Rare Declassified Footage from post WWII Super-bomb tests - The Project Harkin Story
Вставка
- Опубліковано 23 лис 2024
- The allies were not satisfied with the WWII earthquake bombs deployed over Germany during WWII. The Tallboys and Grand Slams did not perform as predicted. Tests were conducted on new bomb designs which accounted for the deficiencies in the WWII designs. Mainly the bombs were up-sized in weight and casing wall thickness. This video reviews the performance of the Amazon II and Samson designs. Both bomb release and test strike footage will be shown with channel annotations describing the events for clarity.
A friend who was a bomb aimer on 617 Squadron during WW2 dropped at least 2 Grand Slam bombs that I know of. His 22,000lb bomb was the one which collapsed the Bielefeld viaduct, and the other one he dropped blocked the Namur rail tunnel. He was part of Flt Lieutenant Squires crew. Both him and his wife are buried in the graveyard 200 yards from my House.
Wow.
Aimer?
@@timeversman9804 ???
The Lancaster is an incredible aircraft. 617 squadron were the elite.
Biederfeld Viaduct still collapsed or was when I was last there in seventies!
What amazes me is that after penetrating 24 feet of reinforced concrete, the casing will be intact. However what amazes me even more is that this u-tuber was able to find all of these tests and video. The amount of research he has gone to so we can be further educated on the war. I salute you sir for your dedication.
Even intact and undamaged in some cases! It’s amazing
Absolutely William... I second that..!!! Had to be one hell of a chore in , and unto itself..you also have my heart felt thanks 😊 as well..!!!
On another note, somebody asked how they could be that accurate. According to my father, one of the aircraft commanders that flew some of those missions, they had just enough fuel to get to altitude, make three wind triangles and then make the bomb run. So, the bombardier had timely and accurate info on the winds aloft when on the bomb run. Smooth, steady and nobody trying to shoot you down had a lot to do with the accuracy they achieved.
I read somewhere that the test they did to see the accuracy and flight of the Grandslam was a bust as they put a camera in the centre of the bullseye and the bomb went right into it so they never saw the footage of it fly.
This is the most accurate description I've heard of a bomb Run for the testing in a long time thank you very much for that 9:34
they reasoned the safest place to put the recording cameras was in the center of the target as nobody ever hit what they aimed at.@@boblordylordyhowie
@mightaswellbe • So then for the most part ( given everything was a go , ofc ) , these particular missions were a one and done ?? Don't misunderstand me for assuming this or anything else for that matter, but what I am saying is this.. considering the fuel capacity ( or limitations ) , the current weather conditions , enemy activity in or around the " target zone " ( < if applicable ) , among other possible factors...also , when the making or building of these bombs then deploying them first came to mind , were civilian casualties ever taken into consideration ?? With these particular bombs and missions , I mean ?? I've already read reports and some quoted remarks made by Truman , talking about that sometimes, civilian casualties were a " condition " of war... regardless of whose administration the or a particular war was being fought or engaged... I know that with him say that , it didn't exactly make him the most loved man in America , at the time...
Straight forward facts with documentation and revelant archival film footage is a level of excellence all its own! You have set the bar high, keep doing what you're doing.
*relevant
All explosive, no filler. Keep on keeping on
And on one more note. They lost one of those monsters. Dad mentioned it and it's also mentioned in part 2 of the Harken project report. According to dad they lost power on one side which, because they were carrying max power just to stay at altitude, caused the plane to yaw, which caused a bank which upped the G-load and the shackles failed and the bomb departed the aircraft. The approximate location is mentioned in the report. According to dad it landed in some farmer's back forty and buried itself so deep they didn't bother trying to dig it up, so it is probably still out there. These things were inert, concrete filled.
It is amazing that can actually hit the target from that altitude.
Basically they had time to do a really accurate wind triangle before the bomb -run. That and nobody was shooting at them. See my other note above.
@@mightaswellbemind you, 617 Squadron got pretty accurate over hostile targets
Also greatly improved bombsights and related equipment became available at the end of the war and in the years that followed. What a vast change from the early years of WW2!
