Researching RAF Squadrons

[Browning303]

Hi all, I hope I'm posting in the right section for this question.

I'm currently trying to write a short book on the RAF from Dunkirk through to the Blitz. I'm trying to research certain squadrons, specifically why the RAF deployed certain squadrons in certain locations. When did they decide to stop using the Fairey Battle in France? Who made the decision to place Defiants in Kent (and within range of the 109s) for the battle of Britain and what was the logic of this?

I have accessed pilot combat records from the national archives as part of my research. While it's very useful for getting an insight into the aircraft types and specific actions, they don't provide information on the more strategic decisions around why certain squadrons were located in certain places. Especially as with the benefit of hindsight some of these decisions seem ill thought through.

Thanks for any help anybody can offer!

 

[gingerbob]

You might be able to find some information in files of Fighter Command (AIR 16, and probably others, such as (possibly) "private files of AOCinC Fighter Command", but my (fairly limited) experience is that it might require some poking around. That is, you may not be able to find a file entitled, for example, "Where to station Defiants"! (That's not meant to sound patronizing- I did research on the Spitfire, and at first had more than enough files that came up simply by searching for the word Spitfire. But that only takes you so far. I've also found that some of the best nuggets are in a seemingly unrelated file: "Oh, by the way, that question you had about xxx...")

It is also quite likely that some of those, for example, "Who should we send to Biggin Hill when we pull 164 Squadron out for a rest?" were never recorded on paper, or if they were, the files might not have survived.

Watch out for the trap of hindsight- remember that in May/June 1940 the Defiant was considered a perfectly viable, perhaps even "cutting edge" bomber-defence fighter. As an example, I saw some files concerning how to prioritize the Merlin XX, and the decision wavered a bit between Defiant and Hurricane.

One final(?) bit of advice: Consult some scholarly books, and pay close attention to the sources given in the footnotes. That can give you some massive "short-cuts" in tracking down places to start looking. And don't worry about the fact that somebody else has already drawn on that file- we all recognize different gems, or have our own perspectives on things. Check out Greg Baughen's books- he covers that period and has a fresh perspective. Whether you agree with him or not, it is nice to have something other than the "standard telling" to consider.

bob

 

[Browning303]

You might be able to find some information in files of Fighter Command (AIR 16, and probably others, such as (possibly) "private files of AOCinC Fighter Command", but my (fairly limited) experience is that it might require some poking around. That is, you may not be able to find a file entitled, for example, "Where to station Defiants"! (That's not meant to sound patronizing- I did research on the Spitfire, and at first had more than enough files that came up simply by searching for the word Spitfire. But that only takes you so far. I've also found that some of the best nuggets are in a seemingly unrelated file: "Oh, by the way, that question you had about xxx...")

It is also quite likely that some of those, for example, "Who should we send to Biggin Hill when we pull 164 Squadron out for a rest?" were never recorded on paper, or if they were, the files might not have survived.

Watch out for the trap of hindsight- remember that in May/June 1940 the Defiant was considered a perfectly viable, perhaps even "cutting edge" bomber-defence fighter. As an example, I saw some files concerning how to prioritize the Merlin XX, and the decision wavered a bit between Defiant and Hurricane.

One final(?) bit of advice: Consult some scholarly books, and pay close attention to the sources given in the footnotes. That can give you some massive "short-cuts" in tracking down places to start looking. And don't worry about the fact that somebody else has already drawn on that file- we all recognize different gems, or have our own perspectives on things. Check out Greg Baughen's books- he covers that period and has a fresh perspective. Whether you agree with him or not, it is nice to have something other than the "standard telling" to consider.

bob

Thank you mate!! Appreciate you taking the time out to write that, it's helpful.

