1,500ºF, and towered over 1,000 feet into the sky. No one had predicted a firestorm as a possible side-effect of the bombing. Over the course of Operation Gomorrah, the bombing and subsequent firestorm killed over 40,000 people, according an article about the operation in Air Force Magazine, 2007. The Allies conducted a similar campaign against Dresden, Germany, during three days in February 1945, while the German army was retreating from all fronts. Previous bombing raids had been conducted against the railroad classification yards in Dresden, but this campaign targeted the inner city. On the morning of 14 February, the bombing produced a firestorm similar to the one in Hamburg, with temperatures reaching 2,700ºF. German sources have the number of people killed ranging between 25,000 and 35,000. The actual number was probably closer to 45,000, according to an article called “Firebombing (Germany & Japan),” by Conrad C.
    [Show full text]
  • The Coastwatcher
    AEROSPACE CURRENT EVENTS Missions for Airships are Back America Semper vigilans! The US army has announced that it will deploy an Semper volans! airship designed to provide early warning of a cruise missile attack on the northeastern United States. The system will undergo a two year test to determine its efficacy. The Coastwatcher The new system is called Joint Land Attack Publication of the Thames River Composite Squadron Cruise Missile Defense Elevated Netted Sensor Connecticut Wing System (Jlens) and has cost $2.8 million to Civil Air Patrol develop the prototype. 300 Tower Rd., Groton, CT http://ct075.org . LtCol Stephen Rocketto, Editor [email protected] C/CMSgt Virginia Poe, Scribe C/SMSgt Michael Hollingsworth, Printer's Devil Lt David Meers & Maj Roy Bourque, Papparazis Vol. IX 9.01 07 January, 2015 Jlens and its Mobile Mooring Station During Testing in Utah. (Credit: US Army) SCHEDULE OF COMING EVENT A Jlens system consists of two tethered aerostats 06 JAN-TRCS Staff Meeting which are 243 long and filled with a mixture of 07 JAN-CTWG Commander's Call helium and air. The test aerostats will float at 13 JAN-TRCS Meeting-Commander’s Call 10,000 feet near the Army's Aberdeen Proving 20 JAN-TRCS Meeting Grounds in Maryland. This will provide coverage 21 JAN-CTWG Staff Call over a 340 mile circle. 27 JAN-TRCS Meeting 31 JAN-01 FEB-CLC@Bridgeport One aerostat carries the surveillance radar and the second vehicle bears a fire control radar. The information will be sent to the North American SQUADRON STAFF MEETINGS Air Defense Command which will compare it 06 January, 2015 with data received from the Federal Aviation Administration.
    [Show full text]
  • Location Indicators by Indicator
    ECCAIRS 4.2.6 Data Definition Standard Location Indicators by indicator The ECCAIRS 4 location indicators are based on ICAO's ADREP 2000 taxonomy. They have been organised at two hierarchical levels. 12 January 2006 Page 1 of 251 ECCAIRS 4 Location Indicators by Indicator Data Definition Standard OAAD OAAD : Amdar 1001 Afghanistan OAAK OAAK : Andkhoi 1002 Afghanistan OAAS OAAS : Asmar 1003 Afghanistan OABG OABG : Baghlan 1004 Afghanistan OABR OABR : Bamar 1005 Afghanistan OABN OABN : Bamyan 1006 Afghanistan OABK OABK : Bandkamalkhan 1007 Afghanistan OABD OABD : Behsood 1008 Afghanistan OABT OABT : Bost 1009 Afghanistan OACC OACC : Chakhcharan 1010 Afghanistan OACB OACB : Charburjak 1011 Afghanistan OADF OADF : Darra-I-Soof 1012 Afghanistan OADZ OADZ : Darwaz 1013 Afghanistan OADD OADD : Dawlatabad 1014 Afghanistan OAOO OAOO : Deshoo 1015 Afghanistan OADV OADV : Devar 1016 Afghanistan OARM OARM : Dilaram 1017 Afghanistan OAEM OAEM : Eshkashem 1018 Afghanistan OAFZ OAFZ : Faizabad 1019 Afghanistan OAFR OAFR : Farah 1020 Afghanistan OAGD OAGD : Gader 1021 Afghanistan OAGZ OAGZ : Gardez 1022 Afghanistan OAGS OAGS : Gasar 1023 Afghanistan OAGA OAGA : Ghaziabad 1024 Afghanistan OAGN OAGN : Ghazni 1025 Afghanistan OAGM OAGM : Ghelmeen 1026 Afghanistan OAGL OAGL : Gulistan 1027 Afghanistan OAHJ OAHJ : Hajigak 1028 Afghanistan OAHE OAHE : Hazrat eman 1029 Afghanistan OAHR OAHR : Herat 1030 Afghanistan OAEQ OAEQ : Islam qala 1031 Afghanistan OAJS OAJS : Jabul saraj 1032 Afghanistan OAJL OAJL : Jalalabad 1033 Afghanistan OAJW OAJW : Jawand 1034
