Fairey Battles and Boulton Paul Defiants
Moderators: Joel Billings, wdolson, Don Bowen, mogami
- MineSweeper
- Posts: 653
- Joined: Tue Sep 19, 2006 6:03 pm
- Location: Nags Head, NC
Fairey Battles and Boulton Paul Defiants
Just wondering if any of these two planes were used in the PTO.....seems odd that they are missing......
RE: Fairey Battles and Boulton Paul Defiants
don't believe so IIRC my Shores Vol I. The Defiant in particular got it's [turret] so badly handed to it during the BoB that the plane was retired to night fighter service quickly and that was in 40'
- MineSweeper
- Posts: 653
- Joined: Tue Sep 19, 2006 6:03 pm
- Location: Nags Head, NC
RE: Fairey Battles and Boulton Paul Defiants
I know they were not great in Europe, but thought maybe they would have shipped some to the Far East (the Backwater of the British Empire) in the 1940 and 41....
RE: Fairey Battles and Boulton Paul Defiants
I wouldn't see the logic at least in the case of the Defiant. It was decisively proven to be a failed concept in terms of fighter vs. fighter. Even counting their underestimation of Japanese airpower, i wouldn't see them being employed anywhere in their original role (which was what was needed by the Empire)
The Battle was IIRC being little used as a daylight bomber after 1940.
The Battle was IIRC being little used as a daylight bomber after 1940.
RE: Fairey Battles and Boulton Paul Defiants
Neither saw frontline servioce with the RAF in the Far East. There were some Defiants used as target tugs by the Royal Indian Air Force
[center]
Bigger boys stole my sig
Bigger boys stole my sig
RE: Fairey Battles and Boulton Paul Defiants
I think the last active front line service that the Battles' and Defiants' saw was the autumn/winter of 1940...
RE: Fairey Battles and Boulton Paul Defiants
ORIGINAL: Big B
I think the last active front line service that the Battles' and Defiants' saw was the autumn/winter of 1940...
IIRC a few squadrons were still flying Nightfighter ops in the summer of 1941 with Defiants. A few were also used during 1942 with the ASR squadrons.
[center]
Bigger boys stole my sig
Bigger boys stole my sig
RE: Fairey Battles and Boulton Paul Defiants
as night fighters yes....but such types (and short ranged at that) weren't needed for the Far East. They needed day fighters above all else. Enter the Buffalo.....(staring Bruce Li!)
- niceguy2005
- Posts: 12522
- Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 1:53 pm
- Location: Super secret hidden base
RE: Fairey Battles and Boulton Paul Defiants
Here's trying to put a happy face on it...
I have read that the main problem with the fighter was drag and manueverability. The whole concept of a powered turret is curious, but then if you're going to go that far why not go all out and convert a B-17. [:D]
Honestly I can't off the top of my head really think of one really successful fighter design that had a rear gunner
Often maligned as a failure, the Boulton Paul Defiant found a successful niche as a night-fighter during the German 'Blitz' on London, scoring a significant number of combat kills before being relegated to training and support roles.
I have read that the main problem with the fighter was drag and manueverability. The whole concept of a powered turret is curious, but then if you're going to go that far why not go all out and convert a B-17. [:D]
Honestly I can't off the top of my head really think of one really successful fighter design that had a rear gunner
Artwork graciously provided by Dixie
RE: Fairey Battles and Boulton Paul Defiants
The RAAF had quite a number of Battles as trainers - but never looked at as a combat plane.
It must have really sucked seeing they sent poor bastards up in Wirraways as fighters in desperation.
It must have really sucked seeing they sent poor bastards up in Wirraways as fighters in desperation.
Robert Lee
- MineSweeper
- Posts: 653
- Joined: Tue Sep 19, 2006 6:03 pm
- Location: Nags Head, NC
RE: Fairey Battles and Boulton Paul Defiants
They did........YB -40[;)]
I have read that the main problem with the fighter was drag and manueverability. The whole concept of a powered turret is curious, but then if you're going to go that far why not go all out and convert a B-17. [:D]
- Attachments
-
- yb40.jpg (26.14 KiB) Viewed 63 times
RE: Fairey Battles and Boulton Paul Defiants
yep....same concept.....bigger failure. [;)] (bigger as in bigger size!) [:D]
- niceguy2005
- Posts: 12522
- Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 1:53 pm
- Location: Super secret hidden base
RE: Fairey Battles and Boulton Paul Defiants
I would like to send 50 of those over Rabaul for a "bombing raid". They wouldn't have to drop bombs, just decimate the CAP. [:D]ORIGINAL: MineSweeper
They did........YB -40[;)]
I have read that the main problem with the fighter was drag and manueverability. The whole concept of a powered turret is curious, but then if you're going to go that far why not go all out and convert a B-17. [:D]
Artwork graciously provided by Dixie
- MineSweeper
- Posts: 653
- Joined: Tue Sep 19, 2006 6:03 pm
- Location: Nags Head, NC
RE: Fairey Battles and Boulton Paul Defiants
[/quote]
I would like to send 50 of those over Rabaul for a "bombing raid". They wouldn't have to drop bombs, just decimate the CAP. [:D]
[/quote]
But there were issues with the concept.....
