The best low-flying attack aircraft of WW2.
- Thread starter I-16_SpB
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Shortround6
Major General
"I'm puzzled by this, Admiral, the BP P.92 wasn't designed as a ground attack aircraft, it was designed for a two-seat turret fighter spec, F.11/37 as a home defence fighter by day or night."
I think Admiral was fooled by part of the "covers everything" specification. They may have thrown in the phrase "ground support" in 1937 but since they didn't really know how they were going to do it or what weapons would actually work it seems a bit wishful thinking.
Probably sounded good to the Bean counters who figured they wouldn't have to buy old fashion artillery for the Army with all these modern planes capable of "ground support" available
I think Admiral was fooled by part of the "covers everything" specification. They may have thrown in the phrase "ground support" in 1937 but since they didn't really know how they were going to do it or what weapons would actually work it seems a bit wishful thinking.
Probably sounded good to the Bean counters who figured they wouldn't have to buy old fashion artillery for the Army with all these modern planes capable of "ground support" available
GrauGeist
Generalfeldmarschall zur Luftschiff Abteilung
And the A-26 gunships
The wording of the spec is pretty clear in its intent as a home defence turret fighter, but for the slight oddity in the armament section, and I quote "Provision is to be made for carrying one 250lb bomb internally." No other mention of such a role in the rest of the spec, focussing on its performance as an interceptor. Incidentally, Armstrong Whitworth, Bristol, Gloster and Hawker are known to have tendered to this spec, but the BP design was selected. Both the AW and Bristol make room in their designs for the carriage of light bombs.
This shouldn't be mistaken for an offensive role though, this was probably for defensive purposes, like in case of invasion and fitting bomb racks to Tiger Moths - the spec was for a high flying interceptor over home territory.
Shortround6
Major General
Perhaps Wiki is wrong (won't be the first time) but the entry for F.11/37 says "Twin-engine two-seat day & night fighter/ground support" but this is hardly the full text.
If you say the original document didn't have that two word section I will believe you and just point to this reference as possible source of confusion.
If you say the original document didn't have that two word section I will believe you and just point to this reference as possible source of confusion.
GrauGeist
Generalfeldmarschall zur Luftschiff Abteilung
That would have most likely been the smallest bomb-bay of any aircraft of the war!
Glider
Captain
It's my belief that the A26, B25, B26, A20 would be far to vulnerable as a low flying attack aircraft against an enemy that had good AA defences. They are too, big, too unmanoeuvrable at low altitude and most of them were too slow. AA guns would have had a field day. It was very unusual to find these types used in this role in Europe, but they could get away with it against the Japanese.
Shortround6
Major General
Might have to measure it up against the Avro AnsonThat would have most likely been the smallest bomb-bay of any aircraft of the war!
Anson might wider but shorter.
Oh yes! Just look at the actions of the 5th Air Force, and the Battle of the Bismark Sea in particular. Battle of the Bismarck Sea - Wikipedia
Shortround6
Major General
There is mention in the specification to operate with a "field force" - ground attack?
The bomb was meant to be a Bomber Breaker.
View attachment 568122
(The British Fighter - Peter Lewis)
Thank you. Again one can see points of considerable confusion. A "Field Force" might be take to mean a force in the field like an expeditionary force or force operating at some location other than the British isles? But actually having nothing to do supporting ground troops directly (taking part in the land battle). More like operating like an interceptor/bomber destroyer to defend the ground forces against attack from tee air.
Also there may be a considerable difference in the size bombay needed for a single 250lb bomb and one that held 250lbs worth of bombs deemed suitable for dropping on enemy bomber formations.(Multiple bombs of 2-10lbs?)
Shortround6
Major General
davparlr
Senior Master Sergeant
There are quite a few really good ground attack aircraft. But I think that there was only one that had a major contribution to WWII, Korea, and well into the Vietnam War. And that one is .....
GrauGeist
Generalfeldmarschall zur Luftschiff Abteilung
Not unusual at all.
The A-20, A-26 and B-25 were very active in the ETO and MTO assigned to the 8th, 9th and 12th Air Forces.
Admiral Beez
Major
Per Wikipedia....for what that's worth:
"The Boulton Paul P.92 was a British design by Boulton Paul for a two-seat turret-armed fighter/ground attack aircraft to meet Air Ministry Specification F.11/37."
Admiral Beez
Major
Spad!
First flown in March 1945, I'd qualify it as a WW2 design. It certainly would have been deployed in Operation Downfall.
davparlr
Senior Master Sergeant
Good call, but, as far I know, it never flew any combat missions WW2, so contributed nothing. Had it done so, it certainly should be in the ranks of one of the greatest.
Admiral Beez
Major
Hmm....Lavochkin La-7? Used in ground attack in WW2, Korean War, but not in Vietnam.
Interesting, two Spads shot down two La-7s over China, according to this book anyway.
GrauGeist
Generalfeldmarschall zur Luftschiff Abteilung
The A/B-26 Invader 
