B-32 Dominator - America's "other" superbomber of WW2

Have you ever heard of America's "other" superbomber of WW2? Yes, it's Consolidated's B-32 Dominator! It was a Plan B to the B-29 Superfortress. It's a tragic tale of a troubled warbird that nonetheless somehow secured its place in history! Like this video? Hit me with a SuperThanks to get more!
Join this channel to get access to perks:
/ @worldofwarbirds
Like airplanes? Check out my other channel: ‪@flyinbryan5629‬

[@ForTehNguyen]

Axis: We can barely fuel and pilot our planes America: Oh, we R&Ded a spare strategic bomber just in case

[@worldofwarbirds]

I fully laughed at this one!

[@hoytoy100]

Goes to show that tactics do not win wars (except against the French and lately the US), it is resources, industrial capability, and logistics.

[@nightbladexxx]

​@@hoytoy100tactics didn't really be at the US, our politicians do that for our enemies

[@CountCraigula]

@@ForTehNguyen Excellent insight! And damn funny!

[@milferdjones2573]

@@hoytoy100 Short wars can be won by good strategy and tactics and better troops long wars won by GDP

[@darkwood777]

My cousin flew B-24s and then transitioned to the B-32 for his last flights in the Pacific. I think he flew 5 flights that were all successful. He wished that they had gotten the aircraft sooner and thought it was a definite step up from the B-24.

[@worldofwarbirds]

Thanks for sharing!

[@joshkamp7499]

Minor but significant error in detail: the bomb load specified was 20,000#, not 2,000 as displayed and stated in the video.

[@worldofwarbirds]

I thought it was a low number too, but I did see it in multiple documents. Perhaps it meant 2000lbs at the very maximum range? At lower ranges and with lower fuel loads it would carry more bomb load? I did state later in the video that the payload ended up being 20,000lbs. Thanks for looking for errors.

[@Wyomingchief]

​@@worldofwarbirdsit is 20,000 lb. One of the original videos on KZbin like 20 years ago, stated 2000 lb also and that misconception has been perpetuated ever since. Numerous people have stated the same thing as you did and, subsequently came to find out that they were misinformed also. I believe I'm one of the Air Force websites you can get the correct information

[@NotchFox]

A p38 could carry an external bomb load 4000 lb. The bomb load of the b32 must have been 20,000 lb.

[@CountCraigula]

The only real flaw that it had was an undersized vertical stabilizer.

[@wellitsjustG]

soo nice to hear a human voice, and some humor with my data download. Thank you.

[@worldofwarbirds]

Glad you enjoyed it! And I get some criticism about the humour so it’s nice to hear people appreciating it

[@mcmax571]

The B-32 was plan B if Boeing couldn't get the B-29 work.

[@milferdjones2573]

Interesting atomic program not coordinated so they put in two bomb bays in both plans and had to do significant changes to get B-29 single bay for the BOMB. LIke Mark Felton on recently released and developed information British had trained and sent a squadron of Liberators to drop the Bomb instead if American bomber engines burning not fixable in time. Even thought the B-29 not quite reliable enough in the end wanting it to be a US dropping Atomic not British the US insisted they do the bombing. Liberator due to slower speed could not do a near 90 degree turn and go back the way it came but it certainly could avoid the blast mostly if it went straight over target. Then war ended and US rudely would not let the British scientist key to developing the bomb take their notes home so British had to work out the fine details to get their bomb to work only for US to reverse policy about the time the Brits tested theirs.

[@robertsullivan4773]

Thanks for remembering the Air man that was the last to be lost on Air combat. I was of the belief he was the last of the war period.

[@worldofwarbirds]

Yes, it sure was a shame to be the last one...

[@davidjernigan8161]

Convair was also working on the B-36 at this time along with the Liberator and Catalina production. So, their plate was pretty full.

[@briancooper2112]

Yes. But at 1945 pby production was shutting down to concentrate on bombers.

[@eottoe2001]

@@briancooper2112 Yeah, because by mid-1943 the German submarines were pretty much decimated by the Allies. The need for PBYs wasn't so much. (If I got this wrong, guy, don't hammer too hard.)

[@lancaster5077]

The PBY had an amazing wing.

[@botalm1878]

One can also say that B32 lived on as CV2-3-and 440 Metropolitan, albeit smaller. Design is very similar.

[@ronrichardson4805]

Would love to see proformance statistics on the B32 vs the B29 !!!

[@markfryer9880]

Given that this video covers several Consolidated aircraft from WWII and the Pacific, you may find the following information interesting. Eighteen months ago I visited the Flying Boat Museum at Lake Boga near Swan Hill in Victoria, Australia. It was built as the Top Secret Flying Boat Maintenance and Repair Facility for the Australian Theatre of Operations and was far enough inland to be safe from Japanese Carrier borne aircraft attack. They have a Frankenstein PBY Catalina hung from the ceiling. The aircraft was rebuilt from the parts of several scrapped Cats. One of several displays are several aero engines, the one that powered the Catalina and then in another corner is the engine used in the B-29 and B-32, and it absolutely dwarfs the Catalina engine in size and complexity. If any of your viewers are visiting Australia and travelling along the Murray River, then 'do yourself a favour' and take a day trip to the Flying Boat Museum at Lake Boga. Excellent place for a picnic around the lake and there is accommodation available, even a caravan park. Swan Hill is just up the road if you need bigger supplies or support facilities. Mark from Melbourne Australia 🇦🇺😮

[@worldofwarbirds]

Thanks for the review! I’d love to get Down Under at some point! I’ve got quite a few viewers and listeners in Australia!

