Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
And keep in mind, at least with Enola Gay, this was the first detonation of the gun-type bomb, the first air drop of an atomic weapon, and the first air burst of an atomic weapon. The Trinity test was of the implosion-type bomb, was conducted on a tower, and for all practical purposes was a ground burst. While the blast itself and the resulting fires in Hiroshima would have provided light, daylight observation and measurement would be far more revealing and accurate. From a scientific standpoint this whole process was still highly experimental.Agree about being a harder target at night for sure.
And I think that's a major reason why the powers to be wanted this to be done during the daytime.From a scientific standpoint this whole process was still highly experimental.
As a parallel question:
The B-29 was not used in Europe, likely because it was superfluous, but since neither the B-24 nor B-17 were capable of carrying Fat Man or Little Boy, how would one of the atomic bombs be delivered to Germany? Would it make more sense to use Lancasters or to move the B-29, an aircraft novel to the ETO, for the delivery?
The B-29 was not operational in the ETO, but they were not novel to that theater. There were B-29's in England as early as 1944.As a parallel question:
The B-29 was not used in Europe, likely because it was superfluous, but since neither the B-24 nor B-17 were capable of carrying Fat Man or Little Boy, how would one of the atomic bombs be delivered to Germany? Would it make more sense to use Lancasters or to move the B-29, an aircraft novel to the ETO, for the delivery?
All valid observations except my question would be "What the hell" are they using Lancasters for if the B-29 is already operational? Considering the modifications the Lancaster would need like Silverplate B-29s. Are you contending the B-29 would be operational but Silverplate was a failure and that's why Lancasters are in the 509th? That's not a snarky question, just a genuine one thanks.I have looked for some time for my book on Silverplate and it remains lost in the magic trash pile, so I will have to use my faulty memory. The work up with B-29s began at Wendover, Utah, and took constant flying for nearly a year to develop the delivery flight profile. The 509th was subject to absolute secrecy. Some men were dismissed from the program for loose lips. Once at Tinian, there were comments about the 509th being a gold brick outfit because they didn't fly mission with the others. The 509th always seemed to be flying 3or 5 plane missions with no losses or damage. Now imagine if the 509th showed up with Lancasters on a island of B-29s. The troops would say "What the hell is that?" The Japanese would say "What the hell is That?" And any imbeded reporters would wonder "What the hell is that?" It would have been like hiding a mule in a herd of horses.
The B-29 (and B-36) were originally designed for the ETO, incidently.As a parallel question:
The B-29 was not used in Europe, likely because it was superfluous, but since neither the B-24 nor B-17 were capable of carrying Fat Man or Little Boy, how would one of the atomic bombs be delivered to Germany? Would it make more sense to use Lancasters or to move the B-29, an aircraft novel to the ETO, for the delivery?
The only major mods on the Grandslam Lancaster Specials were strengthened landing gear and removal of the mid upper turret, and of course removal of the B-B doors to sling the bomb externally ( yet cruise speed, and AMPG was similar to a standard Lancaster at the same weight). Otherwise they were pretty much as any other Lancaster I.
The data on Lancaster performance is available and it clearly shows that the Lancaster was mission capable. Why you continue to claim otherwise, when the data is online:
Lancaster Performance Trials, showing you to be incorrect, is a bit of a mystery.
So you won't be sending a single Lanc on a mission, you'll be sending 6...
Well...So, you mean to say that the Lancaster op is less plausible than we are assuming here???
The reality is a modified Lancaster couldn't do the Tinian raid as it was. How it could have is with in-flight refuelling. It's the only way it could have. Performance wise, with IFR, speeds could be increased as could altitude, but not by as much as the B-29. Carrying out this raid with an MTOW of 72,000lbs gives speeds of between 170 to 190 mph at an altitude of 15,000 feet to reach maximum range, which is suicide and performance would definitely need to be increased. A cruise speed of over 200mph at an altitude of 20,000 feet or more is preferable, but with a B.I (Special) modified to an MTOW of 72,000lbs is unobtainable (see figures above), so another option would have to be investigated. Perhaps the Lincoln, which the Lanc VI was a forerunner to at any rate - skip the troublesome Lanc VI and go straight for the big daddy.
