Tomato Eins Productions

[Tomato Eins]

Nice! Watched it, very interesting.

Thanks ✈

A few minor things, more as additional background info rather than corrections to your excellent work.

1. When the concept for the turret fighter was drawn up, it was to operate in conjunction with single-seaters, the idea being that the Daffys would break up the bomber formations by diving among them and whilst the bombers separated, the single-seaters were to chase the stragglers, or that was the theory. Defiants could fire the guns forward as the pilot had a trigger on his spade grip an there was a switch in the turret that enabled the pilot to fire the guns, but the pilot had no gunsight and the guns were not synchronised. This was rarely used, if at all because the switch was largely wired shut on in-service Defiants.

2. The Hawker Hotspur programme wasn't so much delayed as Hawker at Kingston had little interest in it and work on the prototype was put off and resources diverted to other things, so it took longer because of apathy rather than delay! Eventually the Hotspur prototype went to Farnborough where it assisted in the development of dive flaps for the Henley dive bomber.

3. When the tactical trials were flown in October 1939, the pilot was Philip Hunter, who became 264 Sqn's CO and an advocate for the type, ace-to-be Bob Stanford Tuck flew the Hurricane, and Hunter made it very difficult for Tuck to get in a firing position despite the Hurricane being faster and more manoeuvrable, to the extent that Tuck failed to do so while the Daffy was in Hunter's hands. Sadly, Hunter eventually disappeared on ops in August 1940; he was pursuing an enemy aircraft out to sea and never returned.

Thanks for the additional information. When researching most of the research just talked about the trials in general terms.

4. The Lufbery Circle tactic was also Hunter's doing and the losses suffered by 141 Sqn's Daffys was preventable as the CO of that unit had little faith in the type and despite Hunter recommending tactics, he did not take them up, to the detriment of the Defiant crews lost. This incident was known as the "Slaughter of the Innocents" and was terribly unfortunate, but the Daffys were bounced by around 30 Bf 109s, so they were desperately outnumbered to begin with.

Alec Brew covers this really well in his book 'Boulton Paul Defiant: An Illustrated History'. I would of loved to delve into this more, but I was already struggling with time, so some things unfortunately had to be cut. Brew concludes that the incident with 141 sqn "has tainted the reputation of the Defiant to this day," and I personally agree with this statement. The Defiant had its flaws, but wasn't all terrible, and looking at its entire combat career showed an aircraft that was overall mainly successful in doing its job (but's that another discussion for another day. Sorry for getting a little off track). This book in general covers the history of the Boulton Paul Defiant really well, highlighting its entire career to show that it isn't as bad as history has made it look, while still acknowledging its faults. A great resource for the video and would recommend.

5. Although the Defiant made a good night fighter, it was only intended on being an interim until the radar equipped Beaufighter II appeared in larger numbers, the problem was two-fold; radar sets didn't perform as well as expected and the squadrons had difficulty with them, and the Beaufighter II exhibited terrible handling characteristics on the ground and killed a lot of trainee pilots, even experienced pilots called it a devil of a thing, but of course, that's outside of the scope of your presentation.

Yep, Beaufighter's also encountered teething problems when entering service which limited its use. The Defiant did it's job well enough. Nothing special, but it did the job.

6. The principal Defiant night fighter OTU was No.60, which was the biggest single operator of the type, with more Defiants going through 60 OTU's books than any other. Night fighter training was also conducted with 54 OTU, and that carried out by 60 OTU in Scotland was eventually deemed unnecessary and night fighter training was consolidated at Charterhall, Northumberland with 54 OTU and 60 OTU had been disbanded by the end of 1942. Charterhall became locally known as "Slaughter Hall" owing to the large number of tyro night fighter pilots flying into the ground.

7. A wee note about operators, neither the Royal Australian, Royal Canadian or Polish Air Forces operated the Defiant. The squadrons that operated the type had affiliations with these foreign countries, but they were under RAF jurisdiction, the Canadian and Aussie units being designated either RCAF or RAAF, but they were in fact under RAF control. These were the 400 series RAF squadrons formed under Article XV, although the Polish units in the 300 range were simply Polish squadrons of the RAF. Following the war, some of these units went to their respective countries, which adds to the confusion, but during the war they were RAF units.

