Military Review

Combat aircraft. "Liberator": challenging but effective

44
Today we have the Liberator, the most massive bomber of the Second World War. Released in an amount of 18 copies, it received its name "Liberator" ("Liberator") from the British, and later the Americans liked it, and eventually became the official name for all aircraft of this type.


Combat aircraft. "Liberator": challenging but effective

In general, this plane did not free anyone from anything, the only thing the B-24 could free from was itself from the bomb load. But the "Liberator" did it masterfully.


But - let's go to history.

It all began in June 1938, when the leadership of the army and fleet The United States came to the conclusion that it needed a new heavy bomber, superior in flight performance to the B-17 Flying Fortress.

The development was undertaken by the Consolidated firm with the chief designer A. Ladden. The work on the Model 32 project turned out to be very original. The fuselage was made oval and very high. The bombs were suspended vertically in two compartments: front and rear.

A bomb load of 3630 kg was envisaged - four bombs at 908 kg, or eight at 454 kg, or 12 at 227 kg, or 20 at 45 kg.

An innovation was the new design of the bomb bay doors. There were no doors in the traditional sense, instead of them there were metal curtains that rolled into the compartment and did not create additional aerodynamic resistance when opening the bomb bay.

The chassis was three-pillar, with a nose pillar. The side landing gears were not retracted into the engine nacelles, as usual, but fit into the wing, like in fighters.


The armament for the project consisted of six 7,62 mm machine guns. One course, the rest - in the hatches above, below and on the sides, and one in the tail blister.

And the main difference between the new bomber is the Davis wing. The new wing, invented by engineer David Davis, was a breakthrough. The aerodynamic profile of this wing had a lower drag coefficient than most modern designs. This created significant lift at relatively low angles of attack and gave the aircraft better airspeed characteristics.

The most piquant thing in history is that the first B-24s were not planned for delivery to the US Army. The first orders came from overseas, from France and the UK. France, however, did not have time to receive its planes, since the war was over for it. And the French orders passed to the British. And the British received about 160 more from the French order for their planes. These were mainly reconnaissance bombers.

In the Royal Air Force, the planes received the big name "Liberators", that is, "Liberators".


In order to provide aircraft for everyone, American industrialists had to create a whole conglomerate. Douglas and Ford joined Consolidated and began helping with the release of aircraft parts and components. And in January 1942, the North American company joined the triumvirate, which also mastered the full assembly cycle of the B-24 at its factories. In general, because of this, even difficulties arose in clearly identifying aircraft modifications, in particular, where and by whom the aircraft was manufactured.

And the first serial version of the B-24 was the "Liberator", manufactured for export. It happened in the fall of 1940, and in December the first six aircraft were taken over by the Royal Air Force.

The first were followed by the rest, and as a result, the B-24A firmly received a residence permit in the Royal Air Force. Basically, these aircraft were manufactured as a complete set of submarine hunters.

The armament consisted of six 7,69-mm machine guns: one in the nose, two in the rear, one at the lower hatch point and two in the side hatches. The offensive armament consisted of a container with 2-4 20mm Hispano-Suiza cannons, and depth charges were installed in the rear bomb bay. The front bomb bay was occupied by a radar, the antennas of which were placed on the wings and in the bow.

In the summer of 1941, the first eight B-24As entered the American Air Force. Two cars from this batch were brought to Moscow in September 1941 by an American delegation led by Harriman to discuss Lend-Lease issues.

In August of the same year, the American military took over eight B-24A. They were used as transport aircraft.


In the meantime, the UK began to work hard to modernize the aircraft. The modified aircraft was named "Liberator II".

The differences were that the fuselage was lengthened by almost a meter, more precisely, by 0,9 m, by making an insert in front of the cockpit. The resulting volume was gradually filled with various onboard equipment, so the step turned out to be more than useful. The most interesting thing is that initially it was a purely cosmetic move that did not affect anything. But later, it brought a certain amount of usable space.

Further, two hydraulically powered Bolton-Paul turrets were delivered to the aircraft. Each turret carried four 7,92 mm machine guns. In addition to these machine guns, the aircraft was armed with coaxial 7,92-mm machine guns in the onboard installations and a single one in the lower hatch installation. A total of 13 machine guns.

