Did he say it was practical for the final Fat Man bomb, or for a provisional design that may have had different dimensions?
Again, the max width of Fat Man is 60.25in so it will fit. The minimum width of any design was 59in.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Did he say it was practical for the final Fat Man bomb, or for a provisional design that may have had different dimensions?
Again, the max width of Fat Man is 60.25in so it will fit. The minimum width of any design was 59in.
It could fit but can it be safely deployed???
Again, Chadwick assured Ramsey (who concurred) that it could be safely deployed. I have to admit that I'm not knowledgeable enough about the Lancaster to contradict it's designer...
A destoyed atomic bomb of the little man U235 gun type weapon would produced an insignificant amount of radiation since U235 is not particularly radioactive. Dispersed plutonium 239 from a fat man is probably a more serious matter. The fissile material is inside and extremely strong case.Again, Okinawa cannot be used as an Atomic staging base.
It was under constant attack by the Japanese and would put the atom bomb program in jeopardy.
Aside from the fact that there was a limited supply of atom bombs, if one of the bombs was destroyed by a Japanese bomb, there would be the issue of radioactive debris.
I was thinking about Sweeney's mission and led me to wonder.
Suppose Bockscar was one of these unicorn Lancasters - would it have been able to follow the exact timeline of eventsbas the actual B-29 or would it have been lost in action?
I've seen a great deal of effort to try and "fit" a Pumpkin Bomb into it's bomb bay, so let's assume the fuselage was widened enough to safely accommodate it's dimensions.
Would it have had enough fuel to not only made the trip from Tinian to the rendezvous point, then on to the primary and secondary target then on to Iwo Jima (Okinawa only in an emergency)? For the record, the Silverplate B-29s had a capacity of 7,250 gallons of fuel.
And what about both the imposed drag penalty of the bulging fuselage as well as additional fuel burn for extended (unscheduled) loiter time?
Nearly an hour was spent trying to find a bombing solution for Kokura before moving on to Nagasaki. Additionally, and extra 15 minutes was spend at Yakushima.
Add to that, the extra fuel consumed during the mission with the altitude change due to bad weather.
And finally, because if the faulty fuel transfer pump, Bockscar could not use 640 gallons if fuel, but instead, had to carry that weight home.
So taking all of these actual events into consideration, could a modified Lancaster have made the exact same journey under the exact same conditions?
I was thinking about Sweeney's mission and led me to wonder.
Suppose Bockscar was one of these unicorn Lancasters - would it have been able to follow the exact timeline of eventsbas the actual B-29 or would it have been lost in action?
I've seen a great deal of effort to try and "fit" a Pumpkin Bomb into it's bomb bay, so let's assume the fuselage was widened enough to safely accommodate it's dimensions.
Would it have had enough fuel to not only made the trip from Tinian to the rendezvous point, then on to the primary and secondary target then on to Iwo Jima (Okinawa only in an emergency)? For the record, the Silverplate B-29s had a capacity of 7,250 gallons of fuel.
And what about both the imposed drag penalty of the bulging fuselage as well as additional fuel burn for extended (unscheduled) loiter time?
Nearly an hour was spent trying to find a bombing solution for Kokura before moving on to Nagasaki. Additionally, and extra 15 minutes was spend at Yakushima.
Add to that, the extra fuel consumed during the mission with the altitude change due to bad weather.
And finally, because if the faulty fuel transfer pump, Bockscar could not use 640 gallons if fuel, but instead, had to carry that weight home.
So taking all of these actual events into consideration, could a modified Lancaster have made the exact same journey under the exact same conditions?
As I stated earlier, Sweeny made his decisions based upon his available fuel, with a different range available, he would have made different decisions.
As for drag, we have to consider the reduction due to removal of the front and upper turrets and the masking of the radome by the bulged bomb bay, so overall a probable reduction in drag.
So what decisions would have Sweeny made?
Cut short the rendezvous?
Drop the bomb at Kokura through the clouds and smoke, hoping for the best?
Go on to Nagasaki and then hope they can make it far enough to reach a USN picket sub to ditch by?
What about all the important data onboard that will be lost?
What is the survival rate of Lancaster crews that historically ditched? Can Sweeny guarentee the safety of his crew doing the same?
Yea, he would have flown the mission as planned and returned to Tinian!
And the Silverplate B-29 didn't require a bulged bomb bay!![]()
The title of this thread is The Lancaster as a potential nuclear bomber in 1945.
The B-29 had almost double the TO weight of a Lancaster as well (7250USG = ~6000IG).
As I stated earlier, Sweeny made his decisions based upon his available fuel, with a different range available, he would have made different decisions. Losing an aircraft, via ditching, if necessary is quite a fair trade-off for potentially ending the war and saving, possibly, millions of lives.
As for drag, we have to consider the reduction due to removal of the front and upper turrets and the masking of the radome by the bulged bomb bay, so overall a probable reduction in drag
Sweeny was prepared to drop by radar - that was his call to make and coastal targets generally provide an accurate radar mapping signal. With less fuel available Sweeny might have chosen to proceed to Kokura or Nagasaki, after 15mins at the Rendezvous point and made a visual drop.
B-29s ditched regularly during conventional bombing runs over Japan. War is hell and Sweeny and every other Allied pilot knew there were no guarantees about anything (C'mon how can you even ask such a question?). The vital data such as bomb yield can be estimated by on-board accelerometers and by post drop photo-recon. Aircrew can also exit via parachute over the ditching point, with the plane on autopilot.
I know it is a terrible source, but Wikipedia states;Trying to present a Lancaster mission profile based on the Bockcar debacle is just an attempt to hide the "Silverplate Lancaster's" limitations, you're just moving the gold posts closer. Sweeney was lucky he wasn't court-marshalled and Tibbets even revised his autobiography to dispel claims made my Sweeney to lessen the errors made. Thanks to General LeMay, Sweeney was spared Tibbets' wrath.
I know it is a terrible source, but Wikipedia states;
1) Group Commander Colonel Paul Tibbets and Sweeney therefore elected to have Bockscar continue the mission. So if Tibbets approves the flight with the broken fuel transfer pump, how is this Sweeney's error?
2) Though ordered not to circle longer than fifteen minutes, Sweeney continued to wait for The Big Stink, at the urging of Commander Frederick Ashworth, the plane's weaponeer, who was in command of the mission. I understand that as PIC Sweeney is ultimately responsible for the aircraft, but if the Mission Commander is urging some action doesn't some responsibility for the delay fall on his shoulders?