1000 vs 500lb Bomb Carriers on the Typhoon

[Crimea River]

Hi guys. I'm currently in the throes of building Hasegawa's 1/48 bubble top Tiffie and want to portray it as I8oP of 440 Squadron RCAF with provision for 1000 lb bombs. Having read every post on the Typhoon here by Chris Thomas and others, I'm aware of the fact that the carriers were placed slightly outboard of the position used to mount the 250/500 lb. carriers. However, what I'm not sure of is the visual difference between the two types of carriers. Hasegawa provides what appears to be the smaller bomb carrier but, in looking closely at period photos, it looks to me as though the fairings for the 1000 lb bomb carriers are a bit deeper and wider than the 250/500 lb. carriers.

 

Does anyone have good photos or drawings showing a comparison between the two types? I have seen many photos, including the two below but they don't really give me enough detail to replicate the larger carriers, if indeed they were larger.

 

Edited November 1, 2020 by Crimea River

[Selwyn]

They were universal bomb carriers, the same item was used for all types of bomb

 

Selwyn

[Chris Thomas]

4 hours ago, Selwyn said:

They were universal bomb carriers, the same item was used for all types of bomb

 

Selwyn

I'm sure you know a lot more about bomb carriers than I do Selwyn, but the fairing and the position on the wing both differed for the 1000 lb carrier that was fitted to Typhoons from April 44, as opposed to the 500 lb carrier on earlier Typhoons. Perhaps the actual carrier mechanism was the same? I'll try to find some photos to post.

[Scott Hemsley]

Not really familiar with the Hasegawa kit (1/48 isn't my scale), but one thing to keep in mind when arming your latest build … the 3-bladed Mk.Ib with the small tailplane's could not carry the 1000lb bombs, but the 4-bladed Mk.Ib with the larger Tempest tailplanes, could.

 

Scott 

Edited November 1, 2020 by Scott Hemsley

[Graham Boak]

Scott:  I used to believe that, and indeed that this was part of the split between bombing and rocketing sguadrons.  However Chris Thomas couldn't find evidence to support a claim of limited clearances, and came up with a couple of examples where they did.

 

I still suspect it was a good rule of thumb...

[Chris Thomas]

3 minutes ago, Scott Hemsley said:

Not really familiar with the Hasegawa kit (1/48 isn't my scale), but one thing to keep in mind when arming your latest build … the 3-bladed Mk.Ib with the small tailplane's could not carry the 1000lb bombs, but the 4-bladed Mk.Ib with the larger Tempest tailplanes, could.

 

Scott 

 I know that  4-blader Typhoons were preferred as 1000 lb bomb carriers (due better take-off performance) but as far as I know there was bo restriction on 3-bladders.

[Selwyn]

23 minutes ago, Chris Thomas said:

I'm sure you know a lot more about bomb carriers than I do Selwyn, but the fairing and the position on the wing both differed for the 1000 lb carrier that was fitted to Typhoons from April 44, as opposed to the 500 lb carrier on earlier Typhoons. Perhaps the actual carrier mechanism was the same? I'll try to find some photos to post.

The fairing is that, just a fairing. The carrier is the bit the bomb hangs on to. Both the carriers and suspension lugs were standardised (and still are even today) for all bombs so that you didn't have to change the carrier every time you fitted a different size bomb.  The position of the carrier may have changed because of clearance issues with undercarriage doors and the bomb. or for c of g reasons.

 

Selwyn

[Scott Hemsley]

I know I read that somewhere, but since I can't locate it, I shall bow to both of your conclusions.  By the same token, I would question if there was any difference in size/location between the bomb carriers as you suggest.  According to accounts in the book "Typhoon and Tempest; the Canadian story, by Hugh Halliday, on one raid,  aircraft of 143 Wing flew with 500lb bombs because their supply of 1000lb bombs was exhausted.  That would imply the same bomb carriers were used - in the same wing position, would it not?

 

Scott

[Graham Boak]

I suspect that it simply means that the 1000lb position could manage the 500lb., but perhaps not the reverse?

[Chris Thomas]

18 minutes ago, Graham Boak said:

I suspect that it simply means that the 1000lb position could manage the 500lb., but perhaps not the reverse?

Correct

[Chris Thomas]

10 hours ago, Selwyn said:

The fairing is that, just a fairing. The carrier is the bit the bomb hangs on to. Both the carriers and suspension lugs were standardised (and still are even today) for all bombs so that you didn't have to change the carrier every time you fitted a different size bomb.  The position of the carrier may have changed because of clearance issues with undercarriage doors and the bomb. or for c of g reasons.

 

Selwyn

I suspected that might be the case.  The position was changed to take advantage of a better load-bearing position in the wing structure.  

Edited November 2, 2020 by Chris Thomas
typo

[gingerbob]

11 hours ago, Selwyn said:

The fairing is that, just a fairing.

 

Yes, but from a modeller's point of view, that's the bit that one sees and has to represent!

[Selwyn]

13 hours ago, Scott Hemsley said:

I know I read that somewhere, but since I can't locate it, I shall bow to both of your conclusions.  By the same token, I would question if there was any difference in size/location between the bomb carriers as you suggest.  According to accounts in the book "Typhoon and Tempest; the Canadian story, by Hugh Halliday, on one raid,  aircraft of 143 Wing flew with 500lb bombs because their supply of 1000lb bombs was exhausted.  That would imply the same bomb carriers were used - in the same wing position, would it not?

 

Scott

I didn't say location had changed, I said it may have changed, I'm no expert on this. IF it had changed due to accomodate the size of a 1000lb bomb, putting a smaller 500lb on that position wouldn't be an issue. Obviously a carrier that was stressed to carry 1000lb wouldn't have a problem with a 500 or 250lb either, so why change the carrier?

 

Selwyn

[Crimea River]

Thanks very much for your valued input gentlemen. I take away from all this that, though the carriers themselves may have been the same, for some reason the fairings were indeed different for the 1000lb bomb installation as confirmed by Chris. From photos I make them out to be slightly deeper and wider than the 250/500 lb fairings that are included in the kit and so I'll take a look at how to modify the the kit part or use something from the spares box.