While researching squadron records on bombing in Bosnia and Herzegovina I noticed that Wellingtons of No.205 Group were not carrying 1000 lbs bombs while on regular bases were carrying 4000 lbs bombs, and 250 and 500 pounders also. Does anyone have plausible explanation for that? Were Wellingtons carrying 1000 pounders on other theaters?
1000 lbs bombs on Wellington Mk.X
- Thread starter alsaad
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
fubar57
General
These were the bomb loads carried by aircraft of Sgt. Pilot Maurice Lihou, 37 Sqn/40Sqn. No. 205 Group. No explanation of bomb loads
- Thread starter
- #3
fubar57
General
Just showing the loads
- Thread starter
- #5
Special carriers needed to be installed in order to load the 1000 lb bomb -- and only one could be carried on each outer cell in the bay (so a total of two). I'm getting conflicting information on the details but I think it comes down to a combination of supply issues and the fact that the Wellington bay doesn't seem to be designed with the 1000 lb bomb in mind. The 250 and 500 lb GP and 2000 lb AP bombs seemed to be the focus during design.
Early Wellington manuals do not list the 1000 lb bomb as a possible store.
From 1st quarter 1943 to 1st quarter 1945, only 0.3% of Wellington bombs were 1000 lb GP
(M.E.F. -- all Commands in Middle East, Italy, Malta etc.)
Wellingtons in India and Southeast Asia used a slightly higher percentage, at 4.5%.
Wellingtons in Britain used a fair amount, but numbers are still dwarfed by the 500 lb and 250 lb bombs, as well as the 30 lb and 4 lb incendiaries.
*EDIT
Early Wellington manuals do not list the 1000 lb bomb as a possible store.
From 1st quarter 1943 to 1st quarter 1945, only 0.3% of Wellington bombs were 1000 lb GP
(M.E.F. -- all Commands in Middle East, Italy, Malta etc.)
Wellingtons in India and Southeast Asia used a slightly higher percentage, at 4.5%.
Wellingtons in Britain used a fair amount, but numbers are still dwarfed by the 500 lb and 250 lb bombs, as well as the 30 lb and 4 lb incendiaries.
*EDIT
Last edited:
Crimea_River
Marshal
I have this on file, source unknown but no doubt downloaded from the net. Sorry it's not clear but half way down the left hand column you can see a load out with 2x1000lb GP bombs.
Snautzer01
Marshal
- 46,292
- Mar 26, 2007
Could it be that 2 bombs were less likely to hit the target then lets say 12? 100 pound through a roof of a factory will do a lot of damage 1000 poud outside the gate will not.
In terms of actually doing damage the bigger bombs were more effective in putting factories/ refineries out of service for a longer time. There was a post war survey done on it. When bombing cities the British used bigger "cookies" dropping one 12,000lb cookie in preference to three 4,000lb. The Wellington had a maximum range and a maximum payload but like all bombers it couldn't drop max payload at max range, especially if having to maintain a higher cruising speed.
Reluctant Poster
Tech Sergeant
- 1,776
- Dec 6, 2006
Any bomb less than 500 lb was virtually useles, 500 lb wasn't much better. To damage the machine tools which was what was really necessary to permanently destroy production required bigger bombs. The 4000 lb bombs dropped by the RAF were the best. The study was the United States Strategic Bombing Survey. I have posted excerpts from it previously.
Where did the USSBS get the idea that the 4,000 lb HC bomb was designed to destroy machinery or any other hard targets. Certainly not from the British. High Capacity bombs were designed for use with incendiaries, they were area weapons. It was not a British idea, but one the learned from the Luftwaffe, which dropped parachute mines in combination with incendiaries for the same effect during the various 1940 blitzes on British cities. It was from their own experience that the British realised how difficult it was to destroy vital machinery, like machine tools. The Americans didn't realise until 1945 when, frustrated, they resorted to the area and incendiary bombing of Japan's cities.
British high capacity bombs benefited from the post 1941 introduction of better explosives than Amatol, and then when aluminium powder was added to the main filling in 1943, making the new explosive Minol. Previously aluminium had more important strategic uses, but with Minol both the blast and incendiary effect of HC bombs was increased.
