"The bomb, all 26,000 pounds of it."
Gordon
appears to be at Eglin during drop testing of a Tallboy/Grand Slam
from the B-29 in the background. The fore end of the bomb is painted
that black/white check pattern that Walter Dornberger first brought to
the fashion world; the aft end of the bomb looks like its OD to me.
Ok, I have dozens of photos and scans of both the Tallboy and Grand
Slam, but no images of anything, not the T-12 or T-14, that look
precisely like this one. I'd describe the bomb as a Tallboy with a
lengthening plug inserted between the warhead and tail cone,
stretching it by at least 2 meters or so. The overall visual effect
is a long slender version. Is this the T-14, or what?
Oh, the weight on the caption is extremely difficult to read - it may
say 25,000 but the concensus around my couch was that it says 26,000
pounds, if that helps.
TIA
v/r Gordon
Dan
Are you sure it wasn't the 44,000 pound T12? There was one dropped
from a B-29 in 1948.
http://www.airpower.au.af.mil/airchronicles/aureview/1967/mar-apr/coker.html
I have seen the picture to which you refer if it is of a tall boy
type about 10 feet below the B-29 immediately after release. For the
life of me I can't recall where I saw it. It was around 1968 or 1969.
For some reason I think the book was Balentine Books "B-29"
There is one at the Air Force Armament Museum, but the picture on
their site is poor. If you are interested I can go take some better ones
to send to you weather permitting. We are having English sunshine.
Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
Gordon
caption on back states what I used for the title of the post. No
mistake about it.
This isn't that "drop photo" ( I think I have a scan of that one) - it
looks like they set it out, preparing to load it on a black-bellied
B-29 which is about 200 yards behind the bomb in the photo.
Please don't go to any effort on my behalf - if it ain't on the
internet, its too much effort!
v/r
Gordon
Dan
The museum is about 15 minutes from me and I'll be in that neck of
the woods in a few days anyway. I'll just have to remember to take my
camera.
John Szalay
cf46b9...@m38g2000yqd.googlegroups.com:
the weight is not the same however..paint job look anything like this ?
Gordon
wrote:
> the weight is not the same however..paint job look anything like this ?
yap.... or a test V-2, take your pick.
G
WaltBJ
a T12 (empty, I trust) standing with its nose in the dirt. Also check
RAF Scampton for a Grand Slam gate guard with a slightly different
outcome. Genuine Oopsie.
Walt BJ
ha4h...@kent.i-did-not-set--mail-host-address--so-tickle-me
> Check the Aberdeen Proving Gorund Home Page. Acting as a door guard is
> a T12 (empty, I trust) standing with its nose in the dirt. Also check
Nice photos there!
> RAF Scampton for a Grand Slam gate guard with a slightly different
> outcome. Genuine Oopsie.
Um, debunked I think.
John Szalay
cf46b9...@m38g2000yqd.googlegroups.com:
> New photo in the mail today - its a view of a bomb loading area,
Gordon
Is there any way you can put that photo where we can get a look at it ?
Gordon
wrote:
> Is there any way you can put that photo where we can get a look at it ?- Hide quoted text -
Send me an email and I'll send you the scan. Goes for anyone that
wants it. Sorry, I don't have (or want) an account on any of the
files sharing services.
Gordon at Oldboldpilots .. o r g
Peter Stickney
Gordon,
I may have your bomb.
Your question made me dig out a couple of my old Explosive Ordnance
catalogs, and I think I found a likely candidate.
I haven't asked for the pic yet, but the bomb sounds suspiciously like
the T28E4 (Samson), a postwar effort to improve on the penetration of
the T14 Grand Slam. The T28 differed by having a smaller diameter,
a cylindrical section to the bomb body, and was a bit longer.
On the linked page, although they don't call it out, it's the
second bomb from the top, I think. Even though it looks like it's the same
length as the Grand Slam below it, note that the bomb body is longer.
(The tail cone and fins were light sheet steel.)
Anyway - here's the link:
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/munitions/bombs-ww2.htm
--
Pete Stickney
Failure is not an option
It comes bundled with the system.
Gordon
> I may have your bomb.
You, sir, indeed have my bomb. That graphic is a match, weight is
right - well done, Pete.
> Your question made me dig out a couple of my old Explosive Ordnance
> catalogs, and I think I found a likely candidate.
> I haven't asked for the pic yet, but the bomb sounds suspiciously like
> the T28E4 (Samson), a postwar effort to improve on the penetration of
> the T14 Grand Slam. The T28 differed by having a smaller diameter,
> a cylindrical section to the bomb body, and was a bit longer.
> On the linked page, although they don't call it out, it's the
> second bomb from the top, I think. Even though it looks like it's the same
> length as the Grand Slam below it, note that the bomb body is longer.
