A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Military Aviation
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Biggest German Bomb in WW2?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old September 14th 04, 02:18 PM
Alan Dicey
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Emmanuel Gustin wrote:
"robert arndt" wrote in message
m...
No, SC 2500:
http://www.geocities.com/Pentagon/7087/uk019b.jpg


Hmm... Vaporware aside, which German aircraft could
carry that bomb?


Sources:
Wings of the Luftwaffe, Capt.Eric Brown
The Luftwaffe Album, Joachim Dressel and Manfred Griehl
Hitlers Luftwaffe, Tony Wood and Bill Gunston

Rough figures -
He111H, bomb load 2000Kg in vertical cells sized for SC250 bombs; range
2000 Km
Do217K, bomb load 2510Kg in one long bomb-bay, range 2100Km
Ju88A, bomb load 500Kg internal, 3000Kg external, range 1800Km
Amazingly enough, the Stuka had an impressive capacity



Ju87D, bomb load (external) 1800Kg(short-range, overload), range 900 Km

Now for the He177:
Bomb load -
16x50Kg SC50, 4x250Kg SC250 or 2x500Kg SC500 internally (Brown)
Maximum bomb load 6000Kg (seldom carried) (Gunston)
2,800Kg (A-5 model), 4,200Kg (A-7 model) (Dressel & Griehl)

The bomb bay was split into three sections by structural bulkheads,
limiting the length of any internally-carried store. Torpedoes, for
instance, were to be carried externally.

It appears the design suffered from bad weight escalation as time
progressed (initial design requires strengthening, adds weight, needs
bigger engines, needs more fuel, means less space for bombs). Also the
range requirement means more space is needed for fuel, leaving less
again for bombs.

Range - 5000Km

So the SC2500's that were dropped on Britain were probably carried by
Do217's?
  #12  
Old September 14th 04, 03:48 PM
Geoffrey Sinclair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Eunometic wrote in message ...
"Geoffrey Sinclair" wrote in message

...
Eunometic wrote in message ...



(snip)

The general claims are that they took no losses due to enemy (RAF)
action and although this might be in dispute they certainbly can't be
described as 'heavy'.


So tell us the losses, given in 1944 when the Little Blitz was started
the force had 35 He177s in a force of 550 bombers. How many
He177 sorties?

The He177 first appeared over the UK in 1942, as part of trials,
but was mainly used in the west in anti shipping operations. The
first He177 destroyed over the UK was on 21 January 1944. The
RAF collected the wreckage of 4 He177s in the period 23 February
to 2 March 1944, from crash sites in England.

As for the He177, the tactic was to climb to over 20,000 feet
over France then spend the rest of the flight to and from
London in a shallow dive. As for the claim the RAF failed
to shoot one down, RAF mosquito night fighters made claims
for 8 He177s in the first 4 months of 1944, some of which at
least have been confirmed post war. Who are the people
making the claims there were no He177 combat losses, given
all the Luftwaffe would have had is a failed to return?


It has been claimed. I will track them down.


To repeat myself,

The first He177 destroyed over the UK was on 21 January 1944. The
RAF collected the wreckage of 4 He177s in the period 23 February
to 2 March 1944, from crash sites in England.

Rather hard to claim no losses when the RAF had at least 5
wrecks to look at.

Also note many of the raids were on the ports being used for
Overlord, which flatters the bomber performance since they
effectively did not cross the British coast.

According to Alfred Price's Luftwaffe Data
Book on 27 July 1942 I/KG40 had 16 out of 30 He177s
operational, on 17 May 1943 there was 1 unserviceable He177
in Luftflotte 3, there were another 56 He177s present in
Lufttwaffenbefelshaber Mitte (Germany) of which 26 were
serviceable. On 31 May 1944 Luftflotte 3 held around 50 to 60
He177s in KG40, around 40 serviceable, with Luftflotte Reich
holding some 157 in KG1 and KG100, of which 42 were
serviceable.


Nice data but irrelevent to combat losses.