The British calculated a damage factor for the loads carried by their various bombers. This was based on the acreage a load could destroy in an average built up area, not exactly precision or going after machine tools. Incendiaries were much more effective than high explosive bombs, and incendiaries in combination with high capacity bombs were best of all. An 8,000 lb HC bomb could destroy 1.68 acres per ton. The 1,000 lb GP bomb a mere 0.56 acres per ton. Best of all was the 4,000 lb HC bomb and 4 and 30 lb incendiaries which could destroy 3.2 acres per ton.
Best bomb loads by aircraft type:
Lancaster, 1 x 4,000 lb HC + 17 1/3 SBCs with incendiaries, 10,000 lbs, damage factor 9.98 acres.
Halifax, not so clear cut. 15 SBCs, 5,490 lbs and a damage factor of 6.30 acres OR 3 x 1,000 lb MC bombs and 12 SBCs, 7,449 lbs and a damage factor of 6.12 acres.
The Stirling was seen primarily as an incendiary carrier.
The 500 lb MC bomb was the most numerous high explosive bomb dropped by Bomber Command during WW2 (403,000) so not considered ineffective. 253,800 1,000 lb MC bombs were dropped and 21,000 of the 4,000 lb MC bomb.
To put those numbers into context, 68,000 x 4,000 lb HC bombs were dropped, and 28,663 of the 2,000 lb version (which was skinnier). They were dropped in combination with approximately 3.5 MILLION 30 lb incendiaries and 80 MILLION 4 lb incendiaries.
The best way of destroying a city has been, since time immemorial, to burn it down, just ask Arthur Harris, or Curtis LeMay.
British high capacity bombs benefited from the post 1941 introduction of better explosives than Amatol, and then when aluminium powder was added to the main filling in 1943, making the new explosive Minol. Previously aluminium had more important strategic uses, but with Minol both the blast and incendiary effect of HC bombs was increased.
The British calculated a damage factor for the loads carried by their various bombers. This was based on the acreage a load could destroy in an average built up area, not exactly precision or going after machine tools. Incendiaries were much more effective than high explosive bombs, and incendiaries in combination with high capacity bombs were best of all. An 8,000 lb HC bomb could destroy 1.68 acres per ton. The 1,000 lb GP bomb a mere 0.56 acres per ton. Best of all was the 4,000 lb HC bomb and 4 and 30 lb incendiaries which could destroy 3.2 acres per ton.
Best bomb loads by aircraft type:
Lancaster, 1 x 4,000 lb HC + 17 1/3 SBCs with incendiaries, 10,000 lbs, damage factor 9.98 acres.
Halifax, not so clear cut. 15 SBCs, 5,490 lbs and a damage factor of 6.30 acres OR 3 x 1,000 lb MC bombs and 12 SBCs, 7,449 lbs and a damage factor of 6.12 acres.
The Stirling was seen primarily as an incendiary carrier.
The 500 lb MC bomb was the most numerous high explosive bomb dropped by Bomber Command during WW2 (403,000) so not considered ineffective. 253,800 1,000 lb MC bombs were dropped and 21,000 of the 4,000 lb MC bomb.
To put those numbers into context, 68,000 x 4,000 lb HC bombs were dropped, and 28,663 of the 2,000 lb version (which was skinnier). They were dropped in combination with approximately 3.5 MILLION 30 lb incendiaries and 80 MILLION 4 lb incendiaries.
The best way of destroying a city has been, since time immemorial, to burn it down, just ask Arthur Harris, or Curtis LeMay.
Sorry, my post was badly worded. I wasn't suggesting a cookie was used to blast a refinery just that the blast effect of one 12,000lb cookie is bigger than three 4000lb on a city.
Reluctant Poster
Tech Sergeant
- 1,776
- Dec 6, 2006
Reluctant Poster
Tech Sergeant
- 1,776
- Dec 6, 2006
That is damage from a 4,000 lb HE bomb. They were hardly used by the British in area raids and rarely anywhere else. Bomber Command dropped just 21,000 x 4,000 lb MC bombs during the entire war! It dropped three quarters of a million other MC bombs.
