He 177 bomb load details?

Discussion in 'Warbirds International' started by HoHun, Aug 29, 2002.

  1. HoHun

    HoHun FH Beta Tester

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2001
    Messages:
    2,643
    Hi Exec,

    in another thread, you posted the following maximum bomb load for the He 177:

    short range: 48xSC50, 12xSC250, 6xSC500, 6xSD500, 4xSC1000, 6xSD1000, 2xSC1000+2xSC1800, 2xLMA3+2xSC1800

    medium distances: 32xSC50, 8xSC250, 4xSC500, 4xSC1000

    long distances: 16xSC50, 4xSC250, 2xSC500, 2xSC1000.

    I'm trying to work out the physical layout of the He 177 bomb load now.

    My conclusion so far:

    The He 177 had 3 identical bomb bays for each:

    - 16xSC50, 4xSC250, 2xSC500, 2xSC1000

    The 2xSC1000 couldn't be used in all 3 bomb bays at the same time as the He 177 couldn't carry 6000 kg.

    The 1800 kg bombs would not be carried internally but on the wing racks.

    Is this summary correct? I've mostly guessed it from your description and the information provided in "Wings of the Luftwaffe" by Eric Brown.

    That would leave the He 177 with the following amount of fuel:

    2 x 1520 L forward fuselage
    2 x 1140 L aft fuselage
    2 x 1761 L wings

    =8842 L total

    Regards,

    Henning (HoHun)
     
    vasco likes this.
  2. -exec-

    -exec- FH Consultant

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2000
    Messages:
    24,690
    Location:
    xUSSR
    yeah, the details of greif are pretty unknown matter.

    you may take a look at
    http://www.netwings.org/pages/review/he177/bombsaway.jpg
    http://www.netwings.org/pages/review/he177/bigbomb.jpg
    but those pics are not too informative.

    you may follow to
    http://m2reviews.cnsi.net/scotts/axis/luft/177preview.htm
    or even
    http://www.internetmodeler.com/2000/dec2000/first-looks/revell_he177.htm

    funny, i see bomb bay, but i don't see bomb bay doors. probably doors are two shorter details, on 1/3 length of bay, other is 2/3.

    information about load is taken from William Green's book named "WoL", of course :)
    that's the only source found to be informative about greif when we made the model.
    we obtained russian translation from http://base13.glasnet.ru/angar.htm

    probably we and you are talking about the same source
    http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/search-handle-form/202-9494055-3264651

    indexes of bombs are my fantasy i used to shorten the designation of bombs. i may mistake hardly, mentionning SD1000, because it could be PC1000RS or SB1000. i just wanted to say "armour piercing bomb of 1000kg calibre" with "SD1000" abbreviation ;)

    well, let's take a quick look at these bombs:
    http://www.warbirdsresourcegroup.org/LRG/bombs.html
    PC1000RS armour-piercing boosted len 2.20m
    PC1000 armour-piercing len 2.17m
    SB1000 armour-piercing len 2.64m
    SD1000 semi-armour-piercing and fragmentation len unkown
    SC1000C general purpose len 2.78m
    SC1000L general purpose len 2.53m
    SC1000L2 general purpose len 2.78m
    it seems like GPB's are longer than AP, and indeed we may have problems pushing 6 GPB's into greif.

    so, i render your analysis as correct enough :)
     
  3. HoHun

    HoHun FH Beta Tester

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2001
    Messages:
    2,643
    Hi Exec,

    Thanks a lot!

    >it seems like GPB's are longer than AP, and indeed we may have problems pushing 6 GPB's into greif.

    That's strange indeed!

    Upon close examination, it seems to me that the aft bomb bay is a bit longer than the others. It seems like that was the only one suited for 1000 kg bombs at all - the two forward bays must have been too short for that.

    On the other hand, there seem to have been no internal divisions in the 2 forward bays, so in combination they were long anough for 1000 kg bombs again.

    Regards,

    Henning (HoHun)
     
  4. Flubby

    Flubby Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2001
    Messages:
    253
    Location:
    Germany
  5. HoHun

    HoHun FH Beta Tester

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2001
    Messages:
    2,643
    Hi Flubby,

    Thanks for the information!

    After thinking about it a bit more, I believe the He 177 must have had a "flat" bomb bay like the Lancaster, but divided into one port and one starboard bay.

    Here's the Lancaster principle:

    http://www.nucleus.com/~ltwright/bombs.htm

    The B-17 and B-24 had "stacked" bomb bays with the bombs arranged vertically, by contrast. As you can see from the Lancaster example, the "flat" bay is more flexible.

    Regards,

    Henning (HoHun)
     
  6. ReImahg262

    ReImahg262 New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2022
    Messages:
    2
    Henning, this is my first post here and I hope my reply can help you?
    This below is the layout with six SC500 bombs side by side.

    [​IMG]

    (below) A standard He177 bomb bay looked like this with VENTRAL KEEL beam dividing the bomb bay into a left or right side

    [​IMG]
    This was the bomb bay on the V38 prototype. (below):

    [​IMG]

    The V38 prototype captured at the Letov factory on 8 May 1945 was intended to carry the German Atomic bomb.
    According to Luftwaffe pilot Peter Brill speaking from Spain in 2005. There were nine HE177 converted with "enormous" bomb bays, but only four were ready to fly a mission, held in readiness at Sprottau when the war ended. These aircraft were powered by DB613 engines with 60 litre displacement and 3,800hp driving a contra rotating propeller on each wing. This modified He177 was called the AK177. Some also call it the Ju177.
    this aircraft was fitted with wings designed for the Messerschmitt Me.264. This provided enough extra fuel capacity to allow flight across the Atlantic ocean to USA



    AK177 used wings from the Me.264

    [​IMG]



    [​IMG]


    Peter Brill born 1924:

    [​IMG]

    Below Fuel tanks of He177 A-3:


    [​IMG]

    Standard fuel capacity was 10,400 Litres

    so your figure of:


    2 x 1520 L forward fuselage
    2 x 1140 L aft fuselage
    2 x 1761 L wings

    probably relates to auxilliary fuel tank bladders s in the bomb bays
     
    vasco, Flk, -nicae- and 2 others like this.
  7. Red Ant

    Red Ant Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2002
    Messages:
    4,922
    Location:
    Germany
    Wow, that's the first time I've ever seen someone answer a question that was asked 20 years earlier. :D
     
    hezzey, vasco and -nicae- like this.
  8. ReImahg262

    ReImahg262 New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2022
    Messages:
    2
    I R-e-a-d s-l-ow-l-y


    Like a fine wine, it has aged perfectly. so, for 20 years nobody had the answer?
     
    -nicae- likes this.
  9. -nicae-

    -nicae- Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2000
    Messages:
    6,351
    Location:
    Brazil
    hahahahha
    But I loved the read :)
     
  10. isaev

    isaev Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2007
    Messages:
    4,531
    It could be useful information! :)
     
    -nicae- likes this.
  11. Red Ant

    Red Ant Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2002
    Messages:
    4,922
    Location:
    Germany
    I'm not criticizing you. :) The information could still be helpful since this forum is still somewhat active, even if the game itself is not.
     
    -nicae- and Flk like this.
  12. -frog-

    -frog- Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2003
    Messages:
    3,937
    Location:
    Świdnik, Poland
    @ReImahg262
    Stuff seems to come from some Polish publication (the subtitles are in Polish).
    Can you quote the source?
    Please, please... with some sugar on top of it, if you wish :)
     
    -nicae- likes this.