richochet bomb/bouncing bomb?

[ROBIN BIRD]

I have stills from a film clip of a Sunderland dropping a richochet bomb. I gather the principle was the same as the Barnes Wallis bouncing bomb. Can members of the forum advise me of the difference please.

 

[Listy]

I have stills from a film clip of a Sunderland dropping a richochet bomb. I gather the principle was the same as the Barnes Wallis bouncing bomb. Can members of the forum advise me of the difference please.

A Sunderland? That seems technically difficult, if not impossible? Also I suspect the bomb is a Highball?

It'd be a lot easier if we had a picture to go on?

 

[ROBIN BIRD]

Listy thanks for your interest. Having trouble uploading clip, can't access computer only URL. Will try again, or send me email and I will return photos. The report under Richochet bomb MAEE by R A Shaw is about getting a depth charge to richochet. Yes, tried again and when I try to upload from computer it defaults to URL. Gremlins!

 

[Dreamk]

This sounds as a clip of the testing of British depth charges in 1941-1942.
Ricochet was indeed a huge problem that needed to be overcome so as to make these depth charges operational in versatile conditions.
These lines are taken from a RAF Historical Society seminar on the development of AS weapons:
"The Mk VIII depth charge could be carried in larger numbers by a wide range of aircraft, usually: four on light bombers, such as the Hudson; six on mediums, such as the Wellington and Whitley; and eight on large aircraft, such as the Liberator and Sunderland. This potent new weapon, which featured a plain drum tail, came into use in early 1941 and could initially be dropped at up to 200 mph.


Its slightly domed nose proved a disadvantage, as it allowed the weapon to sink quickly, which was undesirable in an attack on a surfaced or just-diving target,
and it created the risk of ricochet.


An improved depth charge, which emerged as the Mk XI in 1942 featured a slightly concave nose to address the two aforementioned
problems, although even this would ricochet at 300 knots or 345 mph."

 

[ROBIN BIRD]

dreamk, sounds like that could be it although the report is headed ricochet trials, the problem must have been depth charges that ricochet before the target, the opposite to Highball. During my research into the Marine Aircraft Experimental Establishment I obtained a first hand account by an aircraftman that he loaded Highball on a Sunderland for trials. Unfortunately, he is now deceased so I cannot confirm. MAEE, of course, did test Highball, with land based aircraft from Prestwick. Maybe the aircraftman mistook the ricochet trials to involve Highball but this was before MAEE started the Loch Striven drops. ps. just noticed an extra h in ricochet in my original post.

 

[Listy]

Ahhh, they're worrying about bombs bouncing off the water surface. Yeah, I came across that in the Ahead thrown A/S weapons work I did for my next book, now we're making sense.