Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 20

Thread: R.A.F. Stirlings and 'cookie' bombs?

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Northumberland, UK
    Posts
    3,896
    Thanks
    11
    Thanked 72 Times in 69 Posts

    Default R.A.F. Stirlings and 'cookie' bombs?

    Hello everyone

    I came across this photo of a Stirling:

    http://airminded.org/wp-content/uplo...11/ch17887.jpg

    Is the bomb a 4,000 lb cookie? It has the three mounting lugs like a 4,000 lb cookie, and look too 'fat' for a 2,000 lb version:

    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped..._ww2_bombs.jpg

    I thought the Stirling couldn't carry 'outsized' bombs due to the way the bomb bay was divided longitudinally into three compartments, so if this is a 4,000 lb cookie, is this just a posed propaganda photo intended as a bit of disinformation?

    Regards

    Simon

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Glasgow
    Posts
    400
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default

    Simon

    Could it be a sea mine?

    Regards

    Douglas

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Lancashire
    Posts
    526
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts

    Default

    The Wellington couldn't carry the 4000lb cookie for the same reason, but they did. Or at least, some specially-modified examples did. I wouldn't rule out it being done on a Stirling, but I've not heard of it. On these types the bombbay was not only too narrow but too shallow. The Halifax was also shallow but lacked the longitudinal dividers - it carried the 4000lb bomb with adjustment to the inner bombbay doors and (sometimes) a fairing.

    PS I think it's a sea mine too.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Cornwall
    Posts
    1,765
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default

    Looks to large for a Sea Mine, and surely if a Sea Mine, it would have the parachute shroud lines attached at the end, as that type of aerial mine did. Looks like a 2000lb bomb, with angle of photo making it appear bigger than it should.
    Last edited by AlanW; 9th April 2016 at 06:17.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Auckland New Zealand
    Posts
    94
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default

    I agree with Alan, it is not a sea mine it is a 2000 lb bomb with the photo taken at a low angle.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    200
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default

    Evening Gents,
    If you do a search for the 4000lb on google you will get the answer. It appears this photo was used to illustrate the bomb which is a 4000lb HC (would appear to be for press release prop). Modified Wellingtons most certainly carried them both in Europe and the M.E.

    Regards,
    Rob Jerram.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    England
    Posts
    1,645
    Thanks
    43
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default

    Hi,

    This is a 2000lb bomb. No.218 Squadron Stirling's never dropped a 4000lb bomb, simply because the Stirling could not accommodate the thing. Often they would carry two x 2000lb bombs with mixed 500 pounders. As mentioned, I think the angle of the photo is the issue. Cannot see the point of placing a "Cookie" in front of a Stirling even for a PR stunt?

    Steve
    Last edited by Steve Smith; 9th April 2016 at 09:40.
    No.218 (Gold Coast) Squadron Association Historian
    No.623 squadron Research

    ~~IN TIME ~~

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Northumberland, UK
    Posts
    3,896
    Thanks
    11
    Thanked 72 Times in 69 Posts

    Default

    Thanks for all the replies Gents - an interesting selection! I'm convinced it's a Cookie, rather than a sea mine.

    Just revisting the image itself, I found it originally came from the IWM Collection:

    http://www.iwm.org.uk/collections/item/object/205210794

    Caption reads: "A Mark I 4,000-lb HC bomb ('cookie') is prepared for loading into Short Stirling Mark I, 'HA-D', of No. 218 Squadron RAF at Marham, Norfolk, before a night raid on Emden, Germany."

    So (assuming the official caption is correct), it seems like it's a posed photo as Rob suggests, seeing as the bomb wouldn't actually fit!

    Regards

    Simon
    Last edited by wwrsimon; 9th April 2016 at 13:06.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Cornwall
    Posts
    1,765
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default

    Well that says it all..... never trust anything you read on IWM site, i'm always trying to correct them on their mistakes, and besides that, a 4000lb cookie does not, as far as i'm aware, have the slightly pointed nose, it was blunt either end.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Northumberland, UK
    Posts
    3,896
    Thanks
    11
    Thanked 72 Times in 69 Posts

    Default


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •