Author Topic: Doing aerobatics in bomb-loaded bombers  (Read 3447 times)

Offline save

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2873
Doing aerobatics in bomb-loaded bombers
« on: June 19, 2014, 08:13:02 PM »
In Aces High I see some stunts, like loops Immelmans done by mainly 2-engine bombers with bomb-load, and rolls (and shift to different plane to warp the drones) on 4-engined planes.

What would happen if you did this in a RL A-20, TU-2, and also rolls in the 4-engined planes with bombs ?

Worst (or best) is by far the A-20, not only doing 4-g turns, but also barrel-rolls and Split-S outperforming some fighters at combat speed.

Should not structural strength be too much for those planes ?

My ammo last for 6 Lancasters, or one Yak3.
"And the Yak 3 ,aka the "flying Yamato"..."
-Caldera

Offline Ack-Ack

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 25260
      • FlameWarriors
Re: Doing aerobatics in bomb-loaded bombers
« Reply #1 on: June 19, 2014, 08:16:21 PM »
In Aces High I see some stunts, like loops Immelmans done by mainly 2-engine bombers with bomb-load, and rolls (and shift to different plane to warp the drones) on 4-engined planes.

What would happen if you did this in a RL A-20, TU-2, and also rolls in the 4-engined planes with bombs ?

Worst (or best) is by far the A-20, not only doing 4-g turns, but also barrel-rolls and Split-S outperforming some fighters at combat speed.

Should not structural strength be too much for those planes ?



In an A-20, you'd run the risk of being pulled off flight duties or maybe worse for doing aerobatics in the plane, loaded or unloaded.  Aerobatics were strictly forbidden in the A-20.

ack-ack
"If Jesus came back as an airplane, he would be a P-38." - WW2 P-38 pilot
Elite Top Aces +1 Mexican Official Squadron Song

Offline Mongoose

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1606
      • Kentwood Station
Re: Doing aerobatics in bomb-loaded bombers
« Reply #2 on: June 19, 2014, 09:54:09 PM »
Tex Johnson doing a barrel roll in a 707:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-KNbKFMBsQE

This page talks about Lancaster's and the "corkscrew" maneuver.

http://www.pprune.org/archive/index.php/t-265425.html
My Aces High training site:
www.kentwoodstation.com

Offline Puma44

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6815
Re: Doing aerobatics in bomb-loaded bombers
« Reply #3 on: June 19, 2014, 10:00:52 PM »
Those type of maneuvers would most likely over stress the bomb racks and result in loose bombs in the internal bomb bays and/or separate the externally mounted bombs from the racks. 



All gave some, Some gave all

Offline Karnak

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23048
Re: Doing aerobatics in bomb-loaded bombers
« Reply #4 on: June 19, 2014, 10:02:36 PM »
One A-20 pilot told me that his training group were told that the wings would fall off if they rolled inverted.
Petals floating by,
      Drift through my woman's hand,
             As she remembers me-

Offline Brooke

  • Aces High CM Staff
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 15721
      • http://www.electraforge.com/brooke/
Re: Doing aerobatics in bomb-loaded bombers
« Reply #5 on: June 19, 2014, 10:07:57 PM »
Here is a story I heard from a B-17 pilot.

He was on a bomb run into the heart of Germany.  Prior to drop, flying through heavy flak, there was an explosion, and he was momentarily knocked senseless.  When he regained his senses, he still couldn't see because the cockpit was full of thick condensation mist.  That soon cleared, and he found that the B-17 was in a near vertical climb, from which it did a hammerhead and then started down.  He pulled it out of the hammerhead and found that all controls seemed still to be working.  He got things going straight and level again, and they continued on their bomb run and dropped their bombs.  After that, he went back to survey the damage.  Just aft of the cockpit is the radio room, and its walls were completely blown out, with blood and bits of meat all over the place.  There had been two people in the compartment who were now gone.  Behind that was the bomb bay, and after that, the waist gunners and then tail gunners.  Aft of the radio room, things looked OK.  On the way back, because they had been knocked out of formation, and with extra drag, they lagged behind the formation and got attacked repeatedly by 109's.  But they made it back to base.  A month later, they got a letter from a POW camp.  It turned out that the radioman had survived.  He had his parachute off, but when the flak started to get heavy, he went to grab it.  At that moment, a flak hit blew up right inside the radio room.  The radioman regained consciousness falling through the air with his parachute still clutched in his hand.  He put it on, pulled the cord, and drifted down into a farm, where he got stuck in a tree.  The farmer stabbed him with a pitch fork, but the wound was not life threatening, and then he was captured and put into a camp.

