But they had to get to the B-36 at altitude,
Which is easy enough. The MiG-15s service ceiling is around 50,000 feet and a max speed of ~675 miles-per-hour. The B-36B, the version of the B-36 actually available in 1949, has a service ceiling of around 42,500 feet and a max speed of 381 miles-per-hour.
and yes, would have to turn to get a firing solution on a turning B-36.
I've already said why they would not. Until you actually explain otherwise, your blowing smoke.
Since the B-36 was never in combat, it's hard to say that the B-36 gun system would have been as effective as the B-29
Given that it flat-out didn't work until 1950, and even afterwards continued to suffer serious problems, it's very easy to say.
Upthread, I gave the losses, and how many fighters the B-29s actually shot down
No, you gave USAF
claims on how many fighters the B-29s shot down. I didn't mention it at the time since it didn't matter to my point, but bomber gunners overclaiming is even worse then fighter pilot overclaiming. This isn't just limited to Korea either: In WWII B-17 Gunners routinely claimed five or more times as many kills as they actually scored. Allied intelligence had some sense that these claims were wildly overblown, but given the losses the bombers were taking didn't have the heart to officially correct the bomber crews.
The same dynamic was in play over Korea. The Soviets were the ones who attacked the B-29s in almost every instance and we now have access to their records from the Korean War. Not a single one of the "confirmed" B-29 kills on MiG-15s checks out according to these records, although several MiGs are known to have been
damaged by Superfortress guns.
The main value of bomber gunners was in forcing fighters into less-than-optimal attack runs, not so much in actually killing the enemy fighters.
As my point about Bagration that you seemed to miss
The Germans were shattered, but the Soviets couldn't maintain the advance, even in the face of minimal resistance
No, I didn't miss it, because your point is nonsense. The initial German forces were shattered, but the Germans brought in reinforcements rapidly enough that they were hardly facing "minimal resistance" by the time they hit Warsaw. Aggressive counter-attacks by multiple panzer corps on multiple points of the front is not "minimal resistance".
No, they aren't ready in 1948 - well, there *were* usable airfields in Okinawa, Japan, and Guam for heavy bombers, though the units and their logistics would need to be deployed there...
But give Lemay 18 months on a total war footing, and that would change.
Naturally. Although by then the Soviets would have likely extended their EW nets to cover the other approaches, as they did OTL. Even with that though, by the 18 month mark, SAC's weight of numbers would probably be starting to tell.
For this mission, the Mig-15 is the only one worth talking about.
Well, I'd argue some of the other Soviet fighters would be adequate against the B-29/50s. Against the B-36... yeah, the MiG-15 is pretty much it.
Do you know if the average 10,000 yard miss distance was for all of SAC ? Or was it for the crews who were nuclear certified ?
All of SAC. It was the result of the Dayton practice raid in 1949 which pulled in all available air crews. As LeMay said, not one crew completed successfully completed the mission.