[@markfryer9880]

@@worldofwarbirds You are more than welcome to come down for a visit and having viewers here will give you the opportunity of having your own personal tour guides in most places. The Lake Boga facilities are important to me because of a former neighbour and mate of mine who flew in the Cats during the war. He knew three or four generations of my family, so he was important to me. He is gone now, but I still carry the stories that he told me about his time in the RAAF and the Cats. One of his favourite stories was of flying out from Northern Australia up into the islands to our North, landing to refuel and load up with sea mines and then taking off to head for the Inland Sea between Southern China and Japan. Dropping the sea mines, then turning around to hopefully fly back to Australia. Mission Time, 27 hours.

[@namvet_13e]

My Dad flew B-32s, after flying B24s but his service in that bird was all stateside. He never had anything bad to say about that aircraft. He did say it was a very fast bomber.

[@worldofwarbirds]

Interesting! Thanks for sharing!

[@toddsikkema7654]

My dad did the same. I think it was the highlight of his life--he kept all his flight records and a list of the bases he was stationed at, and passed them on to my brother and me when he died. He had many pics of B-32s in flight--he always took a camera with him and managed to get some good photos (not sure if that was allowed, really, but he did it).

[@mkuti-childress3625]

I never heard of it until I started to research something my grandfather told my aunt about an accident at the end of the war that had gutted him exceptionally hard. He told her years ago that there was a mission to photograph Japanese planes to make sure they were removing props and following the surrender agreement and that he was supposed to be on one of those planes that day. Something happened that prevented him from being there at the last moment, so his replacement went instead. That plane crashed immediately upon takeoff, and everyone was killed. He said that there were guys on that plane he had trained and was friends with, and he always felt that it should have been him, instead. Also he said that the investigation was really hard on him because he felt like they were accusing him of sabotage at first. That was all I knew, and my aunt couldn’t remember more details. He never talked about it again to anyone else that I know of, but he rarely talked about the war at all. I never expected a story like this. But… it didn’t make sense to me. He was in the 65th Troop Carrier Squadron as a Comms/Nav guy. And they mostly flew C-47s! On paper, the 65th was with Troop Carrier Groups all during the war except for a period when they were assigned to the 5th Air Force. I know he was good at his job, taught classes, (Grandma was a radio repairman and even she allegedly took a course he taught in OK), etc., and was always a good problem solver. But I wouldn’t have expected him to work with a bomb squadron like this. I checked on dates and their time did overlap quite a bit in and around New Guinea and possibly the Philippines, so I guess they could have met. Unfortunately, his records were in the huge fire, so I’m stuck with Google. But it has been amazing to see all the info out there now, and I’m hoping to figure out how he was involved with the 386th and the Dominator! It’s cool to see people around who knew people who flew that plane!

[@davidjernigan8161]

It's not a surprise so few know about the Dominator since they were all scrapped.

[@worldofwarbirds]

True! And not even one left for a museum!

[@CountCraigula]

Assembly line to scrapyard. Sad.

[@moredistractions]

That's pretty wild. I had never even heard of that aircraft type before, let alone known that they were flown in the war. It's amazing to think that they were only about a decade apart in design from the B-52, which is still on full operational duty today, well into the 21st century.

[@worldofwarbirds]

Yes, there were/are some amazing warbirds with incredible longevity. I’m looking forward to doing the Douglas A-1 Skyraider which will allow me to stretch ‘my’ era into Vietnam and beyond!

[@markfryer9880]

I believe that the Skyraider was equipped with the same engine as the B-29.​@@worldofwarbirds

[@akmurf7429]

The BUFF is a great design that has proven itself over and over. Just like the A-10 they keep threatening to retire. Another still very effective aircraft. But we need to order new stuff to keep the military-industrial complex smothered in cash.

[@akmurf7429]

It's sad how short-sighted they were to not have preserved many of the WWII aircraft. I'm sure they were just glad it was over, wanted to put it behind them, and didn't think about it.

[@Jalu3]

A wing of a B-32 remains at a City of San Diego Park in the Otay Mesa West neighborhood, specifically at the Montgomery-Waller Community Park.

[@worldofwarbirds]

That’s a pretty cool detail. Is there a plaque or anything?

[@dahawk8574]

The plaque is dedicated to John Montgomery. America's Otto Lilienthal, if you will. For those interested in this aviation pioneer, I'd recommend the movie Gallant Journey, with Glenn Ford as Montgomery. There are similar monuments to him in Silicon Valley, in Evergreen and at Santa Clara University. He had no connection to the B-32. None that I'm aware of. And it's not exactly the wing. It's from a static test article.