The turrets have proven to be very useful equipment, greatly facilitating the work of shooters at high speeds.

In addition, all fuel tanks and fuel lines were sealed.

The first aircraft of this modification was taken over by Winston Churchill himself, who flew the Liberator until 1945. Then the prime minister moved to the York from the Avro company.

With Liberators II, the British armed two squadrons at Bombardment and three at Coastal Command. The bombers began to be used in combat mode, first in the Middle East and then in Burma.


American B-24s made their first combat mission on January 16, 1942. Bombed Japanese airfields on the islands. The losses were solely due to insufficient training of the crews to fly at sea. Two B-24s lost their course, fell behind the group and disappeared. The crew of one found a week later on the island, near which they plopped down on the forced, the second, unfortunately, could not find.

Another 17 aircraft received radars and were sent to the Panama Canal Security Group, where they served as patrol anti-submarine aircraft throughout the war.


"Liberator" began its march through aviation parts. The plane "entered" as it is, as it turned out to have very decent flight characteristics, reliability and armament. In general, the prospect of flying to the enemy without any problems, dumping three tons of bombs on his head and leaving safe and sound - the crews could not help but like this. After all, a twenty-five-ton bomb carrier could be accelerated to almost 500 km / h, which at that time was very impressive. For a bomber to escape in time is about the same as "catching up" for a fighter. Eternal competition.

Well, if the fighter did catch up, weapons were used. And here, too, there was a lot of wonderful things.

In parallel with the development of the V-24 (from modification A to D), experiments with weapons began.

On the American version of the B-24C, almost like the British, a dorsal turret from Martin Model 250CE-3 with two Browning 12,7 mm machine guns was installed behind the cockpit. Ammunition 400 rounds per barrel. The British version of the turret was installed in the aft fuselage behind the wing.


The Americans preferred the rate of fire of the British Vickers 7,92 mm, the range and damage of the Browning 12,7 mm. To hit - hit it. And practice has shown that any engine could be choked by a bullet from a Browning very easily.

By the way, American engineers had to invent an automatic breaker, by analogy with a synchronizer, excluding a machine gun shot when the tail unit was in the turret fire sector.

In the tail section, an A-6 turret from Consolidated was installed with two 12,7 mm machine guns. Ammunition 825 rounds for two barrels. One machine gun was installed in the bow. Another 12,7 mm machine gun was installed movably under the fuselage in the direction of the tail section. Well, two machine guns in the side windows.


As a result, 8 machine guns 12,7 mm. Very, very confident.

Then it occurred to someone that they could save some money. And two turrets should be enough to defend the plane. The ventral and side machine guns were decided to be removed as unnecessary.

In order to improve the aerodynamics of the aircraft, they tried to install a retractable turret with a remote control from the Bendix company. The aiming system turned out to be very complex and often just disorientated the shooters. A total of 287 aircraft with such an installation were produced, after which it was abandoned.

And by that time the war was gaining momentum and the appearance of aircraft with reduced armament was received very well. "Zer gut!" - said the Germans, "Arigato!" the Japanese exclaimed. And the curve of losses from fighters in 1942 crept up very steeply.

First, they returned the machine gun under the fuselage. The guys on the Focke-Wulfs loved to attack the Liberator's defenseless belly from the “swing” ...

By the way, the same "Fokkers" were forced to strengthen the forward-facing weapons. Frontal attack on the FW.190 proved to be very effective. Therefore, in the bow they began to install three "Browning" at once. One simply did not have time to stuff the 190's hard forehead with the proper amount of lead and cut out the twin "star" of the engine.


And then the machine guns in the side windows were returned. True, the turrets were improved, now, if there was no need for machine guns, they could be removed and the windows closed.

In 1944, the under-fuselage machine gun was replaced by a Sperry turret with coaxial machine guns. A similar installation was installed on the B-17E. The installation could be rotated 360 degrees, and machine guns could rise in the range from 0 to 90 degrees.


It was in this configuration in terms of armament that the B-24 fought until the very end of the war. 11 large-caliber machine guns made the B-24 one of the most protected aircraft of that war in this regard.

Later modifications (B-24H) were equipped with the A-15 bow turret from Emerson Electric. Then a similar installation from Consolidated A-6A appeared.