Yes very true. I'll try and make that clearer for future presentations.

Thanks for the feedback/additional info, appreciate it. There definitely could be a feature documentary made about this type. I love discussing and learning more about this aircraft. ✈

 

[nuuumannn]

Alec Brew covers this really well in his book 'Boulton Paul Defiant: An Illustrated History'. I would of loved to delve into this more, but I was already struggling with time, so some things unfortunately had to be cut. Brew concludes that the incident with 141 sqn "has tainted the reputation of the Defiant to this day," and I personally agree with this statement. The Defiant had its flaws, but wasn't all terrible, and looking at its entire combat career showed an aircraft that was overall mainly successful in doing its job (but's that another discussion for another day. Sorry for getting a little off track). This book in general covers the history of the Boulton Paul Defiant really well, highlighting its entire career to show that it isn't as bad as history has made it look, while still acknowledging its faults. A great resource for the video and would recommend.

Yup, I have Brew's Air Britain volume, it is indeed a great resource. He is certainly right about the Defiant's reputation suffering as a result of the 141 Sqn incident, the problem with it was that it suffered the 'Chinese Whispers' treatment, where it got worse with every telling, so by the time it got back to the Air Ministry and Dowding, who had reservations about the type from the outset, the response was natural. Two of the pilots were New Zealanders. Another incident that caught headlines at the time was the collision of a Defiant and a Botha over Blackpool in 1941 in broad daylight, all the aircrew died, including the two Defiant crews, both New Zealanders, the gunner leaping from his turret, but he was too low for his chute to open. Civilians on the ground perished as the wreckage fell on the Blackpool railway station.

The fact behind the Defiant as a day fighter was that there were only two squadrons that operated the type in that role and during each combat incident, quite in accordance with Park's tactics, Flights of three, six, nine or 12 aircraft were sent aloft, so it was never represented in large numbers and it shouldn't have had so much exposure to single-seat opposition. But, as has been said before, Dowding was desperate for fighters and felt he didn't have enough, so the Daffy had to be counted.

By contrast the decision to make the type solely a night fighter (the original specification does stipulate that as one of its uses) saved its career and around 13 squadrons wholly or partially used the Defiant as a night fighter. Another contextual tidbit worth examining is the whole "Germans mistaking the Defiant with Hurricanes" angle, which I'm glad you didn't mention, it was first presented during the official Air Ministry account of the Battle of Britain and its coloured the Defiant's reputation ever since, but it's a myth of course, the Germans were well aware of the Defiant's existence at that time during its so called "Day of Glory", when 30 or more enemy aircraft were claimed.

I also find the technical workings of the turret and its impact on the aircraft fascinating, from the point of view of the gunners wearing the "Rhino-suit", the parachute grow bag they had to wear since the parachute had to be worn in the turret, a fascinating concession.

Thanks for the feedback/additional info, appreciate it. There definitely could be a feature documentary made about this type. I love discussing and learning more about this aircraft.

Very much so. In context, the turret fighter was not the greatest idea but it persevered beyond the Battle of Britain, a late 1940 specification for a night fighter was altered to include a turret as a Defiant replacement and Bristol built a variant of the Beaufighter with one and de Havilland built two prototypes of the Mosquito with gun turrets, so the idea didn't die. By the time the night fighter Mosquito with its fixed armament and the excellent results from using the Beaufighter equipped with radar emerged, the Defiant and the Turret fighter's day had passed.

 

[GrauGeist]

"Germans mistaking the Defiant with Hurricanes"

It's entirely possible there may have been a case or two of mistaken identity early on, Saburo Sakai's mistaking an SBD for an F4F nearly cost him his life.

 

[nuuumannn]

It's entirely possible there may have been a case or two of mistaken identity early on,

Maybe, but it's highly unlikely that the Air Ministry author writing the official account of the Battle of Britain in 1941 would have known that.

 

[ARTESH]

Hi All,
I thought I would share with you some short documentaries I've been working on. I'm a young aviation enthusiast and have a huge passion for warbirds.I hope you enjoy and finding them interesting. More on the way so stay posted

Great work, mate. Just here to say that I'm 829th person that subscribed your Chanel.

