4,000lb was the cookie load which filled the extended bomb bay, in conventional bombs its payload was much less.
Mosquito - the alternative strategic bomber
- Thread starter Timppa
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
wuzak
Captain
The maximum load for a XVI was 5,000lb - 1 x 4000lb (HC or MC) plus 2 x 500lb MC under the wings.
Maximum speed with 4000lb bomb aboard was 408mph (Merlin 76/77) and 419mph without. Cruise speed (max weak mixture) >350mph. Range OTOH ~ 1400-1500 miles with 4000lb bomb and drop tanks.
wuzak
Captain
4000lb MC was a conventional bomb and could be carried.
2 x 2000lb AP bombs could be carried, but weren't.
Maximum load without the bulged bomb bay was 3000lb - 4 x 500lb in the bomb bay and 2 x 500lb on the wings.For bulged bomb bay 2 x 1000lb could be carried in the bomb bay.
There were proposals to carry more bombs in the bulged bay. A modified Wellington bomb bay was fabricated to fit the Mosquito. It would have enabled 8 x 500lb or 8 x 250lb bombs to be carried, though de Havilland expressed doubt as to the stability with 8 s 500lb bombs. The Air Ministry then suggested 4 x 500lb + 4 x 250lb, but I haven't seen the response to that.
Mosquitoes could carry 2 x 500lb MC bombs plus 2 x SBC with incendiaries internally if a mixed load was required.
Shortround6
Major General
B-17s could routinely carry 5,000lbs of HE bombs to Berlin or similar distances. When carrying incendiaries the bomb load often fell to a bit over 3,000lbs due the volume, or lack of it, in the B-17 bomb bay. This gives the 4,000lb average so beloved by B-17 critics and Mosquito boosters. B-17 could carry ten 500lb GP bombs or five 1000lb GP bombs in the bomb bay.
Then the comparison is made to the Mosquito carrying the 4,000lb cookie.
From Mike William's site.
http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/mosquito/Mosquito_MkIV-merlin21_ads.jpg
http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/mosquito/Mosquito_MkIV_ads.jpg
http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/mosquito/Mosquito_MkXX_ads.jpg
Now most bombing missions weren't direct flights, dog legs and feints were part of the flight path, also a reasonable reserve might be required.
Mosquitoes rarely, very rarely used 1000lb HE bombs. They also rarely used incendiary bombs. Perhaps they would have been modified adapted to carry such weapons if there was more need but the Mosquito bomb bay was limited in size/volume and you would need roughly 2 Mosquitoes to carry the same loads as a B-17 for practically any weapons except the 4,000lb cookie.Please note that hanging a pair of 500lbs under wing on a Mosquito can cut 225 miles off the range at high speed cruise (max weak mixture) although most economical shows little reduction.
Then the comparison is made to the Mosquito carrying the 4,000lb cookie.
From Mike William's site.
http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/mosquito/Mosquito_MkIV-merlin21_ads.jpg
http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/mosquito/Mosquito_MkIV_ads.jpg
http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/mosquito/Mosquito_MkXX_ads.jpg
Now most bombing missions weren't direct flights, dog legs and feints were part of the flight path, also a reasonable reserve might be required.
Mosquitoes rarely, very rarely used 1000lb HE bombs. They also rarely used incendiary bombs. Perhaps they would have been modified adapted to carry such weapons if there was more need but the Mosquito bomb bay was limited in size/volume and you would need roughly 2 Mosquitoes to carry the same loads as a B-17 for practically any weapons except the 4,000lb cookie.Please note that hanging a pair of 500lbs under wing on a Mosquito can cut 225 miles off the range at high speed cruise (max weak mixture) although most economical shows little reduction.
wuzak
Captain
Small bomb containers could be carried on the forward fuselage positions, but not the rear, without modification of the SBC or bomber. I believe they could also be carried on the wing stations. 2 x 500lb MC bombs could be carried in the rear stations at the same time.
The Mosquito was trialled with 1 x 1000lb GP bomb and 2 x 500lb. The GP was not much of a bomb, since it had around 25-30% charge to weight ratio.
