Bombers with wing cells?

[Ascent]

A question came to light on another forum I look at, which bombers had bomb cells in the wings rather than or in addition to a bomb bay in the fuselage?

I know the Battle did and the Stirling?

Also the Heyford had the centre of the lower wing as a bomb cell but that was rather a unique design and wasn't operational during WWII although I believe it was used for training for the first couple of years.

Not sure about anything else.

 

[pbehn]

The Supermarine B12/36 was to have bombs in wing cells, It may have some advantages but the huge disadvantage is the size of the bomb carried. As far as dropping a big bomb goes it was of less use than a Mosquito same with the Stirling.

 

[yulzari]

The Halifax used some wing bomb cells.

 

[Shortround6]

The Whitley did too.
The attraction was that by spreading the load out over the span of the wing the wing could be built lighter than if the entire load was concentrated at the center. Given the thick wing sections of the time there wasn't any drag penalty.
And nobody had done any real research into actual bomb size and damage so lots of small (250-500lb) bombs looked good.

 

[stona]

The RAF seems to have become infatuated with 250lb bombs for its strategic bombing force in the pre -war period. As SR6 said above, nobody bothered to find out if they would actually work in the intended role... they didn't
Cheers
Steve

 

[pbehn]

Well if the Battle carried them and the heavy bombers carried them you only need one type of bomb, this would have huge advantages in logistics and production.

 

[herman1rg]

I believe the Ilyushin Il-2 also had cells under the mid section of it's wings too.

 

[stona]

Well if the Battle carried them and the heavy bombers carried them you only need one type of bomb, this would have huge advantages in logistics and production.

This is true and, from memory, a good number were dropped in the war though I can't actually look up the numbers at the moment.
Unfortunately they just weren't very good at destroying cities or anything much else
Cheers
Steve

 

[pbehn]

This is true and, from memory, a good number were dropped in the war though I can't actually look up the numbers at the moment.
Unfortunately they just weren't very good at destroying cities or anything much else

I cant really figure out how the error was made just over 20 years after WW1 ended, it was noted then that light and heavy artillery had different effects.

 

[tomo pauk]

I believe the Ilyushin Il-2 also had cells under the mid section of it's wings too.

Four bomb cells - two in the each wing, between the fuselage and the space for retracted U/C.
picture of model

 

[Shortround6]

One source for British bomb information is here:
Bombs

 

[parsifal]

In the 1920's, after the main types of light bombs were settled upon, somebody calculated that the average lethal radius for the 120lb GP bomb was 60m radius. The RAF made calculations from that about how many bombs they would need to flatten a city with how many bombs, as if lethal radius equated to blast effects for buildings and worse, that bombs could be dropped with perfect spacing and accuracy.

Such calculations were based far from reality.

 

[Capt. Vick]

I believe the prototype Vought F4U Corsair had bomb cells in the wing as it was though dropping small bombs on attacking bombers was a feesible attack method.

 

[tomo pauk]

You sure got that right, Jim:

 

[Airframes]

The Avro Anson also had wing, or wing root, bomb cells.

 

[Old Wizard]

 

[stona]

In defence of (sort of ) the 250lb bomb it is fair to note that Bomber Command envisaged two types of target , according to a 1938 Air Staff Memorandum which commented on the Manual of Air Tactics.

1) The 'precise' target, e.g. a power station. The memorandum concedes that this would be 'our hardest task', but theoretically at least enough smaller bombs accurately delivered would suffice and minimise what we now call collateral damage. This is almost insanely optimistic, but with so little practice the Air Staff had little to go on.

2) The 'target group...of considerable area in which are concentrated many targets of equal or nearly eaqual importance on which accurate bombing is not necessary to achieve valuable hits."
This reflects WW1 attitudes, to bombing train stations for example when other valuable targets might also be hit unintentionally. It is also the basis of what would become known as area bombing.

It is also important to note that all this bombing was to be done in daylight. Bomber Command was not inteneded to be a night force and it didn't train to be one. This is clearly demonstrated in the Bomber Command Annual Training Reports in the pre-war period. For example, in 1938, 148,455 training hours were flown by day, just 14,615 by night.

After Harris took over Bomber Command, and the strategic campaign really started, his Command dropped 149,656 x 250lb GP bombs, compared to 82,164 x 1000lb and 531,334 x 500lb bombs. Clearly it was the 500lb GP bomb which became most commonly used, but the numbers are skewed by the huge numbers of these dropped after D-Day to off set shortages of the much superior MC version.
The 250lb version's use was highest in 1940 (61,572 dropped) then fell sharply in 1941 (34,692 dropped) and again in 1942 (15,206 dropped) and 1943 (3,188 dropped). In 1945 the number dropped (27,180) had risen almost to the 1941 figure.
Something else to bring little cheer to the men who risked their lives to deliver them is the failure rate of the 250lb GP bomb, estimated at between 10% and 15%.

Cheers

Steve