Revell and (older) Airfix Lancaster kit ‘loads’.

[John B (Sc)]

Hello again all.  Another Lancaster related query.

 

I see the new Airfix Lancaster B MkII does not provide a bomb load - that can be bought separately. I have some spare bomb offerings in my stash and my spares box, so -

The Revell Lancaster BIII offers bomb load options including one medium size cylindrical bomb and 18 small bombs. Is that a 4,000lb ‘cookie’ and a bunch of 250 lb bombs, possiblythe loading for say a V1 sites (‘No Ball’) ?

 

I also have the second last Airfix moulding of the Lancaster I – the Battle of Britain Flight aircraft. A bomb load including a large cylindrical bomb and some medium size bombs appears to be included.  That might be an 8,000 lb ‘cookie’ and some 500, 750 or 1000 lb bombs.

 

But the emphasis is on ‘might’; I don’t know!  Does anyone know what the loads provide in these kits are supposed to be, please?  ( I should measure the ‘cookies’ diameters; that should tell me what each is supposed to be! But maybe someone here already knows.)

 

John B

 

 

[cherisy]

Hi John The Revell load are 500lb MC bombs and a 4000lb cookie which is a typical area load. The normal load for raids on say Berlin and Hamburg was a cookie  and incentives in Small bomb containers. These can be found in the airfix airfield support set. The Airfix cookie is better than the Revell offering.  If you want to model "Greg's the shot " in the Revell kit as it was depicted for the Berhesgarten raid in April 45 I see to remember  the load was 1 cookie 6 1000lb mc 1 500 lb mc and a 250 lb Gp. I think there's something  about that on here In an old post.

The 8000lb blockbuster was longer and bigger. Its also in the support set. The RAF never used 750 lb bombs . The 8000lb needed bigger bomb doors as seen on the BII Lancaster. The smaller bombs in the 2nd last molding you speak of are 500lb gp bombs. Im doing all this from memory  but there are some  great experts on here that will be able to give you much better detail.  

[cherisy]

On looking at my last post I should have spell checked. I meant Incendiary  not " incentives" doh !

[RJP]

There are loading diagrams in both the Haynes Owners Workshop Manual for the Lancaster and in The Lancaster Manual.  Useful stuff.

 

Bearing in mind that bombs were temporary items, unless you want a specific load or are depicting a specific job you're on pretty firm ground following the charts.

[dogsbody]

There were two types of bulged bomb were fitted to Lancasters. The ones that are in the Airfix B.II kit and the later ones that started the bulge at the front of the bomb bay.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Chris

[Scott Hemsley]

_{cherisy sez...}

Quote

The 8000lb blockbuster was longer and bigger.

When putting together various Lancaster projects for future builds, I discovered a very surprising issue - for me, anyway.  I had always thought the 'cookies' in the Hasegawa and Revell kits were on the anemic side of things, until I looked into the stats for the bombs themselves.  The most concise dimension information I found, came from  "Belcher Bits 1/72 RAF 2000, 4000, 8000 and 12000 lb HC resin set"  of which the instructions can be found here. 

 

In them, he describes the differences between the 4000lb, 8000lb and 12,000lb cookies ... the point being that it's stated the 4000lb 'cookie' is 30"  in diameter.  He goes on to mention that the 8000lb 'cookie' is two 4000lb cannisters bolted together, but these are a larger 38" in diameter ... nothing about it being longer than the 4000lb 'cookie', just a larger diameter.  

 

However, when talking about the 12,000lb 'cookie', he describes it as a 8000lb 'cookie' with a third canister added on, along with "a traditional ballistic cone end section and tail ring supported by six fins. "   To further quote the description in the instructions - "The great weight (and length) meant that it could only be carried on specially modified Lancasters and in fact, was only used by 617 Squadron (the Dambusters). First delivered in September 1943, nearly 200 were used in service; on 9 February 1944, 10 were dropped on the Gnome-Rhone engine factory at Limoges, reducing it to ruins."

 

From a modelling POV, the 4000lb 'cookie' in the Hasegawa B.III comes out to a scale 28" in dia., while the Revell Lancaster B.III has a 4000lb cookie' that is a scale 30".  On the other hand, the Airfix B.I/B.III (1980's tool) has a 'cookie' that is a perfect scale 38" in dia.  Both the Hasegawa and Revell kits have smaller, but suitably sized cradles.   Something I thought might bear pointing out, considering the nature of the thread.   

 

Does this mean the Airfix 'cookie' is actually a 8000lb example?

 

Scott
 

[Finn]

If you want to know about British bombs during WWII, this manual has the info:

 

http://www.lexpev.nl/downloads/britishexplosiveordnance1946.pdf

 

its a large file, 50MB but quite useful.

