Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
The Lancaster VI had a ceiling of 28500ft at 65000lb (max TO weight) whilst carrying all three turrets..
"Carrying" the nuke and "Delivering" the nuke are two totally different objectives. I'm sure the Lancaster was capable of carrying the nuke, but are you seriously trying to say that a plane that will be flying at maybe 20,000 feet (or less) at less than 200 mph, from a base/support structure that is still well withing range of Japanese air power at the time can deliver this bomb?
What about the survival of the crew and a/c? The Enola Gay didn't do that turn and dive away just to look cool.
I'm not trying to be insulting but I think you're not only grasping at straws but the argument of using a Lancaster for this mission is a non starter.
nuuumannns's post #118 is about a concise an argument as you'll get for why the Lancaster was probably never really considered, not to mention it's inability to fulfill the mission profile.
Cheers.
Tinian was easily within reach of IJ twin and single engined Kamikaze attacks:
Japanese air attacks on the Mariana Islands - Wikipedia
In any event, using in air refuelling, the Lancaster could deliver the bomb from Tinian.
Did you not read the previous posts? The Hiroshima mission dropped the bomb at 30k ft, while the Lancaster VI had a service ceiling of 28500ft at Max TO weight while carrying full armour and armament. The Silverplate B-29s had all armament and armour except the tail guns removed. A standard B-29 had a service ceiling of 23800ft at Max TO weight but this rose to 35800ft combat altitude at combat weight (weight over the target). A standard B-29 carrying a 10k lb bomb from Tinian has to TO at near max TO weight to carry enough fuel. Take a Lancaster VI and remove the forward two turrets and their crew and ammo and all armour and the TO service ceiling will be well above 30K ft.
The Lancaster VI's Merlin 85 engines are not even a high altitude rated Merlin even though they have two stage SCs.
We've already established that Tinian was well inside IJ aerial strike range. When flying Atomic strike missions from Tinian aircraft had the option to land on Okinawa or Iwo Jima after weapon release. I haven't done the numbers but this profile might have allowed an overloaded Lancaster VI to have flown from Tinian without resort to in-flight refuelling.
Take a Lancaster VI and remove the forward two turrets and their crew and ammo and all armour and the TO service ceiling will be well above 30K ft.
Just to recap on this, Tinian (and neighboring islands) were under attack until February 1945, when the air attacks ceased.Tinian was easily within reach of IJ twin and single engined Kamikaze attacks:
Japanese air attacks on the Mariana Islands - Wikipedia
In any event, using in air refuelling, the Lancaster could deliver the bomb from Tinian.
Just to recap on this, Tinian (and neighboring islands) were under attack until February 1945, when the air attacks ceased.
The reason they ceased, is because the base that the Japanese were using as a staging base, was on Iwo Jima - which came under Allied assault in February.
From that point on, the only way the Japanese would able to reach Tinian, is with a G4M clean, as the distance from the Home island or Formosa to Tinian was within it's max. ferry range, but not with a substantial loadout.
Even during the months when Iwo absorbed most of its attention, the Seventh went on with its routine neutralization of other enemy bases which could have threatened the Marianas. That mission was to continue until the summer of 1945, and it is useful here to interrupt the Iwo Jima story with a brief summary of operations elsewhere.
Marcus, through which planes could stage from Japan to Saipan--though with longer flights than via Iwo--was kept under constant surveillance, usually by armed reconnaissance missions of two or three B-24's. Between September 1944 and July 1945 such missions totaled 565 sorties. Using Marcus as a target for shakedown missions, XXI Bomber Command dispatched eighty-five B-29's against it during the last month of the war.35 Woleai was visited occasionally by AAFPOA planes, as was Yap, until responsibility for the latter island was turned over to a Marine air group at Ulithi in November.36 Truk, in spite of its severe mauling earlier, was considered a potential danger spot which needed more than sporadic armed reconnaissance, and missions were sent against its installations until the end of the war. Until 26 June 1945 it was AAFPOA's B-24's that did most of the work there, flying 1,094 sorties after 1 August 1944, of which 595 came after the t groups had moved from Kwajalein to the Marianas. The half-dozen or so fighters that the Japanese managed to keep patched up did not offer much resistance, but AAFPOA was generous with escorts, sending P-38's in 75 sorties, P-47's in 234 escort and strafing sorties.37
Until the assault on Iwo Jima the B-24's continued the antishipping campaign in the Bonins. After 6 November there were no more bombing attacks, but with technical aid from NAVY officers the 42d Squadron carried out a number of mining missions against harbors and anchorages in the islands. By 12 February the 42d had planted 275 mines, about half of them around Chichi Jima.38 In his official report Harmon said that the squadron had not been successful in its
objective of clearing the area of all ships over 2,000 tons, and the Joint Army-Navy Assessment Committee credited the B-24's with sinking only a single ship with its mines. Nevertheless, there was some belief in the Marianas that Harmon had deliberately minimized the effectiveness of the campaign "because mine-laying was not considered a proper function for B-24 bombers."39
Capture and Development of Iwo Jima
Japanese raids against B-29 bases, though troublesome, were not important enough alone to have justified the cost of capturing Iwo Jima: the decision to seize the island was made a month before the raids began and they had ceased seven weeks before Iwo was assaulted. Meanwhile, the island had proved a hindrance to the VHB campaign in other ways. Since fighters based on the rock had attacked B-29's en route to or from Japan, to avoid interception the bombers had been forced to fly a dog-leg course which complicated navigation and reduced bomb loads; even then, enemy radar at Iwo gave early warning to Honshu of northbound Superforts. But the idea of seizing the island derived less from its menace while in Japanese hands than from its potential value as an advanced base for the Twentieth Air Force.
