RAF Boeing Washington B.1 (B-29) with Grand Slam bombs

frank

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
May 20, 2006
Messages
617
Reaction score
20
I've looked thru every B-29 book I have or have seen & Googled with no luck. I've read that some of the B-29s sent to the RAF were equipped with racks at the wing roots to carry a Grand Slam bomb under each wing. ISTR also that some USAF a/c were modified as well. I've not been able to find pics or drawings of this installation or use of. Does anyone know if this practice was actually done? Has anyone ever come across any drawings or info? Thanks.
 

sferrin

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
14,474
Reaction score
3,358
this would be the page you're looking for but it looks like all the pictures got pulled.

http://members.aol.com/nukeinfo2/

B-29 with two Tall Boys. (From that page.)
 

Attachments

  • B29withdualTallboyinstallationdetail2.jpg
    B29withdualTallboyinstallationdetail2.jpg
    32.7 KB · Views: 453

frank

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
May 20, 2006
Messages
617
Reaction score
20
Thanks!


sferrin said:
this would be the page you're looking for but it looks like all the pictures got pulled.

http://members.aol.com/nukeinfo2/

B-29 with two Tall Boys. (From that page.)
 

kitnut617

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Dec 15, 2006
Messages
473
Reaction score
248
this would be the page you're looking for but it looks like all the pictures got pulled.


B-29 with two Tall Boys. (From that page.)

Actually, those are two Grand Slams. I've got a number of photos from the Boeing Archive (with licenses) and one of them shows a B-29 with a T.12 mounted (which is a bomb twice as heavy as a Grand Slam) A way to tell what bomb is being carried is by the number of chains holding the bomb to the rack, two chains means a Grand Slam. The B.29 could carry a Tall boy internally.
 

kitnut617

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Dec 15, 2006
Messages
473
Reaction score
248
I've got a high resolution photo of that picture from Boeing, when you look it over with a magnifying glass, there's a guy's face looking out that side bubble window, clear as day ---

You'll notice the notch in the trailing edge of the flap there too ---

As an aside, my Dad served in 617 squadron during the period that they were using the Grand Slam, reason for my interest in the bomb.

The nice thing about using the B-29 was it could get to the height that Barnes Wallace had designed the bombs to be dropped at.
 

Arjen

It's turtles all the way down
Senior Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2010
Messages
2,923
Reaction score
933
I downloaded the image K_M refers to
. Lancaster bomb.jpeg
 

Foo Fighter

I came, I saw, I drank some tea (and had a bun).
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2016
Messages
2,302
Reaction score
1,236
Tallboy had modified doors while the Grand slam had the doors removed and modifications to allow the fuselage to be cleared on release.
 

Arjen

It's turtles all the way down
Senior Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2010
Messages
2,923
Reaction score
933
So it does. The caption disappears the moment you open the image, I missed it.
 

kitnut617

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Dec 15, 2006
Messages
473
Reaction score
248
There's considerable difference in bomb size between the two, I don't have a picture of real one together, but I do have this in 1/72 scale. The really big one is a T.12 made from dimensions I found on a website about the T.12.
 

Attachments

  • Project Box 005.jpg
    Project Box 005.jpg
    144.1 KB · Views: 281

kitnut617

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Dec 15, 2006
Messages
473
Reaction score
248
This is the photo of the T.12 slung under a B-29. Notice the fairing on the underside of the wing root where the spars had to be re-enforced to take the weight.

EDIT: Photo was provided by Boeing Archives with a license which doesn't restrict me where I use it.
 

Attachments

  • T12 & Grandslam 001.jpg
    T12 & Grandslam 001.jpg
    159.2 KB · Views: 270
Last edited:

nuuumannn

Cannae be ar*ed changing my personal text
Joined
Oct 22, 2011
Messages
257
Reaction score
434
I don't have a picture of real one together,

I took this many years ago at Brooklands Museum - scanned from a 35mm photo. Unfortunately the bombs are now no longer in such a photogenic arrangement, although they are together in the same building. You can really appreciate the difference in size between the Tall Boy and the Grand Slam when they are together.
 