Bottom line is that they really couldn’t hit a target with a single bomb from 30k’ consistently. That was the fundamental problem with day light precision bombing in WWII - it wasn’t precise enough. There was a single statement in this video about recommending that the ‘azimuth steering’ device be used. They had experimented with radio guided bombs during the war; the bomb had steerable fins and a smoke trail enabling a bombadier to steer a single bomb on to a target. That technology didn’t quite work well enough to be used at the time but that recommendation is consistent with the critical need for such a capability.
I’m sure that not only did the engineers have an accurate ‘wind triangle’ calculated, but the test were done in unusually calm, stable conditions to enable them to hit the test targets without too many misses (look at the many misses in the video). The winds between the surface and 30k’ are rarely predictable or constant. The Noreen bomb sight and post war develops were never good enough hit strategic targets with enough precision.
The capability to hit strategic targets precisely, e.g. a bridge, was not available until the smart bombs that came out during the Vietnam conflict. Smart bombs are required for these tasks.
Norden Bomb Sight, not Noreen.
Really interesting stuff, thank you 🙂
The Tallboy and Grand Slam bombs were designed by Barnes Wallis, who also invented the bouncing bomb and the Vickers Wellington bomber.
He also designed the Wellesley and R100 airship!
It was a Tallboy that sank KMS Tirpitz too.
Didn’t he also design the dam-buster bombs?
@@HailAnts Yes, those were the bouncing bombs 🙂
@HailAnts He did. He also came up with the idea. It's codename was upkeep and there was a smaller version called Highball to be used against ships and tunnels.
As an engineering 16 year old apprentice, I had the honour of shacking hands with Barnes Wallace. Some time later, I saw him having a coffee alone in the college canteen. I politely asked him if I might sit with him, he said "please do, I could do with a bit of company". It seems that after his speech he was left. We sat there and had 3 coffees. I insisted in getting them despite his protestations. That hour or so will stay with me (I'm 78) until it's lights out. He was a very gentle, quiet gentleman, now it sometimes seems unreal. No wonder we won the war.
The amount of reading this guy does is astounding. Primary sources! Probably the best WWII channel on UA-cam. Outstanding.Keep it up!
This channel is really good. Also check out “Greg’s airplanes and automobiles” for absolutely incomparable WWII content. It’s more aviation focused but might be some of the best content ever. Tell me what you think.
In WW2, Germany built a concrete defensive u-boat factory, designed to withstand Tallboy and Grand Slams. The building is still standing. While Grand Slam bombs did not destroy the building, they ensured production within the facility effectively ceased. The impacts upon the building are immense, and was featured in a recent documentary.
This is the Valentin bunkered facility that is in the video. It was supplied by a railway that ran inside to deliver the completed sections of the TypeXXI u-boats to then be assembled into complete u-boats. They were then to be launched via a floodable lock into the adjacent river basin. It was never finished, and the British wanted the Germans to tie up resources and manpower building it as they had already determined that it's weakness was in fact the railway line to the facility. Any u-boats leaving would have been vulnerable on the surface of the river as well, due to it not being deep enough for them to leave submerged.
What documentary? Name please?
Although the Grandslam did not penetrate the roof of Valentin, one dropped in March 45 did penetrate half way and on detonation the blast did enter the building and brought down some 1000 tons of debris.
If you are going to struggle to hit the bunker, I would think the Tallboy & Grandslams would be a better bet. Causing damage via their shockwaves. Great video again!
Excellent observation! I wonder what the bomb-aimers dropping Tallboy/Grandslam used as their aimpoint? The target itself, which they didn't want to actually hit dead-on, or an offset point? I would imagine aiming directly at the target would be pretty safe, since odds of a "shack" from drop altitude are pretty slim.
@@garibaldo110 Well obviously the target was the aiming point! But it would have been near impossible to hit from speed at high altitude, until the advent of smart bombs in the late 1980s.