[@mkuti-childress3625]

What? I live here in San Diego! My grandfather was supposed to be on the flight that crashed on takeoff at Yonton, but something came up and they got a replacement who was a friend of his. Apparently he was pretty gutted. But I guess it had been really exciting to get to work on the newest plane until then. I will have to go to the park to see it!!! I have just discovered a lot of details about the Dominator, the 386th, and the guys who few them, so now I can take photos for my family!

[@johnosbourn4312]

The infamous Last Mission of the B-32 was flown on Aug. 18th 1945, not Aug. 18th 1944.

[@worldofwarbirds]

Damn did I say 44? Ug. A slip of the lip! I’ll post a correction. Thanks

[@goplad1]

I know where there is an intact example of the B-32. In my model display case! 😁

[@worldofwarbirds]

Who makes the kit? That would be a fun one! I’m working on a B-25 right now.

[@davidgustavson42]

An alternate would have been a logical choice. The Primary problem with the B29 was the engine. Requiring the back up aircraft to use the same troubled engine raises a question. How much stock in Pratt and Whitney did Roosevelt donors own?

[@taproom113]

Always follow the money ... 👍 ^v^

[@DontThinkso-kb9tc]

Hap Arnold built a fighting team that sang a fighting song, About the wild blue yonder and days when men were strong....

[@IOSALive]

World of Warbirds, I really liked this video! I subscribed too!

[@worldofwarbirds]

I'm glad you liked it! Welcome aboard!

[@rafaucett]

I think it's interesting how the B-32 looks similar to the Consolidated PB4Y-2 Privateer (an offshoot of the B-24) especially the tail.

[@worldofwarbirds]

Very much so. In fact another viewer said that he has seen a surviving B-32, but I suspect that it was a Privateer.

[@Wyomingchief]

​@@worldofwarbirdsyeah it is a privateer, and fun fact all the privateers that were used for Forest fighting have all been taken out of service because the FAA demanded it. They had way too many hours and we're becoming unsafe

[@ridethecurve55]

It wasn't the plane, so much as the Parts! Quality Control was a sketchy business back then. My lot goes in for the 'B-32 DeNile🤔'.

[@bertg.6056]

The engines were problematic for both the B-32 and the B-29.

[@worldofwarbirds]

Certainly! They were being asked to perform at their very limit even as the bugs were being ironed out.

[@treystephens6166]

The USA 🇺🇸 wastes a lot of Great Aircraft.

[@worldofwarbirds]

What amazes me was that they had the industrial capacity to invest is TWO superbomber programs while still churning out B-17s, B-24s and all the rest!

[@bricefleckenstein9666]

B-32 was too little too late - no significant quantity ever saw usage before the end of the war, since it didn't even START to arrive at front-line units 'til May 1945.

[@Wyomingchief]

Yeah literally what he talks about in the video😂😂 it's also because the Army Air corps decided to sync all their effort into the b-29. And let's be honest had they done the same thing with the b32 it would have been in service at least a year earlier

[@bricefleckenstein9666]

@@Wyomingchief Perhaps - but it seems the reason it didn't get into production sooner was too many issues, so probably not.

[@richardlincoln8438]

Another entertaining and informative episode Brian. Thank You for Your time and effort. Best Wishes to everyone.

[@worldofwarbirds]

You’re welcome! I always enjoy seeing your feedback!

[@georgedoolittle9015]

Arado medium German Jet Bomber ended this aircraft once the USA which had seen this aircraft in use as a Bomber during the Battle of Remagen over the Rhine i think 1945 as the obvious advantages were clear to all eventually even US Industry. The absolutely *MASSIVE* "Peacemaker" Bomber was being built at this time as well so these literal toys compared to that were all quickly wound down excepting the B-29 and B-50 which soldiered on even today soldier on actually just not as Bombers anymore.

[@TedAlba-v8p]

Boeing had already done the work with B-19 pre-war mock ups.

[@bbeen40]

The Allies also had a squadron of black liberators equipped and trained to dropp the atomic bombs, if necessary. The B-29 cost more than the entire Manhattan project and we still had to have multiple backups. I guess Boeing was always over budget and behind. Some things never change, lol.

[@matrox]

Should have been called the B32 Damn! inator!

[@Jack-xo2zp]

I've always had a question about the B-32 in relation to the B-29 which has never been answered. I've raised the question on several websites that have told the story of the development of the B-29 and how the B-29 program was the most expensive wartime program of the US, and no one has ever had a good answer to the question. The question is, that if the B-29 program was the most expensive wartime program, how expensive was the B-32 program? Was the quoted cost of the B-29 program really the cost of both planes, since both contracts were signed at the same time to produce a long-range bomber? If so, that would explain why the "B-29" program was so expensive since the program really covered the cost of two airplane designs. On the other hand, if the very expensive cost of the B-29 program was just the cost of developing the B-29 and not both planes, then what was the cost of developing the B-32? That cost must have been equally expensive. I've tried to find the cost of the B-32, but there don't seem to be any records available. As you have said, the B-32 seems to be the forgotten bomber. If anyone has an answer, I'd be interested to read it. Thanks.

[@worldofwarbirds]

I’d like to know too!

[@jacksons1010]

I can’t offer a figure, but a primary reason for the expense of the B-29 was the remote-controlled gun turrets, or more specifically the computing gun sights to make the multiple remote gun targeting system work. The B-32 would have fielded the same system, so it would not have represented additional cost. The B-32 also used the same R-3350 engines, so again it didn’t involve additional development cost.