 

Jari

[Finn]

If you want info on actual loads check here:

 

Bomb Aimer's Briefing

 

mainly during the 1944-45 time period and mostly Lancasters but they give the target, the bomb load and in most cases what stations the bombs were loaded on in the bomb bay.

 

Jari

[Troy Smith]

1 hour ago, Scott Hemsley said:

the point being that it's stated the 4000lb 'cookie' is 30"  in diameter.  He goes on to mention that the 8000lb 'cookie' is two 4000lb cannisters bolted together, but these are a larger 38" in diameter ... nothing about it being longer than the 4000lb 'cookie', just a larger diameter.  

Hmm.  I'm going to put a @Selwyn  as this is the sort of thing he knows about.   

The above does seem odd, in as much as if the 8000 lb is 2 4000 lb cases bolted together, then why are they a bigger diameter, and where do they come from?

In addition the the pdf @Finn mentions,  the book 'Bombs Gone, a History of British Air Dropped Weaponry'  has a lot of information and is an interesting read as well. 

 

[Selwyn]

10 hours ago, Troy Smith said:

Hmm.  I'm going to put a @Selwyn  as this is the sort of thing he knows about.   

The above does seem odd, in as much as if the 8000 lb is 2 4000 lb cases bolted together, then why are they a bigger diameter, and where do they come from?

In addition the the pdf @Finn mentions,  the book 'Bombs Gone, a History of British Air Dropped Weaponry'  has a lot of information and is an interesting read as well. 

 

The Larger RAF HC bombs can be a bit confusing but this is how it, goes:

4000lb HC was a stand alone bomb with a diameter of 30", body length without tail 82",with No 24 tail 110".

The RAF also had two types of 4000lb HC sections which were different to the 4000lb HC bomb. These were each 38" wide and 4' in length. One type of section had a domed nose at one end, the other type just parrallel flat plates at each end.

 

The RAF 8000lb and 12000lb HC bombs were of modular construction using these sections.

 So a 8000lb bomb was a domed section and a flat plate section bolted together wth a No33 or No52 tail unit.

A 12000lb HC was a domed section with two parrallel sections bolted together, with a No33 or No52 tail unit.

Hope this helps.

 

Selwyn

[dogsbody]

A few years ago, I took this photo, showing some of the blast bombs for various kits that I have. Make of it what you will.

 

 

So, I'm guessing that the 80's Airfix bomb isn't a 4000 lb. bomb, as it's about the same size as the 8000 pounder from their Resupply kit.

 

 

 

 

Chris

[dogsbody]

6 hours ago, Selwyn said:

The RAF 8000lb and 12000lb HC bombs were of modular construction using these sections.

 So a 8000lb bomb was a domed section and a flat plate section bolted together wth a No33 or No52 tail unit.

A 12000lb HC was a domed section with two parrallel sections bolted together, with a No33 or No52 tail unit.

 

 

So, the 8000 and 12000 pounders had the same tail unit? I've never seen that before. I always thought the 8000 had a simple ring unit like the 4000 lb.

 

 

 

 

 

Chris

[John B (Sc)]

Thank you all - most impressive how much knowledge of the equipment as well as the kits there is on here.  I now know much more than before about British WW2 bombs, and what the kits supply. Not only that but a better idea of marking & painting schemes thanks to db.

 

Cheers,

John B

[Selwyn]

56 minutes ago, dogsbody said:

 

 

So, the 8000 and 12000 pounders had the same tail unit? I've never seen that before. I always thought the 8000 had a simple ring unit like the 4000 lb.

 

 

 

 

 

Chris

Chris you didn't read my post correctly,

Both Bombs could be fitted with with a No33 or a No52 tail unit.

The No33 was the cylindrical Drum tail,a open ended plain metal cylinder.

The No52 was the conical tail unit.

 

Selwyn

[dogsbody]

38 minutes ago, Selwyn said:

Chris you didn't read my post correctly,

Both Bombs could be fitted with with a No33 or a No52 tail unit.

The No33 was the cylindrical Drum tail,a open ended plain metal cylinder.

The No52 was the conical tail unit.

 

Selwyn

 

Well  ! Sorry, Selwyn, my bad! I had too good a time in my 20's and am now suffering from some self-inflicted brain damage.

 

 

 

Chris

[Selwyn]

Just now, dogsbody said:

 

Well  ! Sorry, Selwyn, my bad! I had too good a time in my 20's and am now suffering from some self-inflicted brain damage.

 

 

 

Chris

Ahh! The famed milk of amnesia!

 

Selwyn