Your videos are really incredible, on a whole different level. Instead of sensationalism and emotion, you show facts that are encompassing and technical yet also understandable and in context. No funny business, no drama. Your channel is excellent
I love this kind of detail. I always wondered about topics you cover, but never could find sources. Thanks for your wonderful work!
That's too cool. Project Harken, my father and his crew were one of three crews and their B-29s that were modified and sent over to do this project. At 5:22 is one of the bombs my dad dropped, you can see where the crew wrote their names on the after cone and the name of their B-29, Wun Hung Lo on the pointy end. I have pictures. Hey WWII US Bombers, would you like a copy of what I have?
A great connection to the actual events! I hope WW2USB is able to contact you and incorporate your pictures into a future video.
Wun Hung Lo? Sad to say, they would get court martialed for this today.
Tallboy and Grand Slam went supersonic on the way down. The tail fins induced a spin for an accurate trajectory.
They were used on railway viaducts, tunnels and gun bunkers. They avoided a direct hit. The disruption of foundations destroyed the targets.
Tallboys sank the Tirpitz Only two hut the ship but near miss concussion caused tremendous damage and disrupted and banks built to prevent her rolling over. She rolled over.
Did the RAF not use Grandslams on Tirpitz in addition to Tallboys
Tallboy and Grand Slam were designed by British aeronautical engineer Barnes Wallace, who famously had previously designed the bouncing (water-skipping) bombs used against the dams in the German Ruhr. The bouncing bombs were dropped from only 60 feet above the water by bombers of 617 squadron, stationed at RAF Scampton in Lincolnshire. The same squadron also dropped the Tallboy and Grand Slam bombs.
He also a had a hand in the design of the Wellington bomber. He designed the geodectic airframe fuselage used in the bomber.
Good stuff and great to see the video, I live in Bremen, near Farge and have visited Bunker Valentine several times. For general information, although it was stripped of most equipment, it has been turned into a museum so you can go inside and even see the bomb holes.
The Samson bomb penetrated 19 feet of a 25 feet roof, but it was inert. Had it been filled with explosive and detonated, it probably would have done the job well as the concrete likely had many stress cracks from the impact and was likely held together with the rebar in the concrete.
When you consider manufacturing is all about money then making a bomb that will get near to a concrete target and remove the foundations will cause more damage than making a bomb to penetrate concrete, as, that will come at a higher cost and less impact. We see weapons today go through targets and come out the other side, whereas you could make a far cheaper weapon that removes its base and it falls into the hole completely destroying its capability to function. Barnes Wallis recognised this and didn't try to make a bomb to penetrate 20ft of concrete, he designed it to go under it and successfully blew a U-boat out of the water and onto the quay.
When it came down to the logistics, it wasn't about the bombs, it was the capability of the delivery system.
Tallboy & Grand Slams were not designed to penetrate concrete so they did perform as predicted!
they weren't expicitly 'designed' to, but they sure did a hell of a good job at it! Assuming it was within range of 617 squadron's Lancasters, there was no U-Boat pen or bunker in the Reich that was safe. This post war test seems more focused on the 'one bomb, one hit' approach that is used today with modern guided bombs, but back in WW2 there was NEVER just one bomb, even when you were talking about Tallboys and Grand Slams. If one bomb couldn't bust the roof by itself, the next one or the one after that would.
Your research skills never fail to amaze.
An 8 inch artillery gun barrel was used in operation desert storm to penetrate a bunker and destroy its occupants. The army didnt have any bombs capable of penetrating this particular command bunker. So the actually had to rig up these huge gun barrels and pack them with explosives. Former Delta Force EOD operator Mike Vining told the stoy on the reconnaissance cast.
This sounds a bit far fetched.
I know the Americans used old large gun barrells filled with explosive and they were excellent bunker busters.
Do you know what aircraft had dropped these old WW2 items?
@@jeremyrichards8327 I'll have to go back and find the interview when I have time later
@@jeremyrichards8327 The initial batch of GBU-28 bunker busters was indeed made from 203 mm howitzer barrels. It was a quick way to build up the weapon for Desert Storm.
