Attack on Taranto used RAF Wellingtons instead of RN Swordfish aircraft?

[NOMISYRRUC]

And even if I did accept looney tunes could operate a Wellington with 4500 pounds bombs in the belly from those runways, (and I have seen NO RECORD of this happening.) the saner ones finally said with the loads they were given; "No way, Jose." I go with the historical record. This is not the legendary Jimmy Doolittle and his picked crews and the equally legendary B-25 Mitchell. This is the RAF.

I have posted the link to a historic record that says Wellingtons can operate up to 480 miles from Malta with 4,500lbs of bombs into this thread several times.

Here it is again.

http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/UN/UK/UK-Med-II/maps/UK-Med-II-25.jpg

Why would the British official historian put this in his map if it wasn't true?

And while I'm at it here is a historical record that shows the airfields on Malta in the spring of 1941.

http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/UN/UK/UK-Med-II/maps/UK-Med-II-5.jpg

 

[Deleted member 94680]

Maybe NOT. Stenz. Maybe NOT.

Well yes, it is, as you were suggesting in the video you yourself posted that bombs must be small as two men were loading them.

The men are lifting the bombs; two men to a bomb.

Now, in a separate source, you use 1000lb bombs and small bomb containers (which are essentially cluster bombs, carrying 250lbs of smaller munitions like incendiaries) as ‘evidence’ for small bomb loads. A photo where, a) it’s in India for mission over Burma, not Malta and b) there is at least 8,000lb of iron bombs (by counting tail fins) in the bomb bay. Altogether, it’s probably more than 4,500lbs of bomb load.

Edit: I’m not 100% and by no means an expert, but I think the bombs in that photo might be 500lb GP bombs as opposed to 1000lb HE ones. The tail unit looks more like the one on the 500 rather than the 1000, but I’m not totally sure. That would make the load about 4,500lb - which would fit what others have mentioned.

 

[NOMISYRRUC]

This is a historical record from Page 233 of The British Aircraft Specification File by K. J. Meekcoms and E. B. Morgan.

Air Ministry Specification 29/36
For the Manufacture of Wellington Aeroplanes
Dated 29th January 1937
File Number. 549377/36/RDA3
Issued to Vickers (Type 285

Special Requirements (examples from 53 requirements)
[The one that concerns us is requirement number two.]

2) The bomb compartment is to accommodate internally the following:

18 x 250lb SAP or GP, or​

9 x 500lb SAP or GP, or​

9 x 250lb AS or LC, or​

6 x 250lb B, or​

2 x 2,000lb AP, or​

9 x 250lb bomb containers and 8 x 11.5lb Practice.​

An initial Contract No. 549268/36 for 180 Type 285 Wellingtons, L4212-L4391, was placed in August 1936. The first Mk I, L4212 was flown on 23/12/37, with Pegasus XX engines. The first Mk I, L4212 was flown on 23rd December 1937, with Pegasus XX engines.

The Air Britain Royal Air Force Aircraft for the serial range L1000 to N9999 says that these aircraft were delivered to the RAF between July 1938 and August 1939. More would follow, 11,280 to be exact.

I've done the arithmetic so you don't have to:

6 x 250lbs = 1,500lbs​

9 x 250lbs = 2,250lbs​

18 x 250lbs = 4,500lbs​

9 x 500lbs = 4,500lbs​

2 x 2,000lbs = 4,000lbs - but the 2,000lb AP bomb didn't come into service until 1942.​

 

[naraic]

Need to figure out what exactly the argument is here but I will share some information and opinions.

1. Wellingtons did operate from Malta 1940.

2. Wellingtons did operate bombing missions as far as Naples in 1940 with a full bomb load. Malta to Naples and Malta to Taranto is essentially the same distance.

3. Wellingtons stopped doing full bomb load missions targeting Naples in November 1940 due to crashes on take off. I believe on 3 November 2 planes from a flight of 12 targeting Naples crashed on take off.

4. After this the runway was decided to be too short for full load missions and Wellingtons limited themselves to smaller bomb loads or shorter ranges. Longer runways were completed at different Malta based airbases in 1941. There was a large number of missions bombing Sicily and Naples was bombed with limited bomb loads.

5. I note that the radius of action posted by @NOMISYRRUC listed Summer and Autumn 1941. Perhaps this is important as the the British constantly improved their runways through ww2.
Some numbers for RAF Luqa
November 1940 longest runway 1200 yards
December 1940 longest runway 1400 yards
April 1941 longest runway 1740 yards

6. I cannot find why Wellingtons did not base out of Hal Far in 1940 as it had longer runways than RAF Luqa. I suspect there was a silly reason behind this. I believe at this time Hal Far was seen as FAA air base more than a RAF airbase.

7. If Wellingtons were to contribute to the Taranto raid they almost certainly would be limited to a lighter bomb load if the raid took place on the historical date.

 

[NOMISYRRUC]

2. Wellingtons did operate bombing missions as far as Naples in 1940 with a full bomb load. Malta to Naples and Malta to Taranto is essentially the same distance.

