How accurate was B-26 bombing?

Think you used enough dynamite there, Butch?

What you talking about?....there's still one building and a few trees standing



BUFDRVR

"Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips
everyone on Bear Creek"

BUFDRVR wrote:
Interestingly, I did see where the Iranians have recently developed
a rocket boosted LGB using an M117 as the warhead.

Strange since the thin skinned M-117 has nearly zero pentration
capability. All putting a rocket on it would do was ensure the skin
breached before the explosive chain hit its full psi. A big sparkler
would be the result.

I expect that the rocket is used at the beginning of the flight to enhance
stand-off range, not penetration. Something like USN's Skipper, which was
basically a Paveway II with a Shrike motor on the back end.

--
Tom Schoene Replace "invalid" with "net" to e-mail
"If brave men and women never died, there would be nothing
special about bravery." -- Andy Rooney (attributed)

Subject: How accurate was B-26 bombing?
From: (BUFDRVR)
Date: 3/2/04 4:33 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:

Think you used enough dynamite there, Butch?

What you talking about?....there's still one building and a few trees
standing



BUFDRVR


hole in the pattern


Arthur Kramer
344th BG 494th BS
England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany
Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer

n M-117 has a much thinner bomb
body, but around 50% more explosive filler...

How does this effect shrapnel effecitveness and dispersion?


It throws less frag farther.


BUFDRVR

"Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips
everyone on Bear Creek"

I expect that the rocket is used at the beginning of the flight to enhance
stand-off range, not penetration.

ahhh, ok. I'll buy that then....


BUFDRVR

"Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips
everyone on Bear Creek"

hole in the pattern

Nope, either mil dispersion or it was not in line with the DMPI. IIRC, my
formation went directly across (using the picture either top to bottom or left
to right), it looks like the 2-ship who followed us (later that evening), just
dropped 90-degrees out from us, effectively making a +. Appears that building
may have been spared by targeting....or mil dispersion, can't tell.


BUFDRVR

"Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips
everyone on Bear Creek"

Subject: How accurate was B-26 bombing?
From: (BUFDRVR)
Date: 3/2/04 5:23 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:

hole in the pattern

Nope, either mil dispersion or it was not in line with the DMPI. IIRC, my
formation went directly across (using the picture either top to bottom or
left
to right), it looks like the 2-ship who followed us (later that evening),
just
dropped 90-degrees out from us, effectively making a +. Appears that building
may have been spared by targeting....or mil dispersion, can't tell.


BUFDRVR

"Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it
harelips
everyone on Bear Creek"

Thanks for the rundown. As I have said before my last mission was in 1945
with some practice missions in the Army of Occupation (North Sea Gunnery Range)
in 1946. What you describe is totally unfamiliar to me. It is interesting to
see how things are done now.




Arthur Kramer
344th BG 494th BS
England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany
Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer

"Thomas Schoene" wrote in message
link.net...
BUFDRVR wrote:
Interestingly, I did see where the Iranians have recently developed
a rocket boosted LGB using an M117 as the warhead.

Strange since the thin skinned M-117 has nearly zero pentration
capability. All putting a rocket on it would do was ensure the skin
breached before the explosive chain hit its full psi. A big sparkler
would be the result.

I expect that the rocket is used at the beginning of the flight to enhance
stand-off range, not penetration. Something like USN's Skipper, which was
basically a Paveway II with a Shrike motor on the back end.

Yeah. That is the plan from what I read--add the AGM 130 to the "similar to"
category.

Brooks


--
Tom Schoene Replace "invalid" with "net" to e-mail
"If brave men and women never died, there would be nothing
special about bravery." -- Andy Rooney (attributed)

On 03 Mar 2004 00:21:43 GMT, (BUFDRVR) wrote:

Are the M-117s still being manufactured, or is it *still* a case of
running down old stock?


Running down old stock, and by the looks of some of them, it clearly shows.
Someone must have thought Arc Light was going to last for 100 years. There are
still over 20,000 M-117 at Andersen alone. We're trying to drop as many as we
can since its cheaper to drop them (aircraft fuel included) than it is to
"de-mil" them.

Do they have a noticably better
CEP over a Mk.82/83, or are they significantly cheaper?

The mil dispersion on an M-117 is twice that of a Mk-82 (not sure about
Mk-83?), simply because there less aerodynamic (round like a pot bellied pig)
and manufactured before the Nixon administration.As far as price goes, I'd
imagine they're equal (in current dollars). An M-117 has a much thinner bomb
body, but around 50% more explosive filler...sounds like a "wash" on price, no?

Thanks for the didn't realise they had sooooo many in stock. Hmmm,
will we run out of M-117 before we run out of airframe life on the
Buffs? Interesting speculation, but I guess that's down to the
President and the other world leaders.

---
Peter Kemp

Life is short - drink faster

will we run out of M-117 before we run out of airframe life on the
Buffs?

Doubtful, since they are "de-miling" them as well as dropping them at every
opportunity. We've got 36 years left of BUFF airframe time, by my guess, all
the M-117s will be gone by '06 or '07.


BUFDRVR

"Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips
everyone on Bear Creek"