With IFR, the range could be met if enough tankers were provided. Avro drew up proposals for tankers based on Manchester airframes in 1940; the modifications could fit within the Lanc fuselage and bomb bay as well, so that is feasible. Here is a plausible scenario.
In September 1943, Ramsey is given the go ahead by Arnold to investigate the Lancaster as a potential second fiddle, IFR mods would need to be undertaken based on Avro's drawings and put into service as quickly as possible, requiring crew training etc to bring about a mission capable op. A fleet of tankers is needed and the aircraft would have to fly from Tinian to Japan and back to Tinian. Let's not dick around with Okinawa. Do this properly. The only way it can be done is with IFR.
I am envisioning a similar scenario of tankers to receivers as the Black Buck raids against the Falklands as flown by Avro Vulcans and Handley Page Victors as the tankers. For each bombing raid, the one Vulcan required fifteen to sixteen Victors, to enable them to refuel each other to match the Vulcan. Diagram here:
Operation Black Buck - Wikipedia
From here: Operation Black Buck - Wikipedia
Keep in mind that both missions (Hiroshima and Nagasaki) involved three advance weather scouts and two data/observer aircraft, too.
And they were all interchangeable - meaning all were capable of carrying either the bombs or the instruments.
So you won't be sending a single Lanc on a mission, you'll be sending 6...
Wrong.The weather aircraft and observer aircraft can be any aircraft with suitable range and performance. The only possible weapon exchange has to happen prior to TO. so this means having spare aircraft on Tinian.
Hmmm, you need to read more about the Lancaster. The bomb bay was also strengthened and more powerful engines and different prop blades were fitted. All in all, this was quite a lot of modification to a standard Mk.I, so 'pretty much as any other Lancaster' isn't true.
As for performance, the following is taken from The Secret Years, Flight Testing at Boscombe Down by Tim Mason (Hikoki, 1998) extrapolated from Air Ministry files:
(1) "Unlike the Tallboy, the Grand Slam of 22,000lbs required extensive aircraft modification, more power and a considerable increase in weight."
(2) Tables of Performance record B.I (Special) PB592 as at a MTOW of 72,000lbs as having a max rate of climb of 500 ft per min to 10,000 feet, taking 50 minutes to achieve. Ceiling was 18,600 feet and its maximum speed was a true airspeed of 245 mph at an altitude of 16,200 feet. This data is whilst carrying a Grand Slam.
By comparison, from the same table, Mk.I W4963 with an MTOW of 63,000lbs has a max rate of climb 720 ft per min to 9,200 feet, taking 44 minutes. Its ceiling was 21,000 feet and with a maximum true airspeed of 282 mph at 13,000 feet.
So all round, performance of the Lancaster B.I (Special) was worse than standard Lanc Mk.I, which is precisely what I stated.
No mystery about it. If you look at the page you provided, then compare with the page below, you'll see that I am right in stating that a Mk.I (Special) with an MTOW of 72,000lbs has lower performance, again, so once more, you've gone ahead and proven yourself wrong with your own information!
http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/Lancaster/Lancaster_I_PD435_Performance.pdf
Wot you posted.
http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/Lancaster/Lancaster_VI_JB675_Performance.pdf
Wrong.
They HAD to be interchangable and as it was, Enola Gay flew the data mission for Bockscar on the Kokura/Nagasaki run.
And what's amusing to me, is if everyone was so damned desperate to have one special bomber for this program, they could have used the B-19, but logic (and common sense) dictated that it would require well over a dozen to ensure the missions were able to succeed.
Also, you keep insisting that the Lanc could have ditched after the Nagasaki run - but what the Hiroshima run? What if it had to ditch after Hiroshima then what? Kokura (Nagasaki) still had to be done.