I was just discussing 1940 which includes the Battle of Britain, there were times when pilots just jumped in a plane to get it off the ground and there were times when a pilot returned from being scrambled in a plane whos guns hadn't been re armed. With Bader the 2 minutes to get airborne included getting his legs strapped on, which he used to practice.
The Firebrand and other rubbish from Blackburn
- Thread starter Admiral Beez
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
If anyone gets any ideas about the Botha being used for anything more than as an artificial reef, here are some highlights from testing the aircraft at Boscombe Down, from the same source as the previous entry on the Firebrand:
Pre-war trials were curtailed on the first example to arrive at Boscombe due to unsatisfactory rudder control. This wasn't adequately addressed as during weapons trials with a second aircraft, the pilot could not satisfactorily aim his torpedo because of continuous yawing,"...within a 3 second period". Improvements were made in increasing the size of the control surfaces and fin and hori stab, as well as the technique of cording (where strips of rope are doped on to control surfaces as weight and/or dampers, originally applied to boat rudders).
"Cockpit and handling criticisms were still damning. The undercarriage and flaps were operated by a single lever on the right, while the elevator trimmer was on the left. Changes in rpm, gill setting and undercarriage/flaps all gave large trim changes - no problem for a pilot with three hands".
Retracting flaps after take off caused large sink rate and thus their use on take-off was not recommended. On approach, elevator control was poor with flaps down and it was only just possible to maintain height at low weight on one engine.
With the Pegasus XA trials, the aircraft was in poor condition on arrival and took some amount of maintenance to make it serviceable. On one engine it was impossible to maintain height in any condition. Dives were restricted to a speed of 215mph because of increased nose heaviness. This restriction was lifted owing to shrouds being fitted to each of the control surfaces and dives were recorded at 300mph. Trials with this aircraft ended after a double engine failure because both fuel cocks were set to off and couldn't be changed owing to the levers being positioned behind the pilot's seat!
Pre-war trials were curtailed on the first example to arrive at Boscombe due to unsatisfactory rudder control. This wasn't adequately addressed as during weapons trials with a second aircraft, the pilot could not satisfactorily aim his torpedo because of continuous yawing,"...within a 3 second period". Improvements were made in increasing the size of the control surfaces and fin and hori stab, as well as the technique of cording (where strips of rope are doped on to control surfaces as weight and/or dampers, originally applied to boat rudders).
"Cockpit and handling criticisms were still damning. The undercarriage and flaps were operated by a single lever on the right, while the elevator trimmer was on the left. Changes in rpm, gill setting and undercarriage/flaps all gave large trim changes - no problem for a pilot with three hands".
Retracting flaps after take off caused large sink rate and thus their use on take-off was not recommended. On approach, elevator control was poor with flaps down and it was only just possible to maintain height at low weight on one engine.
With the Pegasus XA trials, the aircraft was in poor condition on arrival and took some amount of maintenance to make it serviceable. On one engine it was impossible to maintain height in any condition. Dives were restricted to a speed of 215mph because of increased nose heaviness. This restriction was lifted owing to shrouds being fitted to each of the control surfaces and dives were recorded at 300mph. Trials with this aircraft ended after a double engine failure because both fuel cocks were set to off and couldn't be changed owing to the levers being positioned behind the pilot's seat!
Shortround6
Major General
I believe about 580 were built and only 2 or possibly 3 operational squadrons ever used them, by the winter of 1940/41 they were being pulled from the operational squadrons and being sent to training units.
Most went straight from the factories to training units and in 1940/41 with Blenheims still equipping many operational units that should tell us something.
Most went straight from the factories to training units and in 1940/41 with Blenheims still equipping many operational units that should tell us something.
The Botha never saw operational service with any RAF squadrons in its intended role, despite what the internet (and wikipedia) will have you believe. One or two individual aircraft were issued to particular squadrons for use as hacks, but not for any other use. The entire lot were issued to trials units, OTUs and MUs (maintenance Unit) only.
yulzari
Tech Sergeant
The Botha turret blanked the rudder as well. To be fair to Blackburns they did tell the Their Airships that it would be grossly underpowered with the Perseus and not their preferred engine but were told they had to use the Perseus as the Taurus was reserved for the Beaufort.
Nevertheless it was far faster than a Vildebeest and the handling and systems issues could have been ameliorated by training and taking the turret off. 400kph is not bad going for a torpedo bomber at the time with the Vildebeest flat out at 230kph so nearly twice as fast.Even the Alabacores could only do 260kph.
Nevertheless it was far faster than a Vildebeest and the handling and systems issues could have been ameliorated by training and taking the turret off. 400kph is not bad going for a torpedo bomber at the time with the Vildebeest flat out at 230kph so nearly twice as fast.Even the Alabacores could only do 260kph.
- Thread starter
- #66
Admiral Beez
Major
One has to assume Blackburn did some flight testing of their own before presenting the Botha to the Air Ministry and RAF reviewers. Why would they bring such a POS forward for formal trials?
swampyankee
Chief Master Sergeant
- 4,030
- Jun 25, 2013
Schedule. If they don't do it by date X, they get paid less
A walk around wouldn't spot the problem and if the pilot cant see the ailerons working from his seat you need communication between the pilot and a tech. The solution is making such wrong connection impossible.
