Why the B-17 Flying Fortress Was a Better Bomber Than the B-24 Liberator

When discussing America’s role in World War II, the focus often lands on the sky – where the clash of engineering marvels turned the tides of many battles. Among the giants of the air, the Boeing B-17 Flying Fortress and the Consolidated B-24 Liberator are often compared for their roles, capabilities, and impact.

The B-17’s Durability: A Legendary Strength

The B-17 Flying Fortress, heralded for its durability and resilience, held a special place in the hearts of its crew. Tom Wiley, a World War II B-17 pilot and squad leader, shared his insights at a veterans’ breakfast, underlining key attributes that made the B-17 safer and more reliable in combat. The plane’s broad, deep wings were a defining feature, contributing significantly to its ability to sustain damage yet continue flying. This aspect was crucial for missions over hostile territory where encountering anti-aircraft gunfire and fighters was a given. The electrical controls of the B-17 further added to its reliability. Unlike the hydraulic controls of the B-24, which were rendered useless if damaged, the B-17’s electrical system offered a chance at makeshift repairs mid-flight, a potential lifesaver in dire situations.

The broader wings of the B-17 didn’t just offer a physical advantage; they influenced the dynamics of air battles. German fighters, recognizing the robustness imparted by the B-17’s design, often prioritized the B-24 Liberator as a target. According to Wiley, this tactic was noticeable during sorties, with German planes bypassing B-17 formations to attack the more vulnerable B-24s. This strategic choice by the enemy indirectly testified to the B-17’s resilience, as its design elements, including the wider wings and larger tail, made it a harder target to bring down.

Vulnerabilities and Valor

Contrasting sharply with its counterpart, the B-24 Liberator, despite its commendable speed and payload capacity, was more susceptible to damage due to its narrower wings. This structural limitation not only made it a preferred target for German fighters but also contributed to a higher vulnerability when faced with anti-aircraft defenses. Wiley’s interactions with enemy pilots post-war reinforced this notion, with one admitting the difficulty of engaging B-17 formations effectively due to their tight defensive positioning and the bomber’s imposing structure.

Interestingly, Wiley’s experiences also highlighted an unexpected dimension of aerial combat—interactions with friendly forces. Recalling an incident involving Tuskegee Airmen, Wiley puzzled over their daring maneuver to fly into a B-17 formation during a mission over Italy. This act, perceived as risky by B-17 crews ready to defend against any perceived threat, was clarified years later as perhaps a blend of audacity and showmanship. Such encounters, while minor in the grand strategy of the war, enriched the lore of these bombers and their crews.