fastmongrel
1st Sergeant
RAF bombs missed by up to 1,000 yards. USAAF bombs hit within a radius of 1,000 yards 
Comparing bomb load effectiveness
- Thread starter wuzak
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Shortround6
Major General
To reduce the errors in testing from dropping from aircraft;
Little David - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The original 4000lb cookies tended to tumble in flight which makes predicting the path a little difficult. Some had a hollow drum attached to the back which was supposed to help but I don't know if the flat front and hollow drum rear gave as steady a flight path as a pointy front ( or semi-pointy) and regular fins.
The USAAC used very few 1600lbs. They get listed a lot as they make an airplane sound like it has a very impressive bomb load. The have a much thicker casing than a "normal" GP bomb and are actually smaller in diameter than a 1000lb bomb. They carried less explosive than a 500lb GP bomb ( here is one example of weight of bomb vs weight of explosive) but fit rather nicely in small bomb bays. Unless attacking armoured ships or concrete they really weren't much good.
Planes do have an effect on accuracy. Some bombers were known to "snake" or yaw a bit from side to side as they flew which affects not only the bomb aimer but the drop it self.
RAF bombs missed by up to 1,000 yards. USAAF bombs hit within a radius of 1,000 yards
"I see what you did there."
I don't see how a aircraft bomb could be fired from that motar without damaging the tailfin.
I know the Northrop flying wing had yaw problems bad enough to make it what was considered a bad bomb platform, but what other aircraft had serious problems with this ?
I have always wondered why they just didn't load B-17s and B-24s with lots of 100 or 200 pound bombs when going after factories or refineries. Looking at strike photos it sure looks like a lot of 500 pounders just made holes in farmer's fields. If they dropped a 100 pounder through the roof of a machine shop it would put the gear out of production just as well as a 500 pdr. If the number of bombs dropped in a raid was doubled, the chances of getting a direct hit would increase, right?
- Thread starter
- #26
wuzak
Captain
The USAAF preferred larger bombs for factories - because they did more damage.
The smaller bombs - 100lb and 250lb - didn't quite do so much damage, and weren't particularly good for knocking out equipment.
There were plenty of times that they did use the 100lb and 250lb bombs, though. And most of the effects were more potholes in farmer's fields (which, btw, usually mean they have missed the target completely, as factories tended to be in towns/cities).
Yes, snaking or excessive yawing would affect accuracy, but then that's where pilot skill comes into effect. "Some bombers"; in which ones was this a specific issue? Can you provide examples of aircraft in which this affected the fall of bombs over a particular target during the war?
Last edited:
Shortround6
Major General
They could use a Sabot to adjust to the size of the bomb. Sabot could be built to push against bomb body rather than the fins.
I can't remember the number/types of bombers offhand but quite a few went through modified vertical tail surfaces from prototype to production or even during production and some types were chosen over others in competitions due to yawing. Not all tail modifications were due to bomb run snaking though.
From Wikipedia regarding the B-26:
According to an article in the April 2009 edition of AOPA Pilot on Kermit Weeks' "Fantasy of Flight", the Marauder had a tendency to "hunt" in yaw. This instability is similar to "Dutch roll". This would make for a very uncomfortable ride, especially for the tail gunner.
Would that affect accuracy?
According to an article in the April 2009 edition of AOPA Pilot on Kermit Weeks' "Fantasy of Flight", the Marauder had a tendency to "hunt" in yaw. This instability is similar to "Dutch roll". This would make for a very uncomfortable ride, especially for the tail gunner.
Would that affect accuracy?
Yes it would, the aircraft would be moving around it's center of gravity, the tail is a lot more distant from the cog than the nose, but the bombadier in the nose would experience the same movements as the tailgunner, just not as severe.
Civettone
Tech Sergeant
I would just like to add that post-war interrogation at German factories revealed that heavy bombs were much more destructive than an equivalent mass of smaller bombs. To put it in other words, better one 2,000 lbs bomb than two or even three 1,000 lbs bombs.
Kris
Kris