The aircraft was one of the first in the United States to receive a normal C-1 autopilot. This was very useful both when flying to islands in the Pacific Ocean and over Europe.

On the modification of the B-24J, a radio semi-compass / directional receiver of coordinates RC-103 appeared. Aircraft with a receiver can be recognized in the photo by a horseshoe-shaped antenna at the top of the fuselage at the front.

At the same time, a thermal anti-icing system appeared on the aircraft. The system diverted hot air from the engines to the edges of the wings (flaps and ailerons) and the tail. This has proven to be more efficient than electrically heated systems as in previous versions.


It would be nice to bring heat into the nose turret, where air currents were constantly present, because of which the arrows were frankly freezing. But until the very end of the war, this problem could not be solved.

As all the modifications and changes were made, the B-24 was frankly "fat" and heavier. Considering that the engines remained the same, an increase in weight from 17 tons for the "A" version to 25 tons for the "D" version, and the maximum take-off weight of the "J" version (the most common) reached 32 tons, of course, all this could not but affect on flight performance.

Crashes of overloaded aircraft during takeoff have become commonplace. But if it was only about takeoff ... As the mass increased, the maximum and cruising speeds, range and climb rate dropped. It was noted that the plane became more sluggish, reacted worse to giving the rudders, and deteriorated stability in flight.

The wing loading has increased. This was used by the Germans, who, on the basis of the investigated downed Liberators, issued recommendations to the pilots to fire on the planes, which made the flight very problematic both due to damage to the wing mechanization and simply caused the plane to fall due to a control failure.

The ventral turret had a particularly negative effect on control. Management became so sluggish at altitude that there was no talk of effective maneuvering while avoiding fighter attacks.


It got to the point that the installation began to be massively abandoned, and in modernization centers in the United States, ball mounts were removed from aircraft intended for operation in the Pacific Ocean and a pair of machine guns were installed instead of them, firing, as before, through a hatch in the floor.

In the European theater of operations, this installation was said goodbye in the summer of 1944, when the Thunderbolt and Mustang fighters appeared in sufficient numbers, which significantly complicated the operations of the Luftwaffe aircraft.


In Europe, a number of B-24Js were equipped with H2X radar for blind bombing. The radar was installed in place of the dismantled turret. The experience of working with bombs based solely on radar data was found to be useful, but due to the fact that the technique was too imperfect, the experimental data was postponed for the future.

In general, the number of modifications of the B-24 for different operating conditions is simply amazing. There were reconnaissance aircraft, in the bomb compartments of which from 3 to 6 cameras were installed, there were leader aircraft for guiding groups of aircraft along the route, there were tankers for transporting fuel (C-109)

The fact that the B-24 was an anti-submarine, patrol and transport-assault aircraft is quite decent.


However, for all its merits, the B-24 by the end of the war turned out to be very overweight. The plane openly asked for more powerful engines, installation of 1400-1500 hp motors. could make life much easier for the crews, but alas. The war dictated its terms, and even the Americans could not solve this problem with honor.

The car turned out to be very difficult to drive, especially towards the end of the war. Taking off with a full bomb load was a problem. Leaving the wrecked car in the air was also very difficult. The car behaved very unstable, and at the slightest damage to the wings, it fell into a fall.

It turned out to be an interesting moment: in 1944-45, many pilots openly preferred the faster and more modern B-24, outdated in every sense, but more reliable B-17.


By the way, the fact that after the war the B-24 was massively decommissioned and sent for disassembly only testifies to the fact that the car clearly did not correspond to the moment. The history of other machines shows that individual models served for 15-20 years after the war. For the B-24, his career ended with the end of the war.

Only five aircraft have survived to this day.

However, this does not at all diminish the contribution to the victory over the enemy that the B-24 made throughout the war. It was a very difficult aircraft, but it was the workhorse of long-range aviation of the USA, Great Britain and a number of other countries, not inferior in anything to other representatives of this class of aircraft.


LTH B-24J

Wingspan, m: 33,53
Length, m: 19,56
Height, m: 5,49
Wing area, м2: 97,46

Weight, kg
- empty aircraft: 17 236
- normal takeoff: 25 401
- maximum take-off: 32 296

Engines: 4 х Pratt Whitney R-1830-65 with ТН General Electric B-22 х 1200 hp
Maximum speed, km / h: 483
Cruising speed, km / h: 346
Practical range, km: 2 736
Maximum rate of climb, m / min: 312
Practical ceiling, m: 8 534

Crew, prs: 10

Armament:
- 10-12 machine guns "Browning" 12,7 mm in the bow, upper, ventral and tail turrets and in the side windows.
- The maximum bomb load in bomb bays is 3 kg.
In the middle part of the wing there were shelves for the suspension of two 1 kg of bombs.
Maximum bomb load (together with external sling) during short-range flight is 5 kg (including on external sling). Normal bomb load 806 kg.
Author:
44 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Pavel57
    Pavel57 31 March 2021 18: 11
    +2
    Tupolev made the Tu-64 project with an eye on the B-24. And I had to copy the B-29.
    1. Viktor Sergeev
      Viktor Sergeev April 1 2021 08: 26
      0
      I wonder how he looked around, well, nothing to do. He clearly tried to make the plane equal to the B29 and looked exactly at the B29.
  2. svp67
    svp67 31 March 2021 18: 19
    +4
    It all began in June 1938, when the leadership of the US Army and Navy came to the conclusion that they needed a new heavy bomber, superior in flight performance to the B-17 Flying Fortress.
    Interestingly, the serial production of the B-17 began in July 1939 ...
  3. A.TOR
    A.TOR 31 March 2021 18: 21
    +9
    Released in an amount of about 19000 (nineteen thousand) pieces
  4. knn54
    knn54 31 March 2021 18: 29
    +5
    In addition to the complexity in management, it was difficult to manufacture and operate, there was a lot of aluminum. And the "champion" in the total number of crew members,
    A significant drawback was the weak armor of the bow, so some pilots took portable armor plates ...
    In Europe, they "debuted" in the summer of 1942 by bombing the oil fields in Ploiesti.
    1. Niko
      Niko 31 March 2021 18: 43
      0
      Quote: knn54
      In addition to the complexity in management, it was difficult to manufacture and operate, there was a lot of aluminum. And the "champion" in the total number of crew members,
      A significant drawback was the weak armor of the bow, so some pilots took portable armor plates ...
      In Europe, they "debuted" in the summer of 1942 by bombing the oil fields in Ploiesti.

      Well, if England is considered Europe, then it's still early on, based on the article hi
    2. Alf
      Alf 31 March 2021 22: 17
      +1
      Quote: knn54
      In Europe, they "debuted" in the summer of 1942 by bombing the oil fields in Ploiesti.

      And as part of the 15th Air Army, they worked in Italy.
  5. Victor Tsenin
    Victor Tsenin 31 March 2021 18: 30
    +7
    > In general, this plane did not free anyone from anything

    How is this, and the liberation of the Japanese from militarism, and the Nazis from Nazism, to which the wonderful machine greatly contributed?

    > And the curve of losses from fighters in 194 crept up very steeply.
    What year will it end up in? Somewhere there was information that the author does not read the comments, maybe it would be worth it.

    > "Davis wing"
    Is a laminar profile different?
    1. Mik13
      Mik13 31 March 2021 18: 49
      +5
      Quote: Victor Tsenin
      > "Davis wing"
      Is a laminar profile different?


      Yes. The Davis wing has a partial laminar flow. Moreover, this result was obtained by chance. And very high resistance at high speeds (which is typical for "thick" profiles).

      In Russian, there are very few materials about this wing in general ... They write that the "Davis wing" retained laminar flow up to 20-30% of the chord (for laminar airfoils this value is about 60%). it should be borne in mind that such a result was obtained because Davis sought primarily to create a wing with a large aspect ratio and, accordingly, with a short chord. It is because of the short chord that such an interesting result was obtained on the thick profile.
      1. Victor Tsenin
        Victor Tsenin 31 March 2021 18: 52
        0
        Thanks for the clarification. And the author reads the comments, the spiteful critics are lying.
    2. Vovk
      Vovk 31 March 2021 18: 58
      +7
      Later modifications (B-24H) were equipped with the A-15 bow turret from Emerson Electric. Then a similar installation from Consolidated A-6A appeared.