[@zombywoof1072]

It wasn't the development of prototypes that was so expensive. It was developing the infrastructure to mass produce the B-29 and the mass production itself.

[@zombywoof1072]

Also, I think someone should look into the claim itself. As we've seen over the last few years, there's been something of a revolution in the history of WWII in general. Many errors and myths passed around endlessly in secondary history sources have been overturned by people researching primary sources. It's interesting that most of the people doing this primary research are advanced amateur historians who are hyper-focused on a single aspect of the war, rather than historians with graduate degrees. And it's being done by people with YT channels. Chalk up a win for the Internet.

[@stephen1991]

I’d assume since they awarded two different companies, Boeing and Consolidated, contracts for their designs of the heavy bomber, there would be two separate contracts. Allowing the two to work simultaneously, while not cost effective, helped insure that the odds were better that at least one would succeed.

[@enscroggs]

The B-32's tail looks like the tail of the PB4Y-2 Privateer.

[@Imintune...]

Never heard of them. Must had a short service life

[@worldofwarbirds]

They almost had NO service life and not one surviving example exists so very few have heard of them!

[@Wyomingchief]

You need to study the Pacific Theater a little better. In fact it was pretty famous because of that last mission over tokyo. It was literally the last air combat of World War II. That's how I first heard about it 30+ years ago. The incident was mentioned in the book Samurai that was written by the top Japanese Ace to survive the war. Suburo Saki

[@worldofwarbirds]

You know about it because you've looked into it. The vast majority of comments I've gotten have been "never heard of it". As we lose the the actual vets, it's then up to people like you and I to pass on the stories that we've picked up. I'm presently reading a book on Guadalcanal "53 Days on Starvation Island" and will be interviewing the author at some point.

[@worldofwarbirds]

Sakai's book is excellent. As I said in my reply to your other comment, many folks have never commented that they have never heard of the B-32. My day job is educator and I see that as my main role here too. Cheers!

[@texhaines9957]

My Grandfather worked on pretty much all Convair bombers but mostly B24 and B36. He was a supervisor.

[@farcohollis1369]

My father was Navy brought on land to oversee the removal of all Japanese propellers and arms.

[@worldofwarbirds]

Did he say what his reception was like? I wonder at those initial contacts between Allied and Japanese forces soon after the surrender.

[@farcohollis1369]

@@worldofwarbirds He said they performed the work willingly but weren’t happy about it.

[@unclefart5527]

Really doubt this came anywhere close to the technology patents of the B-29. If one ended up in Russia the would likely think they had a single tail B-24.

[@IRNHYD]

The B-32 looked more like a four engined variant of the Martin B-26 Marauder than a B-24. As an aside, Martin designed a four engined bomber based upon the Marauder. The sketches look remarkably like a B-32.

[@IRNHYD]

The B-32 actually surpassed the B-29 in some very important respects. The ‘32 had a 20% greater range advantage over the ‘29…. 3800 miles. The ‘32 could maintain a much higher cruising speed (290 mph) than the ‘29 (230 mph). The reversible pitch props fitted to the ‘32 were extremely useful as well. The AF was simply fully invested in the ‘29 by the time the ‘32 made the scene. Some of these advantages were likely why Consolidated (Convair) was chosen to build the B-29s replacement (B-36 Peacemaker)

[@Wyomingchief]

As the previous commenter stated, I doubt the original post is done any significant Research into bomber aircraft World War II because he's absurdly naive in his statements😂😂

[@whatever8282828]

"That's the end of that chapter" … What an intriguing and unfortunate tale!A good effort, I suppose.

[@worldofwarbirds]

Pretty fascinating story though.

[@RobertStewart-i3m]

It would have really been something if the one with the final air fatality had been preserved, trust govt to shoot history in the foot.

[@worldofwarbirds]

I certainly agree! An aircraft type should never just “go extinct “!

[@Wyomingchief]

Well let's be honest here when you just finished a global war were literally thousands of Americans and millions of worldwide population is killed the last thing you're thinking about is keeping things to think about the war😂😂

[@RobertStewart-i3m]

@@Wyomingchief I know, right. As the Romans said: To avoid war, prepare for war.....

[@Sean2002FU]

I was told ( from a very reliable source) there is one survivor....its apparently at the bottom of lake Michigan...That's what i was told from someone who is involved in the Michigan lake wreaks...

[@worldofwarbirds]

Now that's interesting! It wouldn't be the first wreck to come out of that lake if recovered!

[@allegheny48]

In my opinion the B32 was one of best looking 4 engine bombers ever built primarily due to the addition of the 19 ft. vertical tail. Too bad one could not have been saved for the future USAF museum in Dayton, OH. Some pieces still exist but that's it.

[@worldofwarbirds]

If you like "big tails" hehe...

[@tacticalmattfoley]

It's amazing Consolidated was granted another contract after the difficulties with the B24 program.......which was almost impossible to fly at low speed.

