Early Cold War bomber tactics.

Read the forum code of contact

Member for

16 years 11 months

Posts: 2

Hello, I'm new here so please forgive me if this should have been posted in the Modern Military section.

I have recently become interested in (early) Cold War strategic bombers. The British V-bombers, the Tu-16 "Badger" and the B-47s, -52s and 58s. I am wondering what tactics they used.

As I understand it they were generally designed to drop free-fall nuclear bombs from level flight at a high altitude in the late forties and early fifties. Though as ways of intercepting high flying targets improved in the sixties tactics had to change.

Even the B-52s were modified for low-altitude operations inte early sixties. As I understand it they did most of the raids on North Vietnam at high altitude because of AAA?

My question is, how were they supposed to survive the blast and EMP from their own nuclear weapons?

I understand the B-47s and Vulcans used the "toss-bombing" method, which was dangerous in the B-47. But how did the others do it? The Valiants, Victors, B-52s?

Even the B-58 Hustler could go in at low altitude and at Mach 1+, I've read, but I can't imagine it doing the "toss-bombing"-maneuvre.

And the Tu-16, was it only a high altitude free-fall/missile-platform or was it used low-level as well?

I'd be very gratefull if you could clear this out for me.

All the best!
/Mats

Original post

Member for

18 years 10 months

Posts: 320

Vulcans used the "toss-bombing" method

Not really, release was still from level flight. The attack was more properly a "pop up" rather than a "toss".

The Type 2H delivery was developed to cater for two cases:

a. Delivery of the Yellow Sun Mk2
b. Unpowered release of the Blue Steel.

It could also have been used to deliver the Red Beard, but this was never AFAIK a primary weapon for the V-Force. Introduction of the WE177 with its laydown capability made the "pop up" delivery unnecessary. IIRC the 2H took some 72 seconds to complete and we were told that this was some 10 seconds less than the time required for a SA2 missile to acquire, launch and hit us! The escape manoeuvre was a 2g turn to present the tail to the blast (at low level you continued on the release track). EMP was not a subject much discussed in those days, but given the nature of much of the equipment, we are talking "valve technology" here, probably did not present as much of a problem as later.

The "pop up" attack lived on in the form of the 2J, used for the delivery of un-retarded 1000lb bombs. In this case you pulled up at 6 miles to 2500' and released from there. Tactically not really a viable proposition, but it did enable crews to drop live bombs in training without the expense of retard tail units.

exmpa

Member for

19 years 5 months

Posts: 9,821


I understand the B-47s and Vulcans used the "toss-bombing" method, which was dangerous in the B-47.

Not after the fleet was modified! Actually, the fix was done fairly quickly after the problem was identified.

Remember, with the "Hound Dog" the 52Gs and Hs had an early stand-off capability.

Member for

16 years 11 months

Posts: 2

exmpa,

Thank you for clearing that up. Can you tell me more about the 2H method? Did the Valiants and Victors use these tactics as well? I know the Vulcan and Victor could carry the Blue Steel missile as well.

J Boyle,

Thanks for pointing that out.

That would leave the B-58, how were they supposed to survive their own nukes when dropped from low altitude?

Member for

18 years 10 months

Posts: 320

Did the Valiants and Victors use these tactics as well

The Victor 2 would have had an unpowered delivery option for the Blue Steel, so it is reasonable to assume that it was the same as/similar to the Vulcan profile. As for the Victor 1 and the Valiant, I cannot be sure. Neither aircraft was ever operationally equipped with a weapon deliverable from low level, and whilst low level training and trials may have been carried out with both types I doubt that operational profiles of that era included a low level penetration. I have a friend who was a nav on Valiants, I shall ask him when I next see him.

exmpa

Member for

18 years

Posts: 231


That would leave the B-58, how were they supposed to survive their own nukes when dropped from low altitude?

Engage ludicris speed:confused:

;)

Matt

Notice: The above post has no technical content whatsoever, nor is it intended as a serious answer to a serious question, IE, it is HUMOR (HUMOUR???) and should be taken as such. Have a good day.

Member for

19 years 10 months

Posts: 1,261

B-58

Mobryan's kind of right. The B-58 was designed as an extremely high speed, high altitude bomber. But as Soviet air defences became more effective at altitude (both interceptors and SAMS) that tactic became less viable. So alternative ideas were contemplated including low level. And iron bombs. Not sure if stand-off weapons were considered or could be carried. Anyway fundamentally what happened is the B-58 was not suitable at low altitude because of its integral wing tanks (vulnerability to AA) and, given it's primary role [high altitude] was also no longer viable, it had become obsolete and was therefore phased out. Also a very expensive aircraft to operate, but that's secondary.

I opened a thread recently about the B-58 prototype http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showthread.php?t=69710 and in it Bager1968 gave us a link to Joe Baugher's excellent website about the B-58 ... check it out http://home.att.net/~jbaugher2/b58.html