Bomb Winch

Hi Aerohistorian, a BIG thank you for posting those extra photos!

Best wishes,

Walter

Photos as requested 

Hi Alan, yes, still here, unlike many others, sadly.    I can understand people’s frustration about the new look forum, not happy with it myself but there is so much information to be found in all those past threads and it would be a shame for that to be lost.

Back to the bomb winch – Aerohistorian, if you’re reading this, could you next to a few extra photos perhaps also give some dimensions please?   I’m very curious as to how big this piece of kit actually is!   

TIA & cheers,

Walter

Hi Walter, nice to see you still posting on the forum!

You beat me to it by posting that snippet from the Blenheim inventory.   I think this confirms that the hoist was specific to the Blenheim (maybe other Bristol types, e.g.  Bombay).

I couldn’t find anything similar in other Volume Is for contemporary bombers.  It seems as though hoists were not standardised pre-war.  Certainly, the bomb hoist mentioned in the Vol. I for the Hampden I has a Handley-Page Part No.

It’s good that the forum can still produce results like this, even if it’s for a very small audience!

Hi all,  the illustration added by AM above rang a bell and the bomb winch drawn in that internal arrangement drawing matches the one in the AP for the Blenheim.   This is what the Blenheim MkIV airframe inventory says:

And this is the drawing of the “bomb loader” in the Blenheim AP:

So looks like a match with Aerohistorian’s find.   Any chance of a few more pics from different aspects?

Cheers,

Walter

Hi Pim205GTI, and thanks for your thoughts.

I was going along much the same lines as you, i.e. (air)portable and quite possibly from a Seaplane.  No end of searching on the internet turned anything useful up though.

Then, I came across this illustration from a Volume I while going through my own files.  The hoist appears to have been standard equipment on a “well known bomber”  but I’m now cross checking more Volume Is to see if it was also standard issue for other types.

AP1664C  Bomb Winches, Hoists and Associated Equipment,  1941 is available at Kew (The National Archives) and I’ve added it to the list for my next visit.  It may well give the full picture.

If I look at the construction
– it is primarily made out of aluminium
– gear has holes for weight reduction

– handle has minimal dimensions
 

I would think this Bomb Winch is made to be carried on the plane it was used for, so a seaplane perhaps ? 

You’ve got me a bit puzzled TTC2 as the device depicted in the photo of a Mk VI Mosquito isn’t the same device as depicted by the OP?  Similar, but not the same.

Here’s an illustration from the Mosquito VI Volume I showing the technique for bomb loading on the wing bomb carriers.  The narrative describes the device(s) the armourers are using as a Type A Hoist.  These look like the device in your photo?

Here’s another illustration from AP4306A, Data Book Of Ground Servicing Equipment, illustrating a Type B Hoist, which appears to be similar to the Type A in most respects (maybe an improved model, or for loading heavier ordnance?).

Both share some features with the OP’s device but are clearly not the same?

*Apologies if the photos are quite small on your screen – they were full sized when they left my computer!  Just another reason why this forum is not fit for purpose?

Thanks 

Standard portable bomb hoist – see here: https://www.flickr.com/photos/39411748@N06/6407470955

I think you’ll need to offer lots more info if you want a successful id of this piece as it does not look to me to be a standard unit (at least, not one I’m familiar with).

What is the inscription on the label?   Does it give a clue as to whether the item is British or American?

Are there any part numbers or maker’s stamps which would offer clues?

What size are all those fasteners?  They look like mainly 2ba to me, which suggests British origin but I may be wrong.

My casual guess is an  inter-war bomb loader from something but I could be a million miles out, as you haven’t really given us* much to work with.

* by using “us”, I am, of course, assuming that there is more than just me reading this thread, but I could be wrong about that too!