Quote from Daveswarbirds.....
The YB-40 was a derivation of the Boeing B-17, in which additional guns were added in hopes that these heavily-armed B-17s would be able to "escort" the other bombers, protecting them from enemy fighter attacks when beyond the range of friendly fighter escort. Lockheed-Vega had the task of doing the conversion work on the Boeing B-17s, but only twenty YB-40s were made, as well as four training models known as the TB-40. Changes included a remotely-controlled chin turret (which later became standard on the B-17G model), twin .50 caliber guns in the waist positions (instead of the single guns), an extra twin gun power turret behind what used to be the radio operator's gun position, and sometimes extra cheek guns in the nose. The bombs and bombardier were left behind, and extra ammo for the guns was carried. Even with the reduction in weight without the bombs, the added weight of guns and ammo made the aircraft heavier and slower. As a result, once the other bombers had released their bombloads, the YB-40s were outpaced by their lighter brethren, and so failed in their role as escorts. The program was made obsolete not only by its own failures, but by the appearance of long-range fighter escorts that could fill the role much more ably.
I would like to send 50 of those over Rabaul for a "bombing raid". They wouldn't have to drop bombs, just decimate the CAP. [:D]
[/quote]
But there were issues with the concept.....
Quote from Daveswarbirds.....
The YB-40 was a derivation of the Boeing B-17, in which additional guns were added in hopes that these heavily-armed B-17s would be able to "escort" the other bombers, protecting them from enemy fighter attacks when beyond the range of friendly fighter escort. Lockheed-Vega had the task of doing the conversion work on the Boeing B-17s, but only twenty YB-40s were made, as well as four training models known as the TB-40. Changes included a remotely-controlled chin turret (which later became standard on the B-17G model), twin .50 caliber guns in the waist positions (instead of the single guns), an extra twin gun power turret behind what used to be the radio operator's gun position, and sometimes extra cheek guns in the nose. The bombs and bombardier were left behind, and extra ammo for the guns was carried. Even with the reduction in weight without the bombs, the added weight of guns and ammo made the aircraft heavier and slower. As a result, once the other bombers had released their bombloads, the YB-40s were outpaced by their lighter brethren, and so failed in their role as escorts. The program was made obsolete not only by its own failures, but by the appearance of long-range fighter escorts that could fill the role much more ably.
RE: Fairey Battles and Boulton Paul Defiants
Hello...
The reduction in speed was due not only to extra guns and ammo, but also extra armor. From what I have heard, a YB-40 would fly along with the squadron and when fighters attacked, idle back the engines or feather one and fall out of formation. The fighters would then pounce on it. The YB-40 was well able to handle a fair number of fighters, but the Germans quit attacking them when they learned to tell them from the real bombers. So, there value was only good for a limited time, any way.
If you took 50 YB-40s, flew over a Japanese base an challenged the manhood of the Japanese pilots you might some to come up and fight. Worked for Boyington and his band in Corsairs.
Bye...
Michael Wood
The reduction in speed was due not only to extra guns and ammo, but also extra armor. From what I have heard, a YB-40 would fly along with the squadron and when fighters attacked, idle back the engines or feather one and fall out of formation. The fighters would then pounce on it. The YB-40 was well able to handle a fair number of fighters, but the Germans quit attacking them when they learned to tell them from the real bombers. So, there value was only good for a limited time, any way.
If you took 50 YB-40s, flew over a Japanese base an challenged the manhood of the Japanese pilots you might some to come up and fight. Worked for Boyington and his band in Corsairs.
Bye...
Michael Wood
Quote from Daveswarbirds.....
The YB-40 was a derivation of the Boeing B-17, in which additional guns were added in hopes that these heavily-armed B-17s would be able to "escort" the other bombers, protecting them from enemy fighter attacks when beyond the range of friendly fighter escort. Lockheed-Vega had the task of doing the conversion work on the Boeing B-17s, but only twenty YB-40s were made, as well as four training models known as the TB-40. Changes included a remotely-controlled chin turret (which later became standard on the B-17G model), twin .50 caliber guns in the waist positions (instead of the single guns), an extra twin gun power turret behind what used to be the radio operator's gun position, and sometimes extra cheek guns in the nose. The bombs and bombardier were left behind, and extra ammo for the guns was carried. Even with the reduction in weight without the bombs, the added weight of guns and ammo made the aircraft heavier and slower. As a result, once the other bombers had released their bombloads, the YB-40s were outpaced by their lighter brethren, and so failed in their role as escorts. The program was made obsolete not only by its own failures, but by the appearance of long-range fighter escorts that could fill the role much more ably.
- MineSweeper
- Posts: 653
- Joined: Tue Sep 19, 2006 6:03 pm
- Location: Nags Head, NC
RE: Fairey Battles and Boulton Paul Defiants
Deja Vu regarding the Defiants....read that some ME-109s tried to attack some Defiants from the rear, not knowing this type of aircraft (probaly thought they were Hurricanes) and got blasted from the sky for their efforts.....
