4 ms·

Japan's ability to defend itself from air attacks was essentially over before the mass firebombing attacks even began. Before the first firebomb raid the US rem

Japan's ability to defend itself from air attacks was essentially over before the mass firebombing attacks even began. Before the first firebomb raid the US removed all but one machine gun from each B-29's in order to carry more bombs, judging correctly that the Japanese defenses were weak enough.

dragontamer 5y ago
It sounds like the removal of guns was not only about bombs, but also about speed. If you got shot at early, you simply drop your bombs (maybe over rural farmland) and hit the engines as hard as you can. You wanted to fall into the part of the sea where the US-Navy still controlled the area. The bombers were flighting high enough that even if they were shot down... there was a chance of being rescued after a crash landing. But the crash landing absolutely had to be outside of the control of the Japanese. As such, more engine power, less guns, more bombs. Drop the bombs if attacked unexpectedly, and drift towards the Navy. If all goes well... with a bit of luck, you outrun the enemy on the way back as well. Your plane is much lighter after the payload has been dropped
- danielvf 5y ago
  It was for bombs, not speed. Here's right from General LeMay's autobiography: "...We had decided to take out the guns and gunners to make up for the shortage of airplanes, because it would be another factor in helping increase the bombload. However, if the change to low altitude had been quite a step to take, then going in at low altitude with half a crew was something else!" The firebombing of Japan was done at low altitude, not high altitude. Do you have a source on heavy bombers over Japan dropping bombs on farmland and fleeing if attacked? That seems against almost every principal of bomber warfare. Lone bombers are much easier to kill than a formation, and an entire formation jettisoning bombs and abandoning their attack just because a few fighters showed up, or AA fire began is hard for me to comprehend.

dragontamer 5y ago

It sounds like the removal of guns was not only about bombs, but also about speed. If you got shot at early, you simply drop your bombs (maybe over rural farmland) and hit the engines as hard as you can. You wanted to fall into the part of the sea where the US-Navy still controlled the area. The bombers were flighting high enough that even if they were shot down... there was a chance of being rescued after a crash landing. But the crash landing absolutely had to be outside of the control of the Japanese. As such, more engine power, less guns, more bombs. Drop the bombs if attacked unexpectedly, and drift towards the Navy. If all goes well... with a bit of luck, you outrun the enemy on the way back as well. Your plane is much lighter after the payload has been dropped

danielvf 5y ago
It was for bombs, not speed. Here's right from General LeMay's autobiography: "...We had decided to take out the guns and gunners to make up for the shortage of airplanes, because it would be another factor in helping increase the bombload. However, if the change to low altitude had been quite a step to take, then going in at low altitude with half a crew was something else!" The firebombing of Japan was done at low altitude, not high altitude. Do you have a source on heavy bombers over Japan dropping bombs on farmland and fleeing if attacked? That seems against almost every principal of bomber warfare. Lone bombers are much easier to kill than a formation, and an entire formation jettisoning bombs and abandoning their attack just because a few fighters showed up, or AA fire began is hard for me to comprehend.