The RAF concluded that the 500 lb MC and 1,000 lb MC bombs outperformed all other general bombardment bombs. After its introduction in 1943 the latter became Bomber Command's first choice. It dropped 17,500 in 1943, 203,000 in 1944 and still managed 36,000 in 1945.
The 4,000 lb MC bomb was developed in 1943 to replace the largely ineffective GP version. It was supposed to be used against industrial complexes and shipyards from low level. Experiments showed that even dropped from 100' it had good penetration, achieving a crater 14' deep and 54' wide. By the time the bomb became available, Harris was reluctant to carry out any low level attacks, exposing his aircraft and crews to German anti-aircraft fire at low altitude. As far as the main bomber force was concerned there were no specific targets for this bomb and it was relegated to general purpose bombardment from high level (which is why so few were used). 13,000 of the 21,000 dropped were used in 1944 and some of these were dropped by 8 Group Mosquitoes from very low level (requiring an 11 second delay). Mosquitoes of Nos. 128, 571 and 692 Squadrons famously threw 4,000 lb MC bombs into the mouths of vital road and rail tunnels in the Mosel/Rhine valleys near Koblenz on New Year's Day 1945, with some success.
Reluctant Poster
Tech Sergeant
- 1,776
- Dec 6, 2006
my post was in response to bombing factories not cities. The suggestion was to use multiple smaller bombs to destroy a factory
The RAF didn't bomb factories after 1942, with the exception of some special raids. Harris stated several times that he was not interested in such things. He was interested only in acreage destroyed, and if that included factories, so be it.
Harris never hid what he was doing. In correspondence with the Under Secretary of State at the Air Ministry (Sir Arthur Street) in August 1943, he complained that too little attention was being paid to his force and that too much had been focussed on
"the bombing of specific factory premises" rather than, "the obliteration of German cities and their inhabitants as such."
He complained that rather than stressing that the recently attacked city of Kassel
"contained over 200,000 Germans, many of whom are now dead and most of the remainder homeless and destitute"
official hand outs emphasised that the Henschel locomotive works and other important factories were in or near the city. Harris concluded this particular rant by stressing that the aim of Bomber Command should be unambiguously stated as
"the destruction of German cities, the killing of German workers and the disruption of civilised community life throughout Germany...It should be emphasised that the destruction of houses, public utilities and lives; the creation of a refugee problem on an unprecedented scale; and the breakdown of morale both at home and at the battle fronts by fear of extended and intensified bombing are accepted and intended aims of our bombing policy. They are not by-products of attempts to hit factories."
Unsurprisingly the Air Ministry did not heed this advice. When Street replied that
"the widespread devastation is not an end in itself but the inevitable accompaniment of an all out attack on the enemy's means and capacity to wage war."
Harris really went off the deep end.
"It is surely obvious that children, invalids and old people* who are economically unproductive but must nevertheless consume food and other necessities are a handicap to the German war effort and it would therefore be a sheer waste of effort to attack them. This however does not imply that no German civilians are proper objects for bombing. The German economic system, which I am instructed by my objective to destroy, includes workers, houses and public utilities, and it is therefore meaningless to claim that wiping out German cities is 'not an end in itself but the inevitable accompaniment of an all out attack on the enemy's means and capacity to wage war'".
My bold.
*He did not include women, and knowing Harris, this was entirely intentional.
Reluctant Poster
Tech Sergeant
- 1,776
- Dec 6, 2006
All I am saying is that big bombs are required to destroy factories. And contrary to what Harris may have wanted to do he did bomb marshaling yards and he did join in the oil campaign quite successfull.
MiTasol
Major
The Brit archives have a lot on Wellington bomb configurations but none for download that I can see
Search results: "wellington aircraft" | The National Archives
Search results: "wellington aircraft" | The National Archives
- Thread starter
- #20
I have been doing research on Wellington load an foun that it has to do with bomb bay design. On Wellington Mk.X bomb bay was either a single space or divided in two sections. Divided bomb bay could receive GP or MC 1000 bomb in combination with 250pounders, while it was considered that 1000pounders were not effective load for planes with unitary bomb bay as Cookies. In 205. group 1000 and 2000 pounders were used mostly by Liberator squadrons while cookies were exclusive Wellington load.