Here is a story from I heard from a B-29 pilot.

They were flying over Tokyo on a fire-bombing run.  The fires generated such intense updrafts that, hitting one, his B-29 was slammed up several thousand feet and inverted.  To get out of it, he ended up pulling through a split S to recover.

I've read stories of Lancasters doing rolls and split s'es, sometimes as the result of overzealous corkscrew maneuvers (which was a standard by which they evaded night fighters) or as a result of hitting strong updrafts from fires.

Also, you can see videos on youtube of B-17's tumbling or doing vertical dives into recoveries.  I think that the bombers had a lot of strength.  Of course, such maneuvers weren't encouraged, and some resulted in bending the airframe.  Some (the ones we didn't hear about) might have resulted in the plane coming apart.

Offline Cthulhu

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2463
Re: Doing aerobatics in bomb-loaded bombers
« Reply #6 on: June 19, 2014, 10:29:44 PM »
Those type of maneuvers would most likely over stress the bomb racks and result in loose bombs in the internal bomb bays and/or separate the externally mounted bombs from the racks. 

Rolling pullouts are typically the critical design condition for bomb racks, with wing mounted external stores usually seeing the worst of it because of the lateral load component due to rolling. Also, it's usually the bomb lugs themselves, and not the sway braces or the rack structure that fails.
"Think of Tetris as a metaphor for life:  You spend all your time trying to find a place for your long thin piece, then when you finally do, everything you've built disappears"

Offline Puma44

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6815
Re: Doing aerobatics in bomb-loaded bombers
« Reply #7 on: June 20, 2014, 12:40:41 AM »
Good point.  A rolling pull out is also hard on the aircraft structure. 



All gave some, Some gave all

Offline Cthulhu

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2463
Re: Doing aerobatics in bomb-loaded bombers
« Reply #8 on: June 20, 2014, 12:49:33 AM »
Consult MIL-STD-8591 for more info than you ever possibly wanted on the subject.  :)
"Think of Tetris as a metaphor for life:  You spend all your time trying to find a place for your long thin piece, then when you finally do, everything you've built disappears"

Offline DaveBB

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1356
Re: Doing aerobatics in bomb-loaded bombers
« Reply #9 on: June 20, 2014, 05:00:39 AM »
The layout of the bomber you described is not a B-17.  The radio room in the B-17 is aft of the bomb-bay.  The bomb-bay is directly aft of the cockpit.  The radio room of the B-17 is about the only place a tall person can stand in a B-17 without ducking down, it's also quite spacious.  Why would the radioman not have his parachute on, or at least stored in the radio room?  The only two people in the B-17 who did not regularly wear parachutes were the ball turret gunner and the tail gunner (source of parachute info: B-17 tail gunner that worked with my dad).

Now there is a famous case of a B-17 that flew through the propwash of another B-17 while climbing through clouds.  It ended up performing a full loop. IIRC, it had a full bomb load.  A quick search on google will bring it up.
Currently ignoring Vraciu as he is a whoopeeed retard.

Offline colmbo

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2246
      • Photos
Re: Doing aerobatics in bomb-loaded bombers
« Reply #10 on: June 20, 2014, 10:31:42 AM »
The layout of the bomber you described is not a B-17.  The radio room in the B-17 is aft of the bomb-bay.  The bomb-bay is directly aft of the cockpit.  The radio room of the B-17 is about the only place a tall person can stand in a B-17 without ducking down, it's also quite spacious.  Why would the radioman not have his parachute on, or at least stored in the radio room?  The only two people in the B-17 who did not regularly wear parachutes were the ball turret gunner and the tail gunner (source of parachute info: B-17 tail gunner that worked with my dad).

Now there is a famous case of a B-17 that flew through the propwash of another B-17 while climbing through clouds.  It ended up performing a full loop. IIRC, it had a full bomb load.  A quick search on google will bring it up.

I've talked a guy that had over 30 missions in B-17s and had his log to prove it.  He argued with me that the B17G I was flying was an F model.  Sometimes the years hasn't been kind and the memory is a little fuzzy.

