Best and Worst B-17 Crew Positions
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 20 ก.ค. 2024
- During the Second World War the United States manufactured thousands of B-17 Flying Fortresses. These amazing aircraft would take to the skies around the world. The 10 men aboard these planes all had different roles to play to ensure mission success and to keep everyone safe. But with so many crew killed and wounded, which was the best and worst position? In today's video we look at these B-17 crew positions and determine the answer.
At Premier History we want to take you on a journey through time and grow your knowledge to see what it was actually like to be in some of the pivotal points in World History.
Make sure to leave a Like 👍 and a Comment 📜 down below or share this video with your friends.
- - -
🔴 Subscribe to the channel: bit.ly/3pLtnXf
- - -
#PremierHistory #b-17 #WW2
- - -
Follow Premier History on socials:
🐦 Twitter: / historypremier
📸Instagram: / premierhistory
- - -
Almost in F - Tranquillity by Kevin MacLeod is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 licence. creativecommons.org/licenses/...
Source: incompetech.com/music/royalty-...
Artist: incompetech.com/
![[SUB] 베몬이 교관님 멘탈을 탕탕 후루후루~٩(๑❛ᴗ❛๑)۶ FOREVER 웃게 되는 갓기들의 수련회 | 돌들의침묵 | BABYMONSTER(베이비몬스터) 'FOREVER'](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/FISAO7BwIxE/mqdefault.jpg)
![[TH] 2024 PMWC x EWC Group Stage Day 2 | PUBG MOBILE WORLD CUP x ESPORTS WORLD CUP](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/vwIQyCmNIBU/mqdefault.jpg)
What do you believe was the best or worst crew position on the B-17?
Welcome back! If you are new here make sure to hit subscribe to expand your knowledge on Military History and join the growing Premier History Community!
Hey Premier History! Quick question, where do you find footage from WW2?
Belly turret, crew has to maneuver the turret upward to access latch,
On leave, at home.
My dad was a B-17 pilot and was shot down over Holtland, Germany on July 26, 1943 after bombing the Hanover Rubber Works. He was wounded but he and 4 others survived while 5 of the crew were killed. He spent the rest of the war at Stalag Luft III (the camp of the Great Escape) and Stalag VII A. He was liberated on Apr 29, 1945 by the advanced units of Patton's 3rd Army.
And so here I am today at age 77.
Amazing, thank your for sharing his incredible story of sacrifice and survival, he was truly part of the greatest generation!
I thank your father for his temporary captivity in my fatherlund, and wish him swiftness and safe return. (Good fortune).
Stalag 3 was allied airman mostly . They seperated them from Americans
Like your dad, my father was shot down on his 10th mission over Molac, France. He was the Navigator of his B-17. Dad was also a guest of the German government, as he was sometimes smartly say. Stalag Luft III. He was there for the Great Escape and of course General Patton’s rescue. He told us that Patton cried when he saw the condition of the POW’s.
My dad's B-24 had a head on collision with a fighter 4/8/44 just after bombing Langenhagen Airdrome (Hannover airport now). He was Flt Eng/TT gun. The explosion was huge and other aircrews thought nobody in my dad's crew survived, but amazingly they all survived. He ended up in Stalag 17B (Krems, Austria) for 13 months
My dad was a co-pilot on a B-17. On his third mission they were shot down over Belgium. The pilot was killed and Dad was able to land the plane. He and three others lived. He was the only one who was able to exit the plane on his own.
On his fourth mission he was promoted to pilot.
Wher in Belgium?
@@beeldpuntXVI don't know. He said he got lucky and landed near a British patrol and they helped get him back to England.
The things that generation went through is incredible, respect.
These guys are legends, a whole different breed, and I cannot fathom the courage and fear these men had and faced. So much respect and admiration for all of them.
ya, imagine going up in your fighter plane to face these flying fortresses and defend your country vs the bad guys.
those were real heroes.
@@Xingmey It was less easy for the Germans once the US began using the Mustang as an escort fighter. The Mustang could fly with the bombers all the way to Berlin and back.... And by this time, many of the US fighter pilots had gained considerable combat experience in the Pacific theatre, fighting the Japanese......and many of them became aces several times over. One notable pilot was Francis Stanley "Gabby" Gabreski, born in the US to Polish immigrant parents. He scored quite a number of victories flying the P47 Thunderbolt. He was taken prisoner after crash landing during a low level strafing mission in Europe. He was low over a German airfield, strafing, when his propeller caught the ground, and his engine seized. He crash-landed in a nearby field. A P47 Thunderbolt had a 14 foot diameter propeller....... Gabby Gabreski died in the mid 90's, after a career in railroad management.