In other words not WW2 bomb casings as you stated previously?
"Who says B-29s didn't drop bombs on Germany?" A little heads-up next time. Almost had milk coming out my nose.
As Tallboy and Grand Slam were NEVER INTENDED as concrete penetration bombs, their inclusion here is superfluous. They were designed by Sir Barnes Wallis, inventor of the Upkeep mine or bouncing bomb used in the famous Dams raid of 1943.
They were designed as "earthquake bombs" to destroy targets by disrupting or cavitating the ground next to or beneath a target structure. Originally, they were meant for the dams but Barnes Wallis realised the bouncing bomb was a better method.
Stellar job. Thank you!
that bunker is massive and allies let the construction continue till near finish and than hit it hard when concrete still soft. I have been inside and is a very interesting construction.
Very interesting , wasn't aware of the Amazon bomb until now . Was aware of the others from watching Mark Felton Productions .
I used to work in engineering and quality control so I found all the details and diagrams insightful as they were useful when watching the footage .
Cool seeing the vapor clouds forming from the sound barrier about to break around the bomb as it spins and hits the target also.
Great period film and great period data. I have to imagine the effect of that Samson - penetrate 20-ish feet of reinforced concrete then 3900 lbs of boom-boom does its job.
Nothing says the force of the explosive would be down, or in fact, any direction.
The path of least resistance would be right back the way it came from/the big new hole.
@@AndrewBlacker-t1dbefore blowing out of the new hole the shockwave will spread inside the building. And since it was so sturdy, there will be a huge pressure buildup inside
@@TheDasHatti Tall boys and grand slams hit those roofs and the shock wave did nothing.
@@AndrewBlacker-t1d
They took out the V3.
IMO after penetrating so far into the structure the explosion would have finished the job. The resulting spalling would haved been devestating
Great research and orthotic archive footage.
A follow up on this subject on the Grand slam and how it was used would be interesting.
Appreciate the amount of research you do for these videos. Well done. Subbed.
Fantastic video brother. Great work!
At 6:24-6:26 you can see the shock cone form around the bomb.
When we were much younger, we used to get up to mischief in and around the Valentin bunker.
Fantastic footage, thank you!
I suppose it falls a bit outside the time coverage of the channel, but if I remember correctly the AZON equipped sampsons saw use in korea against power plants in the Yalu river
ASM-A-1 Tarzon, based on the US Tallboy.
The Disney (Royal Navy), Tallboy and Grand Slam (RAF) were not Allied developments, not USA at all but British and classified UK Eyes Only. The USA only got British shaped charge explosives quite late in the Manhattan Project. Consequently they USAAF only got to use Disney in 1945. The B-17 couldn't lift a Tallboy nevermind a Grand Slam.
Americans rewriting history as usual!
Yes, another example of a British development given over to America for testing and research. The USA had nothing similar. This film comes over as to denigrate the British blockbuster earthquake bombs which were never designed to penetrate concrete so why bang on about penetration depths. Hitting a relatively small target from height was recognised as near impossilble. But .... with HE at the penetration depth shown for the Grand Slam, massive damage would have resulted.
The later postwar 44,000lb T-12 Cloudmaker US bomb was produced from Grand Slam data passed over.
Considering Britain was broke at the end of the war, they probably appreciated the USAAF conducting tests like this and passing along the information. After all, we were still Allies and the Cold War had already started. Not sure the reference to the B-17, the only aircraft shown is a B-29 which could carry the Tallboy and Grand Slam bombs.
