British Dive Bombers or lack thereof

[Thumpalumpacus]

Was this a night-operation? I do remember an F6F-3E/N or F6F-5N doing a dive-attack on a destroyer at night which either sank it or disabled the ship in 1944.

No, this happened in Dec 41 in the initial Japanese invasion of the island. They lost Kisaragi to a bomb from a Wildcat. Hellcats were obviously not in service at that time.

I think it was an F11C actually.

Wasn't that a fighter? Or did it have a dive-bomber variant?

 

[Shortround6]

Why would it fall 16 f/s in the first second and not 32?

Because the bomb/projectile starts at zero speed (not counting the speed of the aircraft) and ends at 32ft/sec at the end of the 1st second.
the 2nd second has the bomb starting at 32fs and ending at 64fs for a drop of 48ft
the 3rd second has the bomb starting at 64fs and ending at 96fs for a drop of 80ft

Remember that this the acceleration due to gravity and applies to all falling projectiles which is what makes long range gunnery such a problem.

 

[Shortround6]

No, this happened in Dec 41 in the initial Japanese invasion of the island. They lost Kisaragi to a bomb from a Wildcat. Hellcats were obviously not in service at that time.

You are correct but it was shortly after dawn. The Wildcats had taken off in the dark and climbed to 15,000ft-20,000ft and stayed there while the Japanese invasion force vs shore battery action played out. Once the Japanese began to withdraw the Wildcats were called into action to harass the Japanese on their back out. They only had four F4Fs left at this point.

 

[Shortround6]

From what I've seen and read not really although it seemed the USN favored 60/70 degrees (I think that's mentioned in the video clip I posted earlier).

once you get into the very high angles the actual attitude of the plane is different than the dive angle (flight path)
Could be wrong but I seem to recall reading that SBDs that did dive at 90 degrees actually traced a flight path that was closer to 80 degrees.
The wings provided "lift" and offset the aircraft from the direction that the nose was pointed in.
I think this was one reason of the incidence of the wing on the Vengeance.
Now between 1940 and 1944-45 there could have been any number of changes in techniques/tactics in dive bombing by the USN.

To get most dive bombers to actually dive at a pure 90 degrees they have to go 'over center' and get the wings into a negative incidence angle of attack.

They may have found it was more trouble than it it was worth. Both in time to establish the dive and the time to pull out.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

once you get into the very high angles the actual attitude of the plane is different than the dive angle (flight path)
Could be wrong but I seem to recall reading that SBDs that did dive at 90 degrees actually traced a flight path that was closer to 80 degrees.

I've recall reading that as well, I think 90 was the maximum

 

[swampyankee]

So, there wasn't exactly a specific angle that was uniformly used?

Was this a night-operation? I do remember an F6F-3E/N or F6F-5N doing a dive-attack on a destroyer at night which either sank it or disabled the ship in 1944.

Understood.
Was that actually the criteria that was used for being competitive? I do remember some dive-bomber concepts such as the XA-41 which was considered inadequate in speed because it wasn't competitive with fighters (top speed was 333 at sea level; 363 at altitude and 354 at some altitude).

Out of curiosity, what qualities were generally desired in a WWII dive-bomber from a handling stand-point? It seemed the USN and USAAF had different ideals for what they wanted (the USAAF seemed to have higher g-load requirements).
Yeah, so you'd want a plane that has very good aerodynamic breaking so it can dive suitably steep without picking up too much speed, while being able to release suitably low and not rip the wings off the plane, incapacitate the pilot, or get hit by shrapnel?
Why would it fall 16 f/s in the first second and not 32?

I think it was an F11C actually.

In a vacuum, distance is one-half acceleration multiplied by time squared plus initial speed multiplied by time.

 

[SaparotRob]

Was this a night-operation? I do remember an F6F-3E/N or F6F-5N doing a dive-attack on a destroyer at night which either sank it or disabled the ship in 1944.

No. This was during the Japanese invasion in December '41.

 

[SaparotRob]

In a vacuum, distance is one-half acceleration multiplied by time squared plus initial speed multiplied by time.

But that works only for spherical chickens in vacuum.

 

[swampyankee]

But that works only for spherical chickens in vacuum.

It also works for spherical cows.

 

[SaparotRob]

The things one learns here.