    [Show full text]
  • Pan Am's Historic Contributions to Aircraft Cabin Design
    German Aerospace Society, Hamburg Branch Hamburg Aerospace Lecture Series Dieter Scholz Pan Am's Historic Contributions to Aircraft Cabin Design Based on a Lecture Given by Matthias C. Hühne on 2017-05-18 at Hamburg University of Applied Sciences 2017-11-30 2 Abstract The report summarizes groundbreaking aircraft cabin developments at Pan American World Airways (Pan Am). The founder and chief executive Juan Terry Trippe (1899-1981) estab- lished Pan Am as the world's first truly global airline. With Trippe's determination, foresight, and strategic brilliance the company accomplished many pioneering firsts – many also in air- craft cabin design. In 1933 Pan Am approached the industrial designer Norman Bel Geddes (1893-1958). The idea was to create the interior design of the Martin M-130 flying boat by a specialized design firm. Noise absorption was optimized. Fresh air was brought to an agreea- ble temperature before it was pumped into the aircraft. Adjustable curtains at the windows made it possible to regulate the amount of light in the compartments. A compact galley was designed. The cabin layout optimized seating comfort and facilitated conversion to the night setting. The pre-war interior design of the Boeing 314 flying boat featured modern contours and colors. Meals were still prepared before flight and kept warm in the plane's galley. The innovative post-war land based Boeing 377 Stratocruiser had a pressurized cabin. The cabin was not divided anymore into compartments. Seats were reclining. The galley was well equipped. The jet age started at Pan Am with the DC-8 and the B707.
    [Show full text]
  • The First Americans the 1941 US Codebreaking Mission to Bletchley Park
    United States Cryptologic History The First Americans The 1941 US Codebreaking Mission to Bletchley Park Special series | Volume 12 | 2016 Center for Cryptologic History David J. Sherman is Associate Director for Policy and Records at the National Security Agency. A graduate of Duke University, he holds a doctorate in Slavic Studies from Cornell University, where he taught for three years. He also is a graduate of the CAPSTONE General/Flag Officer Course at the National Defense University, the Intelligence Community Senior Leadership Program, and the Alexander S. Pushkin Institute of the Russian Language in Moscow. He has served as Associate Dean for Academic Programs at the National War College and while there taught courses on strategy, inter- national relations, and intelligence. Among his other government assignments include ones as NSA’s representative to the Office of the Secretary of Defense, as Director for Intelligence Programs at the National Security Council, and on the staff of the National Economic Council. This publication presents a historical perspective for informational and educational purposes, is the result of independent research, and does not necessarily reflect a position of NSA/CSS or any other US government entity. This publication is distributed free by the National Security Agency. If you would like additional copies, please email [email protected] or write to: Center for Cryptologic History National Security Agency 9800 Savage Road, Suite 6886 Fort George G. Meade, MD 20755 Cover: (Top) Navy Department building, with Washington Monument in center distance, 1918 or 1919; (bottom) Bletchley Park mansion, headquarters of UK codebreaking, 1939 UNITED STATES CRYPTOLOGIC HISTORY The First Americans The 1941 US Codebreaking Mission to Bletchley Park David Sherman National Security Agency Center for Cryptologic History 2016 Second Printing Contents Foreword ................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Air University Quarterly Review: Fall 1948 Volume II Number 2
