Fatboy Coxy
Airman 1st Class
- 129
- Aug 24, 2019
Hi all, the Fairey Battle is much maligned aircraft, primary for its disastrous losses in May 1940, when it was called upon to destroy the bridges and pontoons across the Meuse. Attacking without fighter escort, flying low to avoid detection from German standing fighter patrols, it was badly exposed to AA ground fire, attacking vital strategic points which were sure to be well defended. Losses were simply horrendous.
But was it so bad, the Blenheim, the new French Breguet 693 and the German Stuka all suffered catastrophic losses when caught alone without fighter escort, while operating in a tactical air role, attacking key points.
If we put the Battle in an environment of clear air superiority, how well does she stand up to the task of attacking those bridges and pontoons?
Firstly, she doesn't have to approach targets at tree top, and be exposed to light AA flying to the target, which was something they did to avoid the German fighters, so her approach can be at something like 5,000 ft
Secondly, she can dive bomb, not at the fantastic angles of the Stuka, but 60 degrees would surely give a better accuracy than level bombing at 5,000 feet.
Thirdly she carried four 250lb General Purpose bombs, a good size for the time, which wouldn't have any problems with pontoon bridges, and I suspect if all four could hit a steel truss bridge, they might well take a span down.
She was very vulnerable to ground fire, in part due to no self-sealing tanks, and her acceleration away after the bomb release, despite being 1,000 lb lighter, was very poor. Self-sealing tanks could have been back fitted in late 1940, if not earlier, but being re-engined, which was greatly needed, meant a commitment to a tactical approach which without air superiority wasn't viable.
Nevertheless, she would have done ok for the time, in that environment, accepting the instillation of seal sealing tanks, and maybe some amour protection being fitted. What do you think?
Regards
Fatboy Coxy
But was it so bad, the Blenheim, the new French Breguet 693 and the German Stuka all suffered catastrophic losses when caught alone without fighter escort, while operating in a tactical air role, attacking key points.
If we put the Battle in an environment of clear air superiority, how well does she stand up to the task of attacking those bridges and pontoons?
Firstly, she doesn't have to approach targets at tree top, and be exposed to light AA flying to the target, which was something they did to avoid the German fighters, so her approach can be at something like 5,000 ft
Secondly, she can dive bomb, not at the fantastic angles of the Stuka, but 60 degrees would surely give a better accuracy than level bombing at 5,000 feet.
Thirdly she carried four 250lb General Purpose bombs, a good size for the time, which wouldn't have any problems with pontoon bridges, and I suspect if all four could hit a steel truss bridge, they might well take a span down.
She was very vulnerable to ground fire, in part due to no self-sealing tanks, and her acceleration away after the bomb release, despite being 1,000 lb lighter, was very poor. Self-sealing tanks could have been back fitted in late 1940, if not earlier, but being re-engined, which was greatly needed, meant a commitment to a tactical approach which without air superiority wasn't viable.
Nevertheless, she would have done ok for the time, in that environment, accepting the instillation of seal sealing tanks, and maybe some amour protection being fitted. What do you think?
Regards
Fatboy Coxy
