Luftwaffe Parachute Mine.

[skull181]

Yes, though it cannot be excluded that initially it was developed to be air-dropped (without parachute) - these attempts were generally unsuccessful.

Maybe it's because the two ships were sunk by Mines, and it's just been accepted that they were Parachute mines..

Dreamk, what is the version on my Avatar?

 

[Dreamk]

The most used over Great Britain - The LMB
This one was dropped over Glasgow on March 18th 1941

This one fell in Moreton (Wirral Peninsula, Merseyside) on April 27th 1941

and this one in Liverpool in 1940 (apparently without opening its chute as its rear part seem intact) - it seems that it is the every same mine that you have on your avatar - just different persons and a small angle of photography, but the other details in the background are identical). This one fell in the garden of a house in Score Lane, Childwall on the night of the 28th/29th November 1940.
this one being used in your avatar:
According to Merseyside Police, This was one of eight such devices that failed to explode that night, on a total of 30 that were dropped. One mine that did explode that night killed 166 people in Durning Road – one of the worst civilian incidents of the war, when a land mine attached to a parachute hit the Junior Instruction Centre in Durning Road, Edge Hill, in the early hours of November 29, 1940. The explosion sent the three-storey college crashing down into the shelter on top of the 300 people hiding there.

 

[Snufkin]

Dreamk,

Just to try to clarify a point - you say in post #10 of this thread, "The above described mine was indeed a parachute air dropped mine, BUT without this tail - this tail was exclusive to the version dropped by boats of the Kriegsmarine (the presence of fins does not imply "air-dropped")"

In post #7 of http://www.bocn.co.uk/vbforum/threads/50783-Luftmine you include a drawing, attached here for convenience, which shows an LMB mine - with tail consisting of fins and surrounding shroud - used by the Luftwaffe; so presumably air dropped via parachute.

Surely then the drawing, if accurate, implies the tail was not exclusive to the Kriegsmarine...? And in the photographs of post #22 above, each tail shroud contained a finned parachute lug?

 

[Dreamk]

The drawing is indeed problematic, I'll come to it in a few moments. It purposes to show on the left an air dropped LMB with a parachute case. On the right of the drawing you have a LMB/S used by the Kriegsmarine.This one is identical to the LMB-III except for the absence of fins.
Concerning the LMB:
LMA and LMA were initially basically similar except for their weight and dimensions.
Here's a photo the cap that was discarded to allow the parachute to deploy (or rather, here, 2 caps, one seen from the inside and the other from the outside)

and the remaining mine case

and a replica made by UK enthusiasts and displayed the Museum of Naval Firepower in Gosport


Now this is the LMB/S used by the Kriegsmarine

and this is the LMB-III


and its tail


However the close examination of the drawing that you did, Snufkin, brings another possibility - that this tail finned mine was contained in a bulky rear cap compartment - this has been proposed by a Soviet author as seen on the following drawing, but it does not correlate with other artefacts - especially as the examination of the finned tail does not support attacement for a parachute. So the issue remains open.....

 

[Snufkin]

So... the tail (be it of the LMB or LMB-III) was not exclusive to the Kriegsmarine?

 

[Dreamk]

If we accept the last hypothesis, no, it may indeed have been part of an air dropped device.

 

[butterfly]

I too am still struggling to understand this one, as the 'tail' as it is referred to, to the best of my knowledge was not a tail, but formed part of the structure internally to hold the ring to which the parachute was attached (this was a heavy duty ring attached with a eye bolt - the lines of the parachute were tied to the ring). The four 'fins' with holes on them being what the outer casing fixed to.

if this 'tail' is not present on the air dropped mines could you supply information regarding just how the parachute was attached? /what was the internal structure to the rear of the magnetic switch?

here are some photos from this thread showing, what I believe to be screws attaching the outer casing to the so called 'tail'. These 'screws' appear to be in four rows, as in the 'tail' however if not attached to the tail what is the internal arrangement? (I have attached images showing red circles around the screws, together with the original photo for comparison) - these can be seen on all the photos of land dropped parachute mines if you study them.

I am of course happy to be corrected in this matter as I am always open to learning new things.

regards Kev

 

[butterfly]

I also took a closer look at this particular image.
To me it would appear that the mines shown in the image are not for naval use, but are being transported along with other Luftwaffe bombs which are located in packing boxes in the background? I think the fact they are on board a ship is misleading. They also show the parachute lug attached, this would not be necessary for a surface/submarine launched mine?

Kev

 

[Dreamk]

Kev, the 4 "pins" fit the rear cap of the case here

If you look carefully at the Bristol LMB reconstruction (made by Tony Boyle, a WW2 RNVR Render mines safe officer) it shows a central lug inside the case to which the parachute strings are attached - but no fins

This is a similar system similar to what can be seen inside air-dropped flares. (British air dropped mines, when equipped with chutes, had a different system with attachment lugs around the end cap)

Hope this helps.