The Wellingtons based on Malta also bombed Taranto in 1940 - two nights after the Swordfish raid. However, the British official history did not say what the bomb load of each Wellington was or how many aircraft took part in the raid.

 

[naraic]

The Wellingtons based on Malta also bombed Taranto in 1940 - two nights after the Swordfish raid. However, the British official history did not say what the bomb load of each Wellington was or how many aircraft took part in the raid.

The only source I can find mentions 10 planes dropped bombs and incendiaries. Doesn't really help too much but at least we know its 10 planes. Probably the same squadron that flew to Naples on 3 November with a full bomb load and had two planes crash on take off as they were overloaded.

The Royal Navy and the Mediterranean: Vol.II: November 1940-December 1941

The Royal Navy and the Mediterranean

This work covers a difficult period of the war for the Royal Navy's Mediterranean Fleet. It covers the destruction of the Italian Fleet at Taranto by naval aircraft from the carrier Illustrious, and the entry of the German Luftwaffe into the theatre with their attack on Illustrious in 1941.

books.google.ie

 

[NOMISYRRUC]

5. I note that the radius of action posted by @NOMISYRRUC listed Summer and Autumn 1941. Perhaps this is important as the the British constantly improved their runways through ww2.
Some numbers for RAF Luqa
November 1940 longest runway 1200 yards
December 1940 longest runway 1400 yards
April 1941 longest runway 1740 yards

I've had another skim through the relevant chapters from the books on Hyperwar that I have been quoting.

The chapter that includes Wellington operations from Malta in 1940 says that they made 94 sorties against Italian ports in November and December 1940. It does say that Taranto was bombed more than once. It doesn't say that the length of the runways restricted the range and payload of a Wellington.

The chapter that includes Wellington operations from Malta in the first half of 1941 says that the length of the runways made taking off and landing difficult, but it doesn't say that they placed restrictions on the range and payloads of the Wellingtons that were based there. The only thing that it says about improvements to the airfields was that taxi tracks were built to increase the capacity of the airfields and that this work began in June 1941.

The radius of action map came from the chapter that included anti-shipping operations from Malta between July and October 1941. The Wellingtons had come back by early August and were used to bomb ports. I couldn't see anything about the runways been lengthened so that they could carry 4,500lbs of bombs for 480 miles. Therefore, as far as I can tell this is what the Wellingtons operating from Malta in November 1940 were capable of.

 

[Deleted member 94680]

The only source I can find mentions 10 planes dropped bombs and incendiaries. Doesn't really help too much but at least we know its 10 planes.

It’s a shame there isn’t more details, which to me imply it’s a “normal” load, so the official history doesn’t think it’s worth mentioning.

I’d point out the (probably) 4,500lb bomb load in the “IWM Burma operation” photo shared above was GP bombs and incendiaries in Small Bomb Carriers, so it’s probably something similar to that.

 

[NOMISYRRUC]

The copy of the Fight At Odds on Hyperwar includes Appendix VI - Principal Operational Aircraft of the Royal Air Force, 1939–1941. Here's an extract:

AIRCRAFT NAME AND MARK	MAXIMUM SPEED​	SERVICE CEILING​	RANGE AND ASSOCIATED BOMB LOAD​	ARMAMENT​
Wellington IC	235 at 15,500​	18,000​	2,550—1,000 or 1,200—4,500​	6 × ·303"​

RANGE AND ASSOCIATED BOMB LOAD. The main purpose of this table is to give some idea of the relative performances of the various aircraft. The figures quoted relate to aircraft flying at 'most economical cruising' speed at the specified height (i.e. the speed and height at which the greatest range could be obtained). Allowance is made for take off but not for landing, the range quoted being the maximum distance the aircraft could cover in still air 'flying to dry tanks'. Furthermore in the planning of operations a reduction of range of about 25% had to be made for navigational errors, tactical manoeuvring, weather conditions and other factors.

Using that formula the practical ranges for a Wellington Mk IC are 1,680 miles with 1,000lbs of bombs and 900 miles with 4,500lbs of bombs. That's considerably more than the 900 miles with 1,000lbs of bombs and 480 miles with 4,500lbs of bombs that I have been quoting for the Wellingtons operating from Malta at the time of the Taranto raid. The figures I have been quoting may be what the length of the runways on Malta restricted them to.

 

[sonofpegasus]

Doing a quick check on the picture of the Wellington's bomb load in India, It would appear to be , Starboard side of Bomb bay 3 x Small bomb carrier (total 750lb) centre aisle of bomb bay 6 x 250Lb GP bombs (double stacked in bomb bay for 1500lb total) Ports side of bomb bay 3 X 250 lb GP bombs (for a total of 750lb). So the total bomb load for this raid seems to be 3000lb which would tally with a raid deeper into Burma. To the best of my knowledge in 1940 the Luka runway was long enough for a full bomb load take off but only just, the safety margin being very small. Therefore full bombload take offs were avoided as much as possible until the runway was lengthened in 1941.

 

[naraic]

Luqa Airport

www.aviationinmalta.com

The source I was quoting about the lengths of RAF luqa.

3 November 1940: Wellingtons Crash on Village Killing Six

Malta – World War 2. First visit to maltagc70? CLICK HERE Get daily updates direct to your computer – sign up to follow maltagc70 (see R) AIRCRAFT PLOUGHS INTO HOUSES Two civilians and fo…

www.google.com

Here's an article about the crash on take off that I mentioned. It concludes that the bombers were carrying too high a load to operate from luqa. It further goes onto mention that orders were issued so that it wouldn't happen again.

I haven't seen any sources that explicitly mention a Wellington operating at full load between November 1940 and April 1941 when there was longer runways but thats not a guarantee.

 

[NOMISYRRUC]

Luqa Airport

www.aviationinmalta.com

That article says that Luqa could handle 24 Wellingtons by 1941. That is a factor which is as important as the weight of bombs that a Wellington flying from Malta can carry because the more aircraft that take part in the raid the better.

What I wanted to do was concentrate all the Wellingtons in the Middle East and Mediterranean at Malta for a mass attack. At the time of the OTL Taranto raid the RAF creating a force of 4 Wellington squadrons in the theatre, that is No. 148 at Malta and Nos. 37, 38 and 70 in Egypt. Each squadron had a nominal first-line strength of 16 aircraft for a total of 64. However, it seems that only 24 of them could be accommodated there at the time.

 

[McPherson]

Well yes, it is, as you were suggesting in the video you yourself posted that bombs must be small as two men were loading them.


Now, in a separate source, you use 1000lb bombs and small bomb containers (which are essentially cluster bombs, carrying 250lbs of smaller munitions like incendiaries) as ‘evidence’ for small bomb loads. A photo where, a) it’s in India for mission over Burma, not Malta and b) there is at least 8,000lb of iron bombs (by counting tail fins) in the bomb bay. Altogether, it’s probably more than 4,500lbs of bomb load.

Edit: I’m not 100% and by no means an expert, but I think the bombs in that photo might be 500lb GP bombs as opposed to 1000lb HE ones. The tail unit looks more like the one on the 500 rather than the 1000, but I’m not totally sure. That would make the load about 4,500lb - which would fit what others have mentioned.

Size scaling, men to bombs to figure out the length diameter ratios. Then went to a source for exact diameters and lengths.

 

[McPherson]

That article says that Luqa could handle 24 Wellingtons by 1941. That is a factor which is as important as the weight of bombs that a Wellington flying from Malta can carry because the more aircraft that take part in the raid the better.

What I wanted to do was concentrate all the Wellingtons in the Middle East and Mediterranean at Malta for a mass attack. At the time of the OTL Taranto raid the RAF creating a force of 4 Wellington squadrons in the theatre, that is No. 148 at Malta and Nos. 37, 38 and 70 in Egypt. Each squadron had a nominal first-line strength of 16 aircraft for a total of 64. However, it seems that only 24 of them could be accommodated there at the time.

Not exactly RTL history. The British had trouble operating eight to twelve from Luqa... as we have it stated in their histories up-cited up-thread. Why? Runways.

 

[Deleted member 94680]

Size scaling, men to bombs to figure out the length diameter ratios. Then went to a source for exact diameters and lengths.

What?

 

[McPherson]

I wanted to establish which bombs were which. I am convinced that the video shows either 250 or 500 pound bombs. I "think" those were 250 pound bombs. But I had to scale and compare to decide. The scale constant or ruler is a man. If the bomb is as long as a man from feet to waist, I am convinced it is a 500 pounder. If it is shorter, then it is the smaller bomb by weight. YMMV on this scaling.

 

[Deleted member 94680]

I "think" those were 250 pound bombs. But I had to scale and compare to decide.

I see. I was thrown by your post where you stated two men were lifting the bomb as if that was a reference to its weight. I was then further confused by your sharing of the photo of a 4,500lb bomb load (from India) - incorrectly (IMHO) labelled as 1000lb bombs - as evidence that Wellies couldn’t lift with 4,500lb loads from Malta. To me, it seemed everything you were posting as evidence proved a 4,500lb bomb load was entirely possible whilst your posts were claiming it was impossible. I didn’t realise you were asking for confirmation of bomb scales and clarification of what you were posting. Apologies.

FWIW, I’m as confident as I can be - thanks in large part to the sources you’ve managed to find - that a 4,500lb load (mixed GP and Small Bomb Carriers) was the ‘normal’ load for a Wellington.

 

[alfredtuomi]

Mosquitoes ? would they fare better ?

yes....but need to build them first.

 

[jsb]

Size scaling, men to bombs to figure out the length diameter ratios. Then went to a source for exact diameters and lengths.

Would the trolley used to carry the bombs be a standard RAF size, could that scale better than variable humans?

 

[McPherson]

Would the trolley used to carry the bombs be a standard RAF size, could that scale better than variable humans?

Yes, but I did not have a source for that one. I did have a source for the average British soldier heels to crown at about 5 feet 7 inches. If the bomb can be scaled to him, anything that comes up to his belt is not a 250 pound bomb. Anything about mid thigh has got to be a 250 pound bomb.