 

[nuuumannn]

To add to Gingerbob's post, you could try looking up squadron ORBs at the National Archive, which might provide a bit of insight and perhaps get hold of a copy of RAF Squadrons by C G 'Jeff' Jefford for a brief history of each RAF squadron. On the Defiant, perhaps the best analysis of the type is the Air Britain title, The Defiant File by Alec Brew, who was or is a member of the Boulton Paul Heritage Society.

On the Defiant, it's worth remembering that there were only two squadrons that operated the type during the battles of France and Britain; these were 264 and 141, the latter relocated to Scotland after its first outing somewhat emotionally named 'The Slaughter of the Innocents' after around 6 Daffys were shot down in a minute when being pounced on by some 30 Bf 109s. At the time 141 was based at West Malling, with aircraft at Hawkinge. 264 Sqn was for a time at Hornchurch, with Manston as its forward operating base, before retiring to Kirton-in-Lindsey after the type was retired as a day fighter in August 1940.

From what I have read, the Daffy was counted among fighter squadrons at the front line to make up numbers. Both Dowding and Park realised that Fighter Command did not have the required number of squadrons, so Defiant, Gladiator and Blenheim units were all counted as available fighter squadrons, alongside Hurricane and Spitfire ones of course. With such a paltry number of aircraft though, the Defiant's usefulness is hard to gauge, although statistically and taking over claiming into consideration, by the end of August 1940, the tally of kills to losses works out just on the positive for the Defiant - just - based on what has been confirmed based on post war research, rather than combat reports, which tell a very different story. A very good account of the Defiant's record as a day fighter is Phil Listerman and Andrew Thomas's book in the Allied Wings series, No.8 on the Defiant.

Logically, had they been based in the north of England and Scotland, out of the range of single-seat escorts, their reputation might have been different and they could have played to their strengths. It is worth noting that 141 Sqn was originally formed within 13 Group at any rate and 264 within 12 Group, so the decision to place the Defiants into the 11 Group sphere of influence appears to be a hasty measure borne of necessity. The type was used as a convoy escort, providing air cover for channel shipping, as well as standing patrols over Dunkirk, both roles for which the Defiants were not really suited.

As for the Battle, it appears that it was retired from front line action in October 1940 with its last sorties against Calais and Boulogne that month from bases in the UK. The AASF was withdrawn from France to lick its wounds with the remaining serviceable Battles being flown back to the UK in mid-June 1940, for obvious reasons - remaining in France was futile and a waste of resources. 98 Squadron was the last frontline unit to operate the type, being based in Iceland with Coastal Command for anti-invasion patrols for a year or so.

I hope this helps a little with your enquiry.

 

[Crimea_River]

Some RAF ORB links here:

RAF and RAAF ORBs available on the Web (new version) - Luftwaffe and Allied Air Forces Discussion Forum

 

[Browning303]

Thank you all so much, these replies have been so helpful. I think I'm going to focus specifically on the Defiant and try to examine in more detail why it was used in a role it was so clearly unsuited to.

 

[Motorsport Micky]

Thank you all so much, these replies have been so helpful. I think I'm going to focus specifically on the Defiant and try to examine in more detail why it was used in a role it was so clearly unsuited to.

Bear in mind the circumstances, as previously pointed out. When Churchill is giving orders for training aircraft which includes Tiger Moths to be ready for the call of battle by dropping hand release small bombs if an invasion happens, as Gingerbob posts above, the posting of Defiants to a front line area becomes more understandable.

Not until after June 24th 1940 were they fitted with props being able to be feathered.

