Americans didn't drop the bomb...
Discussion
EYEWITNESS TO HISTORY
Vet disputes A-bomb legend
Salem's Bruce Banks does not think the Enola Gay carried the huge weapon
CAPI LYNN
Statesman Journal
August 6, 2005
Bruce Banks knows what the history books say. The Enola Gay took off from Tinian Island 60 years ago today and dropped the first atomic bomb, on Hiroshima, Japan.
But he disputes the B-29's role in the mission.
Banks, 80, served at Tinian as a corporal in the Marine Corps. He was one of the first to arrive at the U.S. air base and one of the last to leave.
He says he stood beside the bomb the day it was unloaded and swears that there is no way it would fit in a B-29. He also thinks that one of the two larger aircraft that accompanied the Enola Gay that historic day must have transported the bomb, with the Enola Gay simply acting as a guide.
"I have mentioned my views and observations to a number of people," said Banks, who lives on the outskirts of West Salem, "and it upsets them something fierce and they think I'm sort of a nut."
Robert Heisler has doubts about his friend's theory. They have had many discussions during their weekly pinochle games, and Heisler has written several letters, including one to the television program 60 Minutes, in hopes of prompting some sort of investigation.
There have been no replies.
"Bruce refutes what happened," said Heisler, who was in Europe serving with the Army during the war. "He was there. He's got more inside dope than I do.
"I would just like to know what did happen."
Historians do not back Banks' assertion.
"I have never heard such a tale before," said Dr. James C. Bradford, an associate professor of history at Texas A&M University who edited "Atlas of American Military History."
Banks has never wavered from his convictions, and his family has been supportive of his alternate view.
"He saw what he saw, I'm sure," his wife, Helen, said.
Banks was drafted in 1943, and chose the Marine Corps. With his background as a journeyman machinist at a shipyard, the Marines were eager to make him a mechanic for the 17th Anti-Aircraft Artillery Battalion.
He landed at Tinian on July 24, 1944. His job gave him access to a jeep and freedom to roam the island.
"I was a curious young punk," Banks said.
He said he just happened to be on the airfield the day the bomb arrived that following summer. He was among a group of about 20 servicemen who had gathered after it was unloaded.
"We didn't know it was an atomic bomb," Banks said. "It was just a great big bomb.
"We all wondered, 'What the heck are they going to do with it?'"
He stood beside the egg-shaped explosive, raising his arm above his head to get an idea just how big it was.
"I can reach 7 feet, and I was a minimum 6 inches too short to reach the height," Banks said. "I estimated it was 10 feet long.
"The bomb was too big to go in any B-29. The aircraft was just not made for anything that big."
According to National Air and Space Museum archives at the Smithsonian Institution, several B-29s were specially designed for the secret mission.
Code-named "Silverplate," the aircraft were modified by deleting all gun turrets except for the tail position, removing armor plate, installing electric propellers and configuring the bomb bay to accommodate the device.
The museum's archives list specifications of the Enola Gay, but no measurements of the bomb-bay doors are given.
Banks said soon after the bomb arrived at Tinian, Navy Seabees dug a pit and installed two hydraulic hoists. The bomb later was hauled out and lowered into the pit. Within a week or so, two white aircraft arrived. He hadn't seen anything like them, and assumed they were British.
"They had only one bomb bay and four engines -- much larger than a B-29," Banks said.
"I saw them back the big aircraft over the pit and shove the bomb in it and close the bomb bay doors, then open it and put the bomb back."
He said observed this from about 150 yards away.
Banks wasn't an eyewitness when Col. Paul Tibbets and his crew took off Aug. 6, 1945, on their way to Hiroshima.
"I maintain the only thing the Enola Gay did was show the other aircraft where to go," Banks said. "It's just too big a bomb to fit in a B-29.
"It's not a figment of my imagination. It's what I saw."
Banks got out of the Marines after serving four years, and went on to have a family and work 37 years as a switchman for Southern Pacific Railroad.
It was years after the war when he began to question, in his mind, what unfolded that summer six decades ago.
"I could not understand why we were covering, why we were telling this story," he said. "There had to be more people than just me that were aware of the size of that bomb.