I once heard a pastor, who was an ex-Marine, jokingly call the Air Force 'Boy Scouts'. Being ex-Air Force I understood it was an inter-service joke but I still took offence. A week or two later I informed him that (joking aside) more airmen died in WW2 than the Marines lost in their entire history and he should show more respect. Sadly he brushed it of with "Ya, you guys did your part." I get that the Marines are proud and consider themselves an elite unit - and (in some ways) properly so. I also know that his dishonoring of the airmen who were dying long before Marines were even left the shores of the U.S.A. has diminished him, and all like minded Marines in my mind.
My father was a B17 Bombardier from April - August 1944 and survived 35 missions. 390th Bomber Group Framlingham England. He received the Distinguished Flying Cross, the Air Medal and an Oak Cluster. He was wounded a couple of times by flack but survived the war. This video's statistics are from exactly the time he flew his missions. I had no idea his position was so costly during that time frame. And they were all mostly 21-25 year old kids being asked to go up day after day not knowing if they would make back from a mission. Truly the greatest generation.
My Grandfather was a ball turret gunner on a B-24 Liberator in the Pacific, 90th bomb group, Jolly Rogers. Those men were a special breed.
Thanks for sharing, what an incredibly brave generation!
Respect !
Are you short and small in stature? Was your grandfather? Much respect for him btw, just curious.
I had an uncle that was a flight engineer on a B-24. Flying out of Libya and Italy.
Deepest respect for your grandfather. Definitely a very special breed.
My father was a ball turret gunner on a B-17 in Europe. While fortunately for him his tour of duty was August 1944 thru January 1945, there were harrowing experiences. My father. My hero. He lived his life in honor of his friends and crewmates who didn't return. He instilled in my siblings and I a great sense of appreciation for those who sacrificed for us to live freely.
A late friend and customer of mine was a B-17 waist gunner. He had at least one confirmed enemy kill, and facial injuries from a flak burst. One of his good friends was a B-29 tail gunner in the Pacific. Wendell gave me his autographed copy of Andy's book, Backwards into Battle, before he passed away. He was an incredibly kind man with courage I can only imagine & would talk at length with me about his time in the B-17. He probably forgot more than most people today even know about the B-17. His generation will be greatly missed! My Uncle served on a destroyer in the Pacific, as well. Both were very tough, yet kind-hearted men I will never know the likes of again. My Grandfather served on the Battleship Texas between WW1 & WW2, but passed away 5 years before I was even born. His brothers were also tough and decent men; I miss them all.
My grandpa was a private with the airborne horsedrawn mountain navy. He was always fair to his subordinates and he never started a war. He drowned while attempting to push start a submarine.
Amazing to read! I'm sure you must be so proud
The amount of over claims of gunners was ridiculous. In one raid on the 9th October ‘42 gunners claimed 86 aircraft shot down. Record show the Luftwaffe lost 1 aircraft.
@@XxBloggs *One* confirmed kill doesn't exactly scream massive exaggeration. There's nothing wild or crazy in this guy's story that set off alarm bells and frankly I'm inclined to believe him. Exaggerated kill counts were a thing on all sides, and while surely some were fabrications fog of war being what it was is probably the main culprit. It's not like there's sustained contact, enemy fighters flew quick strafing passes and got the hell out of there, turret gunners didn't exactly have the ability to follow up and ensure the enemy aircraft was totally destroyed when it actually quietly limped back to base.
I thought b29 turrets were unmanned.
One glaring problem with this report… survivor bias. Because the report could only account for casualties in planes that made it home, it does not reflect true casualty rates. For instance, in planes shot down, the casualty rate for ball turret gunners was probably astronomical due to crew inability to easily escape or lack of parachute.
Yeah, I see your point. Must have been terrifying to be caught in there with the plane spiraling down, out of control
Yes that is one of my problems with the information as it is only gathered from the planes that made it back. Also if you add KIA with WIA the rate is quite high especially if you could add in the losses from planes shot down or crashed.
Was the casualty rate figured per flight or for the whole ninety days? I guess, from the video it was the latter percent over ninety days.
The pilot seats also had armored backs, at least later.
There is always going to be bias in any report, regardless of who made it or the conditions in which it was made. Low causality numbers or not, the ball-gunner position had gotten a nasty reputation (seeing surviving B-17s landing on their belly will do that, especially when the gunner was turned into a once sentient paste). In a bailing out situation, the tail gunner and ball gunner were the least likely to survive because of positioning and the chute situation according to other sources that are not me (I'm a Jewish historian not a USAAF aircraft historian). On the bright side, the B-17 wasn't a flying coffin like the Lancaster and it's wings were not easily ripped off with a well placed cannon shot like the B-24.
that bias apply for plane weak points analysis, not for KIA/WIA, after war you get the corrected count anyways
But the survivors reported the attack strategy. Typically head on.
