Wild_Bill_Kelso
Senior Master Sergeant
- 3,231
- Mar 18, 2022
I was relieved, reading it. that my old-ass memory was working, for a change.
I know that feeling
FAA Seafire vs Corsair
- Thread starter aircro
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
I know that feeling
Wild_Bill_Kelso
Senior Master Sergeant
- 3,231
- Mar 18, 2022
Found it. It was an interview with 10 victory Ace Bobby Gibbes. The interview is here
http://www.3squadron.org.au/subpages/AWMGibbes.htm
This is the excerpt in question:
"Well, the Yanks put in a squadron when they first came into the war. They attached a squadron to our wing, 239 Wing, named 66 Squadron, commanded by an American major called 'Buck' Bilby. I happened to be leading the wing on this occasion and before taking off I had a chat to Buck and I said, 'Now, you are flying the same formation as we are, aren't you, Buck?'. And when he told me the formation he was flying I said, 'Well, that formation has gone out with the blades. If you're not flying our Formation, you're not coming'. And that caused a bit of a furore when the Yankee squadron was forced to remain on the ground and I led off with the wing. Later, of course, I was backed up by my seniors and the Americans had to practice our formation. At that juncture we had very bad radio communication. We had HF, we didn't have VHF in those days. And a lot of our pilots would be shot down because of radio breakdown. You'd see an attack coming in, you'd try and warn them but with the radio being ineffective they often were shot down. If they'd heard on the radio, of course, they wouldn't have been. We evolved a formation of every pilot in the squadron, even including the leader of the squadron, all weaving. We flew in pairs but weaving backwards and forwards behind each other so that this way you were able to cover the whole sky ahead, above, below and behind. And each one was keeping a pretty strict look out. The Americans.... The Germans, by the way, called us the 'Waltzing Matildas'. It was a very effective formation. If an attack came in from behind, we'd scream out - the lead would - 'Duck!'. We'd all do 180 degree turn and when the German attack would come in, or the Italian attack would come in, we'd all be facing them, and this was very effective. The Americans eventually did adopt our formation while they flew with us...."
I don't see anything about the VHF and the buttons, I must have read that somewhere else.
http://www.3squadron.org.au/subpages/AWMGibbes.htm
This is the excerpt in question:
"Well, the Yanks put in a squadron when they first came into the war. They attached a squadron to our wing, 239 Wing, named 66 Squadron, commanded by an American major called 'Buck' Bilby. I happened to be leading the wing on this occasion and before taking off I had a chat to Buck and I said, 'Now, you are flying the same formation as we are, aren't you, Buck?'. And when he told me the formation he was flying I said, 'Well, that formation has gone out with the blades. If you're not flying our Formation, you're not coming'. And that caused a bit of a furore when the Yankee squadron was forced to remain on the ground and I led off with the wing. Later, of course, I was backed up by my seniors and the Americans had to practice our formation. At that juncture we had very bad radio communication. We had HF, we didn't have VHF in those days. And a lot of our pilots would be shot down because of radio breakdown. You'd see an attack coming in, you'd try and warn them but with the radio being ineffective they often were shot down. If they'd heard on the radio, of course, they wouldn't have been. We evolved a formation of every pilot in the squadron, even including the leader of the squadron, all weaving. We flew in pairs but weaving backwards and forwards behind each other so that this way you were able to cover the whole sky ahead, above, below and behind. And each one was keeping a pretty strict look out. The Americans.... The Germans, by the way, called us the 'Waltzing Matildas'. It was a very effective formation. If an attack came in from behind, we'd scream out - the lead would - 'Duck!'. We'd all do 180 degree turn and when the German attack would come in, or the Italian attack would come in, we'd all be facing them, and this was very effective. The Americans eventually did adopt our formation while they flew with us...."
I don't see anything about the VHF and the buttons, I must have read that somewhere else.
Found this regarding RAF radios around the start of the war.
"The basic set for all bombers was the TRF General Purose radio, consisting of the R1082 and T1083. This set operated at low frequency, so large range, and was intended for communication of the individual a/c with their base. With a rotatable antenna it could be used for direction finding. As far as I know this set was NOT used for a/c to a/c communication.
