Talk:B-29 Superfortress

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	B-29 Superfortress is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article Milestones below to see why the nomination failed. For older candidates, please check the archive.
Article Milestones Date Process Result November 2, 2004 Featured article candidate Not promoted August 11, 2006 Featured article candidate Not promoted Current Status: Former featured article candidate

	This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
Additional information: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- 1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points are appropriately cited. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- 2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain major omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- 3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- 4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- 5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no Related task forces (general topics): Military aviation task force Military technology and engineering task force Weaponry task force Related task forces (nations and regions): United States military history task force Related task forces (periods and conflicts): World War II task force

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Aviation, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles related to aviation. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.	Aviation Portal
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale. (comments)
Additional information: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- 1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points are appropriately cited. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- 2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain major omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- 3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- 4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- 5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no Related WikiProjects and/or task forces: Aircraft WikiProject

Where is a mention of General Haywood Hansell?

Contents 1 Quibbles 2 Surviving airframes 3 Airworthy Aircraft 4 Who knows about the Convair B-36? 5 Chinese 6 Copyvio by Fiddlers Green? 7 Data table deletion explanation 8 Spelling Convention 9 Early history 10 Operational history 11 Pictures 12 Wunderwaffe 13 bibleography 14 Superfortress family 15 Mass burnings 16 I coulda swore...

[edit] Quibbles

The B-24 and B-17 pilot's manuals have extensive charts and graphs giving optimum power settings, how are the B-29 charts so much more extensive, as claimed?

The term "silverplate" was originally the codeword for "highest priority for raw materials". It was given generically to the B-29 project. I doubt if it was in any way specific to the A-bomb carrier conversion project.

There's very little or no mention of the B-29 successor, the B-50, basically a B-29 with R-4360 engines.

B-50 is a separate article. The comment about power charts comes from a cited source quoting an experienced pilot who operationally flew the aircraft you mentioned. I suspect he knows what he is talking about. - Emt147 ^Burninate! 23:19, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Surviving airframes

Why not subsume the "airworthy aircraft" section into a larger section mentioning (or listing) some or all (maybe not all) of the B-29s which survive instead?

A262 20:49, 18 November 2005 (UTC)

Excellent idea, feel free to go ahead with it. Ingoolemo ^talk 23:30, 18 November 2005 (UTC)

OK - I did that. Also modfified the B-29 users section - There was no mention of the US Navy or the Chinese / Russians and their Tu-4s but this now looks a little messy. A262 16:15, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Airworthy Aircraft

Under the heading Current Airworthy Aircraft, a contributor made the comment that the NMUSAF were, "considering restoring Bockscar to airworthy condition". I believe the author was in error in his report. I too have been through the Museum website and have found no evidence of factual support of this statement. The museum has made the comment referring to their efforts in preservation of the inventory as, "restoring airplanes and other items to an attractive and original appearance" or, post-restoration of the RB-47H as "factory fresh", but "airworthy condition" escapes me in my understanding of the museum's purpose. Can the author direct me to a NMUSAF source in order to substantiate his(her) comment? Inquiring minds would like to know... fliguy

[edit] Who knows about the Convair B-36?

"The B-29 was soon made obsolete by the development of the jet engine and was replaced in the early 1950s by the Convair B-58 "Hustler", the Boeing B-47 "Stratojet", and eventually, the Boeing B-52 "Stratofortress". "

I'm not sure of it. Who knows about the Convair B-36 ?

A:The Convair B-36 was a nuclear bomber with 6 engines that were facing rearward.

The operational airplanes generally had 6 piston engines and 4 turbojets.

[edit] Chinese

Don't the Chinese use a Soviet B-29 knockoff?

The Chinese use (or used) the Russian-built Tu4. There are versions with turboprop powerplants. I will look into it further and edit when necessary--Efrasnel 08:59, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Copyvio by Fiddlers Green?

This article's content is mostly a copy of the same as the content at http://www.fiddlersgreen.net/AC/aircraft/Boeing-B29/info/info.htm

Heh, look at the history of this page - you can see each paragraph being built incrementally. Most likely Fiddlers Green is using our content without crediting us. Stan 05:21, 22 Jul 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Data table deletion explanation

During the FAC discussion, a user pointed out that the data table is superfluous. I have to agree; it is also no longer the current format for specifications etc. If you disagree, insert the data table back in. There's nothing stopping you from doing so, and I won't revert it. •→Iñgólemo←• 02:07, 2004 Oct 26 (UTC)

Alright, you didn't go for it. But I think the data table should be deleted. It's no longer current format, and a good deal of its information is blank. •→Iñgólemo←• 02:30, 2004 Oct 26 (UTC)

[edit] Spelling Convention

As the B-29 was a US built bomber (though used worldwide), should this page be edited with US spelling styles instead of British styles? (defense/defence, caliber/calibre, analyze/analyse, etc.) or left mixed as is?