[@IRNHYD]

The B-24 wasn’t the only aircraft that had such difficulties. The Martin B-26 Marauder was notorious for killing its crews. The problem wasn’t the aircraft. Martin gave the AF exactly what it asked for in the contract. So did Consolidated. The problem was training. Once B-26 crews were properly trained in the aircraft’s idiosyncrasies, the Marauder’s crews loved them. They were nearly as fast as a fighter with no payload. They were very maneuverable. The same issues applied to the B-24 (training)

[@taproom113]

@@IRNHYD Truth. ^v^

[@k75romeofive]

I am not sure they were all scrapped. I live in Colorado and near to an airport that has slurry bombers based there at times. I saw a plane that I recognized as a B24, but had a single vertical tail. I asked a friend who was an ATC at that airport about thie plane and he told me it was a " Dominator". He was an F-4 Phantom pilot and is very well versed in WWII planes. I saw this plane many times that summer and I am pretty sure it was the B-32.

[@worldofwarbirds]

Perhaps it was a PB4Y-2 Privateer? It was the Navy version of the B-24 AND had a single fin.

[@goplad1]

@@worldofwarbirds That's exactly what it was. The Privateer and Dominator were similar in appearance. One could be fooled at first glance.

[@stevetaylor9926]

Or maybe a B-24K or B-24N. They were prototype single tail versions of the B-24. I read somewhere that they handled much better with a single tail. Cheers from Australia

[@ltcterry2006]

PB4Y2 Privateer. A B-24 variant. My grandfather was crew chief on one that disappeared shortly after WWII. My dad flew some for a few hours right out of flight school in the mid-50s. Only one left flying now that I am aware of.

[@IRNHYD]

It was a Privateer you saw, guaranteed. Every single B-32 was quickly scrapped after the war ended.

[@robertspence831]

Thanks for putting this together. Very interesting aircraft. Kind of a tragic history, though.

[@worldofwarbirds]

I agree wholeheartedly.

[@roderickcampbell2105]

@@worldofwarbirds Yes, agreed, and it makes the name of the bomber especially ironic.

[@gotmilk91]

May 1939 was also when the year Empire of Japan began what was then the world's most-intensive mass carpet-bombing against civilian targets at the *_Battle of Chongqing_* (aka "Bombing of Chungking); oddly tho it was kinda like a proxy way btwn the China+USSR side Vs the Japan+USA side... in fact the USA didn't really fully switch-sides unfortunately until mid-1941 w/the petrol+steel embargo finally against Japan.... had the USA sincerely helped China (and USSR) beat-back the Imperial Japanese at the *Battle of Chongqing* - the *attack on Pearl Harbor would've NEVER happened!*

[@stephenskinner4857]

Why isn't the Northrop B35 mentioned in this long range bomber evaluation ? It was the revolutionary flying wing. It was also cancelled like this B32 in favor of the Consolidates B36. They were also destroyed and not one was keep for museum show for such a break thru design. They even knew it had stealth characteristics and the best range because of the Wing low drag advantage. Many backroom stories on this aircraft. I'm also an ex Northrop designer. Later worked for Boeing, which I always felt was a horrible compant that had the inside connectivity.

[@daveburch235]

An uncle worked on the B-32 program as a civilian chief mechanic. By the time I was informed and curious enough to ask him questions, he had passed.

[@markpaul-ym5wg]

I have always wondered what would happen to a plane that was pressurized after being hit with 20mm cannon shells.

[@worldofwarbirds]

Rapid decompression for sure! But I haven’t actually read an account of it happening. I’m curious too.

[@markpaul-ym5wg]

@@worldofwarbirds Thank you for your comment.

[@Wyomingchief]

​@@worldofwarbirdsI have a great uncle that was a navigator on a B-29, and during my younger days I remember talking to him and asking him this specific question. He told me it was common practice to depressurize the aircraft right before they got into the bombing area. And from the way he talked I took it as soon as they got over japan. He did say that his wife when you look at the siding bubbles where the Gunners looked out of they had like a wire or steel cage that would keep somebody from being sucked out of the plane if they happen to be ambushed while pressurized when are the KZbin channels that did a video on the B-29 mentions the depressurization protocols

[@Wyomingchief]

​@@markpaul-ym5wg☝️☝️☝️☝️

[@dahawk8574]

Excellent video. It would have been good to mention the Consolidated Privateer, and also the R2Y. It was the heaviest bombers of WWII that eventually evolved into our modern jetliners today.

[@worldofwarbirds]

I actually have a two-part audio podcast on the MANY varients of the B-24, including the Privateer. I should adapt the episodes to videos....

[@PepeLepew-rm9ft]

looks like they were torn between going Lancaster or B29 .

[@majcorbin]

AVENPORT IOWA DAD JOKE of the day [Q] Which SIDE of an EAGLE,has the most feathers? [A] the OUTSIDE SILLY,of course

[@worldofwarbirds]

Haha!

[@ronjones1077]

And still today our tax $$$$ continue to be wasted

[@rdallas81]

Yeah. Israeli and Ukraine are expensive

[@bobwright5253]

How was it wasted in this case? Bomber development was crucial in winning WW2

[@bryanpelton6646]

Great video! Thanks!

[@worldofwarbirds]

Glad you liked it!

[@sdavrider]

1:29. Bomb load of 2000 pounds? Get your facts straight. Should be ten times that.