For fighters there was the TR9D, consisting of the R1120 and T1119, operating at 4.4-6 MHz. Range of this set was very poor, and was useless a few km away from the air field. So it could then only be used for a/c to a/c communication.
Around May new fighter a/c were started to be equiped with the much better TR1133 set. I expect that not many units in France already used this radio, probably only home based Fighter Command a/c.
Coastal Command used a simplified version of the TR9D, the TR9J
The TR9F was installed into bombers probably from the end of 1940, adding a 2nd channel and possibly a/c to a/ccommunication. So it is pretty impossible to find TR9F in May 1940 a/c."
TR9D was an HF set and TR1133 a VHF set. Being dimensionally identical they could be easily swapped.
By the time of Dunkirk 8 Fighter Command squadrons (4 Spitfire & 4 Hurricane) had been given TR1133, but reverted to TR9D. This was to maintain uniformity of communications across the Command. From "Air Power and the Evacuation of Dunkirk" the TR9D was deficient in range and signal clarity and was prone to atmospheric and electromagnetic interference. The other problem was ensuring that all squadrons in the area had the correct crystals. Each Group apparently operated on its own frequency. Movement between Groups at short notice could result in the inability to communicate with other units.
Overseas the HF TR9D continued for much longer. I've read that refitting it was one of the topicalisation modifications required for Spitfire V. The first Spitfires didn't leave the U.K. until Feb 1942.
This may also be of interest. Someone researching BoB communications for a war game.
"The basic set for all bombers was the TRF General Purose radio, consisting of the R1082 and T1083. This set operated at low frequency, so large range, and was intended for communication of the individual a/c with their base. With a rotatable antenna it could be used for direction finding. As far as I know this set was NOT used for a/c to a/c communication.
For fighters there was the TR9D, consisting of the R1120 and T1119, operating at 4.4-6 MHz. Range of this set was very poor, and was useless a few km away from the air field. So it could then only be used for a/c to a/c communication.
Around May new fighter a/c were started to be equiped with the much better TR1133 set. I expect that not many units in France already used this radio, probably only home based Fighter Command a/c.
Coastal Command used a simplified version of the TR9D, the TR9J
The TR9F was installed into bombers probably from the end of 1940, adding a 2nd channel and possibly a/c to a/ccommunication. So it is pretty impossible to find TR9F in May 1940 a/c."
TR9D was an HF set and TR1133 a VHF set. Being dimensionally identical they could be easily swapped.
By the time of Dunkirk 8 Fighter Command squadrons (4 Spitfire & 4 Hurricane) had been given TR1133, but reverted to TR9D. This was to maintain uniformity of communications across the Command. From "Air Power and the Evacuation of Dunkirk" the TR9D was deficient in range and signal clarity and was prone to atmospheric and electromagnetic interference. The other problem was ensuring that all squadrons in the area had the correct crystals. Each Group apparently operated on its own frequency. Movement between Groups at short notice could result in the inability to communicate with other units.
Overseas the HF TR9D continued for much longer. I've read that refitting it was one of the topicalisation modifications required for Spitfire V. The first Spitfires didn't leave the U.K. until Feb 1942.
This may also be of interest. Someone researching BoB communications for a war game.
Wild_Bill_Kelso
Senior Master Sergeant
- 3,231
- Mar 18, 2022
My understanding is that in this case, which would have been 1942 in North Africa, the regular pilots had short range radios used for communication within the squadron, and the squadron leaders has either a different radio or two radios, and they would switch bands from the squadron to the base, and / or sometimes to the other units they were flying with (bombers they were escorting etc.)
Shortround6
Major General
US army fighters could have 3 "radios".
common was the SCR-522
Four frequencies selectable by push buttons/
Also common was the SCR-274 "radio" which was actually up to 5 units in one. Usually two sperate transmitters and 3 receivers. There was a bewildering set of possible combinations.
Selector switch selected between the different radios in the rack.
There was also the IFF "radio" with demolition charge.
Please note the SCR-522 had 6 watts of power and the SCR-274 had 40 watts CW and 20 watts voice.
Also note that the SCR-522 frequencies were very high and often restricted the range to line of sight.
The P-40F manual gives some general guide lines.
Radios changed a lot during the war, there were newer models and sometimes you had old radios with new designations. The SCR-274 became the AN/ARC-5 in the navy and since it was a modular construction set it depended on the different types of transmitters and receivers for its actual characteristics.
