Talk:Aerial bomb

Untitled

This refers to the object, as a subset of a bomb, and not the act or event, or general description. This is not a disambiguation.
This is an initial stub of course, so it can be filled with mainly technical details, and answers to questions like "Can a machine gun detonate an aerial bomb", "How to aerial bombs work", and "why they do not explode if you hit it with a hammer". (PS, I though I had right spelling of Aerial when I first created it. OOPS!) --Flightsoffancy (talk) 03:25, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

About: "but Italy argued that this ban did not extend to airplanes."

Hello! I've some doubts about this passage: The dropping of bombs from balloons had been outlawed by the Hague Convention of 1899, but Italy argued that this ban did not extend to airplanes.[1] Yes, this passage has a reference: Grant, R.G. (2004). Flight - 100 Years of Aviation. Dorling-Kindersley Limited. pp. p. 59. ISBN 1-4503-0575-4 {{isbn}}: Check isbn value: checksum (help). But there are some facts that sentence inaccurate. Let me explain:

• The First Hague convention had a declaration about prohibit, for a term of five years, the launching of projectiles and explosives from balloons, or by other new methods of a similar nature. See and also this declaration was ratified by all the Great Powers, see . This declaration was about balloons, but used also the words or by other new methods of a similar nature, probably to include airships and other "new methods". However in 1906 this moratorium was expired.
• In the Second Hague convention, was tried to "extend" the old decalration, but, in pratically, it remained only a purpose. Only among the great Powers, only by United Kingdom, United States of America and Austria-Hungary . Also Austria-Hungary never ratified it. Only the Article 25, The attack or bombardment, by whatever means, of towns, villages, dwellings, or buildings which are undefended is prohibited., with the words "whatever means" was a limitation to aerial bombing. For example, when a zeppelin bombed Antwerp for the first time in August 1914, the Belgium's protest was referred about Article 25 "Declares Zeppelin Attack Violated Fourth Convention of The Hague, and not to the declaration XIV, ratified by Belgium, but not by German Empire.
• So, it seems strange that in 1911, was made a sentence like: "The dropping of bombs from balloons had been outlawed by the Hague Convention of 1899,
  • The prohibition of Hague Convention of 1899 was expired.
  • Only UK and USA that signed the extension can made a similar protest
  • But it's seemsstrange that "Italy argued that this ban did not extend to airplanes", due the old, expired, declaration referred also to "other new methods of a similar nature"; and the new declaration wasn't almost recongnized in Europe.

I think that is better to clarify the situation of international law in that sentence. For the moment I wait for further suggestions/opinions. In italian books, I not found yet any evidence of this controversy. For someone is possible to check the original sentence in the Grant's book? Bye! --Il palazzo (talk) 12:47, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

WHY DO BOMBS WHISTLE WHEN THEY FELL?

I think many people coming to this page would like to know the answer to this question, could somebody please add it to the article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.176.239.187 (talk) 13:00, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Because they can't sing. - BilCat (talk) 01:14, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

No mention of the First World War

This is a large oversight for this topic. Swampycow (talk) 17:04, 11 September 2025 (UTC)

battle of blair mountain doesnt count?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Blair_Mountain ~2026-20553-52 (talk) 20:23, 2 April 2026 (UTC)