antarmike

With regard to the B29 carrying TWO Grand slams, The B29 had two bomb bays and when dropping even the bundled M-27 incendary bombs, these were released alternately from each bomb bays to preserve the centre of gravity of the aircraft on it's bomb run.

Sreeing as one grand slam exceeds the normal total bomb load of a B29 (20,000 Lbs), if it were possible to fly with two, these must be an equal distance from the centre of gravity, to ensure level flight, but what happens to the C of G when you drop one, or is it suggested that both were dropped simultaneously?

If dropping Grand Slam from a lanc meant it lept 600 feet vertically, what would happen to a B29 if it dropped just one? its would go so nose or tail heavy as to be unflyable! or if two where dropped two? The change in weight would cause such an upward jump as to leave the wings behind!

I just can't see it as being feasable!

The first version of Americas Atom bomb was "thin Man", a gun type plutonium bomb (with a 17 foot long barrel), and this was developed alongside an implosion type "fat man"

Test drops of both bomb type dummy casings (known as shapes) commenced at Mirror lake in March 1944. The test aircraft was seriously damaged on the last drop and became unavailable until June.

During this delay the Boffins had decided that the Plutonium Barrel type bomb would not work, so a third design , another gun type device but using Uranium 235 was progressed. This was christened "Little Boy"

The Lancaster was suggested as a suitable candidate for dropping the 17 foot barreled "thin man" and it was the death of this project that relegated the Lanc to the sidelines.

Little boy could fit in an unmodified B29 Bomb bay.

Fat man tests were undertaken by 509th Composite group, the dummy bomb being called Pumpkin. Pumkin was a Fat man, with a conventional explosive filling.

However the B29 Had to be modified to carry this casing, Test drops were made over Inyokern rocket range, but there were serious problems with the way the B29 had been modified and a second batch of modified specials was ordered to a new standard.

The First special B29 landed at North Field Tinian on 11th June 1945. From 20th July onwards the 509th began dropping High explosive filled Pumkins on Japanese targets. Twelve Pumkin raids were flown in total, on 20th, 24th, 26th and 29th of July.

These drops were successful and the stage was set. we all know what happened next.

The Lincoln (originally called the Lancaster B Mk IV or V ) had a range of 4450 miles carrying 3000 Lbs bomb load, 2798 Miles with 14,000 Lbs bomb Load or 1353 Miles with A 22,500 Lbs Grand Slam.

the normal stated Max range of the B29 is 4098 miles.

The Lancaster carried Tallboy within it's bomb bay, Although with modified bulged doors.

The lancaster not only dropped 4000 lbs cookies, but double and treble versions of the soft skin High Capacity bomb. (8000 and 12000 lbs)

The point of the mixed load wad the cookie blew of the roofs of buildings so that more of the incendaries could end up inside buidings and start fires. On there own, most of the incendaries would had bounced of the typical steeply sloping german roofs and ended up harmlessly in the streets.

When working in raids of 500 to 1000 aircraft, the different ballistic charecteristics of cookies and incendaries is irrelevant, because if a cookie from one bomber rips of a roof, incendaries from a different bomber can get inside the building, even if this happens two nights later on a seperate raid.

The logic for suggesting an all Mossie bomber fleet, is not to send them all to the same target at the same time. (and getting congested) They could simultaneously attack targets over the whole of Occupied territory, further stretching opposing night fighters and reducing their effectiveness.

It has been argued that the RAF should have only used the Mossie as it's main bomber.

Although not having the same bomb load as a lanc, you would have to have flown more missions to deliver the same tonnage, but being faster, op for op the Mossie had a much lower loss rate.

Having only two crew per aircraft compared to the seven in a lanc, you would have to lose aircraft in the ratio of three and a half mossies per each Lanc shot down. Using just Mossies would have saved aircrew and done the same job.

When compared to the B17 with a crew of 10, you would have to loose 5 Mossies for every B17 to have the same decimation of Aircrew the Americans suffered, and Five Mossies carry a lot more bombs than, one B17.

I would argue that ultimately the Mossie was the best Bomber, and would have been the sensible choice for allmost all bombing operations!

Bovingdon had a Youth Custody Centre built on it as a softener to in becoming a fully blown Prison. Some of the "Battle of Britain" film aircraft were in and out of Bovingdon when the film was being made, and the B25 Mitchell used for Air to Air shots in this film also used the Airfield.

The syncromesh blocking rings in the series Gearbox are "Yellow metal"

If you were to compare the B29 and the Lanc, you would find the B29 was limited by having two relatively small bomb bays, whilst the Lanc had one large one. And the small bomb bays ther B29 had where further reduced in usefulness by having a pressurised tunnel running through them, so that the crew could move about the plane's pressurised areas.

The lanc could carry really useful large bombs, but the B29 had to carry lots of smaller , less effective, bombs.

No good for Bunker busting, U boat Pens, Eathquake bombs or the like.

