The efficiency of multiple crewmen in destroyer type fighters

[Admiral Beez]

So if your pilot gets shot, you're supposed to turn around and fly the beast back and land it on the boat....
Wes

I assume the seat swivels forward? The poor guy at least needs an attitude indicator and compass.

 

[tyrodtom]

I suppose they provided the gunner with controls so that at least he had some chance of doing something if the pilot was disabled.
At least fly them from the immediate danger area, and a semi controlled landing in water was better than a completely out of control crash into the ocean.

Of course the gunner could just jump, but that would be abandoning the maybe wounded pilot, and all the survival equipment on the aircraft.

 

[Shortround6]

If you think the rear gunner on the SPD had a poor view, a number of A-20 Havocs had rudimentary flight controls for the rear gunner

 

[GrauGeist]

The SBD's controls were intended more for pilot relief than full flight procedures.

Heard plenty of stories where the pilot would let the gunner get stick time, since they were most often an NCO and wouldn't have the opportunity otherwise.

Also, I do beleive there was a gauge or two in back that showed altitude and heading, but I don't have access to my computer and the SBD's wiring/controls diagrams.

 

[Airframes]

The reason for the basic flight controls in the rear of the A-20/Havoc/Boston, was to aid the pilot if a bail out was neccessary. The gunner/radio operator was to hold the aircraft steady, whilst the pilot climbed out onto the wing and jumped. The gunner would then bail out. Far as I know, this was the only aircraft where the pilot was not expected to be the last crew member to abandon the aircraft in flight.

 

[pbehn]

I would have thought the SBDs dual control would be for if the pilot blacked out.

 

[tyrodtom]

I would have thought the SBDs dual control would be for if the pilot blacked out.

If you mean during the high G dive recovery, I doubt the gunner would be in any better shape.

 

[XBe02Drvr]

I would have thought the SBDs dual control would be for if the pilot blacked out.

You mean pulling out of a dive bombing run? Good luck!! The gunner is facing aft defending the tail in the dive, and being six feet or so back of the CG, is experiencing more G's than the pilot who sits practically on it, and is now expected to stow his gun, swivel his seat, assume control of an aircraft under heavy G load, while maintaining consciousness after his pilot has blacked out? Certainly you jest. I'd like to put the designer who thought that up through that little exercise in flight!
Cheers,
Wes

 

[XBe02Drvr]

I assume the seat swivels forward? The poor guy at least needs an attitude indicator and compass.

How about an ASI and an altimeter?

 

[GrauGeist]

Here's a diagram that shows the SBD's rear gauge.
Find the panel (located forward, port side of the compartment) which is #11 and on it, are a clock (#42) and an altimeter (#10).
The compass was located forward center of the rear cockpit and is not shown in the diagram.

 

[XBe02Drvr]

The gunner/radio operator was to hold the aircraft steady, whilst the pilot climbed out onto the wing and jumped.

He's enlisted, he's expendable.

 

[BiffF15]

He's enlisted, he's expendable.

Ouch!

 

[GrauGeist]

He's enlisted, he's expendable.

The cockpot of the Havoc was accessed through the upper canopy. The pilot wouldn't be able to remain at the controls because he was blocking the R/O's escape path.
So having the rear gunner steady the ship so the guys up front baled out sounds a bit unconventional, but makes sense.

 

[Airframes]

Bomb aimer's emergency exits were the floor entry hatch for bail out, or the port side glazed hatch on the ground. Pilot out of the cockpit roof hatch, radio op / gunner out of the belly hatch or over the side.

 

[GrauGeist]

Ok Terry, thought the R/O and pilot shared the upper hatch - I know the Havoc was a cramped layout to say the least.

 

[Airframes]

No problem. The area immediately behind the pilot's seat was a 'shelf', partly over the front of the bomb bay, which held the dinghy.
The radio operator / gunner compartment had the radio equipment on a tray under the forward section of the glazing, with the basic flight controls aft and below this, followed by the swivel seat and guns. Below and slightly aft of this was the belly hatch, which could be mounted with a gun, but rarely was. This compartment was separated from the cockpit area, which was not accessible from the rear compartment.
Bomb aimer / navigator compartment in the nose was a totally separate compartment, no access to the rest of the fuselage.

 

[Schweik]

In part the Japanese used bombers for navigation because their radios sucked.*
Please note that some other air forces used bombers as 'navigators' on long distance ferry flights or a few operational ones.

Navigation on long flights was a pretty serious problem for the Allies in the early war. Single engined fighters in particular frequently got lost or ran out of fuel at very inconvenient times. It was common practice to use aircraft such as Lockheed Hudsons and later, Harpoons to guide fighters and single-engined bombers to and from target locations, on maritime patrols or during ferry flights. The Harpoon was sufficiently well armed and maneuverable to be able to (more or less) hold it's own under attack by Japanese fighters and had a more reasonable cruising speed than say, a PBY. Later on the destroyer-like Beaufighter was used for the same type of mission (and they too seemed to do reasonably well against Japanese fighters).

On one famous occasion the (in)famous Australian quadruple Ace Clive Caldwell openly threatened to shoot down a Beaufighter because the crew had failed to do any navigation on a dangerous ferry flight in the South Pacific. They encountered a storm, and Clyde and his fellow Spitfire pilots were in serious peril of being lost at sea. They made it back to base by the skin of their teeth.

Harpoons were also used this way by Allied pilots in the Med, as were Martin Marylands quite a bit, and later naval Fairey Fulmars which were somewhat marginal as fighters. Beaufighters were also used in this way in the Med. I'm not sure about the German heavy fighters but I think Ju 88s were as well on at least some occasions.

Navy pilots were (usually) a lot better trained for navigation than Army pilots were but they too sometimes relied on pathfinders in this manner.

S

 

[Csch605]

You've kind of answered your own question. However, in a very large and heavy airframe, which was needed when engine power was low, the weight of a 2nd crew member made up a proportionately small % of total weight and in exchange the pilot got, literally 'eyes in the back of his head' and an extra pair of hands and eyes to reduce his work load.

YES indeed for the Mosquito was doing high range and very dangerous missions. Having a backup pilot and a second engine made survivability much higher. Really though the Me110 had no chance by June of 1940 in any dogfight but could do cleanup work on damaged planes, sea planes or old slow bombers. Night fighting does not really count since the planners in 1939 did not think radar would become so powerful. Building two 109s versus 1 110 it really is a waste of engines.

 

[Shortround6]

Really though the Me110 had no chance by June of 1940 in any dogfight but could do cleanup work on damaged planes, sea planes or old slow bombers.

It could also strafe airfields ahead of the main attack, it could boom and zoom fighters climbing to gain altitude. It could fly further than the 109 and provide some sort of support where the 109 could not. It could communicate with the bombers and home base while the 109 could not.
Some of these problems with the 109 were fixable or would become fixable intime.

 

[Reluctant Poster]

He's enlisted, he's expendable.

The RAF seemed to feel that way. The rear gunner in the Defiant had almost no chance of bailing out.