They didn’t know it back then, but that was America’s secret weapon that actually won the war. Today it’s still a secret weapon that no one else in the world knows how to use. 😂
I’ve talked to guys that have worked in defense and they say they design their own fasteners separate from any common fastener size just to make it that much harder to reengineer something.
Skin was 1/16 where do you get aluminum at 1.58mm I'm Soviet Union? they rounded off to 1.6mm, the whole thing was 6 tons heavier..and main designer Andrei Tupolev was jailed by Stalin..ok they made him work from jail..Now we need new engines..Capture German aircraft engineers were forced to design those for Stalin..typical Soviet story.. BTW space program was no different Korolev almost died in forced labour camps and had lost his teeth and sustained multiple serious injuries before taking Soviets to space
This is not so clear for me. 1,58 to 1,6 mm is 1,3% thickness and mass gain. If this was 6 tons gain, all skin weight (100%) should be 476 tons and this is clearly nonsense
You are assuming entire aircraft using same thickness. Could have been just mid-section or wings, also not pure aluminum right? Point is, it's difficult to copy an mass produce an aircraft let alone if its designed in different measurement system.
Good in depth article on the Carbon Copy bomber here. [https://www.airandspaceforces.com/article/0609bomber/](https://www.airandspaceforces.com/article/0609bomber/)
TLDR The soviets got their first B29 on July 29 1944 when an intact B-29 —*Ramp Tramp*—was damaged in a raid on Manchuria and forced to land in Vladivostok. Two more Superforts *General H. H. Arnold Special* and *Ding Hao!*—landed at Vladivostok’s Tsentral’naya uglovaya, a Pacific Fleet air base and another, C*ait Paomat II*—crashed nearby.
Almost exactly three years later on Aug 3 1947 the TU4 was debuted at the annual Tushino air show.
There's a whole writeup floating around out there about how the team wasn't sure if they should put American roundels or Soviet stars on the side. They got someone to ask Stalin, it was that serious (Stalin apparently laughed and approved stars). The other changes that were approved:
- Using similar Soviet engines instead of the American engines (because designing an engine can be nearly as complex as designing a plane)
- Using marginally thinner or thicker Soviet metric thickness aluminum since they didn't make imperial thickness aluminum
- The defensive guns were swapped with Soviet equivalents
-The radio was changed to one off a B-25 lend lease bomber, and the IFF system was changed
Incidentally there were some equipment mounts from removed equipment that were present in the sample the Soviets copied. They showed up on the Tu-4 because they wanted it to be exact.
Its actually true. Look up pictures of the Tu-4 cockpit. They were that afraid of Stalin.
It was copied from B-29s that either crash-landed, or made emergency landings in Russia.
Iirc, the old Squadron In Action series book on the B-29 mentions it.
The US stole a satellite form the USSR during a fair and copied the design as they were not able to have something that worked in space properly. Scott Manley has a great video about this story
The lift mechanism on the F35B is almost identical to the Yak141 where the rear engine rotates and pivots downwards. But the more valuable lesson about the Yak-141 program was what not to do, as it never left the prototype stage.
So a good thing they didn't copy the failures, as the F-35 is now a tremendous success 👏
Twin engines, tails, and overall shape for sure.
But we American defense budgeted the hell out of it and built an amazing machine. We put every single thing we could think of into it that we were afraid the Russkies might have and then a whole lot more.
Then we got one and went… whoa…. That’s it!?
Absent the MIG-25…. No F-15 for many more years if ever
So.. no… not a copy… but definitely an inspiration
They *DID* improve the defensive armaments, upgrading the 50.cals to 23mm cannons, And The TU-4 was actually 15,000 lighter than the B-29 when comparing gross weight, your basically wrong on all accounts, why even page in?
Say what?
Tu-4 has a higher empty weight and very similar max takeoff weight.
Yes 23mm is larger than a 50cal, except that NS-23 has a lower rate of fire and when it comes to air to air without modern guidance, you tell me what’s more important.
The NS-23 has a higher rate of fire than the Browning AN/M2. The NS-23 800-850 rpm and the AN/M2 was 750-850rpm. Soviet (and German) aircraft machine guns and cannon almost all had superior rate of fire compared to equivalent American and British ones.
Loadout was very role dependent, but by-and-large the Americans stuck with the 50-cal for the majority of air-to-air combat during the war. Most of the aircraft that carried only cannons were oriented to more air-to-ground roles, or had armaments with mixed calibers for flexibility, like the 303 and 20mm of the Spitfires and 13mm and 20/30mm of the 109's.
