Re: Boeing YB-40 and Reed variations
I have read these posts with a great deal of interest as the concept of the "convoy escort" bomber as it is referred to in many AAF documents is strange enough to appeal to my interest in the bizarre.
The concept of the heavily-armed escort bomber appears to have begun with the British who had asked for such aircraft when first notified about the B-29. By the time the U.S. got around to actually building such aircraft they had rejected daylight bombing and declared the escort bomber as basically nonsensical. They were to be proven correct in at least the latter assertion.
I have in my collection at least five variations and earlier iterations of a B-17 convoy escort predating the ultimate configuration of the XB and YB-40. None are similar to those drawings earlier in this string. In fairness, those are supposedly of Reed Project or similar experiments. The detailed drawings in my possession go from the odd to the "overloaded to the point of failing takeoff" due to the amount of turrets and guns placed in them, plus a number of turret types that were completely new to me and that I've yet to see mentioned in print.
Virtually every heavy bomber project of the early war had "convoy escort" versions at least on paper and I have these as well. The exception appears to be the B-29, but I DO have a B-29 night fighter version proposal that could have easily been used in this capacity. And yes, I'm serious. A B-29 night fighter.
One of the more important aspects of the growth of this concept is that there is a substantial amount of discussion about "convoy escorts" prior to the U.S.'s entry into the war. It is clear from the documents that despite any public utterances to the contrary, the AAF was quite concerned about the bombers' ability to reach the target and return without armed escort. This concern was obviously well-founded, but the story of fighter escort has been discussed with varying degrees of accuracy many times. In the end, there were pretty close to a dozen different "convoy escort" concepts floated around during WWII.
Originally, the B-40 was to have been powered by Allison V-1710s. However, the testing and modification process was taking so long that the AAF asked for a "quick and dirty" conversion to existing airframes that would do the job. When the XB-38 eventually appeared, it was found that the aircraft was substantially faster than the standard R-1820-equipped B-17 of the time, but the additional weight of the Allisons and their cooling systems reduced the range to an unacceptable amount. One can only imagine the impact on range had the aircraft been saddled with the additional turret and gun weight of the B-40 both coming and going to target.
As for the Reed Project, I have copies of the original papers on this aircraft. I've not studied them at length as I'm tied upon on other projects right now, but what I can say is that the aircraft that eventually became known to us as the Reed B-17 had undergone a number of earlier modifications as well. What we see is the final iteration, not the first and only. Once again, none of the photos in my collection show anything approximating the earlier drawings posted here.
All of the above information will appear in print, as well as some other tidbits you will hopefully find interesting. When I finally finish "Consolidated Mess, Vol II" I shall start on the book that will have the above. I am currently putting together the next chapter of Mess, II, which deals with ditching. As with what seems to be EVERYTHING about the B-24, this is much, much more involved than I could have imagined. I can say that the ditching of the B-24 was an issue that was never resolved.
I hope the above proves of interest. I will gladly answer questions, but I'm sure you can appreciate that I'm not going to give away the entire contents of the book here!
Keep 'em flying and thanks for dropping by.
AlanG
