Why Didn't The RAF use Beaufighters Instead of Typhoons In The ETO (1 Viewer)

Geoffrey Sinclair said:

According to RAF Squadrons by Jefford 43 squadron had some Beaufighter II July/August 1943 to go with their Hudson VI, based in Gibraltar with a detachment to Agadir. According to the RAF census as of end February 1943, no Beaufighter II located overseas, no overseas losses, as of end June 1944 none overseas, 2 losses either overseas or with the USAAF, while 86 had been sent to the Admiralty, along with 1 mark IF.

The Admiralty as of end January 1944 reports 14 Beaufighters in Britain, 29 overseas. (11 eastern theatre, 9 Western Mediterranean, 1 Eastern Mediterranean, 8 South Atlantic). The RAF Census for end December 1943 says 6 IIF in SEAAC, 42 to Admiralty, end January 1944 it was 6 in SEAAC, 45 to Admiralty.

Click to expand...

Greyman said:

This matches up exactly with a test of R2054 I have, and I don't think this would be a 'representative' Mk.I (though I'm far from any sort of Beaufighter expert).

R2054 was noted to have:

• early, prototype nacelles
• early, poor finish
• no flush riveting
• external escape door
• retractable tail wheel

I think a better bet would be R2060, which had did not have any of the above (and so had flush riveting, though no retractable tailwheel). This Mk.I was compared to the older one and did 323 mph at 14,250.

EDIT: Also, X7540 and X7542 were tested at 335 and 333 mph respectively, both just under 16,000 ft. These had:

• Hercules X
• improved air intakes
• undercarriage door close mod.

All this said -- the Typhoon had 55+ to 75+ mph on the Beaufighter under 10,000 (depending on the number of Typhoon refinements).

For what it's worth, in British testing there was almost nothing to choose speed-wise between a Boston III/IIIa and a Beaufighter (Herc X/Herc VI).

Click to expand...