Mark Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 Hi all, Amongst the many experts out there in Britmodellerland, would any of you know what type of depth charges were fitted to RAF Coastal Command Catalinas, operating in the North Atlantic during 1943? Specifically the type that was used by John Cruikshank VC during his attack on the German U-boat that won him the Victoria Cross. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LDSModeller Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 Hi Mark, Assuming that Cruikshank's Catalina was carrying standard 250lb Depth Charges (x 4) and not 450lbers, then your depth charges will be Torpex Mk XI depth charges, which are described in this link (gives detail about the break away tail also) http://www.uxoinfo.com/blogcfc/client/includes/uxopages/Mulvaney_Details.cfm?Ord_Id=FB33 Hope that helps Regards Alan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Posted January 19, 2015 Author Share Posted January 19, 2015 Brilliant Alan, thank you! A quick search reveals that Belcher Bits do them in resin, but there doesn't seem to be any pylons with them. Any ideas? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Selwyn Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 Brilliant Alan, thank you! A quick search reveals that Belcher Bits do them in resin, but there doesn't seem to be any pylons with them. Any ideas? It might not have been carrying depth charges at all, which are used for submerged targets. it is more likely to have been carrying Anti Submarine Bombs. The RAF used 250lb 500lb and 600lb AS bombs, The cat could carry upto 1000lb class stores so all are a possible load. Selwyn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham Boak Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 The AS bombs were found to be ineffective at an early stage, partly because of low explosive charge and partly because of the difficulty in hitting anything. By this date I'd expect to see depth charges as the preferred load: a low depth setting would be perfectly adequate for surfaced U-boats. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Selwyn Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 The AS bombs were found to be ineffective at an early stage, partly because of low explosive charge and partly because of the difficulty in hitting anything. By this date I'd expect to see depth charges as the preferred load: a low depth setting would be perfectly adequate for surfaced U-boats. The original 100lb AS bombs were pretty useless, the 250Lb was marginal. The 500Lb and above were quite effective and remained in service at least to the end of WW2. Selwyn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Posted January 19, 2015 Author Share Posted January 19, 2015 Thanks everyone! I've had it confirmed that John Cruikshank's aircraft was carrying six 250lb depth charges. So now that's settled, how do these get hung from the wing? What type of pylon would have been used? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Finn Posted January 20, 2015 Share Posted January 20, 2015 Looks like the bomb racks were built into the wings: http://ww2db.com/images/5104c75b4e603.jpg https://theamericanwarrior.files.wordpress.com/2014/12/11th-af-faw4-pby-catalina-amchitka-island-aleutians-120743-1-of-1.jpg the 'cradle' is most likely for torpedoes. Jari Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
datguy Posted January 20, 2015 Share Posted January 20, 2015 Thanks everyone! I've had it confirmed that John Cruikshank's aircraft was carrying six 250lb depth charges. So now that's settled, how do these get hung from the wing? What type of pylon would have been used? Pylon detail is shown in this here, but it shows only two depth charges mounted on the wing: http://nzetc.victoria.ac.nz/tm/scholarly/WH2-1RAF-fig-WH2-1RAF017b.html Appearance of the loaded pylons is hinted at here: http://ww2db.com/images/52c26684280ae.jpg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Russell Posted January 20, 2015 Share Posted January 20, 2015 Somewhat posed picture of a 450lb DC about to be loaded on a Coastal Command Catalina. These were basically a naval depth charge with a nose cap and a tail and were replaced by the more efficient 250lb weapon. Unfortunately we can't see the pylon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dogsbody Posted January 21, 2015 Share Posted January 21, 2015 Not sure where this image is originally from. I've had it in my pictures for years. Chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony C Posted January 21, 2015 Share Posted January 21, 2015 Might be a wild stab in the dark, but given the similarity in weights carried, wouldn't the bomb cradle have been the same or at least similar, to those used by the Spitfire, when carrying the 500lb bomb on the centre line? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