It would be cool to see a similar video with statistics of which turret positions had the most success hitting enemy planes
it would be cool, but I think impossible to make. I watched a video recently about the Schweinfurt-Regensburg raid, where the allied bomber gunners claimed destroying around 10x the amount of German planes than the Germans actually lost that day. It suggests that for every German fighter downed, about 10 allied airmen would claim it. Not too surprising considering just how many guns from the bomber formation would be shooting at each fighter.
I was told by a WWll B-17 veteran that deadliest position was the tail gunner position, as all the head-on attacks, when the bullets didn't hit anything, they could go all the way out the rear of the bomber, and possible hit the tail gunner quite often,
That’s a good point Wayne thanks for sharing with everyone
Slight correction, even in earlier models the Bombardier had a nose gun to use so he always had something to be doing on a mission. On earlier models it was just a single flex mount .30 caliber. This weak forward armament is one reason the Luftwaffe tended to use frontal attacks against them as it also gave them the best shot at killing the pilot and co-pilot. The final G model had twin .50 caliber guns in a chin turret which made frontal attacks a lot more dangerous for the German pilots.
Very informative thanks for sharing! A single .30 certainly didn’t do the job!
If the plane was going down, the obvious worst place to be would have been the lower turret. You couldn't get out of it unless someone unlocked the entry hatch. Let's face it, if you were going down, the survivability was pretty low due to the small and few exits. Plus, the speed of the plane as it went down would pin you in place.
My father was a flight engineer on B-17s.
It does come as a surprise that there was an appreciable difference in casualty rate between the pilot and co pilot.
That's what really stood out to me. I wonder what accounts for that difference.
In the event of having to bail the pilot probably stayed the longest to make sure the plane stayed level. Gave a higher chance of dying. Just a guess though.@@joshyaks
@@feiorn Oh, that's an interesting thought. I suppose it would make sense as long as one or more other crew members were to make it back to be counted in the survey.
It's not really that signifcant
@@joshyaks could just be enemy fighters purposefully trying to target the pilot
Mistake - two waist gunners at 19% means that the chances one waist gunner would be killed is 9.5%. It's the 3rd deadliest position, not the 1st. (EDIT - My mistake - when you add up the percentages as per the chart at the end, it does show 1 waist gunner is 19.5% KIA.)
yeah, but its talking about overall position, and of the listed casualities, waist gunners still made up 19% of the total number
@@zed2653 Yes, 2 waist gunners are 19%, so the odds of being a waist gunner and KIA is 9.5%.
@@holdfast7182 it doesn't lmao by your logic if both of the waist gunner died you would have a fatality rate of 200% which obviously creates a problem with the tally. Unlike you the airforce is not stupid. The number is based on the number of casualties/the number of waist gunners who went on mission, this is logical. Counting numbers of KIA waist gunners/bombers is not. Nothing is wrong, just a case of stupid people correcting people incorrectly
@@pepebeezon772 200% divided by 2 waist gunners is 100% per each waist gunner.
@@holdfast7182 which is what I'm trying to make you understand, too bad your attention span is shorter than 3 seconds and didn't read the rest of the comment
My dad was a 351st bombardier who was shot down twice on 2 different missions and was put in a POW camp on one of them. These were some extremely brave men.
There was a guy in my Native American tribe, the Choctaw, who was a tail gunner on a
B-17. He flew some 54 missions over Europe. His name was James Parker. His brother, Bill, is known as the first man on Omaha Beach. You can look his (Bill’s) story up online.
Amazing! Thanks for sharing that Cameron!
My Uncle Al was the pilot of a B-24 in the Pacific theater. He was only 19 years old. He always said less than half of his flight school class, survived the war.
pilot at 19?????? you have to be joking
@@excod43different times. They often had a week or so and then up flying bombers with trainers. Many were under 25. Most probably under 30 for sure.
He's a liar. To be a pilot you have to be an officer. To be an officer you need to go through either ROTC or OCS. Both will take more than 2 years. Army Air Force does not allow Rec aged 17 and below to join up.
Don't be a loser and lie on the internet. Its distasteful and pathetic.
@@user-dd8vo7or2dthere was a war on. The average age of pilots was early 20’s. A 19 year old pilot is not impossible.
@@user-dd8vo7or2d You think Army recruiters were checking DoBs in their paper databases after Pearl Harbour? You're so certain of this that you'll go around calling people losers and liars? You must be fun at parties.
These statistics are based on the number of planes that returned to their base. They had no way of knowing losses on crews lost on missions.
Survivor bias.
It probably wouldn't have changed the relative stats too significantly for crews lost on missions because all positions of these crews would have been classified equally as KIA if included.
A lot of bombers crashed in the North Sea and disappeared without a trace. Many crewmen were uninjured and survived the crash, but died of hypothermia or drowning.
