B-17+JB-2 Loon

I just found out B-17's carried these (I knew what a Loon is, but not a JB-2
:). Anyone know a book, or a website that depicts the arragement? I think
this is the beginning of a... :))))
thanx in advance!
tvrtko
Reply to
Tvrtko
Loading thread data ...
: I just found out B-17's carried these (I knew what a Loon is, but not a JB-2 : :). Anyone know a book, or a website that depicts the arragement? I think : this is the beginning of a... :))))
Carrying
formatting link
Launching
formatting link
Here's one being loaded onto the wing of a B-29
formatting link
(looks like the same cradle as in the above photos...)
Reply to
Ruediger LANDMANN
oh damn, another funny for the must-do list.
Reply to
e
See my post under 'B-17 was h111'
Reply to
Wayne Starick
Hello
there is a boom called Combat Legend B-17 Bomber
formatting link
I hope thats the site.
there is info on the bombs and how the B-17's carried them, and there is an artists color rendering of them mounted under the wings.
you might wanna try contacting Wright Patterson AFB Museum, they do have resources available, they helped me on shoo shoo shoo baby B-17
Take care
George
Reply to
George
Thanx for all the replies!
much appreciated :) Cheers, Tvrtko
Reply to
Tvrtko
Also try the Museum at Eglin AFB. That is where they were actually tested and where I got a few great photos from their files a few decades ago when I was in service. The remains of at least two launchers ramps and a number of wreaks were still out on Santa Rosa Island in the late '70s. However, the airframes, made mostly of steel, had mostly rusted away, leaving only the light alloy bits and the concrete warhead ballast. One wreak was particularly sad, the machine appears to have simply flopped on its back right at the end of the launch ramp. Most of the others were in a broad arc from the end of the launchers, apparently they must have been pretty hairy and unreliable, at least early on (?)
Reply to
steve gallacci
This is a very *interesting* picture. You see, I have an old book, _Occupational Handbook of the United States Air Force_, from about 1950, with two different photos from the same situation. In one picture, similar to the one referred above, but at a different angle, the entire tail of the B-29 is visible; the number is 521746. What makes it interesting is that, although the book's pictures are B&W, it is obvious from the color difference that the B-29 has black camouflaged underside, but also an *arctic* *high-visibility* red tail. What was _not_ clear from my pictures, but apparent in yours, is that the underside wing "USAF" marking is on a bare metal background. This would seem to indicate to me, something I've always wondered: did the arctic red take "precedence" over the black underside camouflage? yes it looks that way. This just begs for a very colourful B-29 model, I suppose.
The colors of the picture are very bad; I have assumed from the B&W pictures that the trim on the missile is insignia red as the arctic trim of the aircraft. Your picture seems to indicate a black or dark blue color, but OTOH, the arctic red is not very different, so which color would it be?
Does anyone out there have better pictures, or other ways of confirming my color guess?
Also, given that the aircraft is an AF B-29, wouldn't the missile have a USAF designation, rather than what I suppose is the Navy designation JB-2?
A last question: did B-29's used in Korea get the "USAF" marking redone in red on the underside when they were camouflaged black?
-Lasse
Reply to
Lasse Hillerøe Petersen
I have a very good version of the photo, and it looks line the trim on the missile is also red. The black belly is a left over from W.W.II that seems to have simply never been removed. I suspect that particular missile was a training shape, as it was fairly dinged and worn. Note too that many of the JB-2s did not get their nat'l insignia updated.
No, "JB-2" (Jet Bomb nr 2) is the USAF designation, the Navy nomenclature was some sort of alphabet soup reflecting manufacturer and mission in some arcane form.
I'm nor sure, but more likely the area inwhich the USAF would be placed was scrubbed clear of the black, not unlike the boarder around the nat'l insignia.
Reply to
steve gallacci

PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.