The 1000lb MC was too big in diameter to fit in the standard bomb bay, but could be fitted as a single or double adaptor in the bulged bomb bay. This was done primarily to use the 1000lb target indicator (TI).
The RAF didn't use too many 2000lb HE bombs, the only one in that weight class was he 1900lb GP bomb, not many of which were used. The next size up was the 4000lb MC - which the Mosquito could and did carry. This was the same size as the 4000lb HC cookie, but was the conventional medium capacity "aerodynamic" bomb design.
Since the Mosquito would not fly and bomb in a formation like the B-17, and would likely bomb from lower altitudes the lack of bomb load may have been compensated for by increased accuracy.
parsifal
Colonel
late in the war the mossie could carry 4000lbs all the way to berlin.
(From 'Mosquito',by C. Martin Sharp and Michael J.F. Bower, Faber and Faber Limited, London, 1967):
'At 19.00 hours on 11 July [1942] six Mosquitos of 105 Squadron made a diversionary attack on Flensburg (...). Five carried 4 x 500 lb. bombs, one had 2 x 250 lb. HE and incendiaries.' (page 190)
'Four Mosquitos could place sixteen 500 pounders in a building (page, 196, Mosquito as a day bomber, 1942)
'On 12-13 April [1945], 4/5 Mosquitos [from 139 Sqdn.] went to Berlin, the only ones that night. Incendiaries were carried on this operation, in 4,000 lb. bomb casings. This was the standard load out for incendiary armed mosquitoes late war' (page 365)"
Typically when carrying HE only, the Mosquito carried 4 x 550 lb bombs in the internal Bomb bay. The bombs had to be specially modified with shortened tails to fit into the limited space. Later marks of mosquito had enlarged bomb bays redesigned, increasing this capacity. these later types from early 1944 carried 1000lb bombs on a more less regular basis.
as far as accuracy is concerned, a Mosquito does not have by magic inherent advantage over any other properly designed aircraft . if an aircraft could fly straight and level and the crew were untroubled enough by the threat of flak or enemy fighters. It wasn't that mossies were inherently more accurate, it was that the crews felt safer and less nervous than when they were in a lumbering 4 engine behemoth.
I believe it was the safety that the mossie offered in comparison to its rivals that made it a better, more accurate bomber
(From 'Mosquito',by C. Martin Sharp and Michael J.F. Bower, Faber and Faber Limited, London, 1967):
'At 19.00 hours on 11 July [1942] six Mosquitos of 105 Squadron made a diversionary attack on Flensburg (...). Five carried 4 x 500 lb. bombs, one had 2 x 250 lb. HE and incendiaries.' (page 190)
'Four Mosquitos could place sixteen 500 pounders in a building (page, 196, Mosquito as a day bomber, 1942)
'On 12-13 April [1945], 4/5 Mosquitos [from 139 Sqdn.] went to Berlin, the only ones that night. Incendiaries were carried on this operation, in 4,000 lb. bomb casings. This was the standard load out for incendiary armed mosquitoes late war' (page 365)"
Typically when carrying HE only, the Mosquito carried 4 x 550 lb bombs in the internal Bomb bay. The bombs had to be specially modified with shortened tails to fit into the limited space. Later marks of mosquito had enlarged bomb bays redesigned, increasing this capacity. these later types from early 1944 carried 1000lb bombs on a more less regular basis.
as far as accuracy is concerned, a Mosquito does not have by magic inherent advantage over any other properly designed aircraft . if an aircraft could fly straight and level and the crew were untroubled enough by the threat of flak or enemy fighters. It wasn't that mossies were inherently more accurate, it was that the crews felt safer and less nervous than when they were in a lumbering 4 engine behemoth.
I believe it was the safety that the mossie offered in comparison to its rivals that made it a better, more accurate bomber
Last edited:
Comparing special low level operations with strategic bombing is irrelevant. Mosquitoes could not fly to Berlin at low level, in day light, and put '16 bombs in a building' at any time, even in the last months of the war, and hope to survive. Other similar operations showed that using these tactics they could be, and were, intercepted by Luftwaffe fighters, never mind the anti aircraft defences of Berlin which were not comparable to Copenhagen or Amiens.