    EDITORIAL STAFF F ir st Lie u t e n a n t Chauncey W. Meach am, Editor F ir st Lie u t e n a n t Edmond N. G ates, Assistant Editor PO LLY H. GRIFFIN, Editorial Secretary ED ITO RIAL BOARD C olonel Del ma r T. S piv ey, President COLONEL EDWARD BARBER C olonel M atthew K. Deich el ma n n C olonel J ames W. Chapman, J r . C olonel Lew is E. L yl e W ayne S. Y en a w ine, The Air University Librarian A lder M. J en kins, Educational Advisory Staff The vietvs expressed by authors tvhose contributions are published in this joum al do not necessarily coincide with, nor are they òjjicially those of the Departm ent of tbe A ir Force; of Headquarters United States Air Force; or of The Air University. Appropriate contributions of articles and correspondence relative to the subject of Air Power will be welcomed by the Editor. THE U nited States Air Force AIR UNIVERSITY QUARTERLY REVIEW Volume II _____________________ FALL 19-18____________________ Number 2 OPERATIONAL CONCEPTS FOR MODERN WAR...Col. Dale 0. Smith, USAF 3 AIR POWER AND FOREIGN POUCY.......... Lt. Col. John P. Healy, USAF 15 ELEMENTS OF ORGANIZATION............Lt. Col. William C. Cooper, USAF 27 AIR POWER AND PRINCIPIES OF WAR . Col. Frederick E. Calhoun, USAF 37 THE STRATEGIC STRIKING FORCE....... Lt. Col. Frank R. Pancake, USAF 48 RADIO COUNTER-MEASURES................... Col. Frederick L. Moore, USAF 57 EDITORIAL...................................Col. Matthew K. Deichelmann, USAF 67 AIR ANTHOLOGY........................................................ .................. 70 FOREIGN HORIZONS ...................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The 341St Missile Wing History
    341st Missile Wing History HISTORY OF THE 341 MISSILE WING World War II Bomb Group The 341st Missile Wing began as the 341st Bombardment Group (Medium) in the China-Burma- India (CBI) Theater of World War II. The Group was activated at Camp Malir in Karachi, India on 15 September 1942. The unit was one of the first bomber units in the CBI; being equipped with B-25 Mitchell medium bombers, which were shipped from the United States to Karachi. The aircraft were readied for flight operations by Air Technical Service Command at Karachi Air Depot and dispatched to Chakulia Airfield, now in Bangladesh in December. The group was formed with two bomb squadrons (11th, 22d) which had been attached to the 7th Bombardment Group since May 1942, and two newly activated squadrons (490th and 491st). The 11th Bomb Squadron was already in China, having flown combat missions with China Air Task Force since 1 July 1942. Planes and crews of the 22nd had been flying recon and tactical missions over north and central Burma, also since July. The group entered combat early in 1943 and operated chiefly against enemy transportation in central Burma until 1944. It bombed bridges, locomotives, railroad yards, and other targets to delay movement of supplies to the Japanese troops fighting in northern Burma. 341st Missile Wing History The 341st Bomb Group usually functioned as if it were two groups and for a time as three. Soon after its activation in September 1942, 341st Bomb Group Headquarters and three of its squadrons, the 22nd, 490th and 491st, were stationed and operating in India under direction of the Tenth Air Force, while the 11th squadron was stationed and operating in China under direction of the "China Air Task Force", which was later reorganized and reinforced to become the Fourteenth Air Force.
    [Show full text]