@@patrickmccrann991 Only one B-29 ever toured Britain, none were flown over Europe. In the closing stages, british troops scampered in to Peenemunde and made off with all the equipment which ended up at Woolwich Arsenal (I was still using one of the precision balances in the 80s), the russians got the workers and the scientists and engineers had already decamped, the americans mopped them up. And note Britain already had a lot of the german rocket tech as more than a few of the german donations did not go off, like the doodlebug that landed in the road front of my dad when he was on top of the factory on fire watch (reserved occupation, when he was on active RAF duty, Lanc tail gun, his chaps did their best to obliterate Peenemunde with blockbusters). Much of the tech was given to the americans as lease-lend payment, we had already studied it. You may notice the Disney was rocket assist, british rocketry was not far behind the german and well ahead of the american. British under-wing rockets were accurate with devastating 40-lb penetrating shaped charge, the american 80-lb did not do as much damage and went like a shotgun.
Wow. Good job as always.
First time here. I will be back. Excellent work!!
Really enjoy your videos. Commenting mostly for the algorithm. Good luck and take care.!
The beauty of the Barnes Wallace's Tallboy and Grand Slam bombs, was that they didn't need to directly hit the target. Which considering the technology and the circumstances under which most were dropped, is a good thing. During WW2, accuracy was never that good or consitent. A concrete penetrating bomb is of little use if it can't reliably hit the target. The "Earthquake" bombs made sense at the time.
Excellent video.
Amazing how ineffective a 22,000 lb bomb can be.
If everything you've studied is accurate which I believe is, and you've relayed this to us so brilliantly, you're a legend!!. Taa so much for that m8.
Wow! That'a amazing.
Thank you.
Very interesting information. I enjoy your channel. It is very informative and you have great graphs and documentation.
I’ve got a book on the development of the B-47 and B-52 and various variants and offshoots and there’s notes and illustrations on a projected 80,000+ pound Bomb to be carried on the B-52. Does anyone have any more info?
As soon as a new video is released, I watch it. I even go back to older videos I have seen because the information is very concentrated. The author of these videos could teach a class in technical writing.
Excellent!!!
A lot of people don't really realize how much research went into weapons systems from back in the day!
Similarly, plane and ship design performance, predictions, and subsequent evaluations were paramount before approving any design!
Back in the 15th, 16th, 17th, and 18th centuries, many designers and engineers were killed trying to figure out how thick a cannon's casing must be to lob a projectile a particular distance with desired lethality or structural damage without blowing itself apart upon firing!
The colour picture is of Lorient U Boat Pens. These drops were conducted on the U Boat production facility at Farge, near Bremen, Germany. It was never finished as 617 Squadron put a Grand Slam through the roof. It penetrated, but not with the sort of damage expected.
so in the 40s the largest bombs were 22000 lbs and after 77 year the largest gbu 43 is 21000 lbs and performs significantly worse? isnt it strange the military hasn't improved the platform in all those years?
the GBU 43 has a literal multitude more explosive mass LOL
Thank you
Thank you I live not far from the mock U Boat base bombing range they built in the New Forest, UK for testing large bombs.
Right on. Thanks for sharing.
Thankyou. Very interesting talk.😊
always great content....thank you very much....Paul
Where do you get all this information it’s insane 👍
All explosive, no filler. Keep on keeping on
As a Bomb tech, i want to thank you.! I like to stay up on all ordnance, and in fact had never heard of the Amazon and Samson. I learned 2 new bombs today ! THANK YOU !
Another excellent video 👍🇭🇲 speaking of the Tarzon bomb it would be awesome if you did a video on the Tarzon, Azon and Razon bombs👍
Nice, as always.
Outstanding, informative video! 👍🏻🎅👍🏻
That B-29 tail marking is of the 509th(were they still 'Composite'?) Group; I suspect their bomb aiming was improved after LeMay hit the roof over the miss at Bikini😉
If you're ever in the UK, the RAF testing ground for the first grandslam dropped was at Ashley Walk in the New Forest National Park. The crater of that first bomb is still there. It's a pond now - New Forest ponies drink from it. The whole area is littered with other bomb craters and concrete structures used as targets. A reminder of past times.