HyperWar: The Army Air Forces in WWII: Vol. V--The Pacific: MATTERHORN to Nagasaki [Chapter 19]
Got figures to back that up? On the first page I provided charts and historical information based on trials carried out with B.I Special Lancs, which definitely prove that the Lancaster's performance at MTOW carrying a sizeable load was too slow, at too low an altitude and did not have the range to mount such an operation.
Let's see what the Lanc VI could do. The Impact of the local conditions would have sapped the performance of the Lanc VI as it did the B.I Special in trials, which would, at MTOW reduced its speed, altitude and range with a given load. Yes, it was more powerful, as was the Lincoln, but not that much more powerful, certainly not B-29 powerful. That the B-29 managed the performance that it did flying those ops from Tinian is remarkable for the time, particularly the fact that standard B-29s were doing it on a daily basis. No other bomber in service could have done it, frankly.
Also, we are again ignoring the fact that historically, neither the Lanc VI nor the Lincoln were available by August 1945 to be of any use in service bar for training and familiarisation (three, yes, three Lincolns entered service in August 1945 with 57 Sqn), let alone mount a long range special operation of the nature of nuclear attack.
Lets not forget that the B-29s failed in their attempt at high altitude precision bombing of Japan under General Hansell due to poor bombing accuracy and unacceptable engine failure rates and instead used stripped aircraft to conduct a low level night bombing campaign under Lemay
So, which is it?We've already established that Tinian was well inside IJ aerial strike range.
That's not true. The IJ attacks ceased before the US captured Iwo Jima, and they ceased because IJ had run out of resources and US bombing of IJ airfields.
Not entirely true - what started out as a "modification" actually turned into a production line option. 46 were produced during the war, 65 total.The Silverplate B-29s were specially modded and stripped aircraft and by war's end only about 30 had been produced, under the highest production priority.
Did you not read the previous posts?
*SNIP*
The last bombing raid against Tinian was on 2 February, 1945 - Iwo Jima came under attack by Allied forces 17 days later.That's not true. The IJ attacks ceased before the US captured Iwo Jima, and they ceased because IJ had run out of resources and US bombing of IJ airfields. In fact there was a variety of other bases from which raids could be staged but Japan was too weak to continue their offensive:
Did you not read the previous posts? The Hiroshima mission dropped the bomb at 30k ft, while the Lancaster VI had a service ceiling of 28500ft at Max TO weight while carrying full armour and armament. The Silverplate B-29s had all armament and armour except the tail guns removed. A standard B-29 had a service ceiling of 23800ft at Max TO weight but this rose to 35800ft combat altitude at combat weight (weight over the target). A standard B-29 carrying a 10k lb bomb from Tinian has to TO at near max TO weight to carry enough fuel. Take a Lancaster VI and remove the forward two turrets and their crew and ammo and all armour and the TO service ceiling will be well above 30K ft.
The Lancaster VI's Merlin 85 engines are not even a high altitude rated Merlin even though they have two stage SCs.
Something to bear in mind here was that the bomb's (2) were developed simultaneously with the B-29. Weapon and delivery were sensibly devised to work hand in hand. Had there been no B-29 some other configuration of the bombs and or aircraft used would have been developed.
Leave it in Tokyo Bay with a submarine?
The Lancaster (with which ever engines) was not going to operate within several thousand feet of it's service ceiling. Few, if any, planes ever did.
Service Ceilings are also usually established or rated at standard conditions (59 degrees F/15 degrees C at sea level and standard pressure) with a corresponding drop in temperature at high altitudes. While the air does get colder at high altitudes even in the tropics you have to be a lot higher than 30,000ft for the temperature to be uniform regardless of surface temperature. one old chart shows minus 48 degrees F at 30,000ft on a standard 59 degree F day but a "hot day" (100 degrees F to 6000ft) shows about -5 degrees F at 30,000ft.
Adjust as you see fit but the Lancaster will NOT have the same ceilings in the summer operating from the Marshals as it did in testing in England (no plane would).
The Turbos on the B-29 allowed the same power ratings as lower altitudes to be maintained well into the 30,000ft altitude range.
BTW while not used in combat in WW II the B-29 was capable of lifting quite a large bomb load (given enough runway)
View attachment 529097
perhaps the caption is in error and those are only 12,000lb bombs? in which case the B-29 is carrying a mear 24,000lbs.
and here we run into a problem, if you fit higher altitude rated Merlins you loose around 30hp per engine at take-off. (on a 59 degree standard day)
TANSTAAFL. as it was the Merlin 85s were allowed to use 18lbs of boost for take-off.
The altitude rated Merlin 86 was rated at 1440hp at 22,000ft at 18lbs boost. the Merlin 85 gave 1580hp at 16,000ft at 18lbs.
Both engines had the same cruise ratings and the same climb rating although the Merlin 86 could maintain int higher. The Merlin 86 was intended for a high altitude Lincoln project.
"Carrying" the nuke and "Delivering" the nuke are two totally different objectives. I'm sure the Lancaster was capable of carrying the nuke, but are you seriously trying to say that a plane that will be flying at maybe 20,000 feet (or less) at less than 200 mph, from a base/support structure that is still well within range of Japanese air power at the time can deliver this bomb?
What about the survival of the crew and a/c? The Enola Gay didn't do that turn and dive away just to look cool.
I'm not trying to be insulting but I think you're not only grasping at straws but the argument of using a Lancaster for this mission is a non starter.
nuuumannns's post #118 is about a concise an argument as you'll get for why the Lancaster was probably never really considered, not to mention it's inability to fulfill the mission profile.
Cheers.
The Lancaster VI with full armour and 3 turrets had a service ceiling of 28500ft at 65000lb and maximum speed was 313mph at ~18300 FT.
YEP!In trials in the UK, not in the Pacific under operational conditions.