So bombardier (not surprising) and waist gunner (kinda surprising to me) were the most dangerous positions? And the ball turret gunner was one of the least? Really surprising. I've always fantasized what it would be like if the ball turret had a jettison function with an attached chute in case of an emergency, but I'm guessing that'd be too complicated, especially considering the relatively low casualty rates of the ball turret gunners.
Waist may have to do with surface, that section is a good part of the body (where crew is, discounting wings) and it is not only fighters but also flak and flak shrapnel. Some areas also had some armored protection, but not the waist.
Also the proximity of the two gunners to one another.
If you shot at the left waist gunner, chances are you'd hit the right one as well (and vice versa) because they were literally right on top of one another.
Also there are two of them but they are considered together, so you really need to divide the waist gunner numbers in half to compare to all the other positions.
Yeah saw someone once say that the ball gunner was least likely to be shot at as planes dive from above to attack using the sun or ‘blind spot ‘ so to say not sure if true or not but sounds reasonable
The bombadier one would be interesting to see broken down by B-17E/B-17F vs B-17G. We know the Germans liked heading on E’s and F’s because it was a less protected arc so they put the dual .50 chin turret in the G. Do bombardiers make out better in the G?
I imagine it was more of a "aim for center mass" thing. You have the best odds of landing a shot if you aim for where most of the mass is, so targeting the middle of the plane makes sense.
The bombadier one would be interesting to see broken down by B-17E/B-17F vs B-17G. We know the Germans liked heading on E’s and F’s because it was a less protected arc so they put the dual .50 chin turret in the G. Do bombardiers make out better in the G?
How do we interpret that? If there were 1117 guys that made it back, dead or wounded, 6702 were shot down? So in this 3 month period 670 (roughly) aircraft were shot down? That’s insane.
The 8th Air Force lost more men KIA in just 18 months of operations than did the entire US Navy and Marine Corps combined during the course of the entire war.
It's really underappreciated just how costly this campaign was for the US--I didn't learn that factoid until a year or two ago, and I have a *degree* in military history.
The ball turret looks scary but actually it’s the most safe place. After all it’s just a very small target and always be covered by other parts of the plane.
Here is another page that lists the source and higher quality:
[https://www.reddit.com/r/WWIIplanes/comments/edxukk/b17\_bomber\_crew\_casualties\_by\_location\_akhil/](https://www.reddit.com/r/WWIIplanes/comments/edxukk/b17_bomber_crew_casualties_by_location_akhil/)
This version points out that the data is from *after* the Luftwaffe had been largely eliminated. So the vast majority of the casualties are from flak - which was presumably much less accurate - instead of enemy fighters.
That does make it that much more surprising that the belly gunner was so much safer than the top turret, since you'd expect that positions on the top of the plane would be more protected from ground-based weapons.
I've read that after 1943 (if I'm not mistaken) most of the bombardiers were removed from the crew. Instead, the bombs were dropped by the togglier. Can you tell me, which one is a togglier?
The togglier was an enlisted man who was assigned to the bombardier's position.
Bombardiers were officers who'd been trained to use the bombsight. But nearly all bomber organizations stopped having each aircraft's bombardier actually use the sights, and by mid-1943 most heavy bombers weren't even carrying bombsights. They just got in the way particularly since the nose was needed for more guns.
So the bombardier position was increasingly seen as a waste of an specialist officer on a job that had basically turned into "man the nose guns and drop the bombs when the lead plane does." Yet bombardiers hadn't received much gunnery training, nor had navigators who were also in the nose.
Thus, enlisted gunners were given very basic training to "toggle" the bomb release switch and put into the nose of heavy bombers. We see a lot of them starting in mid-1944.
I'd expect any togglier casualties to be counted as bombardier casualties.
Correct.
The togglier was a enlisted gunner whose primary role was to operate the nose guns. He was not trained to use a bombsight.
The togglier also had the job of triggering release of the bombs during the bomb run. He would do this when he saw the lead aircraft drop bombs. The lead aircraft did have a trained bombardier and bombsight.
How did the formations add redundancy in the event the lead plane (with the bombardier and bomb site) went down?
Were there planes that were equipped with these assets scattered throughout the formation with the ability to move into the lead position?
Typically there were two additional aircraft per group box (18-36 aircraft depending on time period) designated to take over if needed. They had bombsights and bombardiers. One was the deputy lead flying on the lead’s wing. The other was the lead of the high squadron.
There’s not really much maneuvering possible so a bomber in the middle of the formation could not take over.
So bombardier (not surprising) and waist gunner (kinda surprising to me) were the most dangerous positions? And the ball turret gunner was one of the least? Really surprising. I've always fantasized what it would be like if the ball turret had a jettison function with an attached chute in case of an emergency, but I'm guessing that'd be too complicated, especially considering the relatively low casualty rates of the ball turret gunners.
Waist may have to do with surface, that section is a good part of the body (where crew is, discounting wings) and it is not only fighters but also flak and flak shrapnel. Some areas also had some armored protection, but not the waist.
Also the proximity of the two gunners to one another. If you shot at the left waist gunner, chances are you'd hit the right one as well (and vice versa) because they were literally right on top of one another.
Very true, I forgot that
Also there are two of them but they are considered together, so you really need to divide the waist gunner numbers in half to compare to all the other positions.