Initially Merlins were fitted with the wooden 2 bladed Rotol propeller which had a 2 pitch setting, fine pitch for take off and coarse pitch for all in flight operation, meaning it was a buggers muddle of too much on take off and not enough in flight with the engine not being able to give as much power as it was capable of.
De Havilland having a strong civilian aeroplane background had developed in house constant pitch propellers which were able to be feathered for some of their civilian offerings, because they were heavier and offered the possibility of going wrong not fitted to military.
A hasty call to De Havilands from the official at Beaverbrooks ministry supply department in early June 1940, of the sort such as "now look here, we understand you chappies have some of these contracting propellers" (noises of...no sir...constant pitch...constant pitch, heard in the background)" hrrumph yes that's what I said, damn your eyes Perkins...yes constant pitch. Well top priority old boy can you have a look at developing some of these thing's (noises of...how many do we need Perkins 2 or 3...WHAT 300 for conversions ! well it's your pension !) and a constant supply to match all production of Merlin engine units ?"...
"Hhhmmm" De Havilland man bites hard onto his pipe stem, "well we need to develop a hydraulic locking unit with variable capacity to take the Merlin and it's power, lots more than any commercial application don'tcha know ? ( puts feet up on his desk crossing his dark brown brogues) and of course an external hydraulic feed with integrated linkage to in cockpit controls and feathering capacity, which models need converting first ? "

"Spitfire, Hurricane and then a couple of squadrons of Defiants, can we pencil you in for the 10th June to commence"...
"Cough errr we may need a little more time, how about I send a telegram 24 hours before commencement ?" ( heard in background OOOhhh sir...sir ask him for an order), Oh... damn paperwork, I don't suppose you could forward an order could you ?"

"Bit pressed at the moment old boy, don't worry we aren't going anywhere, ha ha, we'll catch up with it later, action this day as the great man says what ?
"Fine says De Havillands best, make it so Mr Jenkins, make it so." ("bugger...thinks the guy from accounts, I bet we never get paid for these")".

So 4 days later 2 sweating and greasy (the hydraulic pipe blew off twice) engineers demonstrated the modified and now signed off constant pitch propeller on a Spitfire loaned by the RAF to the pleased De Havilland directors, and a telegram was sent arranging fitment and proposed dates 8 days away to Beaverbrooks office . A convoy of trucks and engineers from DH left on the 24th June to the various aerodromes and the fitments then completed within a week, allowed the RAFs Spitfires and Hurricanes to gain 7000 feet in height ceiling and 20 seconds reduced climb to 15,000 feet (absolutely essential when climbing to attack levels within a tight time frame) and the pilots benefited from an easier and more flexible plane to fly with the benefit now of having a propeller capable of being feathered when occasion demanded.

Now I've dramatized the above speech and thought processes but something like that happened and that's how the Merlin got it's constant pitch propeller capable of being feathered. Oh...except truthfully,...the guy from accounts was right, the order from Beaverbrooks department never followed on, so De Havilland carried out all the work on trust. They had a battle from Beaverbrooks office because Beaverbrook had been moved on and DH didn't have any paperwork to justify the extensive conversion costs and onward supply costs for the Merlin contracting propellers, "dammit Perkins, I know what I mean ! "
The two Defiant squadrons had received the updated De Haviland constant pitch propellers which were fitted to Spitfire and Hurricane squadrons first as a priority, in June 1940, and when measured up against Gladiators and the other training and "next best"aircraft available were the closest we had to front line fighters after Spitfire and Hurricanes.
Most tactically aware air force commanders knew that their aircrafts life would likely be short but after Dunkirk and under the premise that "if what we have isn't a mess, it will do until a real one comes along ! belts were being notched up and "game faces" were being put on.

 

[swampyankee]

Just to add a bit to the above: DeHavilland were Hamilton Standard licensees.

 

[nuuumannn]

Also, Defiants were never fitted with wooden props.

I'm going to focus specifically on the Defiant and try to examine in more detail why it was used in a role it was so clearly unsuited to.

Good luck with your research and as I have mentioned a couple of published sources already, you won't find it too difficult to find more out there. The Allied Wings series, No.8 on the Defiant has done the leg work in terms of facts and figures regarding its use as a day fighter and is an enormously useful resource, meaning you don't have to go trawling through combat reports etc as the authors have done it for you. Now if only they would do one for the type as a night fighter, where it really came into its own and was quite successful given its limitations.