I'm not an expert in aviation or anything related to that, just several advises about your videos and your Chanel in general:

First of all, I know how hard is making animations, and sincing them with narration, it's a hard work for a single person, but try to keep it at about 1 video per month, is great. There are thousands of Planes to cover, so you'll not run out of ideas very soon.

Second, don't forget to cooperate with other channels that are in same category as yours, Military history in general, is best, followed by Strategy / Flight Simulator Game channels, so you can be the technician / historian guy among gamers ( or generally, younger generations).

3rd, at first two videos, you're some kind out of energy, it's not good. In long, it would become against you. Also you've forgot to great people and introducing yourself to those who are watching your chanell for first time.

4th to mention, your home page needs much work. You have made many videos and playlists, bring them to your homepage.

Lastly, best wishes for you and your great work.

 

[Gnomey]

Good ones!

 

[Tomato Eins]

The fact behind the Defiant as a day fighter was that there were only two squadrons that operated the type in that role and during each combat incident, quite in accordance with Park's tactics, Flights of three, six, nine or 12 aircraft were sent aloft, so it was never represented in large numbers and it shouldn't have had so much exposure to single-seat opposition. But, as has been said before, Dowding was desperate for fighters and felt he didn't have enough, so the Daffy had to be counted.

Very true.

By contrast the decision to make the type solely a night fighter (the original specification does stipulate that as one of its uses) saved its career and around 13 squadrons wholly or partially used the Defiant as a night fighter. Another contextual tidbit worth examining is the whole "Germans mistaking the Defiant with Hurricanes" angle, which I'm glad you didn't mention, it was first presented during the official Air Ministry account of the Battle of Britain and its coloured the Defiant's reputation ever since, but it's a myth of course, the Germans were well aware of the Defiant's existence at that time during its so called "Day of Glory", when 30 or more enemy aircraft were claimed.

I nearly went into the "Germans mistaking the Defiant with the Hurricanes, but it never fitted quite right and was always a bit awkward. Also, the fact that it can't be confirmed also persuaded me away from it. It also takes away from the achievements of the aircraft during the time period. It was used successfully.

I also find the technical workings of the turret and its impact on the aircraft fascinating, from the point of view of the gunners wearing the "Rhino-suit", the parachute grow bag they had to wear since the parachute had to be worn in the turret, a fascinating concession.

Yeah agree. Very interesting.

Very much so. In context, the turret fighter was not the greatest idea but it persevered beyond the Battle of Britain, a late 1940 specification for a night fighter was altered to include a turret as a Defiant replacement and Bristol built a variant of the Beaufighter with one and de Havilland built two prototypes of the Mosquito with gun turrets, so the idea didn't die. By the time the night fighter Mosquito with its fixed armament and the excellent results from using the Beaufighter equipped with radar emerged, the Defiant and the Turret fighter's day had passed.

The turret on the Beaufighter while tested operationally wasn't very successful and more or less killed the turret fighter concept. The Defiant while not spectacular, did it's job. An interesting job it undertook was as an ECM aircraft and then at the end of the war to test ejection seats.

 

[Tomato Eins]

Great work, mate. Just here to say that I'm 829th person that subscribed your Chanel.

Thank you, it is greatly appreciated. ✈

I'm not an expert in aviation or anything related to that, just several advises about your videos and your Chanel in general:

First of all, I know how hard is making animations, and sincing them with narration, it's a hard work for a single person, but try to keep it at about 1 video per month, is great. There are thousands of Planes to cover, so you'll not run out of ideas very soon.

Thanks. The animations was quite difficult to do, and was definitely a learning curve since my experience before hand was rather limited. But we got there in the end. As much as I enjoyed the animations, I'm glad I went to the pictures with narration over the top that I do now. I think it is a better experience for all. Indeed I won't be running out of ideas anytime soon. Also am looking at major aviation events and aviators, so plenty to keep me going.

Second, don't forget to cooperate with other channels that are in same category as yours, Military history in general, is best, followed by Strategy / Flight Simulator Game channels, so you can be the technician / historian guy among gamers ( or generally, younger generations).

A good suggestion. The gaming side of things is something I have considered exploring, just haven't gotten around to doing it.

3rd, at first two videos, you're some kind out of energy, it's not good. In long, it would become against you. Also you've forgot to great people and introducing yourself to those who are watching your chanell for first time.

Thanks for the pick up. I'm going to add a greeting video now.