perdu Posted January 21, 2015 Share Posted January 21, 2015 (edited) In a similar vein to the others I have this on my C drive [/url] Sadly no idea whose Cat this is but it has several bomb carriers underneath the wings, looks to be Coastal Command colours though Edited January 21, 2015 by perdu Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Finn Posted January 21, 2015 Share Posted January 21, 2015 A few more: http://www.iwm.org.uk/collections/item/object/205194545 http://www.iwm.org.uk/collections/item/object/205212716 http://www.iwm.org.uk/collections/item/object/205193653 http://www.iwm.org.uk/collections/item/object/205210044 Jari Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham Boak Posted January 21, 2015 Share Posted January 21, 2015 As this "bomb cradle" looks very much like the universal carrier used on many RAF aircraft od the period, I think you are very safe to assume it is the same as that carried on the Spitfire. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dogsbody Posted January 21, 2015 Share Posted January 21, 2015 In a similar vein to the others I have this on my C drive [/url] Sadly no idea whose Cat this is but it has several bomb carriers underneath the wings, looks to be Coastal Command colours though The Catalina in the second picture is fitted with racks for retro-bombs. These had small rockets fitted to the forward end that cancelled out any forward speed as they were dropped, allowing the bombs to fall straight down onto the target. http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/aircraft-requests/catalina-retro-bombs-37783.html http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USN/rep/ASW-51/ASW-Glossary.html Chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham Boak Posted January 21, 2015 Share Posted January 21, 2015 (edited) The colours look like Coastal Command but the tail code (what can be seen of it) looks US Navy. Edited January 21, 2015 by Graham Boak Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RJP Posted January 21, 2015 Share Posted January 21, 2015 A few more: . . . http://www.iwm.org.uk/collections/item/object/205210044 There's some lovely detail there, especially the stencilled admonition to be careful opening the hatch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admiral Puff Posted January 21, 2015 Share Posted January 21, 2015 (edited) In a similar vein to the others I have this on my C drive [/url] Sadly no idea whose Cat this is but it has several bomb carriers underneath the wings, looks to be Coastal Command colours though The second Cat is one of the RAAF's first batch, photographed either on its way to Australia or after arrival at Rose Bay in Sydney. Because the US was not involved in the war at that time, the RAAF couldn't crew the aircraft, and the job was done by civilian pilots from Qantas. I have more information somewhere, but it's presently packed away for my house move next week. I can say that the glossy area on the lower hull was a coating of lanolin applied as an anti-corrosive. Edited January 21, 2015 by Admiral Puff 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobmig Posted January 22, 2015 Share Posted January 22, 2015 You may find these photos interesting, if not especially helpful. They're Public Archives of Canada photos. Unfortunately, they're scanned from an old issue of IPMS Canada's magazine rather than the originals which would have reproduced much better. The first photo shows a dolly of 250 lb depth charges being dragged to the aircraft. The circular object being carried is a winch. In the second photo a charge is being winched up with a cable passing through the wing. The final shot shows two depth charges in place, along with two sea markers. Photo credits PAC PL16165, PL36213, and PAC OSG-216 respectively. Oh, BTW... the charges were described as being a dark sea grey in colour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magpie22 Posted January 23, 2015 Share Posted January 23, 2015 (edited) 2 Edited April 26, 2015 by Magpie22 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Posted January 23, 2015 Author Share Posted January 23, 2015 Some seriously good good help here guys, thanks to everyone! ROYAL AIR FORCE COASTAL COMMAND, 1939-1945.. © IWM (CH 2449)IWM Non Commercial Licence Of course, this photo no raises the question of guns! I have read that the RAF Coastal Command Catalinas had the Vickers 0.303 machine guns instead of the Browning 0.5 guns used on the US aircraft. Also, the blister guns, were they all a double set in the RAF aircraft, as shown in the photo above? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
diver1 Posted February 1, 2015 Share Posted February 1, 2015 Not sure where this image is originally from. I've had it in my pictures for years. Chris Hi, I recognise the background as I drive past it daily. The photo was taken in Oban Bay, Scotland with the distinctive outline of the Isle of Kerrrera in the background. That would make the destination a Sunderland of 10 Sqn RAAF in 1940/41. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now