Night bombers interception in Western Europe in 1944

"WaltBJ" wrote in message
om...
I have read inan RAF history that some Canadian Halifax squadrons
installed a single flexible 50 cal in a ventral mount - and were
pretty suucessful at countering Schrage Musik attacks. I can well
believe that - looking up through the top of a canopy at a firing 50M2
at say 100 feet would probably be the last thing an LW Nachtjaeger
pilot saw.
Walt BJ


Trouble is a fight between an aircraft armed with 30mm cannon and
one armed with a single 0.5 will mostly favour the fighter.
The most successful defensive tactic was to perform an
immediate evasion by flying a violent corkscrew manoeuvre

Keith

On Mon, 19 Jul 2004 13:24:16 +0100, Keith Willshaw wrote:

[snip]

The most successful defensive tactic was to perform an
immediate evasion by flying a violent corkscrew manoeuvre

Which, be it noted, the single pilot Lancaster was perfectly
capable of doing. Not sure about the Halifax or American Bs.

IBM

__________________________________________________ _____________________________
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 - http://www.uncensored-news.com
The Worlds Uncensored News Source

"ian maclure" wrote in message
news
On Mon, 19 Jul 2004 13:24:16 +0100, Keith Willshaw wrote:

[snip]

The most successful defensive tactic was to perform an
immediate evasion by flying a violent corkscrew manoeuvre

Which, be it noted, the single pilot Lancaster was perfectly
capable of doing. Not sure about the Halifax or American Bs.

IBM


The Halifax used the same tactic, it was simply inappropriate
for the B-17 which operated in tight formation in daylight.

Keith

Subject: Night bombers interception....
From: "Keith Willshaw"
Date: 7/19/2004 2:15 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:


"ian maclure" wrote in message
news
On Mon, 19 Jul 2004 13:24:16 +0100, Keith Willshaw wrote:

[snip]

The most successful defensive tactic was to perform an
immediate evasion by flying a violent corkscrew manoeuvre

Which, be it noted, the single pilot Lancaster was perfectly
capable of doing. Not sure about the Halifax or American Bs.

IBM


The Halifax used the same tactic, it was simply inappropriate
for the B-17 which operated in tight formation in daylight.

Keith


And it would result in death, destruction amid mid-air collisions


Arthur Kramer
344th BG 494th BS
England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany
Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer

The Halifax used the same tactic, it was simply inappropriate
for the B-17 which operated in tight formation in daylight.

B-17's, even in formation, could skid and turn slightly at the right tme to
throw off the German's aim. Given the ballistics of a head on attack, the
firing window was a fraction of a second.

Robert Morgan related in his auto-bio a time when he was flying "Memphis Belle"
in which he pulled up slightly at the very last instant in response to a
German fighter attack. Instead of the cockpit area being hit, the tail was
shredded badly.

Walt

(WalterM140) wrote in message ...
The Halifax used the same tactic, it was simply inappropriate
for the B-17 which operated in tight formation in daylight.

B-17's, even in formation, could skid and turn slightly at the right tme to
throw off the German's aim. Given the ballistics of a head on attack, the
firing window was a fraction of a second.

Robert Morgan related in his auto-bio a time when he was flying "Memphis Belle"
in which he pulled up slightly at the very last instant in response to a
German fighter attack. Instead of the cockpit area being hit, the tail was
shredded badly.

Walt


The American formations also learned to jink (on command of the rear
gunner) to try and avoid attack by the 21cm rockets (and even 250kg
bombs) the Germans were firing and dropping on them. These rockets
were very effective and often took out 3 or 4 bombers and broke up the
formation. It was the appearence of the P38 Lightning that rendered
the use of such heavily laden Me 110, Bf 109 and Fw 190s generaly too
costly. Once the formation was scattered the Bombers were easily
despatched.

Subject: Night bombers interception....
From: (Eunometic)
Date: 7/19/2004 9:23 PM Pacific Standard Time

The American formations also learned to jink (on command of the rear
gunner) to try and avoid attack by the 21cm rockets (and even

After all the missions I have flown I never once heard the word "jinking" We
did none of that. it was straight and level all the way in and steady as a
rock. "jinking" would tumble the gyro on the Norden and force a go-around.


Arthur Kramer
344th BG 494th BS
England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany
Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer

These rockets
were very effective and often took out 3 or 4 bombers and broke up the
formation.

Often? That doesn't jibe with German claims - multiple claims from a single
rocket salvo were VERY rare, as most of the pilots using them misjudged the
release point for the often-erratic WGr 21s.

Damage to more than one bomber was common; but destroying more than one was
not. I haven't met a LW pilot that felt the rockets were a better choice than
cannons - and I have heard more than one of them curse about those "damned
rockets" that made their aircraft sitting ducks for escorts.

v/r
Gordon
====(A+C====
USN SAR

Its always better to lose -an- engine, not -the- engine.

On Mon, 19 Jul 2004 13:24:16 +0100, "Keith Willshaw"
wrote:

Trouble is a fight between an aircraft armed with 30mm cannon and
one armed with a single 0.5 will mostly favour the fighter.
The most successful defensive tactic was to perform an
immediate evasion by flying a violent corkscrew manoeuvre

Indeed, and I'm skeptical of the utility of a hand-mounted machine-gun
in a ventral window with restricted vision, manned by a frozen
air-gunner who has to endure hour after hour of vigilance on multimple
missions before facing the slit-second reactions required to deal with
a real assailant. Plenty of bombers were lost to stern attacks, and
even attacks from beneath passed through the visible arc of the rear
turret before they closed to engage, which should indicate the real
problems encountered relying on unassistated visual observation alone
for bomber defence.

Gavin Bailey

--

Apply three phase AC 415V direct to MB. This work real good. How you know, you
ask? Simple, chip get real HOT. System not work, but no can tell from this.
Exactly same as before. Do it now. - Bart Kwan En

Subject: Night bombers interception....
From: Presidente Alcazar
Date: 7/20/2004 1:20 AM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:

On Mon, 19 Jul 2004 13:24:16 +0100, "Keith Willshaw"
wrote:

Trouble is a fight between an aircraft armed with 30mm cannon and
one armed with a single 0.5 will mostly favour the fighter.
The most successful defensive tactic was to perform an
immediate evasion by flying a violent corkscrew manoeuvre

Indeed, and I'm skeptical of the utility of a hand-mounted machine-gun
in a ventral window with restricted vision, manned by a frozen
air-gunner who has to endure hour after hour of vigilance on multimple
missions before facing the slit-second reactions required to deal with
a real assailant. Plenty of bombers were lost to stern attacks, and
even attacks from beneath passed through the visible arc of the rear
turret before they closed to engage, which should indicate the real
problems encountered relying on unassistated visual observation alone
for bomber defence.

Gavin Bailey



True. The fighter had the advantage. But we got a lot of those little *******s
anyway. When you fight a war you take your losses and keep fighting no matter
what..


Arthur Kramer
344th BG 494th BS
England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany
Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer