News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:The Cannons on the B-29 Bomber by gaius on Wednesday December 02, 2015 @08:35AM (#10662812)
It would probably have been better to omit those heavy guns and turrets and to leave those gunners on the ground to save weight, lives, and resources

That is exactly what Freeman Dyson said of the Lancaster bomber.

Tho' no sooner had the belly turret been removed than the Luftwaffe invented upward-firing guns, they would slip into position directly under, matching speed and heading, then just let rip.

Re:The Cannons on the B-29 Bomber by arethuza on Wednesday December 02, 2015 @08:52AM (#10662884)
Upward firing weapons were actually used in a number of fighters - originally in WW1 for attacking zeppelins:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schr%C3%A4ge_Musik

Re:The Cannons on the B-29 Bomber by Theodores on Wednesday December 02, 2015 @11:56AM (#10664090)
The Schräge Musik approach is also 'Keep It Simple' in contrast to the American over-complicate-it approach.

That term is also interesting as they considered jazz music to be 'queer'.

Ultimately though it was fuel that mattered. When the USA joined the war half way through it meant that Allied planes were on 100 octane petrol, meanwhile the Germans were using some glorified coal slurry and the Japanese were using some tree bark extract made by school kids.

Re:The Cannons on the B-29 Bomber by mrec on Wednesday December 02, 2015 @10:11AM (#10663366)
Don't forget the Defiant, a WW2 fighter whose only armament consisted of a rearward-facing turret.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boulton_Paul_Defiant