I read your review on the WSJ of "A Long Way to Bombs Away".

It's true as far as it goes to say that, for a time, 63% of B-17 crew failed to
complete their tours. It's true that the USAAF largely joined the RAF in terror
bombing in 1945.

It is also true:

That the Germans are clearly on record that the USAAF hurt them far worse than
the RAF did.

That during 1944 over 1/3 of 8th AF bombs hit within 1,000 feet of the aiming
point using visual means.

That B-17's made made up a very important part of a "strike package" to which
the Germans could find no answer.

That the Germans denuded other fronts of day fighters to combat the unescorted
B-17's, when the 8th AF was only sending a few dozen on any given raid.

That on three days during May 1944, the USAAF reduced German synthetic oil
production by 50%. By September, largely due to raids by USAAF heavy bombers,
the Luftwaffe was receiving 1/15th of its required fuel allocation.

That without this havoc wreaked largely by the USAAF, RAF Bomber Command could
not have operated over Germany at all.

That B-17's are offically credited with shooting down more German aircraft than
all other USAAF aircraft types COMBINED (including fighter types). Though B-17
gunner claims were wildly inflated, they were still very deadly and dangerous.
At least two high scoring German aces were killed in combat with B-17's. A
high scoring night fighter ace, whose aircraft had not been touch in months in
combat with the RAF, was killed in his first combat with B-24's.

Without a fleet of B-17's in place in England at the start of 1944, no invasion
of Europe would have been possible. This because the Germans showed they would
only fight for the type of targets that could only be struck by B-17's, and her
stablemate, the B-24.

As Dr. Russell Weigley notes in "Eisenhower's Lieutenants", during the spring
and summer of 1944 the Allies held victory through air power in their grasp,
but did not persevere for the kill.

But that is no fault of the B-17/B-24's or their crews.

Walt