The B29 could only carry the Atomic Bomb after it had been modified to link the two Bomb bays. For this reason the Lancaster was initially carefully concidered as the delivery system for America's "Big Bomb" but eventually it was ruled out( American indepenance and pride rather than an unbiased concidered judgement??).

The Lab was capable of further development, into the Lincoln and ultimatley the Shackleton.

To my mind this makes the Lanc a far better airplane!

I have never seen anything about the B29 carrying Two Grand Slams. The Literature I have indicates its maximum bomb load was only 9072 Kg or 20,000 Lbs.

Where does your info about this come from Steve?

It is definitely no myth that equipment was buried by the departing Americans. A work associate of mine ( a John Oakley) was an Aircraft fitter at RAfFBovingdon, near Hemel Hempsted. He saw Equipment (including Jeeps being buried in Primrose wood at the end of the runway. When a siutable time had elapsed he went digging. He never found a jeep but all his hand tools, spanners etc he was using had been dug out of the ground at that location,

I have details of Williams and James Air starters (V4 piston engine) Ingersold Rand air starter ( 6 Vane rotary) air starter, Bryce hydraulic starter , Berger Hydraulic Starter, Bendix Inertia starter (Clockwork) all of which were used on the Rolls C6 series of engines. The Rolls C6T in my Antar uses a standard electric strter...

Locking door handles for the Antar, pyramid treadstrip for the Explorer and the K9 and a new semi-suspension seat for the Eager Beaver (yes I know that isn't original, but neither is it's roll cage!)

My mate has got one but I only helped by boring out and re-sleeving the wheel cylinders and a few other jobs...

http://i137.photobucket.com/albums/q208/antarmike/andiscotlandtrip123.jpg[/img]

My wifes Scammell sits in it's new lean to shelter...

http://i137.photobucket.com/albums/q208/antarmike/andiscotlandtrip122.jpg[/img]

Eager Beaver ether starting...

Enough to miss some each time but I normally find them next go. The wife has a Scammell Explorer so we are used to looking for grease nipples....

Or has the Agric machine got a track on one side at the rear and a wheel on the other?? possible if intented for direct ploughing where the track would run on the loose ploughed soil in the last furrough and the wheel would be on the hard unploughed virgin soil. Most odd if it was but I can't make the picture out..

There sems to be a big difference between the Agric and the war machine. The Agric seems to have only one central rear track with outrigger wheels whilst the war machine has two rear tracks and no wheels...Whislt realted they are definitely not the same model or design.

The T is simply an early version of the triangular trailer reflector, either total area of triangule to be reflective , or series of about 1" dia reflectors (nine total) set in a white triangle where length of sides has to be between 150 and 200 mm, Trailers made before 1.7.70 may show the "T" in place of these triangles.

http://i137.photobucket.com/albums/q208/antarmike/DSC_0273.jpg[/img]

My 1952 Dyson trailer has the "T" fitted but for the benefit of the modern motorist I have also fitted the modern triangular equivilent.

another myth is that everyone helped build Spitfires by giving their pots and pans and the railings from their front walls. There was the biggest pile of totally unsuitable scrap collected. It kept the public happy cos they thought they were making sacrfifices and helping, but what they gave would have been best laft were it was.

A saw a very beleivable TV program in which it was claimed Hitler never seriously intended to invade britain. He did not have enough landing craft, he had no way of bringing over armour, his navy would have been blown apart by a very powerful and intact Royal Navy, and his sights were always set on Russia after taking France and the low countries. The RAF did not save Britain from invasion, it was never a real possibility. The progarm called on some poeple very close to Hitler to support the claim that Britain was a half hearted side show....

My wife went to see a guy with a Mobile Oxygen plant O854 and he is in the Melton Mowbray area, but she wasn't sure exactly where she had been taken, ( only a feww weeks ago.

The simplest system is the clockwork starter, in which you hand wind a bl00dy great spring which you release to spin the engine and if it doesn't go you just wind it up and try again. Some Petters had them amonst others

Easystart of course isn't just for starting worn out engines, all diesels are harder to start when very cold, but this is particularly true of indirect injection engines. A well maintained diesel will not start in very cold weather if the heat generated in compressing the charge does not raise the temperature enough to ignite the diesel spray from the injectors. Easystart and other "ether" type sprays have a lower flash point than diesel, and will ignite when diesel won't.

In an indirect injection engine the air is compressed in the cylinder where its temperatore rises but it has to pass through a narrow, passage in the head, to reach the injection chamber. In passing through this passage, a lot of the heat the charge gained when compressed is lost to the cold metal that forms the walls of the passage.

If ether is introduced during induction stroke it will be in the cylinder as it the charge is compressed where it will combust in the cylinder not in the cooler injection chamber.

One more O854, the one in the top photo, with the deeper radiator and the Autovac on the scuttle is petrol engined aircraft refueler and is therefore a type 853.

Two ex RAF Coles cranes on O854 chassis

Box body on six wheeler was ex RAF Mobile Oxygen plant, for filling Oxygen bottles on Lancasters etc ( you can still read BOC on the faded red)