In article ,
M. H. Greaves wrote:
Yes i can actualy understand why an under belly defence position would be a
disaster on a flying boat.
But the other a/c such as the heavy bombers i think should have had some
form of under belly guns, but instead they got rid of them, and the
underside of a bomber was the most vulnerable part of a bomber, especially
in the dark.

In the dark - if a fighter closed then the bomber was generally gone
regardless. The best defence was speed, and the dustbin turrets in
the ventral position really sapped that. The tail turret was worth
having as it put a pair of eyes right aft (the four brownings being
less important than the pair of eyes).
Freeman Dyson, who did the Op.An, on the night bombers, is worth
reading on this. Essentially - lose the ventral turret: speed goes up,
losses down. Lose the dorsal and nose turrets on the Halibag - and losses
went down. Lancaster was already good enough to not mess much more with
(it upset the production lines), but certainly H2S in ventral was much
better for bombs-on-target and crews back home than the dustbin turret.

The trade off was different in daylight, of course.

--
Andy Breen ~ Interplanetary Scintillation Research Group
http://users.aber.ac.uk/azb/
"Time has stopped, says the Black Lion clock
and eternity has begun" (Dylan Thomas)