(Please forgive the clumsy title) Years ago I read a story about a B-24 on a raid over Europe that was so badly shot up by Luftwaffe fighters that the crew lowered the undercarriage in the internationally recognised sign of surrender (is that true, BTW?) and were being escorted to land at a German base. However, when one of the B-24’s gunners regained consciousness and saw a German fighter close by he immediately opened up and shot it down, unaware that his own crew had already “surrendered.” According to the story the Luftwaffe were incensed by such “treachery” and from then on singled the B-24 unit out for special attention whenever they encountered it. The book insisted it really happened, though I’ve always taken it with a pinch of salt. Anyone hear of anything like this?
By: Bomberboy - 11th January 2012 at 13:45
Perhaps the Pilot was hit and fell onto the gear down control?
Hmmm, Unlikely I would say!
It’s location requires a bit of a forward ‘stretch’ to reach the toggle switch IIRC.
By: Bomberboy - 11th January 2012 at 13:45
Perhaps the Pilot was hit and fell onto the gear down control?
Hmmm, Unlikely I would say!
It’s location requires a bit of a forward ‘stretch’ to reach the toggle switch IIRC.
By: BSG-75 - 11th January 2012 at 11:16
I seem to remember a variation of this in one of the old Air Ace Picture Library comics.
I remember that, it was a Blenheim squadron in the Battle Of France I believe. “Himmel ! “
By: BSG-75 - 11th January 2012 at 11:16
I seem to remember a variation of this in one of the old Air Ace Picture Library comics.
I remember that, it was a Blenheim squadron in the Battle Of France I believe. “Himmel ! “
By: hampden98 - 11th January 2012 at 11:01
I sort of understand the logic of where you are coming from, except that most main legs etc are actually held in with locking mechanisms that have to be released before the hydraulics then lower the undercarriage.
However
The B-17 does not have hydraulically operated landing gear, or very much else for that matter, as they are all exclusively operated by electrically driven screw jacks.
The only hrdraulics on a Fort are the brakes and the engine cooling cowl flaps/gills.
Even the turrets are electrically operated with an electric motor driving 2 little self contained hydraulic (hydrostatic strictly speaking) power cubes.Hope this helps answer any curiosity.
Bomberboy
Perhaps the Pilot was hit and fell onto the gear down control?
By: hampden98 - 11th January 2012 at 11:01
I sort of understand the logic of where you are coming from, except that most main legs etc are actually held in with locking mechanisms that have to be released before the hydraulics then lower the undercarriage.
However
The B-17 does not have hydraulically operated landing gear, or very much else for that matter, as they are all exclusively operated by electrically driven screw jacks.
The only hrdraulics on a Fort are the brakes and the engine cooling cowl flaps/gills.
Even the turrets are electrically operated with an electric motor driving 2 little self contained hydraulic (hydrostatic strictly speaking) power cubes.Hope this helps answer any curiosity.
Bomberboy
Perhaps the Pilot was hit and fell onto the gear down control?
By: Jayce - 11th January 2012 at 00:25
I dimly recall that this story ended up as the basis of a Commando comic was suitably embellished and subsequently grew in the telling.
There may well be a grain of truth in there somewhere but I’d guess the story as it’s now know has little in common with the event that inspired it.
By: Jayce - 11th January 2012 at 00:25
I dimly recall that this story ended up as the basis of a Commando comic was suitably embellished and subsequently grew in the telling.
There may well be a grain of truth in there somewhere but I’d guess the story as it’s now know has little in common with the event that inspired it.
By: mantog - 10th January 2012 at 23:44
Thanks Bomberboy, it was a longshot, I know.
By: mantog - 10th January 2012 at 23:44
Thanks Bomberboy, it was a longshot, I know.
By: Bomberboy - 10th January 2012 at 23:25
Is it possible that repeated strikes from bullets/cannon shells could inflict damage to the hydraulics in such a way as to ‘blow’ one or both mainwheels down. In such a scenario, it would appear to the attacking fighter that the crew were surrending..whereas inside the bomber crew were doing nothing of the sort!
I sort of understand the logic of where you are coming from, except that most main legs etc are actually held in with locking mechanisms that have to be released before the hydraulics then lower the undercarriage.
However
The B-17 does not have hydraulically operated landing gear, or very much else for that matter, as they are all exclusively operated by electrically driven screw jacks.
The only hrdraulics on a Fort are the brakes and the engine cooling cowl flaps/gills.
Even the turrets are electrically operated with an electric motor driving 2 little self contained hydraulic (hydrostatic strictly speaking) power cubes.
Hope this helps answer any curiosity.
