AHC: Peerless Air Ministry

[AlanJWhite]

Google on ASW rocket Weapon Alpha

I actually thought the 7" UP rocket would make a decent anti-submarine weapon if the "para mine" filling were replaced with a Torpex charge.
It could have either a hydrostatic fuse or the same contact/magnetic fuse used in the bomb fired from the 24 rail HedgeHog Launcher

Aside: the Hedgehog warhead was used in the USN "Mousetrap" weapon - a 4 or 8 rocket powered launcher for smaller vessels

Another what if for @sonofpegasus

 

[yulzari]

View attachment 526383

Started as a kind combination of a PIAT and a "Claymore Mine" originally intended as a booby trap or sabotage weapon by this guy

Cecil Vandepeer Clarke - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

who acted as a kind of "Q" figure to the SOE in WW2

The munition further adapted bodged into an actual crew-served weapon only given to the Home Guard.
(one of several similar crude emergency anti-tank weapons e.g. Blacker Bombard, Smith Gun)

Contrary to popular thought many 'Home Guard ' weapons were not only issued also to the regular Army in Home Defence but also served in action such as the Blacker Bombard that was used in North Africa for example. Not the infamous pikes perhaps; although in the Troubles I was issued a pick axe handle with which to defend my site in England from evil PIRA folk. AsI recall the instructions were, "hit them with the metal end; but dip the wooden end in the blood afterwards..."

 

[perfectgeneral]

who acted as a kind of "Q" figure to the SOE in WW2

Er..."Q" Martel acted as a "Q" figure to the SOE.
Lieutenant-General Sir Giffard Le Quesne Martel
Told the British, USA and Russia how to beat the Germans. With a demonstration against Rommel. After five mentioned in despatches, MC, DSO in the first WW spent the inter-war developing a light tank in his shed. The Large Box Girder Bridge. I swear they just stopped talking about the things he did, rather than he stopped doing them.

"Q" to the left. - "Pay attention DeGaulle, Sikorski, PM, ..."

Also:

We are just shining the light into the dusty corners of reality. It's totally up to you which pebbles you pick from the beach
...
post terminated by the RSPMM (Royal Society for the Prevention of Mixed Metaphors 🤐 )

It's a dark, dusty beach of pebbles...with corners. Reality. As a metaphor it seems more untidy than mixed. Must be hard to vacuum the dust. Especially in the dark. Is that why they have a light on the front of Hoovers...and corner attachments? Keeping it real with cleaning equipment.

 

[Triune Kingdom]

It would be interesting to see Hedgehog make its appearance sooner, although I do not know how much influence would PAM have upon its earlier introduction. It really sounds strange to have Air Ministry playing with Spigot Mortars, but once it does appear, it is possible that it could benefit from better explosives and/or fuses, if PAM has been working on Anti Submarine Bombs and Air Dropped Depth Charges in the meantime. It is reasonable to assume that air dropped ASW weapons are somewhat further along ITTL, since there are dedicated MP aircraft and squadrons in existance at Coastal Command, so it is plausable to think that they would demand a better weapon then what they had at the beginning, a bomb that was problematic.

 

[perfectgeneral]

It would be interesting to see Hedgehog make its appearance sooner, although I do not know how much influence would PAM have upon its earlier introduction. It really sounds strange to have Air Ministry playing with Spigot Mortars, but once it does appear, it is possible that it could benefit from better explosives and/or fuses, if PAM has been working on Anti Submarine Bombs and Air Dropped Depth Charges in the meantime. It is reasonable to assume that air dropped ASW weapons are somewhat further along ITTL, since there are dedicated MP aircraft and squadrons in existance at Coastal Command, so it is plausable to think that they would demand a better weapon then what they had at the beginning, a bomb that was problematic.

Air dropped 7"UP would slip down nicely. A few bubbles perhaps. From a Sunderland or Stirling. Leigh light for night fighting the Uboats recharging on the surface.

 

[Triune Kingdom]

Will we see any efforts being made in regards to somewhat more unconventional aircraft? It would be interesting to see British introducing helicopters, even if these early helicopters are still primitive when compared to the later designs, and failing that there are always autogyros, which were a known technology at this point in time. They could be a nice fit for ASW role, especially if they do not need a carrier deck to take off, and would allow for a much larger number of ships to use them. They could also be used as combination recce and ASW craft onboard BBs, spotting the fall of shot and the like, while providing at least a limited form of ASW protection for the heavy, valuable surface combatants. Such craft could also find employment in Army, as liason craft and artillery spotter, not to mention a possibility of using it for casualty evacuation. Is any of this plausable?