      Many will notice that sometimes on some B-24 series the nose turret is very similar to the tail turret.
      The history of her appearance there is very informative.
      The B-24 was vulnerable to attacks from the front, the British Air Force was the first to learn about this in aerial combat.
      And in violation of all the rules on modernization of aircraft equipment in a living, a number of British air units did the following ... they removed the tail from the decommissioned B-24 and put it in the nose with practically no major alterations.
      The idea turned out to be very successful and stuck.
    3. The comment was deleted.
  6. Mik13
    Mik13 31 March 2021 18: 38
    +8
    It was still PB4Y-2 Privateer - anti-submarine patrol aircraft based on the B-24. He flew from January 1945 to 1955.
    Outwardly, it differs in the tail unit.



    proof: http://www.airwar.ru/enc/sww2/pb4y2.html
  7. Niko
    Niko 31 March 2021 18: 44
    +6
    A very good car to start a war. A sky-high level for the vast majority of countries.
    1. Igoresha
      Igoresha 31 March 2021 20: 49
      +2
      Still not transcendental, the article was in science and life, Tupolev complained when copying the B-29 - the thickness of the sheet with four decimal places, and who can do this with us?
      1. Ryaruav
        Ryaruav 31 March 2021 21: 14
        +4
        this is the result of converting inches to metric units
      2. Alexey RA
        Alexey RA April 1 2021 12: 08
        +1
        Quote: Igoresha
        Tupolev complained when copying the B-29 - the thickness of the sheet with four decimal places, and who can do this with us?

        So this is an old joke.
        - Can you make a sheet with a thickness of 3,175 mm?
        - What do you mean, how can we maintain such accuracy, no-no-no, it's technically impossible!
        - And the sheet is 1/8 inch thick?
        - Yes, not a question, easily!
        smile
  8. Alf
    Alf 31 March 2021 19: 10
    +3
    Each turret carried four 7,92 mm machine guns. In addition to these machine guns, the plane was armed with coaxial 7,92-mm machine guns.

    Roman! Did the Americans buy cartridges for them from the Germans?
    Browning 12,7 mm.

    Maybe it's the Colts after all?
    1. Reserve buildbat
      Reserve buildbat 31 March 2021 20: 43
      +3
      Browning M-2 stood there. 12,7mm
      1. Alf
        Alf 31 March 2021 21: 11
        +2
        Quote: stock buildbat
        Browning M-2 stood there. 12,7mm

        You are right, wrong.
    2. Shiden
      Shiden 31 March 2021 23: 58
      0
      The British had 7,7mm caliber machine guns, but 7,92mm machine guns were also in service with a copy of the Cheskaya Zbroevka 53 on the Churchill and Cromwells. At the expense of aviation, 7,7mm was exactly put on airplanes.
      1. Alf
        Alf April 1 2021 21: 59
        +1
        Quote: Shiden
        The British had 7,7mm caliber machine guns, but 7,92mm machine guns were also in service with a copy of the Cheskaya Zbroevka 53 on the Churchill and Cromwells. At the expense of aviation, 7,7mm was exactly put on airplanes.

        Only a tank is not a plane.
  9. bandabas
    bandabas 31 March 2021 19: 52
    +5
    The article is not bad. Only the "boy's slogan" spoils.
    1. Alien From
      Alien From 31 March 2021 21: 26
      +3
      Personally, I have been very fond of Roman's airplane articles lately, especially photos. hi
  10. Taoist
    Taoist 31 March 2021 20: 38
    +4
    My father told me (he served right after the war and they had several of the restored Liberators in their regiment) that it was a very inconvenient vehicle for ground personnel. In order to hang the bombs, it had to either be lifted on lifts or rolled into a special pit ... The bomb carts simply did not fit under the belly ...
    And the pilots did not praise them:
    "The Liberator did not receive good reviews from our pilots. Besides, it was not called an" iron ", noting the low aerodynamic qualities of this aircraft. 24 had a forward alignment, so landing even on a serviceable aircraft was not easy: before leveling, after reducing the engine speed, bringing the Liberator to the landing angle required a lot of effort. Takeoff on the "Liberator" also had its own characteristics: the main landing gear, retracted into the wing niches, approaching the lower surface of the wing, worsened its flow; the wing bearing capacity fell and remained low until the landing gear took up space in the niches. that the only catastrophe that took place during the operation of American "captured" aircraft in Soviet air regiments occurred precisely on " Liberator ". On May 25, 1945, during the takeoff of Kotyrev's crew on the V-24 (serial number 42-94800), one engine of the aircraft failed. The heavy vehicle quickly lost speed. The pilot began to land from a straight line to a field located behind the airfield. Upon hitting the ground, the car broke in two. Those who were in the tail section were injured.