 

[Snufkin]

Purely from the drawing of the LMB-III from post #24, the "fins" are not actually fins, but ribs (German - rippen). Reinforcing ribs around the parachute fixing lug would distribute the stresses of the opening parachute, which - without them - might fracture the end plate casting. The LMB family would therefore appear to have been designed from the beginning as parachute air delivered mines.

 

[Dreamk]

The ribs concept is quite interesting. It may indeed support the parachute hypothesis. However it may also support the idea that this is for a central attachment point for transport and manutention aboard boats as we see on naval mines.
And Kev, you're right the lug is indeed present, although in US publications this is what appears:

 

[butterfly]

Kev, the 4 "pins" fit the rear cap of the case here
View attachment 111182
If you look carefully at the Bristol LMB reconstruction (made by Tony Boyle, a WW2 RNVR Render mines safe officer) it shows a central lug inside the case to which the parachute strings are attached - but no fins
View attachment 111184 View attachment 111186
This is a similar system similar to what can be seen inside air-dropped flares. (British air dropped mines, when equipped with chutes, had a different system with attachment lugs around the end cap)
I am quiet suspicious about the Russian drawings (the English B&W drawing in the previous post is based upon the original Russian color drawing) showing a tail finned mine inside a bulky case.
Hope this helps.

I would take with a pinch of salt any fabricated mine casing in comparison to an original casing, no matter how good. The bolts protruding from the end, could you show me an original mine with those bolts? (maybe they are there to represent the sprung loaded pins which helped to release the end cap when the lanyard was pulled? .......apologies on closer inspection maybe they are sprung pins, I just cannot recall them being so prominent?

The replica is certainly good in representation, but is it 100% accurate in all details, outwardly maybe, internally?



Kev

 

[Dreamk]

The answer is "I don't know", Kev. And I agree with you an original artefact is 100% better than any reconstruction. May be we can get it touch with this guy - he has had probably access to much more information than all we have been able to collect.

 

[butterfly]

take a look at some of the photos of the parachute mine in the imperial war museum, it has a parachute fixing attached to the 'tail' /ribs. (So too do the ones in the photo showing them on the boat which you posted earlier.)

Kev

 

[Snufkin]

Hypothesis or not, the mine on display in the Liverpool Maritime Museum is actually one of several that failed to explode on being parachute delivered by the Luftwaffe to Liverpool - at least according to the exhibit description.

The attached shows the substantial reinforcing ribs welded to the end plate (of the mine in the IWM). Fins for guidance/stability they are not.

 

[butterfly]

photos of lugs in photos previously posted

 

[Dreamk]

What is most interesting, Kev, is the way they transport this bomb, with ropes around it and not by the lug. On the other hand, why to transport such a mine without its rear casing and chute if indeed it's aimed at luftwaffe use. I don't think it's probable that these last parts are expected to be found and fit on the destination airbase. So here I feel that we have indeed Kriegsmarine mines.
This does not cancel the eventuality that initially such mines where designed for being air dropped, and had a chute fixed on this lug.
Snufkin's arguments are quite strong and convincing.

I must say that I have a tendency to be very cautious with museum displays, above all in the UK - They are also, to some extent, reconstructions. I found there, more than once, a tendency to make the artefact fit some text or drawing (see only the bomb colors and markings in these museum - they fit written regulations, but not always of the right period, and do not often correlate with wartime photographs). It's interesting that these last years there is a general tendency in Europe military museum to look for authenticity in details, and this has caused changes in quite a number of displays, but in UK museum the "Show" aspect is still the prevailing lead - at least it's what I feel.

 

[butterfly]

Kev, I am very cautious with museum displays, above all in the UK - They are also to some extent reconstruction. I found there, more than once, a tendency to make the artefact fit some text or drawing (see only the bomb colors and markings in these museum - they fit written regulations, but not always of the right period, and do not often correlate with wartime photographs). It's interesting that these last years there is a general tendency in Europe military museum to look for authenticity in details, and this has caused changes in quite a number of displays, but in UK museum the "Show" aspect is still the prevailing lead - at least it's what I feel.

I agree, however I was really drawing attention only to the lug. see post 36, the two period photos also show the lug to which the parachute attached, as too does the US document you posted. This indicates to me that this was the correct location for attachment of the parachute on at least some of the mines - I am not familiar with the two point attachment you referred to earlier, this is new to me.

I too do not believe everything I see or read, the internet is full of mis-information............and its not just the internet.
I will be interested to see how the thread progresses. I dont claim to be an expert by any means in this field and am simply adding as I understand it. I am more than happy to stand corrected on points in order to learn new things. As far as wether the mine on display at the Imperial War Museum is accurate or not I cannot say.

regards Kev

 

[Snufkin]

...why to transport such a mine without its rear casing and chute if indeed it's aimed at luftwaffe use...

Many aerial bombs, certainly the larger types, were only mated with their tails at the airfield prior to loading onto the aircraft. Simply ease of transport and storage.

 

[Dreamk]

This thread is exciting. I hope to see it progress. The whole subject of Luftminen is still full of shadowy parts, as we can see with the present discussion on the parachute attachment of the LMB. This forum is a great place.