No article should ever be left mixed. Current convention is this: articles that are firmly American-related should use American spelling, articles that are firmly British-related should use British spelling, and all others should follow the spelling conventions used by the first author. This is mainly because we have been unable to come to a consensus regarding which form of spelling to use. →Iñgōlemo← ^talk 17:30, 2005 Feb 24 (UTC)

[edit] Early history

I've expanded and corrected the early history based on material from Superfortress by Curtis LeMay and Bill Yenne. According to Lemay and Yenne, the Model 322 was a failed project, and the B-29 derived indirectly from the Y1B-20. This is exactly the opposite of what our article said before, so if there are sources that disagree with LeMay and Yenne, we should do some additional research. Isomorphic 09:39, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I believe the article meant to say that it evolved from the Model 322. And it didn't discount indirect derivation from the Y1B-20, so I don't think we need more research. →Iñgōlemo← ^talk 20:18, 2005 Mar 26 (UTC)

As long as you're OK with the current version, we're fine. Isomorphic 06:00, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)

It's probably safe to say that my version was too ambiguous. Thus, we are indeed fine.

→Iñgōlemo← ^talk 21:15, 2005 Mar 27 (UTC)

[edit] Operational history

There is a problem with last sentence of the first paragraph. It states that "77 out of 98 planes launched from India bombing the railroad shops in Bangkok (5 B-29s were lost to non-battle causes)." 98-77 != 5. Were the other loses battle-related?

[edit] Pictures

For those who would like more pictures, you might be interested in Commons:B-29 Superfortress. Ingoolemo ^talk 21:00, 2005 August 8 (UTC)

[edit] Wunderwaffe

The article says that B-29 were only used in the Pacific. This is false, I remember reading that B-29 suffered losses over Germany because their remote controlled turrets were too slow to track the 880km/h fast Me-262 jetfighter, which could shred the B-29 with its strong 4x30mm cannon armament. 213.178.109.36 21:21, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

Incorrect. If you have read about this, it would only be in fiction. (it's possible that B-17 turrets were too slow to track them, however). —Matthew Brown (T:C) 21:52, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

One B-29 was sent to Europe in the spring of 1944 as a feint. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Bernard Biales (talk • contribs).

According to Wheeler^[1], the commander in charge of bombing Europe was initially pleased to see the new developments, but lost interest because of the expence and time needed to retool existing airfields for the B-29—he did not consider the retooling worth the trouble because his B-17s and B-24s were quite up to the task of bombing Europe. If you have a source that proves otherwise, however, feel free to share it. It's very easy to be in error when making negative categorical statements. Ingoolemo ^talk 02:14, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

1. ^ Wheeler, Keith (1982). Bombers over Japan. Virginia Beach, Virginia: Time-Life Books. ISBN 0809434296.

[edit] bibleography

What does "Superfortress! Accessed on January 15, 2006." mean?

[edit] Superfortress family

I was thinking, since there are so many derivatives of the basic B-29, perhaps we should do this with a template rather than a "Related" list? If so, should it be in "box" form? —Joseph/N328KF (Talk) 06:02, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

I absolutely agree. I meant to talk about this earlier. In my opinion, the Tu-4, C-97, and 377 are relevant examples of related developments. But the others are stretching it, especially the Russian planes—which weren't even designed by the same engineers—and the Super Guppy—developed more than twenty years later.

Here are some suggestions:

Derivatives of the B-29
XB-39 Superfortress XB-44 Superfortress B-50 Superfortress C-97 Stratofreighter Boeing 377 Pregnant Guppy Super Guppy Mini Guppy Tupolev Tu-4 Tupolev Tu-70 Tupolev Tu-75 Tupolev Tu-80 Tupolev Tu-85

Derivatives of the B-29 Superfortress
XB-39 Superfortress - XB-44 Superfortress - B-50 Superfortress - C-97 Stratofreighter - Boeing 377 - Pregnant Guppy - Super Guppy - Mini Guppy - Tupolev Tu-4 - Tupolev Tu-70 - Tupolev Tu-75 - Tupolev Tu-80 - Tupolev Tu-85

[edit] Mass burnings

When the B-29s devastated large Japanese cities and wrecked the Japanese industry, Japanese observers described the anguishing scenes as mass burnings. The term "mass burning" is used by some authors as an alternative term to holocaust.

So is the term "Pearl Harbor". - BillCJ 01:30, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] I coulda swore...

...the B-29's had 20mm cannon in the turrets. Can someone look this up? Deathbunny 00:46, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Another very good source for B-29 history is Kenneth P. Werrell, 'Blankets of Fire'-Smithsonian Press, 1996.The Initial B-29 had one 20mm cannon in the tail position along with 2 50 cal machine guns. This weapon was deleted in the field and on the subsequent B-29A to save weight and increase payload and range. At the same time, however, 2 more 50 cal guns were added to the top foward turret. The Japanese. like the Germans, perfered a frontal attack. Also, the much troubled remote gun system apparently never worked terribly well. Fortunately the Japanese Air Force was out of fuel and could never mount the resistance that the GAF could have in late 1944. Tha B-29 was never in combat against the Me-262. The jet fighter that forced the Superfortress into exclusively night operations was the Mig-15 over North Korea in 1951.G Gogel 14:25, 9 January 2007 (UTC)