    The B-17, on the other hand, had a good reputation among the pilots as a "four-engine U-2" due to its excellent aerodynamic qualities and ease of control. "(C)
    1. LastPS
      LastPS April 2 2021 09: 41
      0
      In order to hang the bombs, it had to either be lifted on lifts or rolled into a special pit ... The bomb carts simply did not fit under the belly ...

      American specifics, they proceeded from their technical capabilities and infrastructure, or they simply did not take into account that such machines would be based far from American airfields, although, given the huge fuselage, they most likely understood everything, but there’s a design feature - nothing can be done.
  11. Ryaruav
    Ryaruav 31 March 2021 21: 17
    +2
    b-29 put an end to the life of other strategists of those times
  12. Holuay T.O
    Holuay T.O 31 March 2021 21: 19
    0
    Yes, they caused damage to Germany, even the best German pilots at that time could not do anything
    1. Alf
      Alf 31 March 2021 21: 35
      -1
      Quote: Holuay T.O.
      Yes, they caused damage to Germany, even the best German pilots at that time could not do anything

      The best pilots, the best tankers, the best infantrymen, excellent generals ... But the war, "for some reason," ended in Berlin.
  13. Catfish
    Catfish 31 March 2021 22: 20
    +4
    The "Liberators" operated quite successfully against the German submarines. Being on patrol at night and detecting a boat going on the surface with a radar, the pilots turned off the engines and glanced at low level, on the way a powerful searchlight was cut in, the engines turned on and bombs flew down. As a rule, this was enough for the boat.
    1. Catfish
      Catfish 31 March 2021 22: 25
      +4
      Well, and a couple more drawings. smile

    2. Igoresha
      Igoresha April 1 2021 00: 15
      0
      there was an interview on viasat history, grandfather-pilot English in his youth 4 German submarines drowned on such an airplane
    3. Hanurik
      Hanurik April 1 2021 11: 16
      +1
      Show me that pilot who, in his right mind, turns off his engines in flight.
      1. Catfish
        Catfish April 1 2021 15: 00
        +1
        To Samuel Morrison, please, "The Battle of the Atlantic Won."
  14. Fitter65
    Fitter65 April 1 2021 00: 17
    +2
    Therefore, in the bow they began to install three "Browning" at once. One simply did not have time to stuff the 190's hard forehead with the proper amount of lead and cut out the twin "star" of the engine.
    True, they looked in different directions, and they were served by one person, but Comrade. Skomorokhov knows better ...
  15. dgonni
    dgonni April 1 2021 00: 39
    +1
    The floor of the bomber is the engines. And the Americans still rested on the cooling air vents. And they did not lose!
    For the reliability of the air vent in case of damage cannot be compared with liquid ones.
    Here are some films, even amerovsky about the b-24 is not present.
    And about the b-17 shaft!
  16. ROSS_51
    ROSS_51 April 1 2021 00: 53
    +2
    Douglas and Ford joined "Consolidated" and began to help with the release of components and components for the aircraft. And in January 1942, the North American company joined the triumvirate, which also mastered the full assembly cycle of the B-24 at its factories.

    Actually, Ford was one of the largest manufacturers of B-24s. From their conveyor went 1 V-24 per hour and 360 per month.
    The ventral turret had a particularly negative effect on control. Management became so sluggish at altitude that there was no talk of effective maneuvering while avoiding fighter attacks.

