A Tallboy instead of a bouncing bomb
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1224
- Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2010 10:25 pm
A Tallboy instead of a bouncing bomb
Gentlemen,
We have discussed 'Earthquake' bombs and 'Bouncing' bombs in another thread, however I have often wondered what the result would have been if Barnes Wallis had developed his 'Tallboy' and 'Grand Slam' bombs earlier on an used either one or both types on the dams, would they have destroyed them if they had been dropped close enough to undermine the dam?
We have discussed 'Earthquake' bombs and 'Bouncing' bombs in another thread, however I have often wondered what the result would have been if Barnes Wallis had developed his 'Tallboy' and 'Grand Slam' bombs earlier on an used either one or both types on the dams, would they have destroyed them if they had been dropped close enough to undermine the dam?
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 553
- Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2011 1:00 pm
Re: A Tallboy instead of a bouncing bomb
CEP factor here. The whole point of the bouncing bomb was that it would roll down the upstream side of the dam and end up right at the base.
Anybody know the minimum CEP to be expected by a Tall Boy?
Anybody know the minimum CEP to be expected by a Tall Boy?
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 954
- Joined: Wed Feb 05, 2014 7:05 pm
Re: A Tallboy instead of a bouncing bomb
When you consider the bouncing bomb was going off in contact with the dam, several hundred feet down with all that water pressure adding to the effect ... kinda hard to beat that sort of thing in destructive power.
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 553
- Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2011 1:00 pm
Re: A Tallboy instead of a bouncing bomb
You could get the Good Boy* bomb to the bomb of the reservoir by using a 3 second or so delay.
*Sorry, dog lover.
*Sorry, dog lover.
- marcelo_malara
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1852
- Joined: Sun Oct 02, 2005 11:14 pm
- Location: buenos aires
Re: A Tallboy instead of a bouncing bomb
I don´t know, but seeing what it took the the US to impact the Thanh Hoa bridge in Vietnam you can assume the bouncing bomb was best.OpanaPointer wrote: ↑Sat Oct 31, 2020 12:45 pm CEP factor here. The whole point of the bouncing bomb was that it would roll down the upstream side of the dam and end up right at the base.
Anybody know the minimum CEP to be expected by a Tall Boy?
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 553
- Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2011 1:00 pm
Re: A Tallboy instead of a bouncing bomb
Once they got the laser guided bombs up and running it was over PDQ.
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 954
- Joined: Wed Feb 05, 2014 7:05 pm
Re: A Tallboy instead of a bouncing bomb
Yes, but I don't think they had those in WWII.OpanaPointer wrote: ↑Mon Nov 02, 2020 12:12 am Once they got the laser guided bombs up and running it was over PDQ.
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 553
- Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2011 1:00 pm
Re: A Tallboy instead of a bouncing bomb
Steve Crandell wrote: ↑Mon Nov 02, 2020 10:15 pmYes, but I don't think they had those in WWII.OpanaPointer wrote: ↑Mon Nov 02, 2020 12:12 am Once they got the laser guided bombs up and running it was over PDQ.
...what it took the the US to impact the Thanh Hoa bridge in Vietnam...
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1224
- Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2010 10:25 pm
Re: A Tallboy instead of a bouncing bomb
Gentlemen,
As always, many thanks for your replies, As you say the 'Bouncing Bombs' used water pressure to crack the dam wall(a bit like a giant depth charge) what I was wondering is what the effect would be if a 'Tallboy' (or 'Grand Slam') did land close to the dam wall, would they undermine it and cause it to collapse?
As always, many thanks for your replies, As you say the 'Bouncing Bombs' used water pressure to crack the dam wall(a bit like a giant depth charge) what I was wondering is what the effect would be if a 'Tallboy' (or 'Grand Slam') did land close to the dam wall, would they undermine it and cause it to collapse?
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 553
- Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2011 1:00 pm
Re: A Tallboy instead of a bouncing bomb
There's nothing special about a depth charge other than the device that tells it when to explode, a hydrostatic trigger. And that's kind of the issue. If a Tallboy landed in mud, say some Polish river, it might not detonate. The bouncing bombs used a hydrostatic trigger, right?
SO, the Tallboy would have to land in the idea place, getting it right the first time (for that bomb) and then hit some 1909 Humpmobile that had been thrown off the bridge and landed in the exact spot that was needed for the Tallboy to fuse.
UNLESS the Tallboy was equipped with a hydrostatic fuse.
THEN it would only need to be aimed at and dropped within the range of the explosive shock wave (of sufficient intensity to blow the dam.)
If we remember that the war started out with the Brits hitting ~5% of their target in bombing raids I'm not confident.
SO, the Tallboy would have to land in the idea place, getting it right the first time (for that bomb) and then hit some 1909 Humpmobile that had been thrown off the bridge and landed in the exact spot that was needed for the Tallboy to fuse.
UNLESS the Tallboy was equipped with a hydrostatic fuse.
THEN it would only need to be aimed at and dropped within the range of the explosive shock wave (of sufficient intensity to blow the dam.)
If we remember that the war started out with the Brits hitting ~5% of their target in bombing raids I'm not confident.
Re: A Tallboy instead of a bouncing bomb
Fellow Contributors,
As has been previously shown the "water hammer" effect drops off pretty rapidly with distance, so the Upkeep mine had to explode close to the concrete dam wall. With a dam like the Sorpe, which was a very deep front-to-back earth dam with a concrete core, 617 dropped the mines along the front edge but their shockwave had little effect. Later in the war, 9 squadron attacked the Sorpe with Tallboys but even two hits on the crest causing impressive craters were insufficient to cause even minor leakage. The absolutely massive construction defeated even:
However late in the war attacks were made with Tallboy against the "airside" of the concrete Urft dam, but it would seem even hits failed to dislodge tens of thousands of tons of concrete. There were no Upkeep-capable Lancasters available in winter 1944 and besides the approach was apparently too hazardous. I guess Highball was too small, and maybe even Mosquitos could not get in.