"Some of them could have been sworn to secrecy, but I wasn't in on it. I wasn't even supposed to be there."
Sixty years later, Heisler would love to be able prove his friend right. He has even thought about writing to the British government and Royal Air Force.
"If their plane actually did drop that bomb, why are they letting the U.S. and Enola Gay get all the credit?" Heisler said. "It seems like this went on awfully long if this isn't what happened.
"Wouldn't this drop a bombshell, so to speak, on the whole thing?"
Vet disputes A-bomb legend
Salem's Bruce Banks does not think the Enola Gay carried the huge weapon
CAPI LYNN
Statesman Journal
August 6, 2005
Bruce Banks knows what the history books say. The Enola Gay took off from Tinian Island 60 years ago today and dropped the first atomic bomb, on Hiroshima, Japan.
But he disputes the B-29's role in the mission.
Banks, 80, served at Tinian as a corporal in the Marine Corps. He was one of the first to arrive at the U.S. air base and one of the last to leave.
He says he stood beside the bomb the day it was unloaded and swears that there is no way it would fit in a B-29. He also thinks that one of the two larger aircraft that accompanied the Enola Gay that historic day must have transported the bomb, with the Enola Gay simply acting as a guide.
"I have mentioned my views and observations to a number of people," said Banks, who lives on the outskirts of West Salem, "and it upsets them something fierce and they think I'm sort of a nut."
Robert Heisler has doubts about his friend's theory. They have had many discussions during their weekly pinochle games, and Heisler has written several letters, including one to the television program 60 Minutes, in hopes of prompting some sort of investigation.
There have been no replies.
"Bruce refutes what happened," said Heisler, who was in Europe serving with the Army during the war. "He was there. He's got more inside dope than I do.
"I would just like to know what did happen."
Historians do not back Banks' assertion.
"I have never heard such a tale before," said Dr. James C. Bradford, an associate professor of history at Texas A&M University who edited "Atlas of American Military History."
Banks has never wavered from his convictions, and his family has been supportive of his alternate view.
"He saw what he saw, I'm sure," his wife, Helen, said.
Banks was drafted in 1943, and chose the Marine Corps. With his background as a journeyman machinist at a shipyard, the Marines were eager to make him a mechanic for the 17th Anti-Aircraft Artillery Battalion.
He landed at Tinian on July 24, 1944. His job gave him access to a jeep and freedom to roam the island.
"I was a curious young punk," Banks said.
He said he just happened to be on the airfield the day the bomb arrived that following summer. He was among a group of about 20 servicemen who had gathered after it was unloaded.
"We didn't know it was an atomic bomb," Banks said. "It was just a great big bomb.
"We all wondered, 'What the heck are they going to do with it?'"
He stood beside the egg-shaped explosive, raising his arm above his head to get an idea just how big it was.
"I can reach 7 feet, and I was a minimum 6 inches too short to reach the height," Banks said. "I estimated it was 10 feet long.
"The bomb was too big to go in any B-29. The aircraft was just not made for anything that big."
According to National Air and Space Museum archives at the Smithsonian Institution, several B-29s were specially designed for the secret mission.
Code-named "Silverplate," the aircraft were modified by deleting all gun turrets except for the tail position, removing armor plate, installing electric propellers and configuring the bomb bay to accommodate the device.
The museum's archives list specifications of the Enola Gay, but no measurements of the bomb-bay doors are given.
Banks said soon after the bomb arrived at Tinian, Navy Seabees dug a pit and installed two hydraulic hoists. The bomb later was hauled out and lowered into the pit. Within a week or so, two white aircraft arrived. He hadn't seen anything like them, and assumed they were British.
"They had only one bomb bay and four engines -- much larger than a B-29," Banks said.
"I saw them back the big aircraft over the pit and shove the bomb in it and close the bomb bay doors, then open it and put the bomb back."
He said observed this from about 150 yards away.
Banks wasn't an eyewitness when Col. Paul Tibbets and his crew took off Aug. 6, 1945, on their way to Hiroshima.
"I maintain the only thing the Enola Gay did was show the other aircraft where to go," Banks said. "It's just too big a bomb to fit in a B-29.