Bomberboy
By: Bomberboy - 10th January 2012 at 23:25
Is it possible that repeated strikes from bullets/cannon shells could inflict damage to the hydraulics in such a way as to ‘blow’ one or both mainwheels down. In such a scenario, it would appear to the attacking fighter that the crew were surrending..whereas inside the bomber crew were doing nothing of the sort!
I sort of understand the logic of where you are coming from, except that most main legs etc are actually held in with locking mechanisms that have to be released before the hydraulics then lower the undercarriage.
However
The B-17 does not have hydraulically operated landing gear, or very much else for that matter, as they are all exclusively operated by electrically driven screw jacks.
The only hrdraulics on a Fort are the brakes and the engine cooling cowl flaps/gills.
Even the turrets are electrically operated with an electric motor driving 2 little self contained hydraulic (hydrostatic strictly speaking) power cubes.
Hope this helps answer any curiosity.
Bomberboy
By: mantog - 10th January 2012 at 22:59
Is it possible that repeated strikes from bullets/cannon shells could inflict damage to the hydraulics in such a way as to ‘blow’ one or both mainwheels down. In such a scenario, it would appear to the attacking fighter that the crew were surrending..whereas inside the bomber crew were doing nothing of the sort!
By: mantog - 10th January 2012 at 22:59
Is it possible that repeated strikes from bullets/cannon shells could inflict damage to the hydraulics in such a way as to ‘blow’ one or both mainwheels down. In such a scenario, it would appear to the attacking fighter that the crew were surrending..whereas inside the bomber crew were doing nothing of the sort!
By: Bazza333 - 10th January 2012 at 22:53
I seem to remember a variation of this in one of the old Air Ace Picture Library comics.
By: Bazza333 - 10th January 2012 at 22:53
I seem to remember a variation of this in one of the old Air Ace Picture Library comics.
By: Bomberboy - 10th January 2012 at 22:52
That story is as mentioned generally connected to the 100th Bomb Group and why they got slaughtered at Munster with only one plane returning.
They also got badly hit on the 6th March 44 to Berlin, the first full on attack to the city that everyone got to, as opposed to the 4th March which was intended to be, but mostly due to weather I believe, meant it did not happen in that way.
That said, I don’t believe that the 100th suffered more heavily, relatively speaking, over the course of the war than any other group.
I don’t know that any particular crew and plane were ever connected to the lowering the wheels and then shooting bit.
Neither do I.
That it’s now connected to a B-24 Group speaks loudly to it being just a story that was created to explain a particular rough mission or set of missions.
Sounds perfectly plausible.
On the flip side, there is is a very famous piece of german gun camera footage, (ME 110 I believe), which is also used in the 1990 movie Memphis Belle, clearly shows the wheels being lowered on the Fort, but the german fighter just keeps on shooting. By the time he is now too close and peels off to the left, it is easy to see the wheels of the Fort are well on their way down.
Comments welcome
Bomberboy
By: Bomberboy - 10th January 2012 at 22:52
That story is as mentioned generally connected to the 100th Bomb Group and why they got slaughtered at Munster with only one plane returning.
They also got badly hit on the 6th March 44 to Berlin, the first full on attack to the city that everyone got to, as opposed to the 4th March which was intended to be, but mostly due to weather I believe, meant it did not happen in that way.
That said, I don’t believe that the 100th suffered more heavily, relatively speaking, over the course of the war than any other group.
I don’t know that any particular crew and plane were ever connected to the lowering the wheels and then shooting bit.
Neither do I.
That it’s now connected to a B-24 Group speaks loudly to it being just a story that was created to explain a particular rough mission or set of missions.
Sounds perfectly plausible.
On the flip side, there is is a very famous piece of german gun camera footage, (ME 110 I believe), which is also used in the 1990 movie Memphis Belle, clearly shows the wheels being lowered on the Fort, but the german fighter just keeps on shooting. By the time he is now too close and peels off to the left, it is easy to see the wheels of the Fort are well on their way down.
Comments welcome
Bomberboy
By: Dan Johnson - 10th January 2012 at 22:09
That story is as mentioned generally connected to the 100th Bomb Group and why they got slaughtered at Munster with only one plane returning.
I don’t know that any particular crew and plane were ever connected to the lowering the wheels and then shooting bit.
That it’s now connected to a B-24 Group speaks loudly to it being just a story that was created to explain a particular rough mission or set of missions.
By: Dan Johnson - 10th January 2012 at 22:09
That story is as mentioned generally connected to the 100th Bomb Group and why they got slaughtered at Munster with only one plane returning.
I don’t know that any particular crew and plane were ever connected to the lowering the wheels and then shooting bit.
That it’s now connected to a B-24 Group speaks loudly to it being just a story that was created to explain a particular rough mission or set of missions.
Sign In
January 10, 2012 at 8:20 pm