RAF and Luftwaffe bombing question

It is my contention that the attitude of the bombs at egress would have little, if any, effect on the trajectory as they fell. As Scottie would have it “Ya cannae change the laws of physics” and in particular Newtons laws of motion.

As the bomb is dropped it has a horizontal velocity vector equal to that of the aeroplane and only then starts to accelerate in a vertical direction also. Thus the reason that we see the bombs fipping over as they fall from the He111 is more due to this horizonal velocity than any vertical velocity. This horizontal velocity vector is also demonstrated by the long strings of bombs seemingly strung out below a heavy bomber in photographs. The horizontal velocity will obviously degrade in time due to drag but in general the bombs will travel along below the aircraft whilst simultaneously accelerating towards the earth.

There would be no ‘forward throw’ unless they were ‘toss bombing’, for instance.

I think that the reason for the attitude of the bombs in the bomb bay is more to do with fitting them into the space available within the structure, especially if the design did not make sufficient allowance for larger individual items in the first place. For instance a mid or shoulder wing layout makes it easier to fit in a long bomb bay as in the Lancaster (and others) without weakening the stucture by making large cut outs. Conversely a low wing layout makes it easier to fit in a passenger cabin.

Just my two penneth.

Rod.

I suspect that the attitude of egress of any bombs from the bomb-bay would have little effect on the arming procedures? Wires were attached to the a/c and when the bomb left the bomb-bay they were pulled out and started the arming cycle? Was there not a small propellor on the nose of some bombs that completed the arming procedure as soon as air started to flow past the bomb on its way down?
Presumably, though, that attitude of the bomb as it left the a/c would have a significant difference to the “Forward Throw” bit of the trajectory? But, presumably, this would have been taken care of at the testing stage? (Same like German paratroops opted for the ‘head-first’ dive out of the JU-52, whereas our guys opted for the ‘feet-first’ exit!)
HTH
Resmoroh

I wondered if it had anything to do with the bombs having to be primed before release

Roger Smith.

The reason I said that some bombers carried vertically is that istr that some US bombers also carried bombs vertically,havent got time to check today so maybe complete BS 🙂

You must show him the BoB movie…

The He111 was the only Luftwaffe bomber involved in the Blitz that had the bomb load mounted vertically as described, the other types having conventionally mounted bomb loads.

Thanks chaps, much appreciated 😉

Good question I never even thought of – and equally good answer from Baz 🙂

The simple answer is that some a/c carried their bombs vertically in their bomb bay,so when released – the bomb fell out tail first !!
Edit…many bombers had a multi cell bomb bay(s),whereas (for instance) the lanc had a large single bomb bay !