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

[MIflyer]

The Typhoon was used mainly for ground attack, and only in the ETO. Elsewhere in the war the Beaufighter was used extensively for ground attack. Given the problems with the Typhoon's Sabre engine and almost complete inability to ditch, which led to pilots being fearful of crossing the Channel, why did they not use Beaufighters to attack tanks in France? While the Tiffie probably was better for air-to-air than the Beau, the Allies owned the skies over France and the RAF had plenty of Spit IX that were not much good as fighter bombers which could have provided cover.

By the way, the RAF flew Beaufighters until 1960.

 

[Shortround6]

I like the Beaufighter but.......................

It is big.
It is slow.

Spit IXs don't defend against flak.

You might be better off using A-20s ???

 

[MikeMeech]

I like the Beaufighter but.......................

It is big.
It is slow.

Spit IXs don't defend against flak.

You might be better off using A-20s ???

Hi
You mean the the bigger and slower A-20 (Boston/Havoc)?

"The Typhoon was used mainly for ground attack, and only in the ETO. Elsewhere in the war the Beaufighter was used extensively for ground attack. Given the problems with the Typhoon's Sabre engine and almost complete inability to ditch, which led to pilots being fearful of crossing the Channel, why did they not use Beaufighters to attack tanks in France? While the Tiffie probably was better for air-to-air than the Beau, the Allies owned the skies over France and the RAF had plenty of Spit IX that were not much good as fighter bombers which could have provided cover."

That being said the Boston/Havoc was used for Intruder operations, but the Boston IIIs of Fighter Command started to be replaced by the Mosquito VI from May 1943, much faster and better armed. By D-Day the 2ndTAF were using both Typhoons and Mosquitos for ground attack missions, although smaller aircraft like the Typhoon were probably relatively harder to hit by flak when engaged in ground attack than larger twin-engine aircraft. The Beaufighter was well used by Fighter and Coastal Commands, gradually being supplemented and then replaced by variants of the Mosquito. So why would you have the Beaufighter over Normandy in 1944?

Mike

 

[EwenS]

The Beau was a big aircraft. Typhoon was faster & more manoeuvrable in the role of supporting troops on the front line, and could carry a bigger bomb load.

From 1940 night fighter squadrons had first call on production. Dec 1940 saw the first go to Coastal Command as long range fighters for convoy protection against the Fw200 Condors. But in mid-1941the first 2 CC squadrons were diverted to the Middle East to fulfill the same role there. CC Beaufighter use peaked at 9 squadrons in late 1943 / early 1944. In 1944/45 4 of those converted to the Mosquito FB.VI.

In the Med those initial 2 squadrons added strafing of vehicles to their maritime duties. The next non NF squadron didn't form until Aug 1942. The Med Beaufighter force peaked at 6 squadrons in mid/late-1943, after which there were transfers out of theatre and conversions to other types before the war ended. But the majority of their work was concerned with the long range fighter and coastal strike roles.

In the Far East the first Beau squadron didn't receive its aircraft until Nov 1942. The non NF Beau force peaked at 6 squadrons incl one transfer from the ME in early 1944, and 2 based in Ceylon converting from Beauforts in early/mid-1944. Two converted to Mosquito FB.VI in 1944/45, 1 disbanded in July 1945, leaving just 3 when the war ended.

The operations in the Far East were mostly in the form of pairs of Beaus carrying out long range intruder type work and not direct support of troops on the front line.

As for the Aussies, they formed 2 Beau squadrons in 1942, using British built aircraft, for use in the long range fighter role. Their third squadron wasn't re-equipped until Jan 1945 after virtually all its A-20s had been destroyed or damaged in a Japanese air attack. 2 other squadrons formed on the type in 1945 but only 1 saw combat before the war ended.

The last combat missions flown by RAF Beaus took place in 1948 during the Malayan Emergency. After that their service through to 1960 was in the target towing role.

 

[Glider]

Its also worth mentioning that the Typhoon was very well protected against small arms fire. Armour was added to the floor and the sides of the cockpit as the fighting in Europe progressed..

As a result the Beaufighter was a bigger, slower, less agile target, as well as being more vulnerable to AA fire. Plus of course, it cost more to build and you lost two crew should the plane be shot down.

 

[MIflyer]

Well, flak was not exactly nonexistent in the attack roles the Beaufighter did well, especially antishipping, where the chance of surviving a tour of ops was the worst of any mission, being rather low for one tour and around 15% for two.

But the USAAF thought it would be a good idea to use A-26's instead of P-47's for the CAS and tactical ground attack roles. The "Invader" proved to be just as fast as the P-47 at low altitude, capable of carrying more ordnance, and was at least as fiercely armed as the T-Bolt, having at least six and as much as fourteen .50 cal. But while the A-26 was a better attack aircraft than the P-47, the USAAF found it was so much larger that it had a significantly greater chance of being hit. So the A-26's in the ETO were used mainly on medium altitude bombing missions. And even though the B-26s had side package guns they almost never used them. A B-26 navigator who was on them in the ETO said there was only ONE occasion where they were told to deliver their bombloads and then go down and strafe the target area. On that same mission the bombardier relished finally getting to use that .50 cal in the nose, although it required the Norden bombsight to be removed to do so and the navigator got the job of holding the Norden while the bombardier had his fun.

Interestingly enough, some Mossie equipped units in the Far East had their aircraft replaced by Beaus. The bugs and fungus in that area loved munching on that plywood held together by glue that was based on milk.

 

[EwenS]

47 squadron was the first squadron in India to trade its Beaus for Mosquitos which happened in Oct 1944 but quickly had to switch back due to the glue problems in the wings. But, with those sorted, it re-equipped entirely with Mosquitos between Feb & April 1945.

It was the only squadron to change back to the Beau during WW2.

45, 82, 84 & 110 switched from Vengeance to Mosquito between Feb and Nov 1944, but the wing problems delayed most of these becoming operational on the type until the end of the year. The final Mossie squadron in India / Burma was 211 which swapped Beaus for Mossies in June 1945.

Post war Beaufighters again replaced Mosquitos in the couple of the remaining squadrons from late 1946.

 

[Shortround6]

You mean the the bigger and slower A-20 (Boston/Havoc)?

Beaufighter
Wing area: 503 sq ft (46.7 m2​)

A-20G
Wing area: 464 sq ft

Granted the fuselage was bit bigger.
Speed may depend on altitude.
A-20Gs with the turret peaked at around 325mph.
older versions without turret could hit around 340mph.
Depends on gun trays and other "stuff".

Others have covered things very well.

Japanese AA kinda sucked. Both land and sea. They did shoot stuff down, but not as often as the Germans did. The 25mm fired slow, was slow to reload, vibrated, and both traverse and elevation were slow. The Japanese had no 37/40 mm AA (or just a handful) and the 13.2mm Hotchkiss? repeat, fired slow, was slow to reload, vibrated, and both traverse and elevation were slow.
Japanese Army 20mm AA gun.

fired about 2/3s as fast as German 20mm and with the magazine changes practical fire was even less. Japanese built about 2500 before/during the war.
Germans built about 8,000 of the early slow firing 20mm guns, about 40,000ft of the FLAK 38s and around 3750 of the quad guns.
With the Army scattered from Manchuria to Singapore to New Guinea to the Solomon's numbers in any one location were not great, being charitable.
Ground attack was rather different between Asia and Europe.