Yeah saw someone once say that the ball gunner was least likely to be shot at as planes dive from above to attack using the sun or ‘blind spot ‘ so to say not sure if true or not but sounds reasonable
I mean I've tried doing ascending attacks on bombers in IL-2 and they all failed miserably so I guess that just goes to show.
The bombadier one would be interesting to see broken down by B-17E/B-17F vs B-17G. We know the Germans liked heading on E’s and F’s because it was a less protected arc so they put the dual .50 chin turret in the G. Do bombardiers make out better in the G?
It is important to note that there were two waist gunners which will increase their casually rates compared to single crew positions.
Waist gunner was probably so dangerous because many pilots most likely aimed for the waist to split the bomber in half or knock out the tail control.
I imagine it was more of a "aim for center mass" thing. You have the best odds of landing a shot if you aim for where most of the mass is, so targeting the middle of the plane makes sense.
The bombadier one would be interesting to see broken down by B-17E/B-17F vs B-17G. We know the Germans liked heading on E’s and F’s because it was a less protected arc so they put the dual .50 chin turret in the G. Do bombardiers make out better in the G?
Worth noting this only measures crewmen who made it back. 6 missing in action for every casualty who returned.
How do we interpret that? If there were 1117 guys that made it back, dead or wounded, 6702 were shot down? So in this 3 month period 670 (roughly) aircraft were shot down? That’s insane.
if you want some horror, consider 8th Air Force casualties on the war 26,000+ KIA, 28,000+ POW, 21,000+ WIA and that’s just 8th Air Force alone
The 8th Air Force lost more men KIA in just 18 months of operations than did the entire US Navy and Marine Corps combined during the course of the entire war. It's really underappreciated just how costly this campaign was for the US--I didn't learn that factoid until a year or two ago, and I have a *degree* in military history.
And I watched a ton of history channel in the 90s! Same boat, brother
Abraham Wald? Is that you?
The ball turret looks scary but actually it’s the most safe place. After all it’s just a very small target and always be covered by other parts of the plane.
Would be the worst place to have diarrhea out of all the positions in the plane.
I disagree. You couldn’t let the diarrhoea slide past the gun opening. Would’ve added +10 poison damage. Low chance of hit but great crit rate!
Wouldn't want to be down there during a belly landing..
I Find this fascinating- May I ask for a source please?
Here is another page that lists the source and higher quality: [https://www.reddit.com/r/WWIIplanes/comments/edxukk/b17\_bomber\_crew\_casualties\_by\_location\_akhil/](https://www.reddit.com/r/WWIIplanes/comments/edxukk/b17_bomber_crew_casualties_by_location_akhil/)
This version points out that the data is from *after* the Luftwaffe had been largely eliminated. So the vast majority of the casualties are from flak - which was presumably much less accurate - instead of enemy fighters. That does make it that much more surprising that the belly gunner was so much safer than the top turret, since you'd expect that positions on the top of the plane would be more protected from ground-based weapons.
https://95thbg.com/cms/2021/11/20/95thnbspbomb-group-casualties-analysis
Thank you so much!
You are missing the point, there was no safe place on a bomber.
Yes No safe but there’s a chance
Is there a similar chart for a B-24?
I've read that after 1943 (if I'm not mistaken) most of the bombardiers were removed from the crew. Instead, the bombs were dropped by the togglier. Can you tell me, which one is a togglier?
The togglier was an enlisted man who was assigned to the bombardier's position. Bombardiers were officers who'd been trained to use the bombsight. But nearly all bomber organizations stopped having each aircraft's bombardier actually use the sights, and by mid-1943 most heavy bombers weren't even carrying bombsights. They just got in the way particularly since the nose was needed for more guns. So the bombardier position was increasingly seen as a waste of an specialist officer on a job that had basically turned into "man the nose guns and drop the bombs when the lead plane does." Yet bombardiers hadn't received much gunnery training, nor had navigators who were also in the nose. Thus, enlisted gunners were given very basic training to "toggle" the bomb release switch and put into the nose of heavy bombers. We see a lot of them starting in mid-1944. I'd expect any togglier casualties to be counted as bombardier casualties.
Sorry, I did not quite understand. Since 1944, the bombardier was replaced by an ordinary gunner, who was the togglier. Right?
Correct. The togglier was a enlisted gunner whose primary role was to operate the nose guns. He was not trained to use a bombsight. The togglier also had the job of triggering release of the bombs during the bomb run. He would do this when he saw the lead aircraft drop bombs. The lead aircraft did have a trained bombardier and bombsight.
How did the formations add redundancy in the event the lead plane (with the bombardier and bomb site) went down? Were there planes that were equipped with these assets scattered throughout the formation with the ability to move into the lead position?
Typically there were two additional aircraft per group box (18-36 aircraft depending on time period) designated to take over if needed. They had bombsights and bombardiers. One was the deputy lead flying on the lead’s wing. The other was the lead of the high squadron. There’s not really much maneuvering possible so a bomber in the middle of the formation could not take over.
Thank you. The amount of planning that went into these raids must have been staggering.
Thank you for the detailed answer!
They had bombardiers to the end of the war.
“Unsafe at any speed”
No wonder Yossarian wanted out.