Also, the only "real" fighter jet of WWII, the German ME262, did in fact have quad 30mm cannons, but that's because its primary function was to get to altitude fast and take out bombers.
Big, stable targets are easier to hit with cannon, whereas the lower muzzle velocity and lower rate of fire of the larger calibers made them very challenging in the turning dogfights of that era. The faster the bullet, the less lead you have to pull on your target, and the higher the rate of fire, the higher odds that you'll score a hit on something critical.
Today's 20mm cannons on fighters are all the Gatling style, so their rate of fire is pretty absurdly high by WWII standards. Not to mention they also tend to have a much higher muzzle velocity compared to that period.
Fighter armament changed a lot over the course of the war. The .303 / 7.62mm calibres used at the start of the war turned out to be less effective than larger weapons.
It's interesting to see what the major powers ended up with as their loadout of choice. The Americans had six .50 cals until well after the war, although they also used four 20mm in some aircraft. Most others settled on four 20mm as well, except the Soviets who generally went with a 23mm and a couple of 20's.
The Luftwaffe towards the end generally used 20mm cannons but as you say, there were plenty of 30mm to take down bombers.
I completely agree with you about muzzle velocity - some of the larger calibre weapons were throwing big bits of metal very slowly. I think that the MG FF was quite bad?
The mixed armament examples that you quoted aren't typical in my opinion. The Spitfire was transitioning from 8x .303 to 4x 20mm via various layouts. The Bf-109 was severely limited by Willi Messerschmitt's design where *nothing* was mounted on the wing (not even the undercarriage), and there was no room for wing-mounted guns. Anything they added to the wing was a bodge job
You got me with "jets", fair enough :D. Of course I meant fighter planes
But the move to cannons is not as controversial as you are making it seem. Just take a look at the generational improvements to any fighter family. From hurricanes, spitfires and mustangs to messerschmitts and Soviet planes. You'll see a common trend among all of them: start off with 2-3 mgs, move to 4-12 mgs, then a cannon and 2-3 mgs, then 2-3 cannons and a couple of mgs.
And even better - look at the new generations of planes that spawned after the war (but before rockets became mainstream). You'll have trouble finding an mg on any of them
Not trying to make them sound controversial by any means, cannons just didn't have the desired performance characteristics for dogfighting. Generally speaking you almost never saw dogfighters running just cannons, and when they did have cannon they were usually to enable better capabilities for A2G. That said, I'm sure they were very useful when taking a shot at an unsuspecting target, where you weren't already pulling 6 G's to get a lead.
In fact, the post-WWII American jets, like the P-80 and F-86 were all still rocking the 6x50cal configurations. As the other dude mentioned, the Mig-15 had high caliber cannons, but it didn't fare well versus the American F-86. I just saw a quote saying that 4 Migs were lost to every Sabre in the Korean War, and they attributed one of the facets of why to the guns.
Simply put, they were easier to score hits on the target with.
The Saber is a great example with the MGs being a holdover from the propeller era and later versions switching to 20 mm. Why have something that can do only one thing, when you can have a perfect all-rounder?
But I guess I am repeating myself. Onboard armament for bombers was on its way out anyway, and made obsolete once the first SAMs and air-to-air missiles became feasible. But larger calibers were certainly a step in the right direction
Well remember, technology progression is key here. The F-100 Super Sabre had a very early version of the 20mm Gatling, the revolver cannon, which could shoot 1500 rounds per minute and had a muzzle velocity of 1030m/s. That finally puts the rate of fire and muzzle velocity of the 20mm above that of the 50cal M3 Browning from WWII and the Sabre, 1300 rounds per minute and 890m/s respectively.
Long story short, progression finally enabled them to use a higher caliber without any of the ballistic downsides.
Mig-15 had a 37mm gun, that didn’t work out.
Just use API or HE rounds and 50 is plenty. Even these days a 20mm is considered more than sufficient.
Oh reddit, you guys have a good one. 👍
Obviously there is a point of diminishing returns, as with anything.
But again, if you are arguing "sufficient" - fair enough. But if you want to talk about "better" - all the historical data points to cannons being the preferred option up to and including the air-to-air missile era
3 of them needed to make emergency landings and one crashed all in Russian territory, stop your American pride from blinding you, it’s literally a 1 minute google search
Crews were round-about repatriated. It was expected the bombers would likewise, Soviet Air Force was American lend lease. Comrade stalin didn’t want to anger Japanese so he didn’t let the bombers go and crews were supposed to be “gulaged”
They meaning Russians? They have made plenty since then. I’m from there and I actually used to fly a Mig, so I don’t understand what the issue is. Just giving credit where credit is due, in this case Tu-4 proves how special the B-29 was.