This enthusiast thread discusses the Urft attacks in detail: http://forum.12oclockhigh.net/showthread.php?t=17698
As it observes, Bomber Harris considered attacks on point targets a waste of resources and a worthless distraction from his self-appointed task of flattening every city in Germany.
Ground penetration was a vital feature of successful Earthquake bomb use. The ground had to be hard enough to initiate fusing but ideally not so hard that the bomb might break up on impact. The soggy bottom of the Kaiserfahrt or the Sorpe reservoir were obviously not hard enough. The hard geology of Norway, covered with just a little sediment might have been unfortunately effective for Tirpitz. Direct hits work too. Dropping from a high enough altitude so the weapon could accelerate to supersonic terminal velocity was also important, but European weather often made this impossible.
Fascinating factoid: skinny engineering apprentices were used inside the cast bomb casing during preparation to remove burrs on the surface so that points of shock to the explosive would be minimised to lessen the chance of premature detonation on first impact with the ground.
All the best
wadinga
As has been previously shown the "water hammer" effect drops off pretty rapidly with distance, so the Upkeep mine had to explode close to the concrete dam wall. With a dam like the Sorpe, which was a very deep front-to-back earth dam with a concrete core, 617 dropped the mines along the front edge but their shockwave had little effect. Later in the war, 9 squadron attacked the Sorpe with Tallboys but even two hits on the crest causing impressive craters were insufficient to cause even minor leakage. The absolutely massive construction defeated even:
The bomb disposal team in 1958 successfully defused this Tallboy.or use on underground targets, the bomb was fitted with three separate inertia pistols. These triggered detonation after a pre-set delay, which gave the bomb sufficient time to penetrate the target before exploding. Depending on mission requirements, the time delay could be set to 30 seconds or 30 minutes after impact. In order to guarantee detonation, a total of three separate Type 47 long delay fuzes were fitted inside the rear of the bomb. This dramatically improved reliability of the weapon: even if two of the fuzes failed to function, the third would trigger detonation. Despite this elaborate fusing system however, at least one Tallboy failed to explode during the second attack on the Sorpe dam and was found during repairs in late 1958 when the reservoir was emptied.
However late in the war attacks were made with Tallboy against the "airside" of the concrete Urft dam, but it would seem even hits failed to dislodge tens of thousands of tons of concrete. There were no Upkeep-capable Lancasters available in winter 1944 and besides the approach was apparently too hazardous. I guess Highball was too small, and maybe even Mosquitos could not get in.
This enthusiast thread discusses the Urft attacks in detail: http://forum.12oclockhigh.net/showthread.php?t=17698
As it observes, Bomber Harris considered attacks on point targets a waste of resources and a worthless distraction from his self-appointed task of flattening every city in Germany.
Ground penetration was a vital feature of successful Earthquake bomb use. The ground had to be hard enough to initiate fusing but ideally not so hard that the bomb might break up on impact. The soggy bottom of the Kaiserfahrt or the Sorpe reservoir were obviously not hard enough. The hard geology of Norway, covered with just a little sediment might have been unfortunately effective for Tirpitz. Direct hits work too. Dropping from a high enough altitude so the weapon could accelerate to supersonic terminal velocity was also important, but European weather often made this impossible.
Fascinating factoid: skinny engineering apprentices were used inside the cast bomb casing during preparation to remove burrs on the surface so that points of shock to the explosive would be minimised to lessen the chance of premature detonation on first impact with the ground.
All the best
wadinga
"There seems to be something wrong with our bloody ships today!"
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 553
- Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2011 1:00 pm
Re: A Tallboy instead of a bouncing bomb
The apprentices were obviously not American teenagers. We tend to get to market weight rather more quickly.
Re: A Tallboy instead of a bouncing bomb
Wadinga,
As I understand it the damage to the Sorpe was sufficient to cause the Germans to drain the dam to repair it?
As I understand it the damage to the Sorpe was sufficient to cause the Germans to drain the dam to repair it?
''Give me a Ping and one Ping only'' - Sean Connery.
Re: A Tallboy instead of a bouncing bomb
Hi RF,
I found an outstanding description at https://www.hebels.nl/flights/20130327-1/damsraid.htm
The later October 15th 1944 raid with Tallboys caused only "minor spillage" at the Sorpe and the draining didn't apparently happen until 1958-9 when the unexploded Tallboy was discovered and defused. (There may have been two others.) The post attack photos show several craters in the dam structure. The water level during the attack was apparently somewhat lower than normal, maybe as a protective measure reducing the stress. I expect the Todt organisation just filled in the craters and life went on.
All the best
wadinga
I found an outstanding description at https://www.hebels.nl/flights/20130327-1/damsraid.htm
The later October 15th 1944 raid with Tallboys caused only "minor spillage" at the Sorpe and the draining didn't apparently happen until 1958-9 when the unexploded Tallboy was discovered and defused. (There may have been two others.) The post attack photos show several craters in the dam structure. The water level during the attack was apparently somewhat lower than normal, maybe as a protective measure reducing the stress. I expect the Todt organisation just filled in the craters and life went on.
All the best
wadinga
"There seems to be something wrong with our bloody ships today!"
Re: A Tallboy instead of a bouncing bomb
Thanks for the info.
''Give me a Ping and one Ping only'' - Sean Connery.