Battle of Britain: Bf110 losses and victories

[Glider]

I don't know the action being discussed but do know that the plan was for the Defiant to start above the Bomber, dive underneath it, get to the blind spot below and to one side before firing away. While this is happening the bombers top and bottom guns will have the chance to fire first, the bomber will of course stay straight and level and the defending fighters ignore this sitting defenceless duck which is trying to shoot down the bombers.

I have a feeling that even Downing had his doubts, see item 4 in the letter

PS this is the whole letter, the total letter, with nothing added, taken away, modified and/or changed.

 

[Frantish]

("When WW2 started, everyone was still doing WW1 style air combat.")
I don't think that is correct. The Luftwaffe experimented with the Rotte (2 aircraft) and Schwarm (4 aircraft. A pair of Rotte) during the Spanish Civil War. They also worked out dive zoom tactics for the Me-109. These aerial combat techniques were standardized by 1939.

Winds of change was blown at the start of WW1 for sure, but to me it looks like for the most part not much had changed in the way of weapons, tactics, and beliefs.

I have seen pictures of a British funeral parade for 3 LW fliers killed in UK, full military honors and all (I think pre BoB event).

I think it was the BoB that finally ended any remaining WW1 air combat mentality.

It's a subjective opinion by me, or course.

 

[Frantish]

I don't know the action being discussed but do know that the plan was for the Defiant to start above the Bomber, dive underneath it, get to the blind spot below and to one side before firing away. While this is happening the bombers top and bottom guns will have the chance to fire first, the bomber will of course stay straight and level and the defending fighters ignore this sitting defenceless duck which is trying to shoot down the bombers.

With a top speed about 300mph, it would be able to gently weave though formation raking bombers as it zips past. The 4 belt fed .303 is better then the 75 round drums of the single MG-15.

Consider also most attacks on bombers are near 6, the bullet having to go tough a lots of structure to hit vital areas, and of course armor.
Of course with the large glass cockpits of the 111/17/88 a 1 second burst to side or front would be very effective, and that is much easier to do with a turret fighter.

With a fixed gun fighter, it is difficult to accurate make a deflection shot, and then it may be only 1 or 2 seconds, and it is likely you are hitting less vital parts. The Scharge music of the LW hit along the length of aircraft, including direct shots at vital parts.

The correct tactic is again critical, minimizing weakness and maximizing strengths, and due to the specialized nature of the Defiant a strong escort is needed.


We have advantage of history to see what could be. We also have the ability to realize that a few beliefs back then was in fact false.

I think the Definat would have done pretty when attacking bombers, but was in serious trouble if fighters showed up, except if it was on the deck, just above the ground, in a turn so the turret and shoot at attacking fighter.

 

[davebender]

Defiant
Boulton Paul Defiant - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
304 mph max speed @ 17,000 feet.

Ju-88 A4
Junkers Ju 88 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
317 mph max speed


Hmmm. I'm having visions of the Ju-88 dropping it's bombs and then defeating the Defiant in a dog fight.

 

[Shortround6]

Hmmm. I'm having visions of the Ju-88 dropping it's bombs and then defeating the Defiant in a dog fight.

Might I inquire as to just what medication you are taking?

Try comparing a Ju-88A-2 to the Defiant for an early BoB "dogfight" and then try comparing 4 guns to one one.

 

[Frantish]

Defiant
Boulton Paul Defiant - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
304 mph max speed @ 17,000 feet.

Ju-88 A4
Junkers Ju 88 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
317 mph max speed


Hmmm. I'm having visions of the Ju-88 dropping it's bombs and then defeating the Defiant in a dog fight.

In the BoB it was the 88A-1 which was slower, enough for the Defiant to catch.

You have to be careful when quoting speeds, it is not that simple X vs Y.
Time, Loadout, Alt, variant.

 

[davebender]

The so called "Battle of Britain" lasted about 3 months. No German aircraft is going to excel in that environment unless they are produced in much greater numbers then what happened historically.

Meanwhile there were another 56 months of WWII in Europe. How do you think that Defiant fighter aircraft would perform during those 56 months? I think it would get slaughtered even if it receives newer model Merlin engines over time.

 

[Shortround6]

The so called "Battle of Britain" lasted about 3 months. No German aircraft is going to excel in that environment unless they are produced in much greater numbers then what happened historically.