In fighters the SCR-274 was preset and not tunable in flight. or not tunable very much. In multi seat aircraft there dials that could be adjusted/tuned and with enough time crystals could be changed in flight. Large aircraft could use larger/more powerful transmitters and they could use different antennas. Often they used trailing antennae's of around 100ft in length.
common was the SCR-522
Four frequencies selectable by push buttons/
Also common was the SCR-274 "radio" which was actually up to 5 units in one. Usually two sperate transmitters and 3 receivers. There was a bewildering set of possible combinations.
Selector switch selected between the different radios in the rack.
There was also the IFF "radio" with demolition charge.
Please note the SCR-522 had 6 watts of power and the SCR-274 had 40 watts CW and 20 watts voice.
Also note that the SCR-522 frequencies were very high and often restricted the range to line of sight.
The P-40F manual gives some general guide lines.
Radios changed a lot during the war, there were newer models and sometimes you had old radios with new designations. The SCR-274 became the AN/ARC-5 in the navy and since it was a modular construction set it depended on the different types of transmitters and receivers for its actual characteristics.
In fighters the SCR-274 was preset and not tunable in flight. or not tunable very much. In multi seat aircraft there dials that could be adjusted/tuned and with enough time crystals could be changed in flight. Large aircraft could use larger/more powerful transmitters and they could use different antennas. Often they used trailing antennae's of around 100ft in length.
Hi
I think you will find that the radio at the Dardanelles was Wireless Telegraphy (Morse) not telephony. Telegraphy for artillery observation was in use on the Western front during 1914 by all sides, although in short supply so other methods of communication were also in use eg. signal lamps and pyrotechnics. Extracts from a RFC arty spotting document of December 1914 showing methods of communication below:
The book 'The Air Defence of Britain 1914-1918' by Cole & Cheesman goes into fair amount detail on voice communication used in air defence in Britain.
For pre-WW1 British trials and experiments with communications between air and ground, including wireless, there is my article, 'Communication and Aircraft: The British Military Experience', published in 'Cross & Cockade International Journal' of Winter 2019, for those interested. I also covered the experiments on voice communication between aircraft and tanks during WW1 to some extent in a two-part article on 'Tank Contact Patrols' in the Winter 2009 and Spring 2010 editions of the same journal.
Mike
Oh, oops, forgot that, useful to know. Thanks Mike. I wrote a series of articles on aviation in the Dardanelles campaign years back. Brain's a little fuzzy. I've had a couple of articles published in Cross + Cockade, mainly about early torpedo aeroplanes, and by association the Dardanelles, and I've always found the subject fascinating because of the scope of aviation during the conflict. The use of technologies such as wireless and photo recon was groundbreaking, but it barely gets a mention in the scheme of things. A good series of articles was Over the Wine Dark Sea, which was published in C+C about the campaign. Very insightful.
GreenKnight121
Senior Airman
- 637
- Mar 16, 2014
DC generators for the electrical system were the standard for autos long after WW2 - our 1962 GMC Carryall (and the 1954 Willy's CJ-3B Jeep) had a generator, not an alternator (the alternator has an extra circuit called a bridge rectifier, which converts the AC current produced by the alternator to the DC current used by the vehicle electrical equipment).
The generator DOES produce static that is heard in an improperly filtered/shielded radio... we always knew when the filter capacitors on the power feed to the AM radio were going bad, as you could hear noise that varied in frequency and intensity with the engine RPM.
When we got the 1972 Chevy Blazer it was amazing how much clearer the AM stations came in.
SaparotRob
Unter Gemeine Geschwader Murmeltier XIII
I will sometimes switch my car's radio to the AM band, tune it between stations, and listen to the engine firing.
Sort of like the first gent in this article. Although he does talk a bit about turning…
Flying the Seafire: a comparison with the Vought F4U Corsair and Hawker Sea Fury - The Aviation Geek Club
Flying the Seafire: a comparison with the Vought F4U Corsair and Hawker Sea Fury
theaviationgeekclub.com
Thumpalumpacus
Major
We had a 65 Dodge truck with that going on. The frequency of the static would rise and fall with rpms.