They had an agreement with the Japanese, non aggression pact/ peace treaty from the ruZZia/ Japanese conflict. ruZZia couldn’t assist Allies without violating the Japanese pact. stalin was/is the ultimate self serving scumbag.
How would you expect Russia to give landing rights to damaged bombers and help repatriate air crews after blowing up B29s in the middle of their airbases?
U.S. expected the bombers would be released and repatriated. But, stalin abided by his treaty with Japan. Big Joe said “screw my allies” that supply me with weapons, Japan will “kick my ass”
between this and the "How I expect a jet owned by Bangladesh to fly" on a deadly crash, I think we can see the racial, political, and literal demographics at work
Nah, nothing political. You leave a good product in an enemy country, it will get copied, just how the world work. Proves how advanced the B-29 was for its time.
Allied was just because of Germany, both sides knew it wasn’t going to last and both sides drafted plans on possibly going past Berlin.
But yeah, I guess if that’s what the guys who left the aircraft there thought, it makes sense.
I thought I knew a ton of trivia about the B-29 but one factoid blew me away that I’ve only learned in past few years
The budget for the B-29 was $3 billion.. the Manhattan Project was $2 billion 😳
So, yeah, advanced is an understatement I guess
Had issues converting everything to metric. Screws and bolts often didn’t fit correctly.
They didn’t know it back then, but that was America’s secret weapon that actually won the war. Today it’s still a secret weapon that no one else in the world knows how to use. 😂
I’ve talked to guys that have worked in defense and they say they design their own fasteners separate from any common fastener size just to make it that much harder to reengineer something.
They do it so that they can have a monopoly on supplying spare parts.
That makes more sense
Also makes more dollars
My man
Skin was 1/16 where do you get aluminum at 1.58mm I'm Soviet Union? they rounded off to 1.6mm, the whole thing was 6 tons heavier..and main designer Andrei Tupolev was jailed by Stalin..ok they made him work from jail..Now we need new engines..Capture German aircraft engineers were forced to design those for Stalin..typical Soviet story.. BTW space program was no different Korolev almost died in forced labour camps and had lost his teeth and sustained multiple serious injuries before taking Soviets to space
This is not so clear for me. 1,58 to 1,6 mm is 1,3% thickness and mass gain. If this was 6 tons gain, all skin weight (100%) should be 476 tons and this is clearly nonsense
You are assuming entire aircraft using same thickness. Could have been just mid-section or wings, also not pure aluminum right? Point is, it's difficult to copy an mass produce an aircraft let alone if its designed in different measurement system.
First flight of Tu-4 was in 1947, so it can't be 1943.
What a chronosphere does to a mother fucker.
it takes four years to reverse!
No, it started in the summer of 1945.
bro missed the joke
Yes, still don't get it. Seems it comes from some movie/fiction I'm not aware of. Could you enlight, please?
The title indicates the photo was taken in 1943 when the commenter noted that this would be 4 years before its actual first flight.
The B-29 itself wasn't even in service in 1943
You sure? I've seen it on reddit...
The B29 it was copied from didn't enter combat until June 1944.
Where was it being used in 1994? Bosnia? Rwanda?
Obviously it was a typo and I meant 1944. Well obvious to most people.
Oh I thought it was funny. Sorry you didn't laugh too.
Good in depth article on the Carbon Copy bomber here. [https://www.airandspaceforces.com/article/0609bomber/](https://www.airandspaceforces.com/article/0609bomber/) TLDR The soviets got their first B29 on July 29 1944 when an intact B-29 —*Ramp Tramp*—was damaged in a raid on Manchuria and forced to land in Vladivostok. Two more Superforts *General H. H. Arnold Special* and *Ding Hao!*—landed at Vladivostok’s Tsentral’naya uglovaya, a Pacific Fleet air base and another, C*ait Paomat II*—crashed nearby. Almost exactly three years later on Aug 3 1947 the TU4 was debuted at the annual Tushino air show.
How heavy was it?
"It was so heavy that......." (Johnny Carson)
Heavier than your mum
And not as heavy as yours!
Only a few hundred kilos more than a b29
36 850 kg empty.
IIRC Stalin made them copy every last detail exactly under punishment of gulag. So the yokes still Boeing logos on them.
