How Come Every Time I See a Video of a Bomber Dropping Bombs in WWII, Japanese and German Bombs Wobb

How come every time I see a video of a bomber dropping bombs in WWII, Japanese and German bombs wobble when they fall and American bombs donu2019t?

I can only think of the He-111 German medium bomber. It carries its bombs upside down. When dropped these bombs twist due to air resistance. This is stabilized soon after by the tail fins. The He-111 bomb bay could only drop certain sized bombs in its bomb bay. Regular horizontal bomb bays could use a variety of bombs.Most bombs are carried on their sides. and dropping them usually stabilises sooner. As the war progressed the British found it cheaper to make bombs with thinner metal skins when accuracy was less important. And where shrapnel was not needed. They sometimes did not have stabilizing tails. This was mainly with bombs dropped on German cities and were used with incendiary weapons. This Meant British bombers could carry more explosives and less metal. The bombs explosives would damage buildings with the big explosives and spread incendiaries. With the building open the incendiaries would burn the contents and start huge fires. Maximising destruction and making if difficult for Germans to stop the fires and rescue people. So these bombs, usually large ones, were not stabilized. They were usually used on German cities

— — — — — —

What is the best alcoholic drink?

Captain and coke or jger bombs

— — — — — —

How many hydrogen bombs would it take to ....?

You would not want to melt the Antarctic ice. As soon as it started to melt, because it is upside down, the water would start to drip off downwards into space. Thus the balance of the earth would be upset and the weight of the Arctic ice would cause the world to rotate 180 degrees. That would cause havoc.

— — — — — —

do smoke bombs work on clearing insects in the woods?

Insect Smoke Bombs

— — — — — —

Why do people say nuclear bombs are fake?

I have no idea what they mean by fake. Radiation from bombs usually does not decrease rapidly, at least in human terms. Most commonly used materials in nuclear fission bombs have half lives in the thousands or millions of years.Strontium 90 is a common fallout and has a half life of almost 29 years. That's not time till the whole thing goes inert. That's time till half the atoms, which can be anywhere in a huge area around the blast, decay. Then it will take another 29 years for half of what is left to decay. Then it will take another 29 years till half of the remainder of that does. And then eventually, hundreds of years later, maybe the radiation will be similar to background radiation everywhere else. But it will still be a bit higher.Fusion bombs are much cleaner but many require a small fission bomb just to set them off. And if there's any doubt about the force of these things, they've been tested for decades and it's kinda hard to hide that stuff. Hiroshima and Nagasaki were leveled and fallout affected the population for years afterwards. Tests have rendered islands uninhabitable. When a nuclear reactor, not even a bomb, goes wrong the entire area is evacuated, sometimes permanently. The Tsar Bomba broke windows and knocked people over in the next country! Enough people have seen the mushroom clouds.So if they think these bombs are not real or do not have as much power as they do, they are either joking or probably do not know what they are talking about. These things were powerful enough that owning them both almost caused and prevented WW3 without firing a shot.That said, the claim that in a nuclear war the entire world would just become uninhabitable is also a massive exageration. Global society as we know it would break down, but there would still be plenty of places that survived the apocalypse just fine. Just pray you are not in a city if it ever happens

— — — — — —

were there really bombs planted in the twin towers?

Nobody really knows the answer to this very important question. We should demand a complete investigation - the 9/11 commission report was a sham

— — — — — —

Why are liberals for an all out ban on guns?

more people have died from these shootings than have died from bombs by muslim extremists. where are our priorites?