Venomstick121
Airman 1st Class
- 291
- Dec 21, 2023
you are all goodYes, you're right! I didn't mean to disparage your belief. If I was that would be very uncool of me! Sorry for any hostilities you interpretted!
Most Beautiful Aircraft of WW2?
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Clayton Magnet
Staff Sergeant
- 902
- Feb 16, 2013
A Griffon Spitfire, with unclipped wings and the Malcolm hood, and before the enlarged tail of the Mk.20 series, is tough to beat.
The early Mk.XIV, and PR.XIX are the sweet spot in my opinion.
The early Mk.XIV, and PR.XIX are the sweet spot in my opinion.
I
Dislike all Merlin Spits for their snub noses and small fin and the non-retractable tailwheel.
The very large fin of the Mk. 22 and upwards is ugly, too. So are the frontal chin air-inlets making it look like a guppy.
But you're right! The ones you mentioned are gorgeous!
My favorite is the Mk. 21 with the new wing.
Aesthetically, my absolute favorite Allied fighter.
Like the Griffon bubble-canopy versions of them, too.
Dislike all Merlin Spits for their snub noses and small fin and the non-retractable tailwheel.
The very large fin of the Mk. 22 and upwards is ugly, too. So are the frontal chin air-inlets making it look like a guppy.
But you're right! The ones you mentioned are gorgeous!
My favorite is the Mk. 21 with the new wing.
Aesthetically, my absolute favorite Allied fighter.
Like the Griffon bubble-canopy versions of them, too.
Last edited:
GregP
Major
OK, here an FFVS J 22 with the front end of a Boulton-Paul Defiant grafted on.
I didn't add color and a few "nice to have" things, but a liquid-cooled J 22 looks decent. Not sure whether the wings would have to move forward a bit for CG purposes, but I'm guessing they would be OK where they are.
I didn't add color and a few "nice to have" things, but a liquid-cooled J 22 looks decent. Not sure whether the wings would have to move forward a bit for CG purposes, but I'm guessing they would be OK where they are.
Lucky13
Forum Mascot
First flew on the 18th of March 1945, so....
GregP
Major
One of my favorite airplanes.
In Viet Nam, jets could make 1 or 2 passes over ground troops, then they left to find fuel.
The Skyraiders could orbit for a couple of hours, and every single time one of them made a pass, he could drop something or shoot something. So, they could literally be guardian angles.
While they were overhead, the bad guys were generally on good behavior. Nobody wanted to piss off four Skyraiders since it could very easily prove to be lethal.
In Viet Nam, jets could make 1 or 2 passes over ground troops, then they left to find fuel.
The Skyraiders could orbit for a couple of hours, and every single time one of them made a pass, he could drop something or shoot something. So, they could literally be guardian angles.
While they were overhead, the bad guys were generally on good behavior. Nobody wanted to piss off four Skyraiders since it could very easily prove to be lethal.
Lucky13
Forum Mascot
Well, a few Skyraiders could easily put you in a bit of pickle....
Donivanp
Major
You need a cell of B-52D's! Bad guys were cooked!
Shortround6
Major General
So was anything within a few thousand yds.
Donivanp
Major
AND????
Lucky13
Forum Mascot
Jimbob
Airman 1st Class
at6
1st Sergeant
I've always been partial to the DH Hornet. (I didn't read back 38 pages)
(btw: My rich uncle had me play with his AD-6/7s and CAF friends let me enjoy their P-51s, and they're high on my lust list ... just a bit of shameless bragging about my misspent youth.)
(btw: My rich uncle had me play with his AD-6/7s and CAF friends let me enjoy their P-51s, and they're high on my lust list ... just a bit of shameless bragging about my misspent youth.)
Attachments
Last edited:
The Stannum Liberator
Airman
Hehe, the only positive contribution from a Boulton-Paul Defiant ever.
GregP
Major
C'mon!
It made a good contribution to the RAF by proving to them that turret fighter with the same engine as a single-seater was not an especially good idea. They seem to have taken the lesson to heart as there are no modern turret fighters in RAF service.
Can't be serendipity; it MUST be they learned something from the Defiant and still remember it well enough to not do it again.
It made a good contribution to the RAF by proving to them that turret fighter with the same engine as a single-seater was not an especially good idea. They seem to have taken the lesson to heart as there are no modern turret fighters in RAF service.
Can't be serendipity; it MUST be they learned something from the Defiant and still remember it well enough to not do it again.
yulzari
Staff Sergeant
In 1940-41 it was the best night fighter the RAF had and continued in service after the first radar equipped Blenheims with the Defiant also getting radar. At least it could chase a Ju88 unlike the Blenheim. It was not until the Beaufighter took on the role that the squadrons all moved on from the Defiant. The turret was useful for the role allowing an approach under the Luftwaffe bombers.
Even when it became withdrawn from front line service the Defiant played a vital role as a high speed target tug for AA and fighter training especially with the Hawker Henleys falling out of the sky with overheating engines. There was nothing else at the time that could perform that task. Even used by the USAAF in Britain for target towing.
A concept based upon a flawed, but not unreasonable, assumption that France would not fall so German bombers would not be escorted by single seat fighters. They should have been based in the north to cope with Norwegian based Luftwaffe bombers which had to be unescorted leaving Hurricanes and Spitfires for squadrons further south. With a suitable tactical doctrine, pilot gunsight and training they would have done better but still an unnecessary answer to the wrong question.
Shortround6
Major General
1940-41 covers a great deal of time and my own suspicion is that the Defiant's combat history has been 'tweaked' to keep the idiots who ordered/kept it in production from even further criticism/ridicule.