[@worldofwarbirds]

Yes, I thought it was a low number too, but I did see it in multiple documents. Perhaps it meant 2000lbs at the very maximum range? At lower ranges and with lower fuel loads it would carry more bomb load? I did state later in the video that the payload ended up being 20,000lbs.

[@mikhailiagacesa3406]

It would be interesting to see a comparison for cost per unit between B-32 and B-29.

[@worldofwarbirds]

That IS interesting because the B-29 program is always touted as one of the three most expensive programs of the US War Effort, along with the Norden bombsight and the atomic bom. But they did get a fair number of Nordens and B-29s in the end, bringing down the cost per unit. Fat Man and Little Boy were pretty expensive items!! But the B-32 had to be pretty expensive and they didn't get many units out the pipe at the end...Interesting comment-thanks.

[@irish89055]

Thanks.. this is good except maybe remove the silly images and verbalizations

[@worldofwarbirds]

Point taken, thanks

[@darrencorrigan8505]

Thanks, Warbirds.

[@MichaelCampin]

A bomb load of 2000 lbs, is that a joke as the Avro Lancaster could carry 10x that weight with the Grand Slam

[@lancerevell5979]

B-17 carried 4,000 lbs. normal load and up to 8,000 lbs. max load.

[@MichaelCampin]

@@lancerevell5979 must be a mistake by the commentator

[@travistolbert2647]

Sure everyone likes to go on and on about the Lanc carrying the Grand Slam…. The problem is for every pound of bomb load you trade a pound of fuel this reducing range. You couldn’t fly a Lanc to Berlin and back with a Grand Slam let alone an equivalent bomb load. They also wouldn’t have been able to do it during daylight like the majority of US bombers did.

[@worldofwarbirds]

I thought it was a low number too, but I did see it in multiple documents. Perhaps it meant 2000lbs at the very maximum range? At lower ranges and with lower fuel loads it would carry more bomb load?

[@travistolbert2647]

@@worldofwarbirds That's the basic equation, all aircraft have a basic 'empty weight' and a maximum takeoff. If you want to take more of something you will have to leave something else behind.

[@cefb8923]

Good video!

[@worldofwarbirds]

Glad you enjoyed it

[@lexington476]

1:35 why a range of 5,333 mi? that seems like a really odd number. Even when converted to kilometers it's not a round number.

[@rdallas81]

Lol.

[@2253frank]

it is the distance between brazil and zambia

[@aaaht3810]

The B-32 may have had its problems but it sure looked bad ass in the frontal view. Too bad some could not have been saved. I would sure like to see one fly by.

[@worldofwarbirds]

It looks BIG ASSED from the side view! Sorry I couldn’t resist.

[@IOSALive]

World of Warbirds, You're amazing! Let's be friends and have fun together!

[@worldofwarbirds]

Great! What do you have in mind?

[@comentedonakeyboard]

I guess Domina would have been a even less apropriate name😂

[@robertpalma7946]

Very Good and informative video

[@worldofwarbirds]

Thank you for commenting!

[@matrox]

He has his dates wrong regarding the cease fire after the Atom bomb drop. His saying '44 when it 1945 Aug.

[@worldofwarbirds]

Yup. That was a slip of the tongue. I have published at correction at that point in the video.

[@steve1311]

Would like to see a video of the B-50 bomber.

[@worldofwarbirds]

Hi - yes, it is one the to-do list, but I should do the B-29 first! Also, I think the B-36 still fits in "my" era, don't you think?

[@handy335]

Very nicely done. Thank you!

[@worldofwarbirds]

Glad you liked it!

[@allgood6760]

Thanks for this 👍✈️🇳🇿

[@worldofwarbirds]

Thanks I’m glad that you enjoyed it!

[@artawhirler]

This thing had more bugs than the Amazon rainforest.

[@rdallas81]

More bugs than a section 8 welfare house in Bronx

[@garypmarquis]

Too bad the B32 turned bad.

[@worldofwarbirds]

It’s interesting how some designs are perfect from the start, some need to mature or even change roles, and some are lemons and stay lemons!

[@richardmalcolm1457]

Had the Pacific War gone on into 1946, it's hard to think that there wouldn't have been *some* appreciable role for the B-32. It could not have supplanted the B-29 - it was never quite as good a platform - but given more flight hours, I have to think they could have ironed out the bugs, and made a very serviceable long range heavy bomber out of it.

[@mcmax571]

The B-32-would have never replaced the B-29. The B-29 was the first of the new generation of aircraft that leads into the jet age while the B-32 is still WW2 tect.

[@IRNHYD]

The B-32s prrformance was commensurate with the B-29 in most respects. Speed, payload, etc. The development contract demanded this of the aircraft submitted. The B-32 would not have replaced the B-29… given that the B-29 was produced in far greater numbers. But the B-32 was most certainly not “WWII tech”. At least not in the context you mean.

[@Wyomingchief]

​@@mcmax571yeah you're a bit mistaken, nobody saying the b32 would replace the B-29 but it certainly would have supplemented it and probably been almost equal numbers had the war going on at after an invasion of Japan😂😂

[@gotanon9659]

​@@WyomingchiefBacked up by B-36 Peacekeepers flying from the Mainland US

[@bentonmarcum8924]

This was a superbomber.?