 

[sonofpegasus]

OTL at least one flight of autogyros was used for radar calibration work IIRC. Do not work some interesting auto gyro's will be along in the PAM soon! The RAF air dropped anti-submarine bomb was initially in OTL more likely to destroy the aircraft dropping it rather than the intended target, In the PAM that has already been sorted,
I do have a crazy idea of having trials done of using HE filled UP rockets as a standoff depth charge to attack surfaced U-boats as they dive. In OTL one problem was getting depth charges to explode at a shallow enough setting to rupture the hull of a surfaced/submerging U-boat. IIRC airborne depth charges were eventually fitted with concave noses to low their penetration to depth in water whilst also being fitted with special fuses.

 

[Colin Haggett]

OTL at least one flight of autogyros was used for radar calibration work IIRC. Do not work some interesting auto gyro's will be along in the PAM soon! The RAF air dropped anti-submarine bomb was initially in OTL more likely to destroy the aircraft dropping it rather than the intended target, In the PAM that has already been sorted,
I do have a crazy idea of having trials done of using HE filled UP rockets as a standoff depth charge to attack surfaced U-boats as they dive. In OTL one problem was getting depth charges to explode at a shallow enough setting to rupture the hull of a surfaced/submerging U-boat. IIRC airborne depth charges were eventually fitted with concave noses to low their penetration to depth in water whilst also being fitted with special fuses.

OTL Anti-submarine rockets had a solid nose and were designed to change trajectory under water. They were could be fired in sequential pairs. They could also be fitted to all anti-submarine aircraft from Swordfish to Liberators.

 

[marathag]

Does anyone have any concrete numbers of shells expended per aircraft kill before and after introduction of Proximity Fuze, for some of the more common Allied AA pieces, like 3.7" or 5"

Type	Rounds Fired	Kills	Rounds per Bird
3"/50​	29,614​	87.5​	338​
5" VT​	117,915​	346.5​	340​
5" Common​	223,770​	342​	654​
40 mm​	1,271,844​	742.5​	1,713​
1".1​	85,996​	44.5​	1,932​
20 mm​	3,264,956​	617.5​	5,287​

 

[AlanJWhite]

OTL at least one flight of autogyros was used for radar calibration work IIRC. Do not work some interesting auto gyro's will be along in the PAM soon! The RAF air dropped anti-submarine bomb was initially in OTL more likely to destroy the aircraft dropping it rather than the intended target, In the PAM that has already been sorted,
I do have a crazy idea of having trials done of using HE filled UP rockets as a standoff depth charge to attack surfaced U-boats as they dive. In OTL one problem was getting depth charges to explode at a shallow enough setting to rupture the hull of a surfaced/submerging U-boat. IIRC airborne depth charges were eventually fitted with concave noses to low their penetration to depth in water whilst also being fitted with special fuses.

Two points & two recommendations

The Japanese used a few autogyros for ASW

Kayaba Ka-1 - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

In OTL The problems arising from attacking a (near) surfaced Uboat were some of the first successes of Operational Research.
They determined that an air-dropped depth-charge needed a lower depth setting to maximise the chance of a kill
(it had previously been set to the average depth that a UBoat was found at but this missed "the low hanging fruit")

The technical difficulties in achieving the "25 ft fuse',
and the effect of the "rocket spear" for use against surfaced UB and the "homing torpedo" for use versus deeply dived targets,
are discussed in a book by Alfred Price

Aircraft versus submarine: The evolution of the anti-submarine aircraft, 1912 to 1972: Price, Alfred: 9780718304126: Amazon.com: Books

Aircraft versus submarine: The evolution of the anti-submarine aircraft, 1912 to 1972 [Price, Alfred] on Amazon.com. *FREE* shipping on qualifying offers. Aircraft versus submarine: The evolution of the anti-submarine aircraft, 1912 to 1972

www.amazon.com

Aside: Price also wrote a wonderful study of the "wizard war" of electronics during the bombing campaign (from both sides)

Instruments of Darkness: The History of Electronic Warfare, 1939–1945, Price, Alfred, eBook - Amazon.com

Instruments of Darkness: The History of Electronic Warfare, 1939–1945 - Kindle edition by Price, Alfred. Download it once and read it on your Kindle device, PC, phones or tablets. Use features like bookmarks, note taking and highlighting while reading Instruments of Darkness: The History of...

www.amazon.com

Both are well worth study (if now a little dated) I first read them as an impoverished engineer some 40 odd years ago 👨‍🦳

 

[sonofpegasus]

Thanks for the book info. I do like paper to read, then I am a luddite when it comes to the written word. I shall have to see if I can find some second hand copies to buy once I return to the UK.