How many Mosquitoes are going to be used. Four Mosquitoes dropping 16 x 500lb bombs accurately from low level on a marshalling yard equates to a pin prick.
Then the pressure must be maintained. Oil targets, not easily destroyed and easily repaired, were studied in November 1944. Using Lancasters (and with a daylight 'efficiency' of 80%, that is 80% of bombs within 300 yards of the aiming point, and 26% 'efficiency' by night) Bomber Command's ORS calculated that once location, degree of precision, bombing aids and weather were taken into account, as well as the German's ability to repair, it would take 9,000 sorties per month split between 13 day raids of 200 aircraft and 18 night attacks of 350 aircraft to keep oil plants inoperative. Given the relative average loads of the Lancaster and Mosquito, 9,186lb and 2,101lb according to the BBSU, you will need more than four times as many Mosquitoes as Lancasters. If the Mosquito was twice as accurate (difficult to see given the day time accuracy of the Lancasters) you still need to mount daytime raids with 400 Mosquitoes and night time raids with 700 to deliver enough bombs. This is pure fantasy.
The Mosquito was a great aircraft, but it simply could not carry a big enough load to be the primary strategic British bomber of the war.
Note that whilst it could carry a 4000lb 'cookie' and the theoretical bomb loads posted by various people above, it's average bomb load was just over 2,000lb and even this figure will be weighted by the relatively large number of cookies dropped late in the war.
A heavily modified Lancaster (the cookie carrying Mosquito was also modified to some extent) could carry 22,000lb, but this is meaningless in terms of general strategic operations, where the average was less than 10,000lb.
Cheers
Steve
How many Mosquitoes are going to be used. Four Mosquitoes dropping 16 x 500lb bombs accurately from low level on a marshalling yard equates to a pin prick.
Then the pressure must be maintained. Oil targets, not easily destroyed and easily repaired, were studied in November 1944. Using Lancasters (and with a daylight 'efficiency' of 80%, that is 80% of bombs within 300 yards of the aiming point, and 26% 'efficiency' by night) Bomber Command's ORS calculated that once location, degree of precision, bombing aids and weather were taken into account, as well as the German's ability to repair, it would take 9,000 sorties per month split between 13 day raids of 200 aircraft and 18 night attacks of 350 aircraft to keep oil plants inoperative. Given the relative average loads of the Lancaster and Mosquito, 9,186lb and 2,101lb according to the BBSU, you will need more than four times as many Mosquitoes as Lancasters. If the Mosquito was twice as accurate (difficult to see given the day time accuracy of the Lancasters) you still need to mount daytime raids with 400 Mosquitoes and night time raids with 700 to deliver enough bombs. This is pure fantasy.
The Mosquito was a great aircraft, but it simply could not carry a big enough load to be the primary strategic British bomber of the war.
Note that whilst it could carry a 4000lb 'cookie' and the theoretical bomb loads posted by various people above, it's average bomb load was just over 2,000lb and even this figure will be weighted by the relatively large number of cookies dropped late in the war.
A heavily modified Lancaster (the cookie carrying Mosquito was also modified to some extent) could carry 22,000lb, but this is meaningless in terms of general strategic operations, where the average was less than 10,000lb.
Cheers
Steve
Last edited:
michaelmaltby
Colonel
.. beautiful rebuttals of the thread's principle premis
Shortround6
Major General
Apparently there were two SBC, a small one of roughly 250lbs (obviouly varied due which bombs it was loaded with) and a large one of roughly 1000lb used by the 4 engine heavies, sometimes in combination with the small containers.
One source gives the capacity of the small SBC as follows.
The normal 250 lb. SBC could be loaded with a variety of ordnance:
12 x 20 lb. Fragmentation Bomb
6 x 40 lb. General Purpose Bomb
24 x 9 lb. Anti Tank Bomb
60 x 4 lb. Incendiary Bomb (3 canisters each with 20 x 4 lb.)