Why would he not have his parachute on?  Have you ever tried to do anything with a belly mount parachute on?  PITA

It was common that none of the crew wore parachutes using the clip on chest mount. (They were wearing the harness).  When the backpack parachutes started being used the pilots, Nav and bombardier normally wore them.  As you said tail, ball couldn't (I met a ball gunner that did take the chest mount in the turret with him, his plan if needed was to open the hatch and fall out clipping the parachute on in freefall ).  I never tried it but doubt the top turret gunner would be able to wear a parachute, it is very snug in the top turret of both the B-17 and B-24.

I have to wonder about the loop after flying through prop wash.  Split S would make sense.....the "prop wash" rolls you inverted, split s to recover. (Rolling upright would suck, the B-17 has a very slow roll rate, I think doing a roll in it would be challenging)


Regarding the B-17 and B-24 doing acro IMO the high control forces would be a huge issue.  Just to flare the B-24 for landing takes a lot of muscle on the yoke, at high speed it would be a challenge.  B-17 has a lighter elevator than the B-24 but it too has substantial control forces.  IMO you would have to quickly get things under control before forces became high enough that you couldn't recover.


Columbo

"When once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been, and there you will always long to return."

Fate whispers to the warrior "You cannot withstand the storm" and the warrior whispers back "I AM THE STORM"

Offline Cthulhu

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2463
Re: Doing aerobatics in bomb-loaded bombers
« Reply #11 on: June 20, 2014, 11:23:05 AM »
Regarding the B-17 and B-24 doing acro IMO the high control forces would be a huge issue.

This is my biggest gripe with what I see in-game. Sure, the airframe is probably designed for 3 g's limit/ 4.5 g's ultimate, but the control forces are huge. There's a reason why there are two guys flying these beasts. And yet we routinely see "Blue Angels BS" from buff drivers in-game.
"Think of Tetris as a metaphor for life:  You spend all your time trying to find a place for your long thin piece, then when you finally do, everything you've built disappears"

Offline cobia38

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1258
Re: Doing aerobatics in bomb-loaded bombers
« Reply #12 on: June 20, 2014, 11:31:52 AM »
 whats the difference between a p-38 with 2 1000 lb bombs on the wings verses an A-20 with 4 500 lb bombs on the wings ?
 or a mossi or a 110 ?
 i know for a fact that wings come off of A-20 alot easyer when you have bombs strapped on vs empty,is this same true for 38 ?
 i dont think i recall ever ripping wings off a 38 that was heavy trying to do a hard G turn,but if you try it in a A20 you are back in tower.
 so, i would say that there is definatly  a differance between modeling with bomb load compared to no bomb load.


  Harvesting taters,one  K4 at a time

Offline Brooke

  • Aces High CM Staff
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 15721
      • http://www.electraforge.com/brooke/
Re: Doing aerobatics in bomb-loaded bombers
« Reply #13 on: June 20, 2014, 01:05:22 PM »
The layout of the bomber you described is not a B-17.  The radio room in the B-17 is aft of the bomb-bay.  The bomb-bay is directly aft of the cockpit.  The radio room of the B-17 is about the only place a tall person can stand in a B-17 without ducking down, it's also quite spacious.  Why would the radioman not have his parachute on, or at least stored in the radio room?  The only two people in the B-17 who did not regularly wear parachutes were the ball turret gunner and the tail gunner (source of parachute info: B-17 tail gunner that worked with my dad).

Now there is a famous case of a B-17 that flew through the propwash of another B-17 while climbing through clouds.  It ended up performing a full loop. IIRC, it had a full bomb load.  A quick search on google will bring it up.

I am speaking from memory of a talk, and as you say I have the name of that compartment wrong -- it is the flight-engineer/top-turret-gunner position.  Regardless, there were two guys in it at the time, one of them being the radioman, and the rest of the story is how it was related.

Offline Randy1

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4304
Re: Doing aerobatics in bomb-loaded bombers
« Reply #14 on: June 20, 2014, 02:01:57 PM »
Wing failure loads are probably another one of those things HTC had to make an educated guess on some planes.

If someone had documented numbers like Maximum G load at load-out I am sure they would use that if they had not already.

It could be though the bombers fuel pickup would shut the engines off in a negative G situation.  Colombo can probably answer that.