Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Which, then brings me to another question: Why did the RAF have so much difficulty coordinating fighter escort? They could never seem to get their fighters and bombers in the same basic area of sky...
It isn't easy in contested air space, after the Battle of France Goering asked where his Luftwaffe had gone.Which, then brings me to another question: Why did the RAF have so much difficulty coordinating fighter escort? They could never seem to get their fighters and bombers in the same basic area of sky...
...
Unfortunately, without rework the Hercules rather spoils the view over the nose.
The Early Hercules was good for about 1375hp for take-off (a definite improvement over the early Merlins) and around 1410-1425hp at low altitudes in low blower. However the power in high blower was 1210-1250hp at 15-16,750ft depending on fuel. Drag of the early Hercules installation is going to suck up a fair amount of the extra power.
The Battles, as flown in France had little, if any armor or BP glass and quite possible self sealing tanks unless refitted in the Field?.
Any ideas for using them past the summer of 1940 should take into account several hundred pounds of protection.
...
At such an altitude the bomb sight and bomb aimer were useless. Useful as the Battle may have been for such duties too often in the Battle for France it was used to attack bridges or river crossings with high concentrations of AA guns. Large, slow and unprotected the Battles suffered as might well be expected.
I thought the problem with fighter escort had to do with coordinating the escorts so they would be in the same part of sky (well, maybe not the *exact* same spot, but...), you're saying they didn't even *contemplate* using fighters to escort the planes along?1939 - May/June 1940:
-RAF: what do you mean 'fighter escort'??
-French AF: there is no such thing as 'fighter escort'.
-USAAC: fighter what?
-Soviet AF: fighter escort? Do you want to spend some time in Siberia?
So the problem was that they were too busy defending waves of Bf.109's to be able to escort Battles?It isn't easy in contested air space, after the Battle of France Goering asked where his Luftwaffe had gone.
Books are written on such things, how do you escort a squadron of Battles?So the problem was that they were too busy defending waves of Bf.109's to be able to escort Battles?
1 Squadron of fighters for each Battle, that's how it was done in 1941 with Blenheims.Books are written on such things, how do you escort a squadron of Battles?
Well the Battle is slower and there are more enemy A/C around so lets double that eh?1 Squadron of fighters for each Battle, that's how it was done in 1941 with Blenheims.
Yeah, but I don't have such books. A title would be nice.Books are written on such things, how do you escort a squadron of Battles?
You have already been given one by Fubar, just consider how you would escort a squadron of Battles on a low level attack on a bridge?Yeah, but I don't have such books. A title would be nice.
First you destroy all the enemy fighters. That's what happened in the Pacific. First the Hellcats went in to clear the skies of fighters. Then the Avengers were sent in.You have already been given one by Fubar, just consider how you would escort a squadron of Battles on a low level attack on a bridge?
Well yes, but not 20 miles from Japan the day after Pearl Habor.First you destroy all the enemy fighters. That's what happened in the Pacific. First the Hellcats went in to clear the skies of fighters. Then the Avengers were sent in.
That looks like the perfect formation for a bounce. I read about such formations that lost two or three of their members without anyone being aware of what happened.View attachment 567731
Fairey Battles of No. 88 Squadron RAF based at Mourmelon-le-Grand, fly in formation with Curtiss Hawk 75s of 1e escadrille GC 1/2 of the French Air Force.
It is a lot easier to arrange a propaganda photo than an actual escort mission. In many cases the bombers were not at the same bases as the fighters so some sort of rendezvous was needed. The communications network was a bit lacking (massive understatement) If the fighters weren't there (at the rendezvous) the bombers often pressed on to the attack anyway.
calling off the attack and trying again the next day on the Bridge targets just ment another days worth of German troops and supplies across the river.
One problem I can readily see is that they often made attacks at very low altitude when they'd have been better off starting high up and diving down onto a target instead. From what was written in a manual for the Fairey Battle, the plane could do some very steep dives, with the limit being set (in essence) by airspeed and propeller RPM
While I knew the bombers and fighters weren't at the same base. I'm just surprised they couldn't arrange the rendezvous. As for the communications network, why was it lacking? Was it due to poor planning, or due to the war itself?View attachment 567731
Fairey Battles of No. 88 Squadron RAF based at Mourmelon-le-Grand, fly in formation with Curtiss Hawk 75s of 1e escadrille GC 1/2 of the French Air Force.
It is a lot easier to arrange a propaganda photo than an actual escort mission. In many cases the bombers were not at the same bases as the fighters so some sort of rendezvous was needed.
That's a strange feature to omit from a plane that could do dive-bombing, wouldn't you say?The Battle had no dive bombing sight.
Look at the pic posted by Shortround. The enemy can dive out of the sun, they can dive from behind or just climb up from behind and below. It looks like the Battles are being escorted, in fact it is just presenting a bigger, equally slow target with all eyes and guns in the same formation.Yeah, but I don't have such books. A title would be nice.