? x 25 lb. Incendiary Bomb
8 x 30 lb. Incendiary Bomb
3 x 45 lb. Incendiary Bomb
42 x 4 lb. Smoke Bomb (3 canisters each with 14 x 4 lb.)
3 x 100 lb. Smoke Bomb
2 x 120 lb. Smoke Bomb
There should be also a SBC with 90 x 4 lb. Incendiary Bombs (3 canisters, each with 30 x 4 lb.)
Some of the missions the B-17s flew had payloads of 42 65lb incendiary bombs, this was nominal 100lb chemical bomb filled with one of several incendiary mixtures so the weight varied.
B-17s could also carry 12 500lb bombs or 6 1000lb bombs on shorter range missions like Stuttgart or Schweinfurt.
Berlin was NOT the only target of the strategic bombing campaign.
One source gives the capacity of the small SBC as follows.
The normal 250 lb. SBC could be loaded with a variety of ordnance:
12 x 20 lb. Fragmentation Bomb
6 x 40 lb. General Purpose Bomb
24 x 9 lb. Anti Tank Bomb
60 x 4 lb. Incendiary Bomb (3 canisters each with 20 x 4 lb.)
? x 25 lb. Incendiary Bomb
8 x 30 lb. Incendiary Bomb
3 x 45 lb. Incendiary Bomb
42 x 4 lb. Smoke Bomb (3 canisters each with 14 x 4 lb.)
3 x 100 lb. Smoke Bomb
2 x 120 lb. Smoke Bomb
There should be also a SBC with 90 x 4 lb. Incendiary Bombs (3 canisters, each with 30 x 4 lb.)
Some of the missions the B-17s flew had payloads of 42 65lb incendiary bombs, this was nominal 100lb chemical bomb filled with one of several incendiary mixtures so the weight varied.
B-17s could also carry 12 500lb bombs or 6 1000lb bombs on shorter range missions like Stuttgart or Schweinfurt.
Berlin was NOT the only target of the strategic bombing campaign.
- Thread starter
- #30
A few points:
1. Mosquito could - demonstrably - make two sorties in a night, when the heavies could make only one.
2. The total Lancaster/Halifax/Stirling production was about 16,000. Even if only half of this effort would have been directed to manufacturing (all metal) Mosquito, the number of Mossies produced would have tripled.
3. As I understood, Bennett did not propose massed daylight raids. Hence relative losses would have been at their historical levels.
1. Mosquito could - demonstrably - make two sorties in a night, when the heavies could make only one.
2. The total Lancaster/Halifax/Stirling production was about 16,000. Even if only half of this effort would have been directed to manufacturing (all metal) Mosquito, the number of Mossies produced would have tripled.
3. As I understood, Bennett did not propose massed daylight raids. Hence relative losses would have been at their historical levels.
michaelmaltby
Colonel
".... directed to manufacturing (all metal) Mosquito"
That's news.
That's news.
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
Again folks, in this "what if, should have, could have" scenario, at what speeds and altitudes are these "Strategic Mosquitoes" dropping their bombs at?
IIRC the Mosquito was prohibited from opening its bomb bay doors over 320 mph.
IIRC the Mosquito was prohibited from opening its bomb bay doors over 320 mph.
It doesn't matter how many sorties a Mosquito could make. Unless you can provide many hundreds of them they will not be able to deliver the weight of ordnance required in TIME and space to create the devastation of the most successful area raids. They could not bomb accurately enough, particularly by night, and more so when beyond Oboe range, to carry out a different strategy.
This was a problem experienced by the Luftwaffe and its medium bombers in 1940/41 when they effectively had to 'shuttle bomb' British cities over virtually an entire night to deliver a meaningful weight of bombs.
This is just a function of the science of bombing, something developed and studied at considerable length by the British from 1942 onward. In the simplest terms, if you can't bomb accurately enough to hit a precision target (and there were occasions in 1944 when both US and British bombers attacked the wrong city altogether, never mind the wrong target) you have to deliver sufficient weight of ordnance to devastate an area that may, or may not, include that target. Even in day light, the weight of bombs to ensure destruction of a precise target (think transport and oil plans) is much larger than the author of that article understands. He also fails to take into account the concentration of bombing required. Strategic bombing, or use of Strategic forces in a tactical role (as in the transport and oil plans) is quite different from special operations like those mentioned earlier. Such operations could also entail prohibitive loss rates when launched against anything but almost entirely undefended targets. Bluntly, the Mosquito was not the aircraft for the strategic job.