Attachments

  • Wallis Bombs.jpg
    Wallis Bombs.jpg
    286.3 KB · Views: 204

EwenS

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Feb 20, 2010
Messages
283
Reaction score
480
I don't have a picture of real one together,

I took this many years ago at Brooklands Museum - scanned from a 35mm photo. Unfortunately the bombs are now no longer in such a photogenic arrangement, although they are together in the same building. You can really appreciate the difference in size between the Tall Boy and the Grand Slam when they are together.

The bomb with the black and white markings isn’t a 12,000lb Tallboy but a 4,000lb Tallboy Small created in late 1943 to test the concept. It just serves to emphasise the size of Grand Slam.


Brooklands have examples of all the Barnes Wallis bombs.
 

kitnut617

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Dec 15, 2006
Messages
473
Reaction score
248
Thanks for posting that EwenS, I was going to say that's more of a comparison between a Tallboy and T12. Would you know if there was any plans to put Tallboy Small into service ?
 

nuuumannn

Cannae be ar*ed changing my personal text
Joined
Oct 22, 2011
Messages
257
Reaction score
434
The bomb with the black and white markings isn’t a 12,000lb Tallboy but a 4,000lb Tallboy Small created in late 1943 to test the concept. It just serves to emphasise the size of Grand Slam.

Thanks for that, Ewen.

Brooklands have examples of all the Barnes Wallis bombs.

Indeed it does, although the last time I was there two years ago, I only saw the Grand Slam and Tall Boy Small on display near each other in the stratosphere chamber building.
 

EwenS

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Feb 20, 2010
Messages
283
Reaction score
480
Thanks for posting that EwenS, I was going to say that's more of a comparison between a Tallboy and T12. Would you know if there was any plans to put Tallboy Small into service ?

According to “A Hell of a Bomb” by Stephen Flower the Tallboy Small was designed to prove the ballistics as a step up from firing miniatures from a gun down a gypsum mine and before moving on to produce Tallboy (or Tallboy Medium) and Grand Slam (or Tallboy Large).

One thing learned from the first drops of the 4000lb version was the need to angle the fins to generate spin and improve accuracy. Only 12 were manufactured with the first drop was in Dec 1943 by the AAEE, operating from Boscombe Down, using the range at Orfordness. More tests with them were made in April 1944.

The odd thing is that the 22000 pounder was designed first, then scaled down to 4000lb for the test articles and 12000lb.

Flower’s book was later republished as
 

kitnut617

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Dec 15, 2006
Messages
473
Reaction score
248
Thanks Ewen, my Dad served in 617 sqn from 1944 to 46, he was interested into anything related like that but I don't remember him mentioning anything about the Tallboy Small so I was very interested in it. I'll keep an eye out for that book too.
What I have read about the Grand Slam it was scaled down because the Lancaster couldn't get it up to the altitude Wallis design it to be dropped at, somewhere around 30-35,000ft. The B-29 tests showed what it could really do when dropped from that altitude.
 

taildragger

You can count on me - I won a contest
Joined
Nov 2, 2008
Messages
331
Reaction score
232
I wonder how it was intended that the B-29 would drop the twin Tall Boy load in combat.
- If dropped simultaneously, I'd think that the detonation of the first to hit might impair the effectiveness of the second. They could be configured to separate during the fall, but that would reduce accuracy.
- If the drop was staggered, aircraft motion after release of the 1st 22,000 lb. bomb would complicate aiming of the 2nd.
 
Last edited:

EwenS

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Feb 20, 2010
Messages
283
Reaction score
480
AIUI the only operational outfit was with the 19th BG in Korea using single Tarzon bombs. Anything else was purely an experimental fit. That would allow a reduced fuel load to keep total weight within the B-29 max take off weight of 135,000lb.
 

SleeperService2

Not sure about changing it now.
Joined
Aug 16, 2016
Messages
64
Reaction score
74
I've got a high resolution photo of that picture from Boeing, when you look it over with a magnifying glass, there's a guy's face looking out that side bubble window, clear as day ---

You'll notice the notch in the trailing edge of the flap there too ---

As an aside, my Dad served in 617 squadron during the period that they were using the Grand Slam, reason for my interest in the bomb.