Great job old friend.
Gordon
John Szalay
Peter Stickney
> same
>> length as the Grand Slam below it, note that the bomb body is longer.
>
> Great job old friend.
> Gordon
>
>
Great,
using that information and some I found on the B-29 in the background of
the photo. B-29 45-21705 I was able to find AF reports on the bombs and
some of the tests...
The two reports I found so far are in PDF format and total 21 pages and
192 pages. and include the aircraft serials and all details of each
drop. including diagrams of the two bombs.
They only cover the british phase of the testing.. still looking for
data of other test, perhaps in Fla.
project (http://www.designation-systems.net/usmilav/projects.html#_MX)
MX-915 and MX-760
======================================================================
Project Ruby & Project Harken
Projects Ruby and Harken mere joint Anglo-American Bomb tests,
undertaken for the purpose of providing ballistic data and performance
records of heavy concrete piercing bombs, striking reinforced concrete
targets. The tests were begun in 1945 with bombs developed and used
during World War II, and were continued in 1946 with newly designed
bombs. The 1946 trials were known as Project Raby and were carried out
in Europe by the Air Proving Ground Command, using the Submarine Assembly
Plant at Farge, Germany, as one of the targets.
cameras made it possible to determine
deceleration and angle of yaw. To make these measurements possible,
the bombs were painted with calibrated markings stripe on the body.
TERMINAL BALLISTIC DATA,
Fifteen 25,000 T28E1 (Amazon II) bombs were dropped from 17'000 ft.,
producing a striking velocity of approximately 1100 f/io Of these fifteen
bombs, two Vere fair hits on the 14.76 feet thick roof section, two
struck
over a wall, and one penetrated a short distance and then broke out the
edge.
Nine 25,200-lb. T28E2 (Samson) bombs were dropped from 17,000 ft.
Two good hits were scored on both the 14.76 feet and the 23 feet roof
sections.
The target was the uncompleted Submarine Assebly Plant at"Farge,
Germanys, near the city of Bremen.
DESCRIPTION OF BOABS
The T28E1 (Amazon II) bomb is 38 inches in diameter, 154 inches long
and has a main wallthickness of 4J inches. A cross sectional view is
shown in Figure I. The charge weight is 4v200 lbs, total weight 25
000lbs, corresponding to 16.8% explosive.
The T28E2 (Samson) bomb has approximately the same weight, 25,200
Ibs, but it is longer and has a smaller outside diameter. With a 32
inch maxim=m outside diameter and a main body length of 196 inches, it
is designed for greater penetration than is the Amazon. The main wall
thickness is 4 1/8 inches with a charge weight of 3900 Ibs, giving 15.5%
explosive.
Both the T28E1 and T28E2 bombs had the Tallboy type fin assembly
consisting of a tail cone carrying four radial vanes which are set at an
angle of 50 to the axis of the bomb to produce rotation in flight.
=========================================================================
=============
John Szalay
Good Job.
a little futher information..
================================================================
AFHRC Project Ruby. AAF Proving Grounds Command, Eglin Field,..
A. Project Ruby
A joint Anglo-American test program, called Project
Ruby was initiated in the spring of 1946 to determine
the cause of earthquake bomb failures during the war
and test new penetration bomb designs against captured
Nazi fortifications under ideal conditions. No
controlled tests of large penetration bombs had ever
been made prior to Project Ruby and after an
expenditure of $380,000 for the US Army Ordinance
Corps. to develop munitions capable of penetrating 32
ft of reinforced concrete, it was essential that
practical tests take place. At one point, the AAF
considered deep penetration aerial bombs as second in
importance only to the atom bomb insofar as the US
offensive war potential was concerned.
The original objectives of these tests were to study
the strength of casings, determine the detonation and
fuzing system sensitivity, reliability of
fuzes/primers/boosters and the sensitivity of the
explosive filling. The target for these tests was the
U-boat assembly pens at Farge that had a steel
reinforced concrete roof structure 16 ft thick. The
RAF had dropped 13 Grand Slams and 4 Tallboys on the
Farge complex on March 27, 1945. Two Grand Slams
successfully penetrated the roof during that raid.
The mission objective to determine if the explosive
filling was too sensitive and the cause of pre
detonation problems was later dropped when a survey of
the Farge site revealed that many important roads and
industrial sites were so close that live trials posed
too great a risk. Since the tests were to determine
depth of penetration, not blast effect, the bomb
casings were sand filled.
In March 1946, three B-29A Superfortresses specially
( 45-21747, 45-21750, 45-21751 )
modified to carry either the Tallboy or Grand Slam
bombs joined 10 specially modified Avro Lancaster B.