My dad flew Air/Sea Rescue patrols with the RAF. I read his airman's logbook, and his squadron's operations log, and it was sobering. The books were full of entries like: "Searched for Beaufighter, nothing found" or "Searched for Wellington, nothing found". It was sad --- there were so many of them.
They surveyed injuries and deaths of returned flights.
Fights that did on return were 100% dead or Pows and the minority.
It does not change the stat numbers ..
Yes you know the losses on planes the didn't return. 100%
Dad did 30 missions as a top turret gunner and flight engineer in a B17. In the late 70s the VA started giving him disability checks for PTSD. You could tell that he had been through something the really rattled his cage.
Thanks for sharing Patrick, you must be so proud of what he achieved. It’s a shame more of those brave men weren’t helped earlier with the things they had to see and do
My dad was a top turret gunner on a B-26 Marauder. He shot down 3 aircraft. I asked him one day how many aircraft shot down and he said none but he scared the hell out of few. I only found out he actually did shoot down those 3 by looking up his military record after he died. He seldom ever talked about the war unless he made a joke about something. They were a rare breed, no doubt! I know I would have had the skill to do what many of them did but I doubt I ever possessed the back bone to do it day after day! The 8th Air Force alone had more people killed in action than the entire US Marine corps in the whole Pacific war! The RAF bomber command had a higher casualty rate then the 8th did but they were in the war long before we were.
My father in law was a radio operator who did 35 missions. He lived to the age of 98. He was awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross but never did say what he did to earn it. He considered himself to be very lucky.
Thanks for sharing his story, you must be so proud! I’m sure you would be able to find his DFC citation with a little bit of research
On 10/07/44, the B-17 piloted by my dad took a hit from flak, severing the tail. The tail gunner, radioman and copilot were killed. All of the remaining 6 crew survived except the top turret gunner who jumped, but was never seen again.
It's interesting that the waist gunner casualties were so high. Could this be because there were two of them? Therefore, they make up a greater percentage of the total crew members.
Maybe they took more bullets from enemy fighters?
Waist gunners were back to back and would often get hit by the same rounds killing/wounding both, I have seen photos that went from when the camera first showed up till they were hosing the blood out with anything that was not part of the aircraft fresh of the assembly line, not a sight many would want to remember. Mechanics would plug holes punched through to afford a drain to be used at the time.
My uncle John was an armorer in the army air corps. I believe he was the guy who replenished the ammunition and repaired the guns. Somehow he was credited with shooting down a German airplane that was strafing the planes on the runway. His obituary said he was awarded a bronze star, a purple heart and eight oak leaf clusters. We never knew. He never talked about it.
Thanks for sharing his amazing story John, it seems like so many men of that era were reluctant to share their stories due to the hardships they endured, which is all the more reason to share what we know for future generations.
Neither one of my grandfathers who were in WW2 ever did either. I never got really got anything out of them. Most things I got were second hand. They just wanted to be goofy, have fun, and play around with us grandkids. We were only happy to oblige. LOL! So lucky to have our dear grandparents from the Greatest Generation! How ignorantly blessed we were! I love My Grandpas!
It is an anathema for most men to want to kill another man. It is an horror to see another man, or worse a friend, torn to bits. For those reasons, dialogue on the matter would be expectantly subdued.
the belly gunner had good survival rate but if something went wrong e.i. they get stuck they had to sit there and wait to die sometimes for hours which would suck.
Given that you make no distinction between the two waist gunners, the position with the highest increase above flat 10% is the bombardier, as the "waist gunner" position is actually 2 people and not 1. So in a flatline distribution, you would expect the waist gunner "position" to account for 20% of the casualties and every other (1 person) position to account for 10%. In other words it would be like combining the pilot and co-pilot statistics into a single: pilots/cockpit statistic.
The problem I saw was that there are two waist gunners so that’s gonna double their casualty rate
And also if one got hit from a straight on angle there’s a good chance they’d both be hit although idk how often they were attacked from a straight perpendicular approach
Although the USMC get the glory with their high casualty rates and intrepid and courageous actions in the Pacific. The Bomber Corp of the US Army had horrendous casualty rates. And I believe had the most casualties of any other battle arm. “The Greatest
Generation” is the truth.
My dad was a waist gunner. He flew 26 missions over Europe.
Thanks for sharing, you must be so proud
My dad was an aerial gunner on a B-17 in World War II. He said he was a ball turret gunner. But on occasion he said, that he would take over one of the waist gun positions. He did not elaborate on this. He had steel balls!
Superb video!
Thank you, glad you enjoyed it!
My Dad flew as a ball turret gunner and at times waist gunner for the 97th bombgroup, 15th AF out of Foggia Italy; he said once while he was in the ball turret, the tail gunner was panicking because his guns were jammed and a German was closing in...the pilot just put the nose down and dad said he shot the german plane down from the ball turret.
another great vid
Thanks for the support Mabbrey, glad you enjoyed it!
Three comments: 1) the KIA and WIA information came from planes that made it back; i.e. the survey information doesn't include planes that were shot down and lost over Europe. 2) The aluminum skin on american bombers offered little protection to the crew. You can punch a hole through it with a screwdriver and a hammer. 3) Co-pilots were NOT glorified assistants to the pilots; i.e. on a typical mission they flew the aircraft approximately 50% of the time. My father who was a co-pilot said tight formation flying was so physically demanding (one hand on yoke, one hand on all four throttles and no hydraulics) that the pilot and co-pilot had to switch off every 20 minutes during the mission.
You fail to adjust the statistics for the fact that there were TWO waist gunners. Each had a 9.5% chance of being KIA and a 10.55% chance of being WIA, making this position third most dangerous rather than the top.
This was my exact thought, I was wondering if anyone else had already commented.
This was my exact thought, I was wondering if anyone else had already commented.
@PremierHistory. Pardon me for not tagging you. This footage is awesome. Where do you find footage from WW2?
Listened to a great presentation given by a former ball-turret gunner. He always felt he had the best protected position, with the 2 fifty cals protecting each side and the heavy door protecting his back side. He said most everyone else had noting but thin aluminum skin between them and the incoming fire/fragments
That’s a great point, he only really needed to worry about his front, well that and the claustrophobia!
A great suggestion! Seeing those statistics, I was left wondering if the differences were not due to the position itself but to any added protection some positions had. Another factor might be that German fighters coming from the side would aim for the middle of a B-17, which posed the most risk for the two waist gunners.
From a statistical POV, the waist gunners actually have it no worse than the other guys. Their rates are higher because there are two of them in essentially the same position, the only position counted in this way. If you split them in half, the bombardier and nav position are worse off. Cool video! :)
My dad was the flight engineer on a B17. He was also trained by the pilot to fly and land the plane in case pilot and Co pilot were kia.
Amazing Steve, thanks for sharing his story. That’s a great insight into the experiences of those brave men
- *We should not forget that who got killed mattered for the safety of the plane as a whole.* If gunfire only killed the two waist gunners (19% KIA), the B-17 had an excellent chance of making it back and thus into the statistics. But if it killed the pilot and co-pilot, the B-17 would spiral out of control, killing all aboard and not making into the statistics. That would explain the relative low death rate for the pilot and co-pilot. When both of them are hit, the entire crew is likely to die.
-But that does not explain the otherwise odd difference between the pilot (7.3% KIA) and co-pilot (6.4% KIA). With the pilot dead, we might think that the less experienced co-pilot would have less chance of bringing the plane back. The difference there may lie in another statistical bias. *The survey was of returning crews not crews that bailed out.* With the pilot killed, for some reason the co-pilots might be more likely to nurse the plane home rather than order a bailout.
-Another issue is the odd difference between KIA and WIA. Sometimes one is greater and sometimes the other. *That depended in part on how easily a wounded crew could be treated by others, so a WIA did not become a KIA.* One waist gunner could easily treat the other, explaining the 2.1% greater WIA over KIA. On the other hand the belly gunner would be harder to treat, resulting in a 0.5% KIA over WIA.
The final issue comes when the KIA and WIA figures are added together, since the combination means a position is hit. *For the waist gunners that is an incredibly high 40.1%. For the co-pilot that is a far lower 12.3%.* That is over a three-to-one difference that needs explaining.
Isn't the last question answered by your first comment? A plane shot through at the waist might carry home its two wounded waist gunners, while another shot through the cockpit goes down.
One point I'd make is that the short time period of that survey may give an inaccurate result because it doesn't give enough time for any change of tactics by the Luftwaffe.
One simple example: the early B-17 were vulnerable to head-on attack, and so the statistics for the navigator will be higher. When the B-17G appears with its chin gun the head-on attack became a much less appealing option for the German fighter pilots, and so beam/stern attacks became more common.
Did the waist gunners have the bad stats because there was two of them, or is the amount per man? Also, I wonder why the pilot and co-pilot would be significantly different.
The statistics were for each individual position so it was ‘per man’ so to speak, regardless of there being two Waist Gunners. I believe the Pilot being worse off than the Co-Pilot may have to do with the order of bailing out of the aircraft in an emergency or it going down. The Pilot being virtually the last to leave. Hope that helps.
@@PremierHistory Yes, that makes sense. Thanks 🙂
@@PremierHistory Ah that answers my question why the difference between Pilot and Co-Pilot. The Co-pilot left in a bailout before the pilot. Indicating exit strategy and access to exit points was very important.
@PremierHistory can you confirm the KIA percentages, as they only sum to 90% (WIA is fine at 100%)? Given that there were typically a crew of 10, I do believe that the waist gunner percentages are only higher due to being representative of the two crew with that same position. Thus the crew at the front/top gun positions were the most at risk.
@@cowenpsu90if youre wrong and one assumes the waist gunner % were for each man and not combined as a couple, then surely that does give the extra 10% and makes 100% total or near as dammit?
Bombardier was the most at risk position, ball turret was actually one of the safest!
Very exposed at the nose of the aircraft that’s for sure
You mean waist-gunners, followed by bombardier (see table at 08:40)
@andrewdewit4711 there are two waist gunners, so you need to divide the number in the table by 2 to make it equivalent to the other crew positions, so 9.5% kia - 10.55% wia.
A very interesting video presented with respect. Thank you for sharing. And honour to all those that served, from all nations, fighting fascism.
I would like a deeper understanding for how they did the math here. Like, if one position has a 7.3% KIA, does that mean 7.3% of the total KIA in the survey were that position? Or that from the planes sampled, 7.3% of guys at that position were killed?
Seems like if it is the former, then waist-gunner stats could be skewed, since there are 2 of them of each crew instead of 1. (ie, if 19% of the KIA are waist gunners, then you should divide by 2 to get the KIA % for *each* waist gunner spot).
Wait, since there are 2 waist gunners on each B-17, and every other position require only one man. So the only reason waist gunners suffer the highest death rate is that there's more of them.
The crew position I would like to have is...left behind.
So, "King Nine Will Not Return," then?: th-cam.com/video/G2LfTYF4_Qk/w-d-xo.html
A couple opinion bases statements, but the vid was mostly accurate. Gramps was B17 Engineer, 8/12/15 AAF 301st BG 419th. MSgt Engineer
I suppose this statistic takes into account the casualties in the crew of the planes that returned from a mission. Some positions, such as the belly gunner, must had more casualties if the plane had crashed. It's another example of "survival bias".
Best position for me would be Left Out They were heroes just going up in my opinion. I think the stats during this survey might be skewed a bit due to the entry of the Mustangs for bomber escorts later in the campaign, inexperienced replacement crews, and the near elimination of the Luftwaffe. Definitely agree with your assessment. Awesome content, as I have wondered the same.
the stats for the waist gunners are not that bad since there were two of them - not sure why that distinction was not mentioned
I’d be interested in what position provided the best chances for survival when bailing out the acft.
Dad was a right waist gunner on the B-17! Shot down on 5th mission! POW for a year!
Thanks for sharing his story! Long time to be in a POW camp
After watching some episodes of Masters of the Air, I can't believe the gunners didn't accidentally waste each other plane to plane (blue on blue). I wonder about their training to not hit another Fortress in the chaos of battle.
First, according to post WW2 statistics, the Ball gunner was the second SAFEST in the crew; second only to the co-pilot. Two, according to a former ball gunner I spoke with, wearing a parachute was possible and was done (he did) but not by many.
please do a video on these
(this is a copy and paste list for a few channels)
units and tactics/evaluation of loadouts of troops (from different jobs (and other branches)
like the 82 snd 101 airborne units
or infantry tank units, (or when tanks were assigned a infantry unit like i think earlier war Russia then all tanks were formed into there own units wich meant the infantry no longer knew the true strength of there own tanks but alowed tank units to fight more efficiently)
the tank doctrine of countries
evaluation of tank veiw ports
evaluation of tanks/armored vehicles of different countries
evaluation of aircraft types of different countries,
different between navil and army/air force fighters
logistics units of the axes and allied powers in ww2
ww1 estern front tactics
Russian Civil war tactics and strategies
navil ship cross sections (all the rooms and how it all works)
evaluation of types of ships
or evaluation of navil warfare (or just dedectsded videos on ww1 and ww2 navil doctrine as theres stuff out there on other times of history)
air craft carrier strike group formations exsamples (from different countries)
ancient persan ships,
ancient veneti ships (gauls that fought ceaser)
ships used by genoa and the vernesain republic
the vernesain republic government
all sailing ships, (i know theres many on yt but some contradict each other and i think theres more left out)
ancient macenean greek and trojan troops
2b9 vasilyok morter
tactics used so far in the Ukraine war,
better for squads to be 2 teams of 5 or 3 teams of 3,
and probably the easiest, better to keep troops well feed or starved like an animal
how dose age effect comsnders eg napoleon got older so took less risks,
ancient urban warfare
ww2 tactics in Asia, tactics in the Chinese age of warlords, (and Chinese civil war)
tactics in the ruso jap war
cold war navil tactics,
Korean war tactics,
strange tactics or unque battles from the American war of independence and America civil
how were 17th centry sailing ships build
types of bombs lunched by drones
comands given on sailing ships (like ease the sheets and get ready to chine, or slack n beases, basically things you hear movie capitns say)
why did the nazis never return (or a video on best occupations)
why did the Japanese empire fall, dont just say "America" like things like how there army and navy argued alot
alot more on the Polynesians and māori, but please learn pronounceations if you do this
Even though, of course, it makes sense that the waist gunners suffered a lot of casualties. I always felt like they were the ones that could most easily bail out at least.
Best position was mechanic on the ground who maintained the engines and systems of the aircraft.
I’ve read from a different source that the bombadiers beat out the waist gunners because of the attack doctrine of the Luftwaffe. They approached at 12 o’clock high because that position had the least amount of gun exposure on them and the best chance of disabling the crew involved in mission execution. The bombadier took point, basically, and usually got it first.
if you consider that the waist gunner position is really 2 people, then the bombardier is actually the most dangerous according to the stats, and the waist gunner is closer to the Navigator in terms of the stats.
@@SPIKER1880 Ah, good point. That clarifies my argument.
Wild,a bunch of brave kids in these planes
Indeed so brave!
Kids indeed. Most were like 18, 19, 20. 25 and you were an old man. A true Children’s Crusade.
Do we have any data on which of the waist gunners (left or right) had higher casualties?
Your KIA numbers at the end only get to 90% plus the waist gunners are two positions so the 19% killed is split between two men.
My grandfather was a bombardier in a B-17. They were shot down during the Battle of the Bulge. Their aircraft exploded and my grandfather was thrown free of the craft and woke up somehow under his parachute. Only the pilot and a waist gunner survived along with my grandfather.
To be up there and having enemy aircraft shooting at you, and Flak being shot up at you. You needed “a pair” bigger than a ball turret!!
I work as season ground staff at an American cemetery, we have 3812 graves of American military personel, and the majority are bomber crew, as are those on the "Wall of the missing".
Masters of the Air
Waist gunners had full exposure to enemy fire and cold. Their fire positions being fully wide opened. That counts, although other gunners where suffering cold too. Navigator and bombardier where located in front of the planes, also acting as front gunners and targeted by enemy figthers in face to face: less defense and more valuable damages to be done to the plane to make it RTB.
I always thought the tail Gunner would-be the first to get taken out as it was the only gunner in the back besides the ball turret which could only angle back so much as well as the top turret.
In my opinion the worst position would have been the ball turret gunner, just because of how difficult it would have been to get out if you needed to bail out.
Best crew position for a b-17 was the ground crew😮
As others have pointed out this data is only that of B-17’s that made it back to base or made an emergency landing on allied secured ground.
Also agree that the waist gunner % should be divided by 2 as you usually had two gunners.
My Dad was a B-17 co-pilot with the 325th Bomb Squadron, 92nd Bomb Group, Station 109, Podington, England. He was shot down on his 2nd mission on 11 April 1944.
5 crew members were killed in action. The records are inaccurate as they show the Bombardier and Navigator as KIA, yet they were my father’s roommates in Stalag Luft 1.
For certain I know the pilot, flight engineer top turret gunner, right waist gunner and tail gunner were all killed in action. I do know they suffered a horrific head 20mm fighter attack that came through the cockpit windscreen.
Podington is now Santa Pod - a drag racing strip.
My uncle died on his 26th mission. He was the pilot. He went down in the channel on his first mission because they were down to one engine and the fuel had leaked out. He bailed over France when he went down the second time. I never heard what brought him down there. And then a German 88 flak gun killed him and all but 3 men including the Groups Colonel died that day.
He was decorated when the lead and co lead went down and he took charge to reorganize the group to reform and strike the target on about his 15th mission. Shortly after that he was made group leader.
He told Dad that the worst position was tail gunner. He said to get one out of the tail you needed a body bag and a mop.
Dad would say It took the Germans three times to finally get him.
He did a lot of living in his 22 years of life. He is in a grave in Belgium with many of his friends.
Waist gunner percentage was higher but their were two of these on each aircraft.
If they asked me where I want to be, I'd say, I like those radios!
I would have said by the fire in my den. Go figure.
Dad was a ball turret gunner. He was about 5’10 but side once inside he’d flipped on his back , plug in his suit and if no one was shooting at him he was fairly comfortable. An odd memory was after returning the kitchen was often closed but the cooks would have left something for them. His favorite and he talked about it often was really large bowls of fruit 🍎.
Thanks for sharing, I don't care what the stats say, you had to have brass balls to climb in to that ball turret. I've seen in museums how cramped these WW2 planes can be, some positions look like you would have to be 6 or 8 years old to fit in them.
A few issues with the statistics would be with regard to the waist gunner position. First of all, there are two waist gunner positions, one on each side, which would make sense as to why their casualty and wounded percentages are double or more of what the other positions are. Second, would be the fact that with the close proximity of other allied aircraft being in extremely tight formations that they unfortunately were very likely to have had quite a bit of friendly fire on one another. If they're flying in a formation of 3-6 aircraft, then the plane in the center would have allied aircraft on both or potentially all sides of them. I imagine there was unfortunately quite a bit of friendly fire on other allied aircraft that resulted in quite a few casualties or men wounded.
My Grandpas who fought in WW2 said nothing to me. How ignorantly blessed I was to have them! One taught me to play guitar...really well! I love you My dear departed Grandpas!
Thanks for sharing your story Gary, really appreciate it
My Maternal Grandfather was a waist gunner on a B-17. He survived 25 missions without injury and was a member of the Lucky Bastards.
Unfortunately, I never got to meet him because he passed away in 1960 due to lung issues (asthma) which he first developed during his time in England.
Cruel world
The higher numbers for the Pilots, navigator and bombardier's were the head and by that number is target #1 for fighters. and the Tail gunner for that being open to getting hit from all angles.
*When your time is up...its up!*
Question: Are waist gunners over-represented in the KIA and WIA numbers because there are two of them, or did you factor that into your calculation?
Tail gunners were the last non-bomb or reconnaissance job onboard bombers to be retired in the US Air Force, the last one was phased out completely in 1991 after a missile hit a B52’s tail due to the guns being locked onto by an anti-radiation missile using the radar of the guns to lock-on
Bombardier and Navigator are more dangerous than waist because there are two waist gunners. Since you’re giving the ratio of casualties at a given position to the overall number of casualties, you’d have to divide the ratio for waist gunners by two to get a fair comparison. This is presuming you don’t know whether someone was right or left waist when they became a casualty, and assuming the rates of left and right waist casualties are about equal.
Waist gunner starts are x2 as they are the only position with 2 crew members
Now do one for the Lancaster. I’d bet bomb aimers had a higher survival rate than the others.
Best position, Ground crew. Worst, anywhere on that aircraft when it took off.
I would have opted for upper mid turret.
My dad was a waist gunner and aerial photographer on the B-24 liberator. 5th air force, 20th combat mapping squadron.
All of them
Balls of steel, all of those men had em.
Definitely! They were the greatest generation!
@@PremierHistory
Imagine being between age 18 and typically 25 doing this? Most of us can't begin to know what it must have felt like.
I've been a big military aviation fan and fan of 20th. Century warfare my whole life. If I can't imagine it in reality ( a good thing 🤔) I can atleast learn and know of it to respect it and those that served in the military and through the wars. Both my parents lived through WWII in Europe as children, so I have learned much of their history too.
So given that the waist gunners had two positions it is not a surprise that that positions show as been the highest but when divided it ends up being just a bit above the flight engineer. So the real dangerous position was the bombardier.
Surrounded by only plastic, it's no wonder!
The B17 had a large steel bulkhead mounted behind the pilots. It was thick enough to stop .30 calibre rounds, but nothing heavier. The tail gunner had an armoured plate mounted in front of him, to protect his upper body and chest. He had to reach round it to operate his guns. The waist gunners had virtually zero protection other than steel helmets, if they wore them. The aluminium skin of the B17 was thinner than a postcard, and offered no protection at all against gunfire or shrapnel from flak bursts.... Brave men, all of them.... Claims from gunners is US bomber formations were sadly often exaggerated. You might get a raid with 300 to 400 US bombers, all in large formations. Imagine a scenario where a German fighter aircraft might attack the formation, and (say) 15 to 20 waist gunners, along with a similar number of top turret gunners, all fired at the fighter. The German plane is hit, and goes down smoking. *All* the gunners then claim a probable kill...... Not that this takes anything away from the sheer bravery and guts of these men.....
Unfortunately my great grandpa was part of the 19% of kia waist gunners, according to my great grandma his position was strafed by a German plane. Wounds were said to be as big as tennis balls.
What this tells us is survivability on aircraft that returned. What it doesn't tell us is which position had an easier time egressing once the command to abandon ship was given. I'm reasonably sure the ball turret gunners didn't fare nearly as well in that.
I noticed the KIA numbers only account for 90%.
I didn't realise that the jobs of top gunner and flight engineer were done by one person.
Well, I'm 6'5" so most likely I would have been the top or side gunner?
I'm not surprised the pilot/co-pilot, navigator, and bomb bombardier had the highest KIA/WIA percentage.
To all WWII allied airmen thank you and R.I.P. 🇺🇸 🇬🇧
I would have thought that the waist gunners were the safest ( if there was such a thing ) position
Turns out that I was wrong .
It would make sense the waist gunner had the highest casualty rate considering there were 2 of them. It seems the bombardier was the worst position.