WI: 'Tall Boys' & 'Grand Slams' used by the US against & Japan?

[BlueTrousers]

They were well involved in trying out air-to-air refueling and were nearly picked to drop the atomic bombs on Japan until the above mentioned converted B-29's were converted.

They were nearly picked as a stick to beat Boeing with. There was never any real risk of the atomic bombs being carried by a British aircraft that couldn't fly high enough or fast enough to survive the delivery.

B-29s were dropping Grand Slams on U-boat pens in May 1946. Yes, you read that date right. If there was an operational need to drop them over Japan (and I'd suggest that would most likely be shutting down LoCs during an invasion), then they could do the job perfectly well. Unless politics demanded that the slower, lower-flying, shorter-ranged bombers of Tiger Force be used.

Yeah, I can see these being used in Japan. They are much lighter and smaller than Tall & Grand. Anyone has the dimensions of the B-29's bomb bay? I'd love to know if it could carry one (or more?) internally. That would give it at least a payload of 3 (wing, wing, bay) while saving a lot of weight, so no loss of range/performance other than that caused by drag of the bomsb.

The Disney and Tallboy concepts (Grand Slam was originally Tallboy Large) were actually very different.

Tallboy was designed to penetrate deep into the earth adjacent to a target, then destroy it by disrupting the ground it stood on. It wasn't actually designed to directly penetrate hard targets, though it could do a decent job through sheer size and explosive power. Against the thickest roofs of submarine pens, they only penetrated part-way, but the explosive effect finished the job.

Disney was a direct penetrator in a similar performance class to the BLU-113, and considerably outperformed the Tallboy concept against hard targets. Once it had penetrated, the charge would go off inside the bunker, potentially doing more damage. Though it had to hit first, which was a bit of an issue.

 

[Hammerbolt]

Tallboy was designed to penetrate deep into the earth adjacent to a target, then destroy it by disrupting the ground it stood on. It wasn't actually designed to directly penetrate hard targets, though it could do a decent job through sheer size and explosive power. Against the thickest roofs of submarine pens, they only penetrated part-way, but the explosive effect finished the job.

Yeah I know the concept, the whole "Earthquake Bomb" idea. But I have to admit I always found it funy. Not the idea "per se" but that the bomber would be able to pick a spot just next to the target from XXXXXX thousand feeet up to put one bomb, specially under combat... and the fact that the bomb pretty much "yeah right I hit here I wreck everything here just the same".

 

[Hydra1234]

I think the RAF's Tiger Force would disagree.

They were well involved in trying out air-to-air refueling and were nearly picked to drop the atomic bombs on Japan until the above mentioned converted B-29's were converted.

For what it's worth, if we're talking about Mark Felton's video on the "Black Lancasters", Greg's Planes and Automobiles' rebuttal should also be mentioned:

Claiming exclusive access to top-secret sources rubs me the wrong way, and a quick perusal of other forums and the handful of papers on the Tiger Force points out that nobody else not citing Felton has been able to verify the existence of the modified "black Lancasters".

The RAF also scrapped in-flight refuelling programs (for the Lancasters and Halifaxes) in April 1945 too, which seems to suggest it isn't the panacea for extending range that it is in the modern day.

 

[Hammerbolt]

Another point: I very much doubt that, politically, it would be feasible for the USAAF to get the RAF to do their job. Much of the US (those in the know, ofc) saw the nuclear program as a US effort, not for foreigners (nvm how much there were in it...) and seen as a way to finish Japan. Give that to the brits? No.

 

[BlueTrousers]

Yeah I know the concept, the whole "Earthquake Bomb" idea. But I have to admit I always found it funy. Not the idea "per se" but that the bomber would be able to pick a spot just next to the target from XXXXXX thousand feeet up to put one bomb, specially under combat... and the fact that the bomb pretty much "yeah right I hit here I wreck everything here just the same".

TBH, you don't need to hit that specific spot - just miss the target by an acceptably large margin. Although as late as 1955, when the RAF was debating whether it was worth the V-Force carrying Tallboy, they reckoned on a 50% circular error of 1,200 feet, so you're still loooking for a fairly near miss.

Another point: I very much doubt that, politically, it would be feasible for the USAAF to the RAF to their job. Much of the US (whose in the know, ofc) saw the nuclear program as a US effort, not for foreigners (nvm how much there were in it...) and seen as a way to finish Japan. Give that to the brits? No.

Even if the entire B-29 fleet got eaten by rabid weasels or something equally improbable, forcing the atom bomb to be carried by a Lancaster, it would certainly have been an American Lancaster. They'd probably have got Victory Aircraft (hey, at least it's on the right continent!) to do a special run for the USAAF, and I wouldn't be entirely surprised if it was fitted with V-1650s as well.

 

[Father Maryland]

Hello "Disney Bomb"

Randy

I was thinking less bunker buster and more maritime strikes and firing HE versions of the super tiny tims take out major chunks of any enemy facility.

In OTL the Tiny tim was basically a 800LB semi AP bomb with a reinforced nose cone and propelled by a dumb rocket engine. With them something like a F4 Corsair could with a single shot potentially one shot kill (and quickly) something like a heavy cruiser. Or send a fleet carrier to the yards for a long ass time.

There was a sort of 14 inch diameter version of it. Basically think that Tiny Tim and now imagine I believe 120 percent heavier and more powerful with a even more powerful rocket to propell it. Think of them as anti ship missiles (like Harpoon or Exocet) minus the guidance package.

There was a scrapped plan late in WW2 thata coule squadrons o USMC Corsair drivers would be transferred to Europe to strike at Penneemund.

 

[Rolf]

I think the RAF's Tiger Force would disagree.

They were well involved in trying out air-to-air refueling and were nearly picked to drop the atomic bombs on Japan until the above mentioned converted B-29's were converted.

Tiger Force would not be ready until December '45

 

[Father Maryland]

I was thinking less bunker buster and more maritime strikes and firing HE versions of the super tiny tims take out major chunks of any enemy facility.

In OTL the Tiny tim was basically a 800LB semi AP bomb with a reinforced nose cone and propelled by a dumb rocket engine. With them something like a F4 Corsair could with a single shot potentially one shot kill (and quickly) something like a heavy cruiser. Or send a fleet carrier to the yards for a long ass time.

There was a sort of 14 inch diameter version of it. Basically think that Tiny Tim and now imagine I believe 120 percent heavier and more powerful with a even more powerful rocket to propell it. Think of them as anti ship missiles (like Harpoon or Exocet) minus the guidance package.

There was a scrapped plan late in WW2 thata coule squadrons o USMC Corsair drivers would be transferred to Europe to strike at Penneemund.

I'v'e also been intrigued by say developing an air deployable version of the shells used for the 16 inch guns used for the Iowa battleships. Sort of like the IJN dropped modified BB rounds on the US battleline at Pearl Harbor. I'm thinking about say taking the supposedly "Best AP BB heavy shell ever designed" and making it a unguided cruise missile by sticking on a rocket booster so you have say a modified 16 heavyweight AP shell being propelled by something like a RATO and say hitting a naval ship at the same speed that say a modern exocet would hit at.