[csteimel47591]

Hey all,
I was wondering what the most effective bomb/size ratio was in real life (as far as the fighter-bombers go...) I know in WWII most fighter-bombers usually carried 2x 500LB bombs rather than 1x 1,000LB. However in IL-2 the 1,000LB bomb is much more effective due to it's larger blast radius.

Was 2x 500LB bombs more effective in real-life? I know they usually had to release both 500's at the same time, when they were wing mounted (1 on each wing)... I suppose in real-life the two bomb blasts of 2x 500lb's would compound making the blast radius similair to the 1,000. I've found in IL-2 however, the 1,000 gets the job done much better.

As far as stability goes, it seems to me than 1 1,000 lb bomb mounted on the centerline of the plane would be more stable than haveing a 500LB on each wing. Similairly, the 1,000 would proably produce less drag as well... So why did most fighter-bombers usually use 2x 500LB instead?

[Guest]

Pherhaps it was to spread the damage are because if you have 2 bomb on the wings and you release at a certain angles then the 2 bombs can cover 2 seperate areas whereas a single larger bomb cannot cover a wider area. Well it kinda can but if you are after more than one target than use 2 bombs because you can spread them out whereas one bomb is only good for target in a small area and you are kind of limited if you get what I mean.

[Checkyersix]

It could be more a matter of the intended target. 2 x 500lb bombs would give you more shrapnel than 1 x 1000lb (because of the higher surface area), which would be more damaging against soft targets like trucks. A 1000lb bomb would be more useful against fortifications or armored targets. Availability was probably a factor as well - there might have just been more 500lb bombs around.

[ArcticViper]

There's also the question of reliability that so many people tend to forget, since our simulation doesn't represent that without mods... A bomb dropped didn't guarantee damage to the enemy even with a direct hit.

A relatively large percentage of the ordnance dropped in WW2 were duds or they failed to explode due to various factors, 2x 500 lb would have a higher % chance of actually doing the damage instead of just making a very small and expensive hole in the ground... :wink:

Just a thought