The Waterbury Democrat., 1942-08-10

potent air weapon of the war. So alarming has this word been that the Army Air Force and the Boeing company which made the original ships, assigned some of their per- sonnel to run down the source of the story. It is now possible to tell what really happened.
 The main fact of the story is eS- sentially accurate. Seven Flying Fortresses, flown by RAF pilots, were sent over for daylight raid against an important objective, and five of them were shot down. But the facts behind the raid reveal an amazingly careless disregard of cor rect tactical handling of the big ships, and this caused the heavy losses.
 It was not the first time the For tresses had been sent over the con- tinent, either, but the second. On both trips they were unescorted by fighter planes. The first time, the planes went over at high altitude, which is what the Fortresses were designed for daylight precision bombing at heights above ack-ack and pursuit plane ceilings. The course to the objective was flown blind, there being a heavy haze. ON THE NOSE
 Not being able to see their tar get, no bombs were dropped, on this first raid, but when the planes reached the point where the naviga- tors said the target should be, pho- tographs were taken, using filters and trick infra-red photographic equipment. The planes, unchal- lenged, flew home.
 Whn their films were developed, 1t was discovered the planes had been right over their target. Had they dropped their bombs, they would have registered direct hits.
 Elated, the RAF command or dered the planes sent back on the same mission the following day. This time the pilots were told to go in at 5000 feet. Why, will never be known. Maybe it was because they had encountered no opposition when they had gone over at much higher attitudes.
 Anyway, the weather on this flight was clear. The pilots obeyed orders. And the Germans were Wait- ing. Apparently warned by the previous days flight, they come up with everything they had in the vicinity. What they did to the seven big bombers was plenty. Ger man attack planes went after them from above, below and the sides. And five of the seven were shot down. One limped home and made crash landing. Photos show the fuselage riddled with bullet holes.
 It was from this tragic misuse of the Flying Fortresses that the planes began to get their bad name in Eng land. The story was repeated, and word got around that the Flying Fortress was a washout for use in Germany, though it might be all right against undefended objectives. CHANGES UNFOUNDED
 The Flying Frotress was said to be too slow, to be insufficiently armed, to carry an inadequate bomb load two tons against British bombers' seven tons. All the charges, Army Air Force officers declare, are urfounded.
 The Fortress, known to the Army as the B-17, is faster than the Consolidated B-24 and was built for long range, high altitude bombing - around 5000 miles at 90, ,00O feet or better-carrying two tons of bombs at this extreme range. When the range Is cut down to around 500 miles and the gasoline load can be decreased. the bomb load can be increased accordingly.
 Flying Fortress armament has been stepped up with each new model. The first Fortress carried only .3O-caliber machine guns, and had no tail gun. The Japs found that out and did consider able damage to Fortresses in the Far East. That was corrected, and in the battle of Midway the big bombers had field day.
 Today, the Fortresses carry eight or more 50 caliber machine guns, including two in the tail, and are the worlds heaxiest armed and armored planes.
 Better Dig bombers unquestion- ably will be built before the war is over, but the word from the Air Force today is not to sell the Fly ing Fortress short.