Not really, losing 1 out of 1,000 is low, losing 1 out of 5 is high
losses. For example on 18 April 1944 the Luftwaffe sent 125
bombers to London, 5 of which were He177s.

(snip)

See above for other reasons why interception was hard, and
the bombers came from France, rather hard to stay in a dive
from Germany to England, especially one steep enough to do
400 mph in an aircraft with a top speed of around 300 mph.


Presumably they would not begin their diving attack immediatly if this
was the Hi-lo-Hi attack profile.


So the claim is the He177s came from Germany, which would
reduce the bomb load for a start. The information I have is they
came from France, went high, stayed in a dive to the target and
left at low altitude, no climb on the way out.

Rather strange to bomb London and the channel ports from
Germany when the French airfields were closer.

(snip)


You want lots of fuel if you are going to climb high and then
try and stay in a 400 mph dive for a long time. You do not want
a big bomb load if your objective is to climb high and fly fast.

Now add the fact one or two of the bomb bays were often blanked off.
My bet is each bomb bay could carry a 2 1,000 kg bombs, so in theory
if all three were available you end up with 6,000 kg, but in practice it
would seem the maximum internal load was 2,000 or 4,000 kg, given
the bomb bay blanking.


That sounds like a faith based answer.


No, straight logic, 3 bomb bays of the same size, given some
references talk about 2 1,000 KG bombs as the internal load
it becomes quite clear, 2,000 KG is clearly to low given the
three bomb bays even given the bomb bays were shallow, since
there was a 1,520 litre fuel tank over each. If the bay was blanked
off the relevant tank could be changed to a 3,450 litre one.

If the 2,800 kg figure for internal bomb load for the A-5 is correct
it would mean the version being quoted has at least one of the
original bays was blanked off during production.

The A-5/R6 was the version that came with only one bomb bay.

A substantial internal bombload comparable or slightly superior to
unmodified allied 4 engined heavies is most likely. I doubt blanking
was the issue however.


Ah yes, we are back to faith based answers. It is probable the
He177 with all bomb bays in operation could carry around 6,000
KG of bombs internally, at least in some versions. The point is
the modifications to carry the glider bombs reduced internal bomb
capacity and upped weights, the wing strengthening, and it was
largely the modified bombers that ended up bombing England.

The He177 had a lower useful load than the standard allied heavies.

The initial He177 units used against England in early 1944 were
3rd staffel I/KG 100 and 1st staffel I/KG 40.

There were variants of the He 177 for instance apart from the He 177
A3 and He 177 A5 there were subdivisions of the aircraft to He 177
A5/R2 or A5/R4 possibly representing maritime and land attack versions
with or without part of the bombay blanked and with racks added of to
carry a torpedoes or mines or misslies to bulky.

I suspect the "R" refers to "rucksatz" or field conversion kits the
Luftwaffe was fond of using to adpat its aircraft.

More typically
1000kg of bombs would be carried internally.

Clearly preposterous.


Ah yes, the faith based answer.


Then you are agreeing with Wilshaw that the He 177, a bomber the size
of a Lancaster,B17,Liberator with a bomb bay doors that extend a
substantial length of the fueselage probably carried only 1000kg of
bombs at a time a FW 190 single engined fighter carried more than
this?


Let us start with the fact the He177s had been modified to carry
the glider bombs, modifications which included the bomb bay
blanking off, thereby reducing their internal capacity. Then we
add the tactics, fly as high as possible and stay in a dive over
England, a dive steep enough to convert an around 260 mph
maximum continuous cruise to a ground speed of 400 mph.
Noting economical cruise was 210 mph at 20,000 feet. The
dive angle was steep enough to up speed by around 50%.

So no external loads and keep the internal weights down, above
average fuel for the high climb and fast cruise. My point is there
is a good chance the He177s used against England were only
carrying something in the 1 to 2,000 KG range thanks to their
modifications and the penalties extracted by the defences. Rather
like the fact Lancasters could carry 14,000 pounds of bombs to
Berlin but rarely went beyond 10,000 pounds in order keep
performance acceptable given the defences.