As recounted earlier, the pricipal reason why it was used in roles it was unsuited for was expediency. It found its niche as a night fighter and some 13 or more squadrons operated the type again, out of expediency owing to a lack of progress with getting the Beaufighter into service in numbers earlier than anticipated, but the strengths of the Defiant proved a good/necessary interim solution until the Beau and eventually the Mossie entered service in numbers. The last Defiant fighter unit was 264 Sqn, the first, which began accepting Mosquito nightfighters in April 1942, but didn't relinquish its last Defiant until later that year. It is worth examining the big picture regarding the Defiant's career; it spent nearly three years as a frontline fighter and spent two thirds of that as a night fighter, at which it did well, all things considered, so by and large it was, in fact a success, despite whay might be believed.

 

[Mike Williams]

[…]that's how the Merlin got it's constant pitch propeller[…]

Not quite I think, please see:

No. 19 Squadron Operations Record Book, 1 November 1939
No. 54 Squadron Operations Record Book, 10 December 1939
Rotol Airscrews for Spitfire, HQ Fighter Command, 16 June 1940
Spitfire Conversion of 2 Pitch De Havilland Airscrews to Constant Speed, HQ Fighter Command, 17 June 1940
Spitfire I fitted with De Havilland Constant Speed Airscrew, 22 June 1940
No. 92 Squadron Operations Record Book, 25 June 1940
609 Squadron Operations Record Book, 26 June 1940
No. 611 Squadron Operations Record Book, 28 June 1940
No. 74 Squadron Operations Record Book, 28 June 1940
Flight, May 23, 1940: The Latest Rotol Airscrew
W/C Ian Gleed D.F.C., Arise to Conquer, (Random House, New York 1942) pp. 62-63.
No. 1 Squadron Operations Record Book, 18 April 1940
Paul Richey DFC, Fighter Pilot (Redwood Press, Wiltshire 1990) p 93.
No. 151 Squadron Operations Record Book, 13 April 1940
No. 151 Squadron Operations Record Book, 15 May 1940
Hugh Halliday, No. 242 Squadron, The Canadian Years, (Canada's Wings, Ontario, 1981). p.78.
Wing Commander Tom Neil, DFC, AFC, AE, Gun Button to 'Fire', (William Kimber, London 1987), pg 48.

 

[Motorsport Micky]

Not quite I think, please see:

No. 19 Squadron Operations Record Book, 1 November 1939
No. 54 Squadron Operations Record Book, 10 December 1939
Rotol Airscrews for Spitfire, HQ Fighter Command, 16 June 1940
Spitfire Conversion of 2 Pitch De Havilland Airscrews to Constant Speed, HQ Fighter Command, 17 June 1940
Spitfire I fitted with De Havilland Constant Speed Airscrew, 22 June 1940
No. 92 Squadron Operations Record Book, 25 June 1940
609 Squadron Operations Record Book, 26 June 1940
No. 611 Squadron Operations Record Book, 28 June 1940
No. 74 Squadron Operations Record Book, 28 June 1940
Flight, May 23, 1940: The Latest Rotol Airscrew
W/C Ian Gleed D.F.C., Arise to Conquer, (Random House, New York 1942) pp. 62-63.
No. 1 Squadron Operations Record Book, 18 April 1940
Paul Richey DFC, Fighter Pilot (Redwood Press, Wiltshire 1990) p 93.
No. 151 Squadron Operations Record Book, 13 April 1940
No. 151 Squadron Operations Record Book, 15 May 1940
Hugh Halliday, No. 242 Squadron, The Canadian Years, (Canada's Wings, Ontario, 1981). p.78.
Wing Commander Tom Neil, DFC, AFC, AE, Gun Button to 'Fire', (William Kimber, London 1987), pg 48.

Thanks Mike, good information, further details here

Stories of the Battle of Britain 1940 – Constant-Speed Propellers — Battle of Britain | 1940 | Reference | Spitfire Mk. I

Micky