[@worldofwarbirds]

It didn't work out that way...

[@artawhirler]

Good video! Thanks!

[@derek45auto23]

They should have kept one for Wright Patt

[@johnruetz3849]

I agree that one should have been saved for the museum. I was stationed at Wright-Patterson AFB in SAC ( 17th BW , B-52E and KC135A ) in the 1960's when they moved the museum from Patterson field to Wright field. I was at the museum about a year ago and plan on going again soon. I plan on being there a whole day because there is so much to see. I HIGHLY recommend it.

[@worldofwarbirds]

I certainly agree! An aircraft type should never just “go extinct “!

[@garyteague9555]

Never heard of the b32

[@worldofwarbirds]

So many haven't!

[@foxhoundms9051]

Was Boeing still whacking whistle blowers back then?

[@worldofwarbirds]

Seems to me at the time they were more interested in fixing engineering problems and not "fixing" truthtelling employees. Japan was the one that ended up getting whacked!

[@Taketimeout3]

Got most things right except thr piffling bomb load. 2000 lbs? Whats the point if flying 5k miles to drop so little? Always made me wonder who made these frankly ludicrous requirements.

[@worldofwarbirds]

I thought it was a low number too, but I did see it in multiple documents. Perhaps it meant 2000lbs at the very maximum range? At lower ranges and with lower fuel loads it would carry more bomb load? I did state later in the video that the payload ended up being 20,000lbs.

[@IRNHYD]

The an-32 had the same payload as the B-29. The B-32, largely due to greater aerodynamic efficiency, had a 20% greater range over the B-29: 3800 miles. The ‘32 could also maintain a much higher cruising speed (290 mph) than the ‘29 (230) and the reversible pitch props were a very useful feature… but the AF was already fully invested in the ‘29 by the time the ‘32 made the scene. People keep posting the idea that the ‘32 was vast inferior to the ‘29. Both aircraft were developed from the same contract specifications that ultimately would result in a bomber with greater range, higher speed, that could carry a nuclear payload. I’m not knocking the ‘29. Ultimately it was the right airplane at the right time. The ‘32 could also have filled the role, had it been developed further. The fact that Consolidated (Convair) was awarded the contract for the aircraft that would replace the B-29 (the B-36 Peacemaker) bears this out.

[@ianmckay1780]

The type is/was known to me, only vaguely, as I wasn't born until '55 (in UK at that). Don't know where or when or even how, but it would explain why I had a problem with naming b29's as b32's. Just saw in comments someone has a model of this, maybe that is where i "knew" about it from as I was/still am interested in aero/general modeling.

[@worldofwarbirds]

I am a model-maker too and I think this would be a fun kit and interesting conversation-starter for anyone I would show my collection to: "now what the heck is THAT?"

[@Wyomingchief]

Subaro Sakai the leading Japanese ace to survive World War ii, wrote a book called Samurai which is probably where you first heard about the b32 dominator. I believe that book was published in the seventies and was quite popular. That's where I heard about the aircraft when I was in high school in the early eighties

[@ScottsChristmasChannel]

the B-32 has a close cousin in the PB4Y-2 Privateer flown by the US Navy. Have you done a video on it?

[@worldofwarbirds]

I cover it somewhat in the B-24 episodes, but as it was SO different and had a longer postwar career, it could probably get an episode all to its own!

[@ScottsChristmasChannel]

@@worldofwarbirds looking forward to it!

[@gordonhall9871]

waste of money

[@johnnyjericho8472]

Doesnt matter. It was 80 years ago.

[@jimjenkins2319]

I still like to think the B-32 could have contributed if Operation Downfall had happened.

[@worldofwarbirds]

I'm thinking that this might have allowed some time for the bugs to be worked out. And as Downfall was going to be an "all hands on deck" operaton, for sure it would've been involved.

[@danielocarey9392]

The war ended in 1945. This video states that it was 1944.

[@worldofwarbirds]

Yes,that was a slip of the lip. I need to put a correction on the video!

[@mitchsilverman1093]

A "superbomber" with an unpressurized crew compartment. Sure.

[@worldofwarbirds]

Yup. Ooops.

[@MarkShinnick]

Damm hard to end up with good airplanes.

[@worldofwarbirds]

True that!!

[@JosephDent-qd9ih]

Dominator

[@josephjuno9555]

2000 lb bomb load? That seems pretty lights? Small carrier planes can carry 1000lb

[@worldofwarbirds]

Yes, I thought it was a low number too, but I did see it in multiple documents. Perhaps it meant 2000lbs at the very maximum range? At lower ranges and with lower fuel loads it would carry more bomb load? I did state later in the video that the payload ended up being 20,000lbs.