"It's not a figment of my imagination. It's what I saw."
Banks got out of the Marines after serving four years, and went on to have a family and work 37 years as a switchman for Southern Pacific Railroad.
It was years after the war when he began to question, in his mind, what unfolded that summer six decades ago.
"I could not understand why we were covering, why we were telling this story," he said. "There had to be more people than just me that were aware of the size of that bomb.
"Some of them could have been sworn to secrecy, but I wasn't in on it. I wasn't even supposed to be there."
Sixty years later, Heisler would love to be able prove his friend right. He has even thought about writing to the British government and Royal Air Force.
"If their plane actually did drop that bomb, why are they letting the U.S. and Enola Gay get all the credit?" Heisler said. "It seems like this went on awfully long if this isn't what happened.
"Wouldn't this drop a bombshell, so to speak, on the whole thing?"
TheEnd said:
Ganglandboss said:
So he's not disputing it fell out of a plane - just the type. If this loony was right, what would be the point in misleading people about the type of aircraft?
Yep, no motive, and also, you wouldn't need to send another bomber as a "guide"
k with us) would have been lessened if it was "Don't fk with us...in a few months, when we've got our own plane that can drop this"But yeah, Superfortress was the biggest bomber in WW2 wasn't it?
Just had another thought. All the things that happened during the war are usually twisted so that it was the Americans who saved the day and get the credit - capturing the Enigma machine (according to Hollywood) etc. Makes a change for some of them to try and foist the credit for an American venture on to the British.
Superfortress was probably the biggest, either that or the B-32 Dominator.
I know they painted a few Lancasters white for the Tiger Force, but supposedly there were none out there... just the same as no B-29's were supposed to be in Europe (like the one found in the Ijsselmeer in Holland.)
Group Captain Leonard Cheshire was involved, and on the mission.
The bombs were designed to be carried on supports used for the 22,000lb "Grand Slam" as carried by the Lancaster.
Wierder and wierder.
I know they painted a few Lancasters white for the Tiger Force, but supposedly there were none out there... just the same as no B-29's were supposed to be in Europe (like the one found in the Ijsselmeer in Holland.)
Group Captain Leonard Cheshire was involved, and on the mission.
The bombs were designed to be carried on supports used for the 22,000lb "Grand Slam" as carried by the Lancaster.
Wierder and wierder.
richw_82 said:
Superfortress was probably the biggest, either that or the B-32 Dominator.
I know they painted a few Lancasters white for the Tiger Force, but supposedly there were none out there... just the same as no B-29's were supposed to be in Europe (like the one found in the Ijsselmeer in Holland.)
Group Captain Leonard Cheshire was involved, and on the mission.
The bombs were designed to be carried on supports used for the 22,000lb "Grand Slam" as carried by the Lancaster.
Wierder and wierder.
What a Weirdo.I know they painted a few Lancasters white for the Tiger Force, but supposedly there were none out there... just the same as no B-29's were supposed to be in Europe (like the one found in the Ijsselmeer in Holland.)
Group Captain Leonard Cheshire was involved, and on the mission.
The bombs were designed to be carried on supports used for the 22,000lb "Grand Slam" as carried by the Lancaster.
Wierder and wierder.
Weren't there 3 B29s on the mission - the other 2 doing filming and monitoring ... the whole thing was basically an experiment. IIRC Enola Gay flew on the second mission (Nagasaki) as one of the support planes.
Not sure that precision bombing (mentioned above) was really needed given what the A-Bomb did and how it did it .... just needed to get it on the city.
Not sure that precision bombing (mentioned above) was really needed given what the A-Bomb did and how it did it .... just needed to get it on the city.
Ganglandboss said:
Do yourself a favour - there are some hardcore plane nerds very knowledgeable aviation enthusiasts on this forum who will make you look very silly if you persist with this.
Now how why they do that?The guy in the article is from a known unit, and can be traced to that place at that time. Whether or not he's lying we don't know.
As mentioned in my earlier post, there were some strange parts about it, as to why there was even a minute British involvement.
They built a bomb from scratch, why did they have to use a special bomb crutch from a Lanc rather than building one to suit a B29?
