I guess ditching is not the only thing they didn't do well. Oh well, I guess emergency landings are not real high on the list of design objectives.
The empty weight of a C-87 is listed at 30,650 pounds. If I remember, the empty B-24 was 34,500 so with the removal of 4 gun turrets and 10 weapons that would lighten the airplane by approx. 4000 pounds. So, it appears that they simply increased the useful load to 56000 or more and that put the airframe back into the B-24 gross load and that is where it wasn't very friendly. It was designed more for speed with the Davis wing and lighter airframe. High gross weight wasn't good in anything but perfect conditions. My friend , Lew, wouldn't criticize the airplane and said firmly, "it got us back every time." He was a big part of that equation. My first flight in one was a shock when I could see the structure wiggling and wrinkling and bending in flight. Not in a B-17.
I worked with Ernie for 4 years doing the stuff for Flying Magazine and the book. I talked with him about his experiences with the C-87 and others and his comment," An evil bastard contraption," was gentle compared to what he really said about the C-87. He also had no nice things to say about the Stratocruiser but the C-47 and C54 were two of his favorites . i remember that the B-24 constantly had something leaking; hydraulic fluid or fuel. Walking by one on the ramp on a hot day you could detect the aroma of fuel most of the time. The rat's nest of plumbing, heavy hardware store-style brass fuel transfer valves on top of the wing center section always smelled of 110-115 octane fuel. I noticed that some pilots took off with the bombay doors cracked open for circulation. Not saying that was the way all of them were but I remember it from Langley.