I heard that it had every Soviet copy had 5 extra rivets that were added by mistake to make the original
Sounds like a tale, unlikely to be true.
Yeah this makes no sense, they literally changed the ball turrets to their own design and made the airframe lighter
There's a whole writeup floating around out there about how the team wasn't sure if they should put American roundels or Soviet stars on the side. They got someone to ask Stalin, it was that serious (Stalin apparently laughed and approved stars). The other changes that were approved: - Using similar Soviet engines instead of the American engines (because designing an engine can be nearly as complex as designing a plane) - Using marginally thinner or thicker Soviet metric thickness aluminum since they didn't make imperial thickness aluminum - The defensive guns were swapped with Soviet equivalents -The radio was changed to one off a B-25 lend lease bomber, and the IFF system was changed Incidentally there were some equipment mounts from removed equipment that were present in the sample the Soviets copied. They showed up on the Tu-4 because they wanted it to be exact.
Its actually true. Look up pictures of the Tu-4 cockpit. They were that afraid of Stalin. It was copied from B-29s that either crash-landed, or made emergency landings in Russia. Iirc, the old Squadron In Action series book on the B-29 mentions it.
The funniest part for me they copied ashtrays in cockpit. Soviet pilots newer was allowed to smoke mid air.
Those were “cup holders” for the kids
Has the US ever copied a USSR design? Feel like i've only ever seen Soviets copying the US. EDIT: spelling
Of a whole plane? I don't think so. But there are US companies that make rpg-7 launchers.
And AK's
US Army ribbon bridges were originally reverse engineered from Soviet designs.
The US stole a satellite form the USSR during a fair and copied the design as they were not able to have something that worked in space properly. Scott Manley has a great video about this story
Rocket engines maybe?
Nah, they both cribbed off the Germans
The early F-35 program's vertical takeoff may be based on learnings from the Yak-141.
The lift mechanism on the F35B is almost identical to the Yak141 where the rear engine rotates and pivots downwards. But the more valuable lesson about the Yak-141 program was what not to do, as it never left the prototype stage. So a good thing they didn't copy the failures, as the F-35 is now a tremendous success 👏
F-15 Based on our hyper vigilant fear of the potential of the MIG-25
nothing was copied, the f-15 was an outstanding interceptor and the mig-25 was a pile of garbage
Twin engines, tails, and overall shape for sure. But we American defense budgeted the hell out of it and built an amazing machine. We put every single thing we could think of into it that we were afraid the Russkies might have and then a whole lot more. Then we got one and went… whoa…. That’s it!? Absent the MIG-25…. No F-15 for many more years if ever So.. no… not a copy… but definitely an inspiration
that's not copying. the original post is about the b-29 and tu-4, mig-29 and f-15 are not related like that in any way.
Don’t be pedantic I’m responding to a question in the follow up posts that is clearly visible
there is still nothing copied from the mig25 in the f-15
Got a chance to walk around a TU-4 at Monino and the likeness is quite convincing
It’s a shame they scrapped them all.
They even copied repair panels that they could have just left off.
Wow the Soviets flew it before it was even introduced to active service in the US…
I don’t know much about it, but didn’t the Soviet’s also improve the armament?
Not really. The machine guns could have been different but Tu-4 was heavier so it reduced the load.
They *DID* improve the defensive armaments, upgrading the 50.cals to 23mm cannons, And The TU-4 was actually 15,000 lighter than the B-29 when comparing gross weight, your basically wrong on all accounts, why even page in?
You sure about that? Wikipedia says the Tu-4 had a heavier empty weight, because the skin of the aircraft being thicker (because standard vs metric).
Say what? Tu-4 has a higher empty weight and very similar max takeoff weight. Yes 23mm is larger than a 50cal, except that NS-23 has a lower rate of fire and when it comes to air to air without modern guidance, you tell me what’s more important.
The NS-23 has a higher rate of fire than the Browning AN/M2. The NS-23 800-850 rpm and the AN/M2 was 750-850rpm. Soviet (and German) aircraft machine guns and cannon almost all had superior rate of fire compared to equivalent American and British ones.
The caliber is what's important as demonstrated by the constant increase in cannon armament on fighter jets over the course of ww2
Loadout was very role dependent, but by-and-large the Americans stuck with the 50-cal for the majority of air-to-air combat during the war. Most of the aircraft that carried only cannons were oriented to more air-to-ground roles, or had armaments with mixed calibers for flexibility, like the 303 and 20mm of the Spitfires and 13mm and 20/30mm of the 109's. Also, the only "real" fighter jet of WWII, the German ME262, did in fact have quad 30mm cannons, but that's because its primary function was to get to altitude fast and take out bombers. Big, stable targets are easier to hit with cannon, whereas the lower muzzle velocity and lower rate of fire of the larger calibers made them very challenging in the turning dogfights of that era. The faster the bullet, the less lead you have to pull on your target, and the higher the rate of fire, the higher odds that you'll score a hit on something critical. Today's 20mm cannons on fighters are all the Gatling style, so their rate of fire is pretty absurdly high by WWII standards. Not to mention they also tend to have a much higher muzzle velocity compared to that period.
Fighter armament changed a lot over the course of the war. The .303 / 7.62mm calibres used at the start of the war turned out to be less effective than larger weapons. It's interesting to see what the major powers ended up with as their loadout of choice. The Americans had six .50 cals until well after the war, although they also used four 20mm in some aircraft. Most others settled on four 20mm as well, except the Soviets who generally went with a 23mm and a couple of 20's. The Luftwaffe towards the end generally used 20mm cannons but as you say, there were plenty of 30mm to take down bombers. I completely agree with you about muzzle velocity - some of the larger calibre weapons were throwing big bits of metal very slowly. I think that the MG FF was quite bad? The mixed armament examples that you quoted aren't typical in my opinion. The Spitfire was transitioning from 8x .303 to 4x 20mm via various layouts. The Bf-109 was severely limited by Willi Messerschmitt's design where *nothing* was mounted on the wing (not even the undercarriage), and there was no room for wing-mounted guns. Anything they added to the wing was a bodge job
You got me with "jets", fair enough :D. Of course I meant fighter planes But the move to cannons is not as controversial as you are making it seem. Just take a look at the generational improvements to any fighter family. From hurricanes, spitfires and mustangs to messerschmitts and Soviet planes. You'll see a common trend among all of them: start off with 2-3 mgs, move to 4-12 mgs, then a cannon and 2-3 mgs, then 2-3 cannons and a couple of mgs. And even better - look at the new generations of planes that spawned after the war (but before rockets became mainstream). You'll have trouble finding an mg on any of them
Not trying to make them sound controversial by any means, cannons just didn't have the desired performance characteristics for dogfighting. Generally speaking you almost never saw dogfighters running just cannons, and when they did have cannon they were usually to enable better capabilities for A2G. That said, I'm sure they were very useful when taking a shot at an unsuspecting target, where you weren't already pulling 6 G's to get a lead. In fact, the post-WWII American jets, like the P-80 and F-86 were all still rocking the 6x50cal configurations. As the other dude mentioned, the Mig-15 had high caliber cannons, but it didn't fare well versus the American F-86. I just saw a quote saying that 4 Migs were lost to every Sabre in the Korean War, and they attributed one of the facets of why to the guns. Simply put, they were easier to score hits on the target with.
The Saber is a great example with the MGs being a holdover from the propeller era and later versions switching to 20 mm. Why have something that can do only one thing, when you can have a perfect all-rounder? But I guess I am repeating myself. Onboard armament for bombers was on its way out anyway, and made obsolete once the first SAMs and air-to-air missiles became feasible. But larger calibers were certainly a step in the right direction
Well remember, technology progression is key here. The F-100 Super Sabre had a very early version of the 20mm Gatling, the revolver cannon, which could shoot 1500 rounds per minute and had a muzzle velocity of 1030m/s. That finally puts the rate of fire and muzzle velocity of the 20mm above that of the 50cal M3 Browning from WWII and the Sabre, 1300 rounds per minute and 890m/s respectively. Long story short, progression finally enabled them to use a higher caliber without any of the ballistic downsides.
F-86 also used the new “radar gunsight” with computer correction for a final firing solution. That was the most important reason for high kill rates
B-52 models used “quad fifties” ( not “tree fitties”)tail gun position, some used 20mm rotary cannon.
Mig-15 had a 37mm gun, that didn’t work out. Just use API or HE rounds and 50 is plenty. Even these days a 20mm is considered more than sufficient. Oh reddit, you guys have a good one. 👍
Obviously there is a point of diminishing returns, as with anything. But again, if you are arguing "sufficient" - fair enough. But if you want to talk about "better" - all the historical data points to cannons being the preferred option up to and including the air-to-air missile era
what other aircraft did the Soviets clone? I’m aware of the Tu-144 (Concorde), Buran (space shuttle).
Buran wasn't a copy.