Meanwhile there were another 56 months of WWII in Europe. How do you think that Defiant fighter aircraft would perform during those 56 months? I think it would get slaughtered even if it receives newer model Merlin engines over time.

Changing the argument?

No one is claiming the Defiant was a really good idea or that it could have gone on to serve another 56 months. You were talking about JU-88s dogfighting Defiants.

Of course if you want to compare the JU-88A-1 and A-2 to the Defiant MK I that is one thing.

If you want to use the A-4 then maybe you should compare it to the MK II Defiant Night fighter since by 1941 most Luftwaffe raids were being conducted at night. Speed is up to 313mph compared to the JU-88s 317mph. Of course that 317mph is without external bomb racks fitted let alone the bombs. With the racks I doubt either plane would have enough of a speed advantage to overtake the other. Of course since the Defiant does have radar (OK not very good radar) it might get a bit of advanced notice on the JU-88.
The JU-88A-4 needed the racks because on that model they had blanked off half the bomb bay to fit an additional fuel tank so without the racks the bomb load was 1100lbs.

 

[Frantish]

Meanwhile there were another 56 months of WWII in Europe. How do you think that Defiant fighter aircraft would perform during those 56 months? I think it would get slaughtered even if it receives newer model Merlin engines over time.

Shortround6 is correct, no aircraft would last without changing the design, engines, functions, operation, etc.

And I never said the Defiant would last the war.

Let me be clear, and this again is reference to the 110's.
Any warplane to succeed must use the tactics that emphasize its strengths, and compensate for its weaknesses. When its strengths are few, its usefulness is limited, but it is still useful.

By 1940 it was clear the 110's and Defiant usefulness as a dog fighter was all but gone, however there was niche missions both could do well in, if flown correctly.

 

[davebender]

Germany probably had more night fighters employed against Britain during 1941 to 1945 then day fighters. That's a primary mission, not a niche mission.

 

[Glider]

By 1940 it was clear the 110's and Defiant usefulness as a dog fighter was all but gone, however there was niche missions both could do well in, if flown correctly.

By 1940 the 110's usefulness as a dogfighter was all but gone, that I agree. That the Defiant ever had a chance as a dogfighter I disagree, it was a bad idea that never had a chance, was a waste of resources and tragically the cause of wasted lives. Period

 

[parsifal]

By 1940 the 110's usefulness as a dogfighter was all but gone, that I agree. That the Defiant ever had a chance as a dogfighter I disagree, it was a bad idea that never had a chance, was a waste of resources and tragically the cause of wasted lives. Period

Apologies, because i have not read all the posts. I think it was a waste and a bad idea as a day fighter. Its whole conception was flawed. It had some success however, as a night fighter, shortround said the radar was not very good. That would be true if measured against the later war AI radars, but in 1941 it had the best AI radar in the world, and according to Gunston, these enjoyed considerable success.

The Defiant was retired, not because it was unsuccessful, but because its successor, the Beaufighter NF offered much better capability.

 

[Milosh]

Germany probably had more night fighters employed against Britain during 1941 to 1945 then day fighters. That's a primary mission, not a niche mission.

June 24 1941
Night fighters > 148
Fighters > 229 Luftflotte 3 (Fance, Belgium, Holland)

July 27 1942
Night fighters > 203
Fighters > 274 Luftflotte 3 (Fance, Belgium, Holland)

May 17 1943
Night fighters > 378
Fighters > 358 Luftflotte 3 (Fance, Belgium, Holland)

So it was not until mid 1943 that there was more NFs and not all those NFs were deployed in the West.

Ma 31 1944
Luftflotte 3 (Fance, Belgium, Holland)
Night fighters > 102
Fighters > 168

April 9 1945
Night fighters > 485
Fighters > 1305

 

[Glider]

Apologies, because i have not read all the posts. I think it was a waste and a bad idea as a day fighter. Its whole conception was flawed. It had some success however, as a night fighter, shortround said the radar was not very good. That would be true if measured against the later war AI radars, but in 1941 it had the best AI radar in the world, and according to Gunston, these enjoyed considerable success.

The Defiant was retired, not because it was unsuccessful, but because its successor, the Beaufighter NF offered much better capability.

I was commenting in its use as a day fighter. As a stop gap night fighter it probably did better than most people expected helping fill a significant gap until the Beaufighter was available in numbers.