Right, you’ve completely lost me now.
Generic drawings are the drawings on which the British and Americans based the Upkeep weapons. They are published officially in America, Britain and Europe and on the net.
These weapons are joint Anglo American, the interst is 60/40 for each nation.
According to your earlier posts:
All these weapons can be considered as joint Anglo American. The drawings of the American spherical mine and the British spherical mine are only days apart.
Yes we are indeed talking about Upkeep and its family and the generic drawings.
Given that there was only one ‘Upkeep’ and the British and American drawings were only days apart might I suggest that the American drawings were copies of the British drawings intended for production of Upkeep in America?
There is a big difference between the design of Upkeep and the production of Upkeep.
Again with regard to Tallboy and Grand Slam are we talking about the design or the production of these weapons?
Evidently the design of the casings of these weapons was changed (from cast to welded) to aid production in America (and the integrity of the welded casings was proven) but the integrity of the original cast casings had also been proven (as had their accuracy with offset tails) in trials and more importantly in combat.
I don’t doubt that America spent huge sums of money on Tallboy and Grand Slam but it is important when and how this money was spent. Money spent integrating Tallboy or Grand Slam with the B-29 in the summer of 1945 hardly warrants these weapons being thought of as joint Anglo-American.
The Ruby project that you mention was a joint Anglo-American project but this was a test drop of Tallboy and Grand Slam carried out in 1946.
Sign In