Let the enthusiasts come. Bring answers too.
Possible rationale:
Before the full effect of a nuclear attack was known the US did not want it known that thay could not deliver their new superweapon.
Immediately after the attack they took the "credit"
The whole thing was very very secret and only a few people actually knew what was going on. Most were sworn to secrecy.
In the years that followed the US wanted to cover up any suggestion that they could not deliver their bomb so the story stayed. The cold war made any suggestion that they couldn't deliver their bomb a very very secret thing.
Decades later that didn't matter but by then the history books were written and the UK, with lots of Japanese companies bringing much needed employment, did not want to open a can of worms by saying "it was us".
So the wrong story stayed.
I'm not saying he's right, just pointing out that it is plausible. It would be very naive to deny any alternative version of history just because the version you know was written in a history book that you read at school.
Before the full effect of a nuclear attack was known the US did not want it known that thay could not deliver their new superweapon.
Immediately after the attack they took the "credit"
The whole thing was very very secret and only a few people actually knew what was going on. Most were sworn to secrecy.
In the years that followed the US wanted to cover up any suggestion that they could not deliver their bomb so the story stayed. The cold war made any suggestion that they couldn't deliver their bomb a very very secret thing.
Decades later that didn't matter but by then the history books were written and the UK, with lots of Japanese companies bringing much needed employment, did not want to open a can of worms by saying "it was us".
So the wrong story stayed.
I'm not saying he's right, just pointing out that it is plausible. It would be very naive to deny any alternative version of history just because the version you know was written in a history book that you read at school.
cymtriks said:
Possible rationale:
Before the full effect of a nuclear attack was known the US did not want it known that thay could not deliver their new superweapon.
Immediately after the attack they took the "credit"
The whole thing was very very secret and only a few people actually knew what was going on. Most were sworn to secrecy.
In the years that followed the US wanted to cover up any suggestion that they could not deliver their bomb so the story stayed. The cold war made any suggestion that they couldn't deliver their bomb a very very secret thing.
Decades later that didn't matter but by then the history books were written and the UK, with lots of Japanese companies bringing much needed employment, did not want to open a can of worms by saying "it was us".
So the wrong story stayed.
I'm not saying he's right, just pointing out that it is plausible. It would be very naive to deny any alternative version of history just because the version you know was written in a history book that you read at school.
Also if it all went wrong (no really big bang) it could be laid firmly at the UK's door?Before the full effect of a nuclear attack was known the US did not want it known that thay could not deliver their new superweapon.
Immediately after the attack they took the "credit"
The whole thing was very very secret and only a few people actually knew what was going on. Most were sworn to secrecy.
In the years that followed the US wanted to cover up any suggestion that they could not deliver their bomb so the story stayed. The cold war made any suggestion that they couldn't deliver their bomb a very very secret thing.
Decades later that didn't matter but by then the history books were written and the UK, with lots of Japanese companies bringing much needed employment, did not want to open a can of worms by saying "it was us".
So the wrong story stayed.
I'm not saying he's right, just pointing out that it is plausible. It would be very naive to deny any alternative version of history just because the version you know was written in a history book that you read at school.
DrTre said:
TheEnd said:
Ganglandboss said:
So he's not disputing it fell out of a plane - just the type. If this loony was right, what would be the point in misleading people about the type of aircraft?
Yep, no motive, and also, you wouldn't need to send another bomber as a "guide"k with us) would have been lessened if it was "Don't fk with us...in a few months, when we've got our own plane that can drop this"But yeah, Superfortress was the biggest bomber in WW2 wasn't it?
d commies were on the Allied side...richw_82 said:
As mentioned in my earlier post, there were some strange parts about it, as to why there was even a minute British involvement.
I'll leave the rest but we were heavily involved in the Manhattan Project from the start. I say "we" but the British contingent were mostly immigrant scientists - start with the Australian Mark Oliphant who went to the US in 1941 (or 2?) to see why the US had done nothing with the info we passed to them about Uranium use in a bomb. A quick google suggests starting here --> http://lanl.gov/history/wartime/britishmission.sht...
Edited to sort out the quoting
Edited by Mark-C on Friday 3rd July 00:26
Gassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff