Originally posted by hitech
The idea that a diving plane couldn't release bombs is a false. If from a dive the pilot puts 1 g on the airplane. The bombs will release exactly as if the bomber was level.
HiTech
In a simplified physics world you would think so, but it simply isn't the case. Because you have the nose pointed down, you have induced a vector component and it's the vector component that does this theory in. Then there is the issue of bomb stability with the bomb being pitched into a high-speed airflow at an angle off that for which it was designed to stabilize. One of the major problems with dumping ordnance in a dive from an internal bomb bay was the bombs tumbling and striking the aircraft and each other. The Navy had problems with this when dive bombing with the TBF/TBM. Procedures were developed to minimize the risk, but it was never completely safe.
Another issue was the 200% rule for bomb racks. in other words, the racks were rated for 200% their normal max weight loading. It was common place for bomb to rip off of external racks of fighters when subjected to G loads that exceeded the rating.
For example, the P-38's shackles could withstand loads of up to 4,000 lbs before the bomb would simply pull off. So, in theory a 500 lb bomb would stay attached at loads up to 8g. A 1,000 lb bomb could be expected to rip away at 4G. However, this ultimate loading is also mitigated by side loading (sway), yaw loads and all other vector components loading the shackles. None of these additional loads can be predicted by a pilot, so all bets are off.
Vectors are also induced when using pitch-up to toss bombs from the bomb bay. How the bomb will respond to that vector is unknown. But, you can be sure that it will be different than imagined.
It was not uncommon for heavy bombs to break away from shackles when the bomber was subjected to severe wind shear. Nothing quite like having a fuzed 1,000 pound GP bomb bouncing around the bomb bay. If you were lucky, it was the lowest in the stack and it could be jetisoned by opening the bomb bay doors, as long as it didn't tear up fuel and hydraulic lines or electrical conduits in the bomb bay. If it was at the top of the stack, odds where that it would knock more bombs off the shackles. Shackles sometimes failed under minimal load.. things wear out or are sometimes improperly adjusted.
Some years ago a problem developed during ordnance tests of B-1Bs dropping retarded Mk.82 and Mk.84 retarded bombs. The retard mechanism is called a "ballute" (combination parachute and balloon). If the retard ballute deployed too soon, it could cause the bomb to pitch up and strike the underside of the bomber. I designed the retard sensor for the safe and arm fuze. I had to redesign the sensor to accomodate a reduction in peak G because the ballute deployment was delayed to allow the bombs to clear the aircraft and this delay resulted in bomb velocity being degraded, reducing the peak G at ballute deployment. The bombs are retarded (slowed rapidly) to allow the bomber to clear the fragmentation zone (bombs are dropped from low level) before detonation. I also designed the sensor for the contact fuze.
Anyway, dynamics associated with dropping bombs are extremely complex and not remotely as simple as you have indicated.
Whether or not a dive angle limit for level bombers is practical from a programming point of view, I can't comment as I do not have any idea. I do know that the physics of releasing ordnance from aircraft is extremely complex from my own experience in designing fuzing system components for modern ordnance (FMU-139 and FMU-143 unitary fuzes).
My regards,
Widewing
