In article ,
Guy Alcala writes:
Peter Stickney wrote:

snip

"Quest for Performance", L.K. Loftin, NASA History Office, 1985,
available online, has a quite good explanation and analysis of the
directions that designing high performance airplanes took through the
first 80 or so years. The data tables list the following values for
the various airplanes.

Airplane: Aspect Ratio Wing Loading Cruise Speed L/Dmax
B-17G 7.58 38.7 182 12.7
B-24J 11.55 53.4 215 12.9
B-29 11.50 69.1 253 16.8

Altitudes in cases would be 25,000', (Critical Altitude for the
turbosupercharged engines, in each case) and all speeds are True
Airspeed.

Something appears seriously wrong with the B-17G cruise speed. At 25,000 feet, 182 TAS
works out to only 124 CAS, and we know the a/c normally cruised at 150-160 IAS (TAS about
215-240 at typical bombing altitudes) and climbed at about 130-140 IAS, vs. 160-180 IAS
cruise for the B-24. There's no way the position error is that high, and compressiblity
error is just 1-2% at that speed and altitude.

I just went and rechecked, and every source I have for the B-17G says
182 TAS @ 25,000, including Wagner, who gets his data from the
Aorcraft Characteristics Summaries.
My RAF Fortess II (B-17F) manual gives best cruise as 140 IAS, which
give a shade under 210 TAS at 25,000. This is backed up by the B-17F
Range Chart page that's posted on Zeno's Warbirds site. The G was, of
course, much dirtier, what with the chin turret, and, in the later
models, the bulged cheek gun windows & such. While 125 IAS seems a bit
on the low side, it wouldn't be impossible.

--
Pete Stickney
A strong conviction that something must be done is the parent of many
bad measures. -- Daniel Webster