[@Wyomingchief]

​@@worldofwarbirdsyeah the 2000 lb bomb load is an error that was made by somebody who put out a video years ago on KZbin about the dominator. And it seems like everybody's perpetuating that myth. It's actual maximum bomb load at maximum range was 20,000 lb

[@worldofwarbirds]

I got my numbers here: www.joebaugher.com/usaf_bombers/b32.html

[@ericbrammer2245]

The PBY Privateer and the last bunch of B-24's also had the Tall-Single-Tail. What wasn't Known Then (and plagued even the P-38/P-61/XF-11/C-119) was that in banked turns, twin-boom planes experienced 'prop-wash' that made the Yaw authority 'Iffy', but it Also did THAT to B-24's in Level flight (Lancasters, too, & why the Manchester had 3 fins in it's tail), So, a Single 'shark-fin' cut into cleaner air, while causing more drag, but lesser handling issues.

[@cameronalexander359]

Very complicated aircraft. Managing the electrical system alone seemed like a full-time role.

[@WilliamMurphy-uv9pm]

Thirty percent is 1/3? Wow, only in government!

[@williamcharles9480]

Sad story and what a waste at the end when you scrap brand new aircraft.

[@worldofwarbirds]

Yes, and the crazy thing is, before they could wind everything down, there were times when brand-spanking new aircraft came out the factory door and were flown straight to recycling centers!

[@Wyomingchief]

At the end of the war they literally scrapped and even in some cases pushed overboard thousands of aircraft because they did not need them

[@daviddickey1994]

Well I never.

[@phoboskittym8500]

The "Lucky 32"

[@IRNHYD]

The plane was rushed into production. Given what the Air Force was demanding in these aircraft at the time, the teething problems of the B-32 were relatively minor. What I don’t understand is why the AF summarily scrapped all of these ships, when clearly it was a superior aircraft in every way to the B17 and the B-24. But instead of utilizing this airframe, the B-17 and even the B-24 were rolled out into other conflicts (Korea, Vietnam…Dien Bien Phu) where they were hopelessly outclassed… even when serving as reconnaissance ships and whatnot. Even as target tugs, the B-32 would have been more useful than the other ancient heavy bombers. The Navy or the Marines could have used these aircraft. Or they could have sold them to one of America’s allies… and in so doing we’d probably have at least one static B-32 airframe in a museum somewhere. I’ve never fully understood the rush to scrap important relics in this nation. My Grandfather served in WWII. A chief petty officer aboard Yorktown, then Enterprise after Yorktown was sunk. That ship was so famous… her deck guns and pilots shot down hundreds of Japanese aircraft. She was directly responsible for the sinking of nearly 1000 Japanese ships. For a time, she stood alone in the pacific, against the Japanese. If ever there was a ship that deserved preservation it was her. But she was scrapped. Americans should have had at least two B-32 airframes in museums to see. Instead it’s almost as if the AF didn’t want folks to know this aircraft ever even existed.

[@worldofwarbirds]

Perhaps it was the same story as the Halifax / Lancaster in the UK. The Lanc was clearly better, but they didn't want to disrupt the production of total numbers of bombers so they just kept on churning out Halifaxes too instead of delaying for retooling. It is a CRYING shame that no B-32 exists. My friend was at the USAF museum yesterday and sent me about 200 pictures...one of the should be of a B-32!

[@keithmcwilliams7424]

I think dungeon master would have been a good name 😊😊😊

[@lastshovel5287]

@ 2:42... whats the 4-engine seaplane on the far right side?

[@worldofwarbirds]

Looks like the Xpb2y-1 prototype, unless I’m mistaken. It became the Coronado.

[@jonfallis305]

catalina?

[@Wyomingchief]

​@@jonfallis305no the Catalina was a two engine seaplane. It's a Coronado

[@bloqk16]

Gee! With the deafening sound of those four unmuffled radial engines running at speed, and yet the USAAF considered the cockpit _'too noisy(?)_ That's puzzling!

[@ltcterry2006]

I knew a retired USAF Lt Col who flew B-32s in wWII, C-119s in Korea, and C-130s in Viet Nam. One war is enough for any man, let alone three!

[@worldofwarbirds]

Wow that is amazing! Thanks for sharing!

[@user-cf1se1kk5x]

The tail of this plane bothers me somewhat

[@worldofwarbirds]

It certainly had a big butt!

[@JohnWayneCheeseburger]

Im an avation and history fan, and I didn't know most of this info. Super good video man keep up the good work.

[@worldofwarbirds]

Glad you enjoyed it! Thanks for the nice words!

[@Michael.marshall-w3d]

This is the first time I have heard of the B-32. I never heard about it in combat.

[@Mike-tg7dj]

Sad they didn't keep at least one. That automatic gun turret system is pretty sweet, and for what they were doing aerial reconnaissance they were able to take out IJAF airplanes was pretty incredible. You do have to realize that by war's end that the combat experience those Japanese pilots had were young inexperienced.

[@worldofwarbirds]

Yes it really was a shame that they didn’t keep at least one for the museum!

[@Wyomingchief]

Actually a lot of the pilots that were flying air defense over Japan at that time where some of the most experienced squadrons. They were comprised of veterans who had been wounded and sent back to the home islands. They also had some of the most sophisticated interceptors, some that were much better than the Corsair or the Hellcat. What you're thinking about as far as an experienced Pilots go are the ones that were being sent out on Kamikaze raids. Granted the inexperienced kamikaze pilots were the vast majority of the pilots. But those Pilots assigned to the Interceptor Squadron is especially around Tokyo were the best, and a lot of them had far more experience than the Americans