    What does the turret have to do with it? She could only influence directional stability.
    At altitude, due to the thin air, the effectiveness of ailerons, elevators and rudders of any aircraft decreases, and even more so for a loaded bomber.
    And what effective maneuvering a bomber while evading attacks Does the author speak at all? The tactical technique was to go in a dense group to increase the density of machine gun fire of the entire group. The only maneuver when dodging the fire, which I have met with a mention - "snake", and even then, is not applicable in a dense formation.
    And yes .. Nothing is said about the main advantage of the B-24! He could carry a bomb load for 1700 miles, and in terms of the totality of characteristics - range, payload and speed exceeded the B-17.
    1. sedoj
      sedoj April 2 2021 15: 28
      0
      From their conveyor went 1 V-24 per hour and 360 per month.

      What is it like? With a five-day working week and an eight-hour working day, 360 doesn't work. Something in this data does not match.
      1. ROSS_51
        ROSS_51 April 2 2021 16: 22
        0
        Does not work? Plug in other numbers .. This is data from the historical record of the Ford factories. On foreign resources, the diagram of the B-24 assembly line is easily googled. And then there is a shift work schedule and 10 and 12 hour working days. Some developed countries still have 10 hours a day.
    2. Usher
      Usher 5 May 2021 18: 12
      -1
      Quote: ROSS_51
      Douglas and Ford joined "Consolidated" and began to help with the release of components and components for the aircraft. And in January 1942, the North American company joined the triumvirate, which also mastered the full assembly cycle of the B-24 at its factories.

      Actually, Ford was one of the largest manufacturers of B-24s. From their conveyor went 1 V-24 per hour and 360 per month.
      The ventral turret had a particularly negative effect on control. Management became so sluggish at altitude that there was no talk of effective maneuvering while avoiding fighter attacks.

      What does the turret have to do with it? She could only influence directional stability.
      At altitude, due to the thin air, the effectiveness of ailerons, elevators and rudders of any aircraft decreases, and even more so for a loaded bomber.
      And what effective maneuvering a bomber while evading attacks Does the author speak at all? The tactical technique was to go in a dense group to increase the density of machine gun fire of the entire group. The only maneuver when dodging the fire, which I have met with a mention - "snake", and even then, is not applicable in a dense formation.
      And yes .. Nothing is said about the main advantage of the B-24! He could carry a bomb load for 1700 miles, and in terms of the totality of characteristics - range, payload and speed exceeded the B-17.

      How is it 1 per hour and 360 per month? There are not 360 hours in a working month.
  17. Constanty
    Constanty April 1 2021 08: 36
    0
    In fact, the "Liberatory" were overloaded and sometimes there were accidents and disasters at the start, sometimes ending as spectacular as in the case of this B-24M-5-FO Liberator
    s / n 44-50468 - effect - 6 killed
  18. Constanty
    Constanty April 1 2021 09: 06
    0
    The article mentions that the Liberators were used to transport VIPs, as in the case of Churchill and Harriman. Also transported min. General Sikorsky, Liberaror MkII RAF AL523 crashed at the start in Giblartar. For my part, I can say - it's a pity that it's so late - he was a very negative person for Poland. Doubtful morally - and it has been since the days of the Legions during the First World War.

  19. Pavel57
    Pavel57 April 1 2021 11: 39
    0
    Quote: Victor Sergeev
    I wonder how he looked around, well, nothing to do. He clearly tried to make the plane equal to the B29 and looked exactly at the B29.

    In the course of the draft design of the aircraft in the general types brigade, headed by B.M.Kondorsky, several dozen layout options were considered. The range of options considered was very wide - from four-engine aircraft close to the B-24, B-17 and Me-264, to exotic layout solutions using a two-boom scheme.

    http://www.airwar.ru/enc/bomber/tu64.html
  20. TermNachTer
    TermNachTer April 1 2021 12: 20
    +1
    The article is certainly interesting. But, I'm embarrassed to ask what kind of caliber the British have - 7,92 mm.?))) I, by my naivety, always thought that they had 7,69 - mm.)))) 7,92 is for the Fritzes) ))
  21. NF68
    NF68 April 1 2021 16: 09
    0
    The Americans preferred the rate of fire of the British Vickers to the 7,92mm range and damage of the Browning 12,7mm.


    Not "damage", but efficiency / high efficiency. This is not a computer game. And, as it was already noted before me, the British did not have 7,92 mm machine guns, they had 7,62 mm. machine guns.