 

[PMN1]

The Sycamore Seeds: Early British Helicopter Development has pictures of the MV Daghestan operating Sikorsky R4's in A/S roles from a landing platform December 43 and January 44, doesn't say whether they carried anything or were just used for observation.

 

[AlanJWhite]

Thanks for the book info. I do like paper to read, then I am a luddite when it comes to the written word. I shall have to see if I can find some second-hand copies to buy once I return to the UK.

Like you I prefer paper copies, especially for non-fiction.
I checked and both these titles are available from the Reserve Stock of my County Library service.
Thats Bucks of course but you may be able get in your area too. Try before you buy

 

[Glyndwr01]

I remembered this story from a couple of years ago.

Rockets, Rommel and the Duke of Richmond

A few weeks into the war against Hitler's Germany and the Master Gunner of the British Army is a worried man. The Royal Artillery is by far and away the most professional arm of the British Army, but it's way below establishment in modern guns and there's going to take a long delay before the...

www.alternatehistory.com

 

[Colin Haggett]

Two points & two recommendations

The Japanese used a few autogyros for ASW

Kayaba Ka-1 - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

In OTL The problems arising from attacking a (near) surfaced Uboat were some of the first successes of Operational Research.
They determined that an air-dropped depth-charge needed a lower depth setting to maximise the chance of a kill
(it had previously been set to the average depth that a UBoat was found at but this missed "the low hanging fruit")

The technical difficulties in achieving the "25 ft fuse',
and the effect of the "rocket spear" for use against surfaced UB and the "homing torpedo" for use versus deeply dived targets,
are discussed in a book by Alfred Price

Aircraft versus submarine: The evolution of the anti-submarine aircraft, 1912 to 1972: Price, Alfred: 9780718304126: Amazon.com: Books

Aircraft versus submarine: The evolution of the anti-submarine aircraft, 1912 to 1972 [Price, Alfred] on Amazon.com. *FREE* shipping on qualifying offers. Aircraft versus submarine: The evolution of the anti-submarine aircraft, 1912 to 1972

www.amazon.com

Aside: Price also wrote a wonderful study of the "wizard war" of electronics during the bombing campaign (from both sides)

Instruments of Darkness: The History of Electronic Warfare, 1939–1945, Price, Alfred, eBook - Amazon.com

Instruments of Darkness: The History of Electronic Warfare, 1939–1945 - Kindle edition by Price, Alfred. Download it once and read it on your Kindle device, PC, phones or tablets. Use features like bookmarks, note taking and highlighting while reading Instruments of Darkness: The History of...

www.amazon.com

Both are well worth study (if now a little dated) I first read them as an impoverished engineer some 40 odd years ago 👨‍🦳

They were both in my personal library until last year and read many times.

 

[sonofpegasus]

Does anyone know the maximum size and weight that a Flying Fortress or Liberator could carry? I am currently working on the PAM bomb development and I was wondering what the American bombers could cope with. Did they have an equivalent of the 4000lb cookie. I know that the only American ww2 bomber that could carry the tallboy was the B29,

 

[pjmidd]

Does anyone know the maximum size and weight that a Flying Fortress or Liberator could carry? I am currently working on the PAM bomb development and I was wondering what the American bombers could cope with. Did they have an equivalent of the 4000lb cookie. I know that the only American ww2 bomber that could carry the tallboy was the B29,

US equivalent is the AN-M56, its like a cookie but streamlined. Liberator was tested carrying two but externally one under each wing. I believe the B-17 was limited to 2000lb bombs. Bomb loads vary with range , Liberators are normally rated at 10x500 or 5x1000 for long range missions with B-17's at 4000lbs but both can carry more than twice that on short ranged missions.

 

[lgkmas]

Try this for starters.
usaac bombs
However, it was basically the size of the bomb bay that determined whet they could carry. AIUI, the B-17 had a rather small bomb bay lengthwise compared to say the Lancaster so it might be worthwhile seeing what the differences were in that regard.

 

[Driftless]

Could the B-17 have been modified to carry a larger bomb partially external, configured something similar to the lifeboat carrying "Dumbo" version?

 

[Peg Leg Pom]

It's not worth doing as the range of the aircraft would be too limited to make it worth while. In terms of bomb load the B17 wasn't a heavy bomber, it was a four engine medium bomber. Even at maximum load it could only carry half the bombload as the three British heavy bombers.