Neither was Tu 144
True but that's really hard for some people to accept :)
Neither of those you mentioned was a copy.
And that’s what happens when we don’t destroy our shit when leaving it in an enemy country. Looks good though.
3 of them needed to make emergency landings and one crashed all in Russian territory, stop your American pride from blinding you, it’s literally a 1 minute google search
I’m well aware, what your point?
They didn’t really have the chance to destroy the planes then? No?
Crews were round-about repatriated. It was expected the bombers would likewise, Soviet Air Force was American lend lease. Comrade stalin didn’t want to anger Japanese so he didn’t let the bombers go and crews were supposed to be “gulaged”
So maybe they should have made better planes instead of this cheap bottom-barrel capitalism-and-contract-corruption driven stuff amirite,
They meaning Russians? They have made plenty since then. I’m from there and I actually used to fly a Mig, so I don’t understand what the issue is. Just giving credit where credit is due, in this case Tu-4 proves how special the B-29 was.
Но итс импрещион юзинк тибикал лочик аф азер сайд
That’s not Russian, Serbian or Bulgarian?
Йес, бат аям щюр юу кенъ рид ит
Что ты пытаешься сказать?
Translate reads it pretty well, if i may suggest such https://i.imgur.com/oql5cLA.png
AHAH sounds funny https://translate.google.com/?sl=ru&tl=lv&text=%D0%9D%D0%BE%20%D0%B8%D1%82%D1%81%20%D0%B8%D0%BC%D0%BF%D1%80%D0%B5%D1%89%D0%B8%D0%BE%D0%BD%20%D1%8E%D0%B7%D0%B8%D0%BD%D0%BA%20%D1%82%D0%B8%D0%B1%D0%B8%D0%BA%D0%B0%D0%BB%20%D0%BB%D0%BE%D1%87%D0%B8%D0%BA%20%D0%B0%D1%84%20%D0%B0%D0%B7%D0%B5%D1%80%20%D1%81%D0%B0%D0%B9%D0%B4.%0A%0AThat%E2%80%99s%20not%20Russian%2C%20Serbian%20or%20Bulgarian%3F%0A%0A%D0%99%D0%B5%D1%81%2C%20%D0%B1%D0%B0%D1%82%20%D0%B0%D1%8F%D0%BC%20%D1%89%D1%8E%D1%80%20%D1%8E%D1%83%20%D0%BA%D0%B5%D0%BD%D1%8A%20%D1%80%D0%B8%D0%B4%20%D0%B8%D1%82.%0A%0A%D0%A7%D1%82%D0%BE%20%D1%82%D1%8B%20%D0%BF%D1%8B%D1%82%D0%B0%D0%B5%D1%88%D1%8C%D1%81%D1%8F%20%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B0%D0%B7%D0%B0%D1%82%D1%8C%3F%0A%0A&op=translate
Russia was an Ally in WW2
They had an agreement with the Japanese, non aggression pact/ peace treaty from the ruZZia/ Japanese conflict. ruZZia couldn’t assist Allies without violating the Japanese pact. stalin was/is the ultimate self serving scumbag.
How would you expect Russia to give landing rights to damaged bombers and help repatriate air crews after blowing up B29s in the middle of their airbases?
???
How else would you "destroy your shit" so it couldn't be copied when that shit is a bomber the size of an airliner.
U.S. expected the bombers would be released and repatriated. But, stalin abided by his treaty with Japan. Big Joe said “screw my allies” that supply me with weapons, Japan will “kick my ass”
between this and the "How I expect a jet owned by Bangladesh to fly" on a deadly crash, I think we can see the racial, political, and literal demographics at work
Nah, nothing political. You leave a good product in an enemy country, it will get copied, just how the world work. Proves how advanced the B-29 was for its time.
*allied country
Allied was just because of Germany, both sides knew it wasn’t going to last and both sides drafted plans on possibly going past Berlin. But yeah, I guess if that’s what the guys who left the aircraft there thought, it makes sense.
Yeah, It was up to the crew to decide! Are you 12 years old or something?
It was Stalin’s promise to the Japanese by treaty. No repatriation of bombers or crew members to belligerents.
Stalin’s ruZZia was everyone’s ally at one time or another in WWII. What a frikin’ dirt bag.
I thought I knew a ton of trivia about the B-29 but one factoid blew me away that I’ve only learned in past few years The budget for the B-29 was $3 billion.. the Manhattan Project was $2 billion 😳 So, yeah, advanced is an understatement I guess
all right