Also if the weights are correct the He177 useful load was around
3 tons less than the B-17G and the Lancaster. And note the depth
of the bomb bays, given the fuselage fuel tanks.

Internet resources might be in dispute but there would be books with
complete Luftwaffe bomb loading plans for the aircraft available we
can check up on.


So let us know what you find.

Presumably you have noted while
the B-17 could carry 12,800 pounds internally it often operated
with 4 to 5,000 pound bomb loads? Similar for other heavy bombers.
Bomb load depends on mission. The mission profile of the He177
in 1944 would indicate bomb loads well below maximum.


Weight does not impeded dive speed as much as it impedes top speed and
climb.


Last time I checked weight stops you from flying high enough to
stay in a 400mph dive for a long time. The He177 was not a high
flyer, service ceiling around 22,000 feet at maximum load, around
20 minutes to 20,000 feet.

There is a difference between the theoretical performance of the
different types and the way they were used on operations.

Geoffrey Sinclair
Remove the nb for email.


  #13  
Old September 14th 04, 11:35 PM
robert arndt
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

So the SC2500's that were dropped on Britain were probably carried by
Do217's?


Both the Do-217 and He-177 carried the SC 2500. The He-111 was limited
to the SC 2000 (which is seen in the background of many photos of that
bomb).
The almost completed He-274 and planned Fw Ta 400 could have carried
the SC 2500 as well.

Rob

p.s. Please note that the SC 2500 MAX was rarely used.
  #14  
Old September 15th 04, 01:01 AM
Mike Dargan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Top Secret wrote:
Compared to Allied forces, what was the max they fielded? My understanding
is they lacked heavy bombers.

Top Secret


What does this have to do with Bush's TANG service (or lack thereof) or
Kerry's Purple Hearts? Let's try to stay on topic.

Cheers

--mike
  #15  
Old September 15th 04, 02:16 AM
WaltBJ
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Considering the 217's marginal single-engine capability, carrying an
SC2500 must have been a little hairy. Just thinking about a night
takeoff with one aboard makes me cringe. If you lost an engine right
after TO you'd have to jettison the bomb to remain airborne - and it
would land right under you . . . 10,000 Reichsmarks going home to the
folks?
BTW - how big were the sea mines dropped by parachute as
'blockbusters'?
Again BTW in Bob Brahams' book he mentions shooting down a 177 in
daytime over France - poor beast was apparently stooging around the
home drome when Braham and his RIO saw it - their Mosquito had no
problem with the 177.
Walt BJ
  #16  
Old September 15th 04, 02:55 AM
Steve Hix
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article tDL1d.436892$%_6.239494@attbi_s01,
Mike Dargan wrote:

Top Secret wrote:
Compared to Allied forces, what was the max they fielded? My understanding
is they lacked heavy bombers.

Top Secret


What does this have to do with Bush's TANG service (or lack thereof) or
Kerry's Purple Hearts? Let's try to stay on topic.

Cheers

--mike


Dang...now I have to clean the keyboard.
  #17  
Old September 15th 04, 06:56 AM
Krztalizer
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


Again BTW in Bob Brahams' book he mentions shooting down a 177 in
daytime over France - poor beast was apparently stooging around the
home drome when Braham and his RIO saw it - their Mosquito had no
problem with the 177.


If the text isn't too lengthy, would you mind relating the story? I am not
familar with it. I know I have his book somewhere, but they are all in
storage. The interview with the FW 190 pilot that shot him down was
interesting. The thing that stood out when I read it some time ago was the
author's humility and grace concerning his own near-fatal error in combat with
handled with flat honesty. It was a riveting book and I wish I could find it
to read that passage you mentioned.