Sailing up to Hamburg in 1978, I saw a submarine pen which had been hit by a very big bomb. The roof of about 20 feet thick had been broken and had collapsed. For once they had actually hit something important and not the town. Lorient for example.
i know the tallboys and grand slams were not designed to target concrete, but they did penetrate some of the uboat pens. one bomb actually went throgh and exploded next to a moored submarine throwing up onto the dock inside. i've seen pictures of the holes in the uboat pens made by these bombs. the germans after the war thought they were rocket propelled. sure some did breakup on the concrete, but there is archival footage of their effectiveness.
I always thought the radial WWII powered aircraft could be developed further and have far greater potential with modern technology.
So could steam engines and sailing ships. But every technology has some point at which its development potential is less than other cheaper technologies. Propellers simply can't go as fast as jets, not climb as high, and their complexity makes them expensive. It was routine for four engine propeller passenger planes to land across the Atlantic with one engine out. Jet engines are far more reliable. You probably could make radial engines as reliable, but they would cost a fortune, be slower, not be able to fly above the weather, and carry fewer passengers. You could probably build a pontoon bridge across the Atlantic for 500 mph steam engines too, but why?
@@grizwoldphantasia5005 Piston engines cannot be made as reliable as turbines. The fundamental reciprocating action of the pistons, rods and crank create stresses that cannot be designed away. Pistons represent more parts and higher cost with lower reliability.
As the power is increased the weight increased too much and cooling became more and more difficult and reliable decreased. For high power applications it really was a dead end.
The ultimate radial powered bomber was the 1949 Convair B-36. It was supposed to be the USA's cold war bomb delivery platform, but it really rammed home to the USAAF that it was just too difficult to maintain. It had so many spark plugs, at least one would fail on nearly every flight, so they had to change all the plugs before every mission. That alone meant the end of piston engined bombers. Jets need a lot less maintenance labour and are scalable - that is, a bigger one is just as reliable as a small one, unlike piston engines, whose failure rate fundamentally rises in direct proportion to size.
Gas turbine engines are inherently more reliable than internal combustion engines.
Internal combustion engines are however more fuel efficient (particularly diesels).
Gas turbine (turboprop) engined versions of the WW2 Lincoln bomber were built and used operational post war.
Really great and fascinating review
They may not be great but I bet they would give you a headache my dad flew in Lancasters radio operator he said when they dropped a bomb called a cookie it was that heavy it felt you we’re going up in a lift he did 31ops 8 times to Berlin.
I live not far from the Valentin bunker.
I had no idea that the front part of the bunker was also used as a target. A marine depot was later located there. The rear part of the bunker was no longer used because it was too damaged by the tests.
Bonjour de France. Do you have films of TOULON's bombings or reconnaissance in 43 and 44? Merci.
Fascinating. I recall the improvised bunker busters made for the Gulf War I being made from old 8" artillery barrels, hand filled with buckets of molten TNT.
It's strange that such a weapon wasn't never used again, at least 'til the end of 20th century.
Either in Korea and in Vietnam surely there were targets that justified such a devastating bomb.
Probably not. You need a point target, either one with massive protection above it (to justify the Samson's concrete penetration) or one that can be destroyed by the enormous crater made by a Tallboy/Grand Slam exploding at depth. Bridges, deep large tunnels and underground installations being prime targets.
For anything on the surface, something like an 8000-pound thin-walled 'cookie' with its blast effect would be more effective.
Fascinating subject 👍
Great info.
Was any of the data used to develop the beasts like MOP and GBU-28?
*Great video...👍*
great stuff, ty
Very interesting. They were dropping under ideal conditions but still...great aiming.
Had the Germans learned their radio guided bomb was successful. The Navies would have had a herd time staying afloat..But it traveled so fast. It went right through the ship. Before it could explode..
Nice informative video. Thanks.
Just two Months ago I was in the Bunker (U-Boat Bunker Valentin) shown direct in the beginning.
In exactly that part that was bombed. It's still intact.
Btw: I live in the City next to the location the Bunker is.
I wonder how effective a multiple shaped charge bomb would be on penetration? What if you had a half dozen back detonating shaped charges stacked up one behind the other and upon impact they detonated sequentially from the front to back. I know it has been done with two shaped charges like this but what about more than that?