Mk. I of No. 15(B) Squadron, RAF stationed at the
Central Bomber Establishment, Marham, Norfolk to carry
out bomb tests against a selected target. Scheduled
for testing during Project Ruby was the Army Ordnance
Dept�s 22,000 lb �Amazon� earth penetration bomb.
Seven B-17G Fortresses with external wing racks for
the 4,500 lb rocket assisted Disney bomb were included
in the test schedule.
Modification to the Avro Lancaster I included removal
and fairing over the nose and dorsal gun turrets,
removal of the H2S blister. The bomb bay doors were
removed and the roof of the bomb bay was remodeled
from a flat deck to an inverted V shape to accommodate
the oversized Grand Slam.
Poor weather during the tests limited the bombing
altitudes to under 20,000 ft. At the conclusion of
the tests, the US Armaments Board determined that none
of the bombs tested during Project Ruby were suitable
for use against heavily reinforced concrete
structures. It is interesting to note that Project
Ruby was concerned only with direct hits instead of a
"near miss" undermine of foundations as was the
original intent when Barnes Wallis dreamed up the
earthquake bomb.
B. Harken Project
As a follow on to Project Ruby, Harken Project was
initiated to begin testing refined weapons from Ruby
as well as more recent designs beginning April 1,
1947. The Military Air Attach�, London was instructed
to make inquiries for the use of an airbase on British
soil that could handle three modified B-29s operating
at a gross weight of 135,000 lb. and approximately 200
personnel. A port facility to receive bombs weighing
25,000 lb, with a length of 218 inches (without tail
fin assembly), diameter of 32 inches and with suitable
transportation facilities to move the bombs overland
to the airbase of operations. In exchange for
participation and logistical support, the RAF would be
allowed to observe the test of an improved 22,000 lb
T2S Amazon bomb. Once again, the submarine assembly
pens at Farge, in the British Sector would be the
target.
The Farge site was an enormous complex of work shops,
warehouse and assembly docks approximately 1,300 yards
long and 120 yards wide. The large reinforced
concrete roof presented an excellent target against
which the new bombs could be tested.
The original pour of the reinforced cement roof was
about 12 feet thick. Successive additions had
increased the thickness to about 16 feet by the end of
hostilities. A �fangrost� screen of closely spaced
inverted U shaped concrete beams about three feet wide
and five to six feet above the roof had been
constructed over most of the machine shop. These
beams served to deflect or pre-detonate bombs in the
void underneath. The under side of the roof was
covered by a corrugated metal scab mattress which
prevented detached concrete from falling onto the
areas below. The concrete was generally of average to
poor quality which explains why post war photographs
show so little concrete adhered to the tangle of
reinforcement rods hanging from the areas where Grand
Slams penetrated the roof.
After a survey of the site, several hazards to the
surrounding community were identified: a heavily
traveled highway was only 500 yards away, the western
end of the site was 400 yards from the ship channel to
Bremen, an electric power plant serving three cities
was only 800 yards away and a storage facility that
was the entry point of all gasoline for the European
Theatre was located only 1,500 yards from the site.
For these reasons, the site was not recommended as a
target for bomb tests unless undertaken in ideal
weather conditions and provided inert bombs were used.
The testing of two new penetration designs was to be
ready beginning April 1, 1947 and would be conducted
simultaneously. 35 large inert bombs of two types,
each weighing about 25,000 lb, code named Amazon II
and Samson were tested during a program that was to
take approximately 4 to 6 months to complete
Results were expected to be good as stateside range
bombing with the Amazon II and Samsom bombs showed
that actual range errors were less than 1 mil from
provisional bombing tables 22,000-B-0 used with bomb
T28E1 and 25,000-A-0 used with bomb T28E2. Because of
previous experience with casing breakup, Matt Dilot
of bomb manufacturer A.O. Smith Corp. was authorized
to observe the tests.
9. Bomb, SAP, 25,000-lb, T28E4
Development work on the 25,000 lb SAP bomb probably
began in 1946 with practical testing during Harken
Project of 1947. Project Ruby had pointed out short
comings in the Grand Slam design which failed on
several occasions to penetrate the massive, though
poor quality concrete roof of the Farge site. From
the photograph below, the overall length of the bomb
was about the same as the Grand Slam. The bomb casing
was 199 1/2 inches in length and had a diameter of 32
inches. The tail assembly was mounted to the casing
by sixteen studs in the base plate. Another source
described the 25,000 lb bomb as being 218 inches long
with a 32 inch diameter. The tail section measured 87
inches in length in stowage position and weighed about
800 lbs. Unlike the Grand Slam, the nose of the bomb
was a solid piece without an armor piercing plug.
Development work on this bomb was still underway in
1950.
This program was likely canceled by the summer of 1954
when multi-megaton thermonuclear weapons of similar
weights made conventional earth penetration bombs of
this size obsolete.