The B-17 did not perform poorly in the Pacific. The B-24 carried a heavier bomb load over longer ranges a bit faster than the B-17. On the other hand, the B-17 was easier to fly especially at altitude, could fly higher than the B-24, and was considered the more rugged than the B-24. The higher ceiling and ease of flying at higher altitudes meant the B-17 could fly tighter formations at higher altitudes which also made it better at self-defense against heavily defended European targets.
The picture below was taken on October 9, 1943. The column of smoke is above the FW-190 plant at Marienburg Germany. FW-190 production was just cut in half for several months by the highly successful bombing.
| Credit: Wikipedia |
B-24s in formation attacking Ploesti in Romania in 1944. The billowing smoke is from smokescreens used by the Germans and Romanians to screen the targets in the hope of preventing precision bombing.
| Credit: Wikipedia |
Only the 8th Air Force flying from the UK had more B-17s than B-24s.
As experience with both types grew in 1943, it simply made more sense to concentrate B-17 units in Europe leaving the B-24 the main US heavy bomber everywhere else. Even in Europe, B-24 units outnumbered B-17 units in the 15th Air Force flying from bases in Italy against targets in Europe.
How close to the ground could WW2 planes fly?
Gabby Gabreski, one of the top American fighter aces in Europe during World War II, had a unique way of flying. He was known for flying incredibly low to the ground, sometimes so low that... (Read Full)
Source: Charles Fletcher (Quora)