Sort of like the first gent in this article. Although he does talk a bit about turning…
Flying the Seafire: a comparison with the Vought F4U Corsair and Hawker Sea Fury - The Aviation Geek Club
Flying the Seafire: a comparison with the Vought F4U Corsair and Hawker Sea Fury
Although he's a bit disingenuous.
Even the Seafire III, the last wartime variant had a decidedly pedestrian top speed of just 350mph on a good day, it required the F-4U to dump all its advantages and come play on your terms for this turning fight.
And the last WWII Corsair version, the F-4U4? It was a beast - arguably one of the best piston engined fighters ever.
Wild_Bill_Kelso
Senior Master Sergeant
- 3,231
- Mar 18, 2022
Interesting that even that guy notes that a Corsair could 'turn with' a Seafire at low speed, with flaps etc., that is news to me
His comment about, "if we saw them first" is a little telling. My guess is that the Corsair was more able to dictate the terms of the dogfight than the Seafire. It sounds like the Seafire needed to get it into a turning fight to gain the advantage. But, I could just be reading a lot into it.
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
There's a maneuver called a yo-yo...
As mentioned, "the Corsair was more able to dictate the terms of the dogfight than the Seafire."
Wild_Bill_Kelso
Senior Master Sergeant
- 3,231
- Mar 18, 2022
There's a maneuver called a yo-yo...
As mentioned, "the Corsair was more able to dictate the terms of the dogfight than the Seafire."
Some people claim that WW2 pilots didn't do Yo Yo but from pilot interviews it sounds like they did. This is how Robert DeHaven described turning with a Zero in a P-40:
[Y]ou could fight a Jap on even terms, but you had to make him fight your way. He could outturn you at slow speed. You could outturn him at high speed. When you got into a turning fight with him, you dropped your nose down so you kept your airspeed up, you could outturn him. At low speed he could outroll you because of those big ailerons ... on the Zero. If your speed was up over 275, you could outroll [a Zero]. His big ailerons didn't have the strength to make high speed rolls... You could push things, too. Because ... f you decided to go home, you could go home. He couldn't because you could outrun him. [...] That left you in control of the fight.
Which sounds to me like a Low Yo Yo
I wonder what the story was there ... looking at the test at : Seafire Mk. III Trials
Using that as a starting point and moving to photos of BPF Seafires -- it seems like refinements would include:
- individual exhaust stubs instead of triple ejector fishtails and heaters
- small cannon bulges instead of large 'universal wing' bulges
- unused 20-mm stubs faired over instead of hemispherical blanks (I see quite a few examples of both, it seems)
------------------------------------- - Aero-Vee air filter instead of temperate air intake with snow guard ... I'm sure the larger air intake was a downside but I'm assuming there was no snow guard in the Pacific
- how prevalent was the +18 boost upgrade?
Thumpalumpacus
Major
My understanding is that yoyos both low and high are useful for cutting turn radius insofar as they either expend extra energy (high yoyo), thereby shortening the radius of the turn, or in the case of a low yoyo, allow you to pick up speed and still maintain a tight turn.
Not being a pilot, much less a fighter pilot, I can only get it from reading or flying a sim, which may or may not be accurate. But essentially a yoyo burns turn-radius into the vertical plane and ideally allows you to maintain a suitable horizontal turn-radius with the hope of catching a suitable sight-picture, either by burning off speed in a high yoyo, or recapturing speed in a low yoyo.
Wild_Bill_Kelso
Senior Master Sergeant
- 3,231
- Mar 18, 2022
yep, and I think that is what DeHaven meant by 'putting your nose down' in the turn.
Some of the pilots in the Med mentioned cutting turns tight going nose down and deploying a small amount of flaps. The P-40 had a flap control on the joystick. They didn't have a specific combat flap setting but apparently would deploy some in certain maneuvers. Going nose down helps pick up the speed you would normally lose with some flaps down.
Some of the pilots in the Med mentioned cutting turns tight going nose down and deploying a small amount of flaps. The P-40 had a flap control on the joystick. They didn't have a specific combat flap setting but apparently would deploy some in certain maneuvers. Going nose down helps pick up the speed you would normally lose with some flaps down.
Thumpalumpacus
Major
Right, and if you're coming down in a dive and trying to overshoot your opponent, pulling into a high yoyo will both reduce horizontal turn radius and preserve alt.