RE: Fairey Battles and Boulton Paul Defiants
ORIGINAL: niceguy2005
Here's trying to put a happy face on it...
Often maligned as a failure, the Boulton Paul Defiant found a successful niche as a night-fighter during the German 'Blitz' on London, scoring a significant number of combat kills before being relegated to training and support roles.
I have read that the main problem with the fighter was drag and manueverability. The whole concept of a powered turret is curious, but then if you're going to go that far why not go all out and convert a B-17. [:D]
Honestly I can't off the top of my head really think of one really successful fighter design that had a rear gunner
Oh....I can think of one....
Bristol F-2B Brisfit
Dick Doll's Bristol F.2B Brisfit The Bristol Fighter was the most successful two-seat fighter of World War I, and was buiIt to the extent of 4,470 aircraft between 1916 and 1926. It's included in the World's Smallest Air Museum collection because of that importance. Take care to understand the wing joining at the fuselage.
n 1917, the Bristol Fighter was a very misunderstood aeroplane. On 5 April, six Bristol two-seater fighters of No 48 Squadron took off on the aircraft's first operational mission. Only two returned. Near Douai the Bristol Fighters had been attacked by five Albatros DIlls, the aircraft they had been designed to fight against. But conventional two-seater tactics were hopelessly inadequate against the hard-hitting ...
(Best I could do on such short notice)[:D]
- Attachments
-
- IMG.jpg (15.21 KiB) Viewed 63 times
RE: Fairey Battles and Boulton Paul Defiants
ORIGINAL: bbbf
The RAAF had quite a number of Battles as trainers - but never looked at as a combat plane.
Quite right. The Empire Air Training Scheme used large numbers of British serial numbered aircraft.
ID Number: P00869.057
Physical description: Black & white
Summary: EVANS HEAD, NSW. 1941. FAIREY BATTLE AIRCRAFT ON THE AIRFIELD. (DONOR J.S. ARCHBOLD)
Copyright: clear
Related subject: Airfields; Fairey Battle
Related place: Evans Head
Related conflict: Second World War, 1939-1945
- Attachments
-
- P00869.057.jpg (41.47 KiB) Viewed 63 times
Cheers,
Reg.
(One day I will learn to spell - or check before posting....)
Uh oh, Firefox has a spell checker!! What excuse can I use now!!!
Reg.
(One day I will learn to spell - or check before posting....)
Uh oh, Firefox has a spell checker!! What excuse can I use now!!!
RE: Fairey Battles and Boulton Paul Defiants
ORIGINAL: m10bob
Bristol F-2B Brisfit
(Best I could do on such short notice)[:D]
Let's see if we can do a bit better.
(It must be real, it's in colour....... ) [X(]
ID Number: P03631.013
Maker: Hurley, James Francis (Frank)
Place made: Palestine: Mejdel Jaffa Area, Mejdel
Date made: 25 February 1918-28 February 1918
Physical description: Colour
Summary: Observer, pilot, and Bristol Fighter F2B aircraft, Serial B1146, of No. 1 Squadron, Australian Flying Corps. The pilot (left) is Captain (Capt) Ross Macpherson Smith, MC and bar, DFC and two bars. Capt Hurley visited No. 1 Squadron on the 25 and 28 February 1918 and this photograph was probably taken on one of these days. This image is a colour Paget Plate. The same image is available in black and white and is held at B01633.
Copyright: clear
Related conflict: First World War, 1914-1918
Link to much better version of this picture Wikipedia Link
- Attachments
-
- P03631.013.jpg (23.34 KiB) Viewed 63 times
Cheers,
Reg.
(One day I will learn to spell - or check before posting....)
Uh oh, Firefox has a spell checker!! What excuse can I use now!!!
Reg.
(One day I will learn to spell - or check before posting....)
Uh oh, Firefox has a spell checker!! What excuse can I use now!!!
RE: Fairey Battles and Boulton Paul Defiants
ORIGINAL: Reg
ORIGINAL: m10bob
Bristol F-2B Brisfit
(Best I could do on such short notice)[:D]
Let's see if we can do a bit better.
(It must be real, it's in colour....... ) [X(]
ID Number: P03631.013
Maker: Hurley, James Francis (Frank)
Place made: Palestine: Mejdel Jaffa Area, Mejdel
Date made: 25 February 1918-28 February 1918
Physical description: Colour
Summary: Observer, pilot, and Bristol Fighter F2B aircraft, Serial B1146, of No. 1 Squadron, Australian Flying Corps. The pilot (left) is Captain (Capt) Ross Macpherson Smith, MC and bar, DFC and two bars. Capt Hurley visited No. 1 Squadron on the 25 and 28 February 1918 and this photograph was probably taken on one of these days. This image is a colour Paget Plate. The same image is available in black and white and is held at B01633.
Copyright: clear
Related conflict: First World War, 1914-1918
You're the man!![:D][&o]