4th to mention, your home page needs much work. You have made many videos and playlists, bring them to your homepage.

I'm working on improving it

Lastly, best wishes for you and your great work.

Thank you for the feedback and support. Appreciate it. More videos on there way✈

 

[GrauGeist]

In regards to an animation aspect, you may find this thread interesting:
My New IL2 Video Research Thread...

Years ago, several of the forum members got together and recreated a historical event using IL-2: Sturmovik as the medium.
It took considerable effort, but in the end, was quite rewarding.

 

[ARTESH]

In regards to an animation aspect, you may find this thread interesting:
My New IL2 Video Research Thread...

Years ago, several of the forum members got together and recreated a historical event using IL-2: Sturmovik as the medium.
It took considerable effort, but in the end, was quite rewarding.

An interesting one! I wish we were able to make more videos like that. I really love that kind of videos.

 

[nuuumannn]

The turret on the Beaufighter while tested operationally wasn't very successful and more or less killed the turret fighter concept. The Defiant while not spectacular, did it's job. An interesting job it undertook was as an ECM aircraft and then at the end of the war to test ejection seats.

It wasn't so much the Beaufighter fitted with the turret that killed the turret fighter, it was the performance of the night fighter Mosquito with the fixed forward firing armament built to F.21/40 that brought the turret fighter idea to its natural conclusion, its performance was demonstrably better than the turret armed Mosquito, the fourth prototype, so the night fighter specification F.18/40, to which the Beaufighter Mk.V was modified to quietly went unanswered. The Beaufighter Mk.V was going to be put into production, but its performance was no better than the Defiant it was intended on replacing.

Good work with the video clip, I look forward to the next one.

 

[Tomato Eins]

In regards to an animation aspect, you may find this thread interesting:
My New IL2 Video Research Thread...

Years ago, several of the forum members got together and recreated a historical event using IL-2: Sturmovik as the medium.
It took considerable effort, but in the end, was quite rewarding.

That is really interesting and a very good video. A great watch and good job to everyone involved.✈An interesting one! I wish we were able to make more videos like that. I really love that kind of videos.

I wish we were able to make more videos like that. I really love that kind of videos.

I agree, I would certainly be interested. It would be great to make more of that kind of video.

 

[Tomato Eins]

It wasn't so much the Beaufighter fitted with the turret that killed the turret fighter, it was the performance of the night fighter Mosquito with the fixed forward firing armament built to F.21/40 that brought the turret fighter idea to its natural conclusion, its performance was demonstrably better than the turret armed Mosquito, the fourth prototype, so the night fighter specification F.18/40, to which the Beaufighter Mk.V was modified to quietly went unanswered. The Beaufighter Mk.V was going to be put into production, but its performance was no better than the Defiant it was intended on replacing.

Good work with the video clip, I look forward to the next one.

Ahhh yep that makes a lot of sense. Thanks for clarifying that. Thanks, interestingly the next one focuses on the Beaufighter. Not far away now ✈

 

[ARTESH]

I agree, I would certainly be interested. It would be great to make more of that kind of video.

Well, it just needs a little bit of good content, which is plenty here.

 

[Tomato Eins]

Well, it just needs a little bit of good content, which is plenty here.

very true, maybe one day✈

 

[Tomato Eins]

New video. This time focusing on the Bristol Beaufighter. It is a long video, the longest I've done. I realise this breaks away a little from the idea of Tomato Eins to have short videos, but there is little out their on the Beaufighter, so I didn't want to over condense it and miss important details. I wanted to create a fairly dense and detail recorded of its service.

 

[Tomato Eins]

Mustangs in Australia! The latest video covers the history of the P-51 Mustang in Australia, including manufacturing of the Mustang by CAC as well as service with the RAAF. Australia was the only country outside of the USA to produce the mustang.

 

[Wurger]

 

[SaparotRob]

I did not know that any Mustangs were manufactured outside of the U.S.

 

[GrauGeist]

I did not know that any Mustangs were manufactured outside of the U.S.

The Commonwealth Aircraft Corporation (CAC) manufactured quite a few native designs as well as manufacturing licenced P-51s.

One interesting design of theirs, which never got past the prototype stage, was the CA-15. It's a shame that it never had a chance, as it seems like it would have been a good performer.