It appears that the Defiant didn't get radar (at least in squadron service) until Sept 1941? well after the Night blitz was over. Some accounts claim one radar assisted interception by the Defiant?
A lot of Defiant accounts say things like "best at time" without ever saying what the kill rate was or total kills or any way of actually evaluating the results achieved.
The British night fighter force got very dismal results during 1940 and very early 1941. When they are only shooting down 0-4 German planes per month by ALL night fighters combined declaring one type the best due to ability to chase Ju-88s (which were not the majority of night bombers) seems a bit of artistic shading.
The British night fighter successes increased dramatically in the late winter/early spring.
A little perspective.
In the first 2 month of the night blitz the RAF shot down 8 German aircraft out of 12,000 sorties.
The next 3 months were even worse. Just about all intercepts were visual.
It was only in March where the RAF shot down 22 planes in one month, mostly Beaufighters (with radar) due to much practice by both aircrew and ground controllers, and better weather and shorter nights. April saw 48 Germans shot down and the first 2 weeks of May saw 96 shot down. The Defiants were lucky if they scored 1/4 of the kills. By this time the Blenheim's had been pulled from most units. Germans flew off to attack Russia and German activity over Britain decreased substantially.
Defiant was the best night fighter in the fall of 1941 when they got radar at squadron level? I don't think so.
Without radar in 1940 or early 1941 was it the best night fighter? I think again the answer is no. even with two sets of eyes the Defiant was not as good as Beaufighter even with crappy radar. In Defiant accounts much is made of the "superiority" of the Defiant over the Blenheim, Blenheims were being replaced by Beaufighters in the fall of 1940, pretty much as fast as the Beaufighters could be built. However there were not very many Defiants in service in late summer or fall of 1940.
We get stuff like this "By August 1940 it was withdrawn from daylight combat operations but as a A.I. radar equipped night fighter it done extremely well shooting down more raiders per interception than any other night fighter of 1940-1941. *NARROW MARGIN Wood & Dempster p432"
Now seeing as how the Defiant didn't even get radar until Aug/sept of 1941 how did it have a higher success rate that another night fighter of those two years?
Clever wording? more raiders per interception than any other night fighter? Define interception please.
Some accounts claim that the Beaufighters scored over 1/2 the kills of May 1940.
Now if two Defiants actually spot (visually) two German bombers and and count that as interception and shoot down both that is 100%. If we are counting being vectored onto a bogie and failing to make contact is that an "intersection"? If Beaufighters (from several squadrons) are vectored onto over 100 boogies over two weeks time converted 1/2 of them to visuals and manage to shoot down 1/2 of the visuals (25%) of the Vectors) how does that count as to kills per intercept?
The problem is finding all of these supposed Defiant Kills.
The Next problem is sorting out which planes were in Service when. That is actually serving in night fighter squadrons.
In assesing RAF night fighting skills, don't forget they didnt just rely on aircraft, preferably radar equipped, but on the GCI radar network.
Existing CH/CHL radars and back room facilities were not good enough to direct night fighters. The first experimental GCI station was built in Oct 1940 with 6 copies built by the RAE/TRE in Nov/Dec 1940. The first of these was manned 1 Jan 1941 and was handed over to the RAF at the end of that month. These sets included the first operational PPI displays.
These 6 sets went to radar sites at Sopley, Avebury, Durrington, Willesborough, Waldringfield and Orby. These covered an arc round the coast from the Severn estuary to the Humber..
A sector controller within the existing network passed a potential target off to a GCI controller who directed a fighter until it made AI or visual contact (moon permitting).
By July 1941, 17 GCI stations were operational. By the end of 1941 29 were operating. In addition, by Nov 5 CHL stations had been modified to allow direction against low flying Luftwaffe raiders and mine layers. These were augmented by mobile GCI stations over time.
Between Jan & May 1941 enemy losses went from 0.5% to 7%.
By June 1941 the design of the fixed GCI chain had been decided, and the AMES Type 7 radar developed to that design in 6 months. This was supposed to provide multiple controlling facilities and improved radar coverage, longer range and better height finding. But these were slow to enter service, taking until late 1943 for the 21 fixed stations to be completed and then without the multiple controlling facility.
(Watching the Skies. A History of Ground Radar in the Air Defence of the United Kingdom- HMSO)
Existing CH/CHL radars and back room facilities were not good enough to direct night fighters. The first experimental GCI station was built in Oct 1940 with 6 copies built by the RAE/TRE in Nov/Dec 1940. The first of these was manned 1 Jan 1941 and was handed over to the RAF at the end of that month. These sets included the first operational PPI displays.
These 6 sets went to radar sites at Sopley, Avebury, Durrington, Willesborough, Waldringfield and Orby. These covered an arc round the coast from the Severn estuary to the Humber..
A sector controller within the existing network passed a potential target off to a GCI controller who directed a fighter until it made AI or visual contact (moon permitting).
By July 1941, 17 GCI stations were operational. By the end of 1941 29 were operating. In addition, by Nov 5 CHL stations had been modified to allow direction against low flying Luftwaffe raiders and mine layers. These were augmented by mobile GCI stations over time.
Between Jan & May 1941 enemy losses went from 0.5% to 7%.
By June 1941 the design of the fixed GCI chain had been decided, and the AMES Type 7 radar developed to that design in 6 months. This was supposed to provide multiple controlling facilities and improved radar coverage, longer range and better height finding. But these were slow to enter service, taking until late 1943 for the 21 fixed stations to be completed and then without the multiple controlling facility.
(Watching the Skies. A History of Ground Radar in the Air Defence of the United Kingdom- HMSO)