The daylight role of the Mosquito over the Reich is really fascinating - Braham
weaves a great personal history of his time in that maelstrom.

v/r
Gordon



  #18  
Old September 15th 04, 10:23 AM
Alan Dicey
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

robert arndt wrote:

Both the Do-217 and He-177 carried the SC 2500. The He-111 was limited
to the SC 2000 (which is seen in the background of many photos of that
bomb).


I can't find bomb-bay dimensions for either the Do217 or He177. He111
had small internal cells and a max load of 2000Kg - it is possible that
the photograph of the SC2500 posed in front of an He111 is just that -
posed. The only way an He111 could carry a bomb bigger than the SC250
was by external carriage IIRC. Not saying it isn't true, just that I
havent seen any evidence.

Do217 /seems/ to have a bomb-bay big enough - a single bay almost the
length of the plane. I wonder if any of the He177's three bays was long
enough for the SC2500? Of course, it could have been externally carried.

The Warbirds Resource Group site
http://www.warbirdsresourcegroup.org/LRG/sc2500.html
has dimensions of 155" long by 32 in diameter. Thats 392 cm by 32 cm.
Too long for the He177's internal bays?

The Stirling suffered a similar problem - the MoD spec asked for small
bomb carriage only, and the bomb bay was divided into longtitudinal
cells. As bombs grew larger, the Stirling couldn't carry them, which
was one of the reasons it was quickly superseded in the bomber role.
The later Lancaster, on the other hand, had an unobstructed bomb bay 10
meteres long.
  #19  
Old September 16th 04, 01:20 AM
Krztalizer
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


I can't find bomb-bay dimensions for either the Do217 or He177. He111
had small internal cells and a max load of 2000Kg - it is possible that
the photograph of the SC2500 posed in front of an He111 is just that -
posed.


I have a photo somewhere of a 111 wearing an SC2500 under the wing, where they
also carried the V-1.

v/r
Gordon
====(A+C====
USN SAR

Its always better to lose -an- engine, not -the- engine.

  #20  
Old September 16th 04, 01:39 AM
Eunometic
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Alan Dicey wrote in message ...
robert arndt wrote:

Both the Do-217 and He-177 carried the SC 2500. The He-111 was limited
to the SC 2000 (which is seen in the background of many photos of that
bomb).


I can't find bomb-bay dimensions for either the Do217 or He177. He111
had small internal cells and a max load of 2000Kg - it is possible that
the photograph of the SC2500 posed in front of an He111 is just that -
posed. The only way an He111 could carry a bomb bigger than the SC250
was by external carriage IIRC. Not saying it isn't true, just that I
havent seen any evidence.

Do217 /seems/ to have a bomb-bay big enough - a single bay almost the
length of the plane. I wonder if any of the He177's three bays was long
enough for the SC2500? Of course, it could have been externally carried.

The Warbirds Resource Group site
http://www.warbirdsresourcegroup.org/LRG/sc2500.html
has dimensions of 155" long by 32 in diameter. Thats 392 cm by 32 cm.
Too long for the He177's internal bays?

The Stirling suffered a similar problem - the MoD spec asked for small
bomb carriage only, and the bomb bay was divided into longtitudinal
cells. As bombs grew larger, the Stirling couldn't carry them, which
was one of the reasons it was quickly superseded in the bomber role.
The later Lancaster, on the other hand, had an unobstructed bomb bay 10
meteres long.


The He 177 had to devote a considerable amount of material to stress
for the dive bombing specification it had to adhere to. I suspect
this is the reason the bay was subdivided with structural members.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Iran's nuclear program Thelasian Military Aviation 107 August 31st 04 06:35 AM
FDR and Bush 43 WalterM140 Military Aviation 44 June 24th 04 12:16 AM
A BOMB PATTER IS LIKE A FOOTBALL ArtKramr Military Aviation 17 March 3rd 04 02:54 PM
Soviet Submarines Losses - WWII Mike Yared Military Aviation 4 October 30th 03 04:09 AM
AIRCRAFT MUNITIONS - THE COBALT BOMB Garrison Hilliard Military Aviation 1 August 29th 03 09:22 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:44 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.