The nice thing about using the B-29 was it could get to the height that Barnes Wallace had designed the bombs to be dropped at.
Reading through this thread and looking at the photos I'm struggling to see how the wings would support the Tallboys, and the fuel, and the normal bombload, and the turrets/guns/gunners. Is there any evidence of the wing root modifications applied to the T-12 carrier? As that beast weighed about twice as much as Grand Slam would the double carriage of same need the same strengthening. Has anybody found any paperwork to provide more information on this project.

To my mind using bomb bay tanks and part filling the wing tanks seems the only way this might work. It's interesting to note the T/O and landing weights in the S.A.C HERE landing weight limited by strength nearly the same as T/O limited by space.
That would allow a reduced fuel load to keep total weight within the B-29 max take off weight of 135,000lb.

The Characteristics summary HERE shows 140 000lbs as MTOW performance limited, the lower figure is space restricted so a little more to play with.
 

Dilandu

I'm dissatisfied, which means, I exist.
Joined
May 30, 2013
Messages
1,690
Reaction score
1,335
Website
fonzeppelin.livejournal.com
AIUI the only operational outfit was with the 19th BG in Korea using single Tarzon bombs. Anything else was purely an experimental fit. That would allow a reduced fuel load to keep total weight within the B-29 max take off weight of 135,000lb.

Yep, the USAF were skeptical about RAF idea of "very-very precise bomb drop"; they argued that in non-ideal condition it's just too hard for average crew to achieve, and highly-trained special mission squadrons are not practical in cost-effective terms. So, the idea of installing RAZON tail guidance kit (with enlarged rudders) on Tallboy was suggested. Albeit the rudders weren't still big enough, so the circular wing was added during testing, to provide aerodynamic lifting force in any desired direction of turn.

1608476446003.png
 

Grey Havoc

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2009
Messages
16,722
Reaction score
6,287
On a sad note:

Squadron Leader ‘Benny’ Goodman, one of the last surviving bomber pilots of 617 (Dambuster) Squadron – obituary
Squadron Leader Lawrence “Benny” Goodman, who has died aged 100, was one of the last two surviving Lancaster pilots of 617 (Dambuster) Squadron who were involved in attacking the German battleship Tirpitz in late 1944. And in the final weeks of the war he dropped the 22,000 lb “Grand Slam”, the biggest bomb dropped by the RAF.
Goodman had completed his training as a bomber pilot in the summer of 1944 when he was posted to 617 Squadron, based at Woodhall Spa in Lincolnshire. With its unique reputation as a special-duties squadron manned by highly experienced crews, it was unusual for a novice crew to be sent to 617.

Rest In Peace.

:(
 

pathology_doc

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Jun 7, 2008
Messages
1,058
Reaction score
421
What I have read about the Grand Slam it was scaled down because the Lancaster couldn't get it up to the altitude Wallis design it to be dropped at, somewhere around 30-35,000ft. The B-29 tests showed what it could really do when dropped from that altitude.
Based on reading Brickhill's "The Dam Busters", the thing they found is that both Tallboy and Grand Slam were capable of doing everything that was originally desired from the concept, even though the Lanc couldn't get it up to Wallis's ideal drop height.
 

RLBH

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
May 5, 2007
Messages
380
Reaction score
276
What I have read about the Grand Slam it was scaled down because the Lancaster couldn't get it up to the altitude Wallis design it to be dropped at, somewhere around 30-35,000ft. The B-29 tests showed what it could really do when dropped from that altitude.
Based on reading Brickhill's "The Dam Busters", the thing they found is that both Tallboy and Grand Slam were capable of doing everything that was originally desired from the concept, even though the Lanc couldn't get it up to Wallis's ideal drop height.
Logically, once you're dropping from high enough to reach terminal velocity, all extra altitude does is increase the time available for wind to push the bomb off course.
 

Similar threads

Top