Compared to modern bunker busters?
Thanks for an interesting documentry. Is there an explanaition for the relative high accuracy of these superheawy bombs ? If you compare with general purpose bomb, in WWII, it is a very high percentage that are direct hits.
This was under controlled peacetime conditions. The plane was not being shot at and could take as long as it wanted to line up or make several passes if necessary. The crew were also likely familiar with the target so could sight it much easier
What he said. Furthermore, it would be far far easier to calculate the exact trajectory of one massive bomb as distinct from a bunch of lesser bombs.
And most of the bombs dropped missed…
Well, not all that much time. My father was one of the pilots and told me they carried just enough fuel to get in the air, up to altitude and make three wind triangles to establish the winds aloft before the bomb run itself. Nothing to spare time wise so if they could not drop on the target, they were supposed to go ditch it in the North Sea, do not land with that thing on board.
Those wind triangles would make a huge difference. In wartime missions, no one dared to fly triangles over flak or when fighters could be around.
Tall Boys and Grand Slam bombs were both filled 2 miles from where I live in NW England. Smalll world and all that.
The German 800mm cannon about 31.5 inches Dia. and it penetrated deeper than this, I think. Not sure but I believe it was the Dora or something like that.
Hi, I am a hoɓby historian and living next to the U-boot bunker in Bremen. My grantparents told me about the tests but I've never seen pictures of it or find any information.
Where do you get the footage from? Is there more than the few seconds you use in your video?
amazing that the bombs were undeformed
👍👍
I wonder why they never though to try a shaped charge bomb for this type of attack.
Did they get that idea from “Victory Through Air Power”?
Another great video.
I love the way they gave catchy names to the ordinance
In fact each one of those bombs sounds like something off the menu at denny's, doesn't it?
The final codename was changed to the grand slam.
And now, I am really curious, if you have any films about the T-12 Cloudmaker bomb, which was 44k lbs, designed for the B-36 Peacemaker (what a names... :) ) en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/T-12_Cloudmaker
Enjoy reading the facts and your precise narrative. The Grand Slam did suprisingly well for what was meant to be an earthquake bomb.
Good stuff! I'll be back.
I’m surprised that the German battleship tirpitz was not mentioned being sunk by tallboy bombs.
it was: 0:20 .
How do these bombs compare to the U.S. military deep penetration bombs of the 21st century (2000 to current)?
We have to remember that the concrete and rebar of those days may not have been what today's technology has to offer in hardened targets.
The same goes for the metal used in the bomb making material. Both are indicative of the times. Yet they were able to produce, through trial and error the results they were looking for back then.
Fast forward to today. Times and materials have for sure have changed.
This video is very impressive inasmuch as it gives one the scope of research for the times.
We can only imagine today's efforts to cover that scope of issues they are trying to not only solve, but to conquer what they may have to go against !
Actually I think metallurgy in those days was more advanced thank you think.
The Tallboys were expensive to make with machined steel noses and crews were instructed to bring them back if no target was acquired.
@@jeremyrichards8327 I believe you. The Germans were smart as we know today. As well as the Brits and us. However, compared with what we have today, I do believe we could have ruined there day with today's ordinance. Don't you agree ?
@@budwickman446 Ruined their day well possibly but we had very good well educated scientists in those days as did the Germans.
War pushes technology and I think the Ukraine conflict has been a wake up call.
Could a drone lift a 5 ton bomb?
@@jeremyrichards8327 Then it took time to fill them with explosive. They only did one test drop. I think they were concerned if the fuses would survive the impact.
The crater at Ashley Walk has since been filled in, which is a damn shame. It ought to be uncovered and marked with chalk to show its great size.
The Bielefeld Viaduct was repaired with totally different construction so the part the RAF deleted is obvious today.
A storm water control lake hides much of any craters that were still left.
The document at 1:35 doesn't seem to have read the document at 1:25.