I doubt that Bader or anyone else got airborne in two minutes. Leigh-Mallory famously claimed that he could get a wing of five squadrons airborne in six minutes and over Hornchurch at 20,000 feet in twenty five minutes.
On October 29th, after two months of practice and with Bader in command a five squadron wing took seventeen minutes to get airborne and then another twenty before it set course from base!
Single squadrons could do better, I seem to remember Park insisting on a maximum of six minutes for a squadron to get airborne. That's probably why Leigh-Mallory chose that time.
Because they don't get paid until they do. The client specified changes that increased weight and also specified the engines that limited the power. Military procurement is full of such things. I am sure Blackburn told whoever was involved it would be a POS and they said build it anyway.
Shortround6
Major General
The Botha was designed around the Taurus engines but the Taurus was running late and reserved for the Beaufort, the Botha was reduced to the Perseus. Weight gains were well know during the design process as the official requirement was changed from a 3 man crew to a 4 man crew. The extra man isn't so bad but the requirement wanted a bigger fuselage to give the extra man room to work, Put that together with the roughly 20% drop in power and you didn't need to be a mathematician or aeronautical engineer to figure thing was going to be underpowered.
Even the MK I version with improved engine could not maintain height on one engine at even modest weights. We can argue about which is statistically safer or about the remaining engine only getting you to the scene of the crash but if the remaining engines crash site is only a few miles from the 1st engine quitting then things are pretty bad. For morale purposes the crew should have at least the illusion they can make it home on one engine instead of the certainty that they won't.
No 608 squadron started equipping with Bothas replacing Ansons it the end of June 1940, they received over the next 3 months about 30 aircraft of which only one was lost on an operational patrol (not due to enemy action) however the Ansons were slowly reintroduced ant the last operational mission by a Botha by No 608 squadron was in Nov 1940.
Now if coastal command does NOT want the Botha just a few months after the BoB and while the night Blitz is going on and preferes the Avro Anson why on earth would you ship the things to Mayala? You could build wooden airfield decoys a lot cheaper and easier.
Even the MK I version with improved engine could not maintain height on one engine at even modest weights. We can argue about which is statistically safer or about the remaining engine only getting you to the scene of the crash but if the remaining engines crash site is only a few miles from the 1st engine quitting then things are pretty bad. For morale purposes the crew should have at least the illusion they can make it home on one engine instead of the certainty that they won't.
No 608 squadron started equipping with Bothas replacing Ansons it the end of June 1940, they received over the next 3 months about 30 aircraft of which only one was lost on an operational patrol (not due to enemy action) however the Ansons were slowly reintroduced ant the last operational mission by a Botha by No 608 squadron was in Nov 1940.
Now if coastal command does NOT want the Botha just a few months after the BoB and while the night Blitz is going on and preferes the Avro Anson why on earth would you ship the things to Mayala? You could build wooden airfield decoys a lot cheaper and easier.
swampyankee
Chief Master Sergeant
- 4,030
- Jun 25, 2013
I'm sure there is a way to fix the Botha:
Remove engines.
Remove valuable bits from airframes.
Use Taurus engines and useful bits to build a competently designed airframe (the stability problems were not the fault of the lower-powered engines!), possibly a trimotor.
Remove engines.
Remove valuable bits from airframes.
Use Taurus engines and useful bits to build a competently designed airframe (the stability problems were not the fault of the lower-powered engines!), possibly a trimotor.
- Thread starter
- #73
Admiral Beez
Major
What do you think of the Firecrest?
swampyankee
Chief Master Sergeant
- 4,030
- Jun 25, 2013
I don't know enough about it. On the other hand, it was too late.
Kevin J
Banned
So it seems what we really needed to do the job was a trimotor a la SM 79. Looks like Italians did get some things right.
Shortround6
Major General
No, what the British needed was decent, reliable radial engine of 1100-1200hp.
Italians used three 750hp engines which is hardly a good solution.
British could have slung a torpedo under Blenheim and not done any worse than the Botha and Beaufort as torpedo bombers go. Many successful torpedo bombers of WW II hung the torpedo out in the breeze and did not inclose it or recess it. The Beaufighter carried it 100% exposed.
Italians used three 750hp engines which is hardly a good solution.
British could have slung a torpedo under Blenheim and not done any worse than the Botha and Beaufort as torpedo bombers go. Many successful torpedo bombers of WW II hung the torpedo out in the breeze and did not inclose it or recess it. The Beaufighter carried it 100% exposed.
Kevin J
Banned
Licence build of the R-1830 would have been perfect.
As I see it great aircraft were designed by great designers with great design teams, not by committees. I have no idea why someone decided a torpedo bomber required four crew. Mitchell ignored the night fighter requirement of the Spitfire. The Stirling followed all sorts of requirements of the design brief and ended up being almost useless, the Lancaster didn't it was just a huge flying bomb bay. The Mosquito and P-51 were just "designs" designed to be the best that they could be, their later versatility came from that basic head start. They even slung a torpedo under Mosquitos post war which shows what can be done, carring the Torpedo internally is only an advantage going out or if you normally don't use them.
