On Sat, 23 Aug 2003 03:20:19 GMT, Guy Alcala
wrote:

[Stirlings doing daylight tactical bombing in support of B-17s]

Only for targets with light flak defenses, similar to those the mediums would go after. At least they
have dual controls, but they'd already been taken off day ops over France back in 1941?, and I don't
think the defenses had gotten any lighter since.

They weren't taken off due to heavy losses per se [3-6 Stirlings from
7 and 15 Sqns in 3 Group were used in July 1941 for Circus ops], just
that BC wanted them for the main strategic offensive and any bomber
lost in daytime or even allocated to FC was seen as a disproportionate
waste of resources from painfully small and slowly-expanding
four-engined bomber production. We're reversing that perspective
here, particularly after October 1943 when the Stirling force is baked
by sufficient production output, but by the same token is looking for
a mission as they are about to get dropped from deep-penetration
missions.

BTW, do you have any idea why they didn't put some
extended tips on the Stirlings, as they did for the Halifax? Maybe it just would have taken too much of
a change to get them up to reasonable heights.

The only effort to do this that I can see came with the
"super-Stirling" using Centaurus engines mooted by Shorts in 1941.
The Centaurus wasn't going to appear in adequate numbers in time to
have an impact on Stirling usage in the real world, meanwhile in
1941-42 the MAP and AM were unhappy with Short's chronic failure to
meet existing Sitrling production targets. Any new type or equipment
change which would further hinder production seems to have been
dismissed out of hand, although that's conjecture on my part in the
absence of hard evidence.

The ceiling of the Stirling I was regarded as a problem, but it was
hoped better engines would fix the problem, rather than changing the
airframe, i.e. by the Hercules XIs used in the Stirling III.

[2 Group B-25s using 4,000lb bombloads in January 1943]

BTW, what was the
target of that first attack? Are we talking a "just nip across the channel to Calais and back" sort of
thing?

Yes, the targets were on the Ghent-Terneuzen canal in Belgium; but on
the other hand they also carried 4,000lbs on deeper penetrations to
Brest and Normandy that I'm aware of. I was hoping you might have
some evidence of 12th AF range and bombloads to compare, or even from
ops in the SWP.

[cowardly and snivelling agreement by the colonialist Yanqui
running-dogs snipped]

J. Edgar Hoover, eat your heart out.

We draw the line at accessorizing with earrings and pearl necklaces; supposedly he didn't.

snip story confirming tea as vital to the British war effort

Well, it would help if you were aiming to contribute some badly-needed
inaccurate, nationally chauvanistic-abuse to this thread, if you could
actually manage some substantive inaccuracy. I note that so far I
have been the only contributor to succeed in adding unsupported
personal abuse to the thread so far. My victory in traditional usenet
terms is, frankly, unassailable.

Gavin Bailey


--

Another user rings. "I need more space" he says.
"Well, why not move to Texas?", I ask. - The ******* Operator From Hell