Cheers
Steve
This was a problem experienced by the Luftwaffe and its medium bombers in 1940/41 when they effectively had to 'shuttle bomb' British cities over virtually an entire night to deliver a meaningful weight of bombs.
This is just a function of the science of bombing, something developed and studied at considerable length by the British from 1942 onward. In the simplest terms, if you can't bomb accurately enough to hit a precision target (and there were occasions in 1944 when both US and British bombers attacked the wrong city altogether, never mind the wrong target) you have to deliver sufficient weight of ordnance to devastate an area that may, or may not, include that target. Even in day light, the weight of bombs to ensure destruction of a precise target (think transport and oil plans) is much larger than the author of that article understands. He also fails to take into account the concentration of bombing required. Strategic bombing, or use of Strategic forces in a tactical role (as in the transport and oil plans) is quite different from special operations like those mentioned earlier. Such operations could also entail prohibitive loss rates when launched against anything but almost entirely undefended targets. Bluntly, the Mosquito was not the aircraft for the strategic job.
Cheers
Steve
I imagine that 'low level' attacks are envisaged. The same basic law applies to the Mosquito as all other bombers, the higher the release altitude the less accurate the bombing. The original articles premise is dependent on much more accurate bombing than that achievable by the 'heavies'.
PFF Mosquitoes dropped TIs from a low as 800 feet, they would not blow the aircraft up, and on a good night could mark within 100m of the aiming point. Maybe this is what the writer envisages?
Cheers
Steve
wuzak
Captain
IAS
No, they could and occasionally did operate on consecutive nights. The limiting factor was primarily the weather. Obviously no squadron could operate repeatedly night after night as attrition, fatigue and even supply factors would come into play. The one thing that frequently seems to have been in short supply is the small bomb container. Some Groups attempted to hoard these against future operations, reducing the percentage of incendiaries carried, and were told in no uncertain terms not to do so.
The rate of returns on a second night of operations was markedly higher, particularly for Halifax squadrons. Whether this was really due to technical issues with the aircraft at a time of high work load, or was due to other factors, was a question which troubled the Command at the time.
Cheers
Steve
Shortround6
Major General
A night in Dec or a night in June?
Sunrise and sunset times in Berlin
Historical loss levels or casualty rated may not have been all that good in the first year of operation, when the Mosquito only equipped a few bomber squadrons. Things got better later but the Mosquito never operated in large formations or streams of hundreds of mosquitoes crossing the target in a 1/2 hour to 2 hours time.
And if you are only going to drop a few hundred tons (or a few dozen tons?) per raid/night it is going to take an awful long time to destroy many targets.
Shortround6
Major General
A Stona has already said a major factor was weather.
Another limitation is operational planning and supplies. Individual bombers or small groups of bombers (4-8) out of a squadron or group might have had a 12 hour or less turn around but rearming/refueling dozens of bombers per airfield in 10-12 hours (how much time between planes landing and needing to take off to be over Germany during darkness? The Erks sure didn't have 24 hours). Plotting take-off times for hundreds of bombers and routes to and from the target and getting the information to the squadrons involved is also not done on the fly or with only a few hours time.
Last edited:
Shortround6
Major General
I would note that many "post" war criticisms or alternate strategies assume the opponent will make NO changes to their defensive set up.
Lots of Mosquitoes coming in low and fast and few large bombers at high altitude?
Build lots of 20mm and 37mm AA guns and fewer 88mm and 105mm AA guns.
Problem for Germans is not "solved" but the loss rates for the Mosquito will change.
Lots of Mosquitoes coming in low and fast and few large bombers at high altitude?
Build lots of 20mm and 37mm AA guns and fewer 88mm and 105mm AA guns.
Problem for Germans is not "solved" but the loss rates for the Mosquito will change.
