Downing Soviet Tu-4 on the Polar Route

[BROF]

Everyone says the same thing, but no one is sure. In my opinion it makes no sense to load a point defense interceptor with heavy guns. To shoot down a Soviet Tu-4 in polar route would have sufficed with a Northrop Black Widow with 20-mm guns and the P-72's six 0.5 Browning would be enough to intercept any isolated aircraft that overcame the DEW Line's defenses.

DEW line became operationnal in 07/1957...

 

[Justo Miranda]

DEW line became operationnal in 07/1957...

The last Soviet Air Force Tu-4 was retired in the early 1960s

 

[BROF]

They were retired from strategic missions for more many years already. Anyway the P-61 could not intercept a B-29 / Tu-4 at its cruising altitude and even at its best altitude had a very narrow speed margin over a B-29 / Tu-4. It was rather disappointing aircraft, especially in ceiling and speed over 6000 m altitude. And P-61s had long disappeared when DEW line became operational. Mixing P-61, B-29 / Tu-4 and DEW line is juste nonsensical.

 

[Justo Miranda]

They were retired from strategic missions for more many years already. Anyway the P-61 could not intercept a B-29 / Tu-4 at its cruising altitude and even at its best altitude had a very narrow speed margin over a B-29 / Tu-4. It was rather disappointing aircraft, especially in ceiling and speed over 6000 m altitude. And P-61s had long disappeared when DEW line became operational. Mixing P-61, B-29 / Tu-4 and DEW line is juste nonsensical.

You confuse a hypothetical situation (World War III) with historical facts. Had circumstances necessitated the entry into service of XP-72 and the rapid construction of a series of radar stations at the subsequent DEW Line site, they would also have necessitated the active service of ANY available Soviet nuclear-capable bomber that would be flying at low altitude to evade radar detection

 

[Scott Kenny]

Everyone says the same thing, but no one is sure. In my opinion it makes no sense to load a point defense interceptor with heavy guns. To shoot down a Soviet Tu-4 in polar route would have sufficed with a Northrop Black Widow with 20-mm guns and the P-72's six 0.5 Browning would be enough to intercept any isolated aircraft that overcame the DEW Line's defenses.

A 37mm would only need a couple of hits to down a Tu-4/B-29, while .50cals would take IIRC twice the weight of ammunition.

It's why the late-war German interceptors went from 7.92mm to 15mm to 20mm to 30mm.

And if you want a mixed battery of say, .50cals and 37mm, you want a 37mm with close to the same MV as the .50cals (~2800fps) to hit at the same point of aim. So you'd need a different weapon than the M4/M9/M10 37mm autocannons as used in the P-39 etc. Something using the same ammunition as the M3 37mm antitank gun.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

They were retired from strategic missions for more many years already. Anyway the P-61 could not intercept a B-29 / Tu-4 at its cruising altitude and even at its best altitude had a very narrow speed margin over a B-29 / Tu-4. It was rather disappointing aircraft, especially in ceiling and speed over 6000 m altitude. And P-61s had long disappeared when DEW line became operational. Mixing P-61, B-29 / Tu-4 and DEW line is juste nonsensical.

The DEW Line came into existence in the late 50's. Earlier variants, and less effective ones, like Pinetree, were essentially stop gaps. By the time of DEW, the US interceptors were second generation jets like the F-89 or F-86D and there were Nike Ajax batteries in place for most critical targets and cities in the US northeast region.

Within a few years, this would shift to Nike Hercules, BOMARC, and newer interceptors like the F-102. SAGE was also in place starting in the late 50's.

Aside from that, if the Tu 4 threat were really serious, the US could have pushed aircraft like the DF-82 carrying an early AAM like the Ryan Firebird.

And there were jet nightfighters like the F-94 Starfire even in 1949.

 

[Atomic Coyote]

Given that the Tu-4 replaced the defensive .50s from the B-29 with NS-23s, I wouldn't feel too comfortable going up against them in a .50 armed fighter than would need a ton of hits to take it down.

Of course, as previously mentioned, this is moot, because there were other interceptors in place by 1949 and the Tu-4's range would have been marginal to hit much of the US even in a one-way attack. In the early 50s I would wonder if the Soviets would choose to use them against Western Europe instead.

 

[Kiltonge]

Aside from that, if the Tu 4 threat were really serious, the US could have pushed aircraft like the DF-82 carrying an early AAM like the Ryan Firebird.

And there were jet nightfighters like the F-94 Starfire even in 1949.

A general rule of thumb is that an interceptor needs a speed margin of at least 50% over that of its target to be able to engage anything capable of manoeuvring, which is why the B-29 was easy prey for MiG-15s over Korea but why an SR-71 interception by a MiG-25 had to be head-on with a big helping of luck ( which it never got ).

 

[Justo Miranda]

A 37mm would only need a couple of hits to down a Tu-4/B-29, while .50cals would take IIRC twice the weight of ammunition.

It's why the late-war German interceptors went from 7.92mm to 15mm to 20mm to 30mm.

And if you want a mixed battery of say, .50cals and 37mm, you want a 37mm with close to the same MV as the .50cals (~2800fps) to hit at the same point of aim. So you'd need a different weapon than the M4/M9/M10 37mm autocannons as used in the P-39 etc. Something using the same ammunition as the M3 37mm antitank gun.

The B-29 was very tough, some returning from Japan after being hit by two kamikazes.