Good video, thanks for posting. I still can't believe that who ever designed this thought it was going to work. But then again would it have been more successful with forward firing armament as well as the turret, similar to the Bristol fighter of WW1?
Good video, thanks for posting. But then again would it have been more successful with forward firing armament as well as the turret, similar to the Bristol fighter of WW1? thanks Nick an interesting aircraft
I still can't believe that who ever designed this thought it was going to work. This is indeed the traditional view. But once you drill deeper - and you have to drill VERY deep to find it!!! - you get smacked around the face with the wet kipper of a VERY suprising fact... ...the design of the Defiant was based on a VERY sound scientific principle of ballistics! :mellow: Be amazed, be very amazed...."No-Allowance Shooting" No allowance shooting, a principle of air combat, an overview. Once the turret of the Defiant was locked forward - firing past the head of the pilot! - at a fixed angle of 19 degrees (so that it didn't hit the propellor)... ...he didn't even need a sight - ALL he would have to do is catch a bomber, fly along underneath it, and press HIS slaved firing button. He couldn't miss! Sound familiar??? Schräge Musik - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
But then again would it have been more successful with forward firing armament as well as the turret, similar to the Bristol fighter of WW1? It DID have forward-firing armament....the turret! The turret revolved 360 degress....BUT on an electrical mechanism that acted as the "interrupter" so that the gun would cut off when it passed in line with the tail! BUT when it rotated forward....the pilot had a lock-out lever down by the side of his seat that locked the traverse - it was an electrical traverse, when the pilot used the lever, the turret rotated then the current was cut when in-line ahead - and locked the elevation at 19 degrees...so that the bullet stream couldn't hit the prop. Engaging the lock-out lever ALSO slaved the electric firing control for the Brownings to a secondary button on his joystick.
It DID have forward-firing armament....the turret! The turret revolved 360 degress....BUT on an electrical mechanism that acted as the "interrupter" so that the gun would cut off when it passed in line with the tail! BUT when it rotated forward....the pilot had a lock-out lever down by the side of his seat that locked the traverse - it was an electrical traverse, when the pilot used the lever, the turret rotated then the current was cut when in-line ahead - and locked the elevation at 19 degrees...so that the bullet stream couldn't hit the prop. Engaging the lock-out lever ALSO slaved the electric firing control for the Brownings to a secondary button on his joystick. Phylo Thanks for the explanation, I was not aware that the guns could actually be fired whilst the turret was in that position. Nick
Suprisingly - it was actually a GOOD idea.... ALL the Defiant had to do was catch a bomber....and fly along underneath it from back to front - firing as it went. As long as the pilot kept roughly along the centre line of the bomber, he didn't need a gunsight for he simply COULDN'T miss! Problem of course was - as with most "good" ideas - it needed perfect conditions for its application! It needed bombers with no or at most a weak ventral defensive armament - and most German bombers had one rifle-calibre MG firing from underneath covering the Defiant's ideal line of approach/attack. One MG may not sound a lot....but the designers of the 1930s were aware that single rifle-calibre MGs HAD been a good defensive armament against attacking fighters in WWI that only had one or at the very most two forward-firing MGS to attack them with! To them - that single MG seemed enough!:mellow:And against a Defiant flying along underneath the gunner in a straight,steady line....it probably WOULD be enough! The SECOND problem was....Defiants had to be GOT into that position. When they were designed....and their quarry designed ...close fighter escort wasn't really on the agenda, especially in Germany. All sides still thought bombers in formation could cover each other with their single rifle-calibre MGs and thus close-in escort simply wasn't needed... And the Luftwaffe also had the idea that THEIR fighters would rove - "free hunt" - I.E. escort bombers loosely waiting for enemy fighters to come up to attack....then break off and fight a SEPARATE engagement with the enemy fighters So the "worst case" scenario that was envisioned was that the RAF's Spitfires and Hurricanes would have to draw off/swat away the Luftwaffe's roving escorts, giving the Defiants a free approach to the weak underside of their targets... ....and the BEST case scenario was of course that while an UNESCORTED bomber formation could cover each other laterally....their underbellies would still be relatively weak...and open to the Defiants. Just a pity noone really told the Luftwaffe to play along! :p
Suprisingly - it was actually a GOOD idea.... ALL the Defiant had to do was catch a bomber....and fly along underneath it from back to front - firing as it went. As long as the pilot kept roughly along the centre line of the bomber, he didn't need a gunsight for he simply COULDN'T miss! Problem of course was - as with most "good" ideas - it needed perfect conditions for its application! It needed bombers with no or at most a weak ventral defensive armament - and most German bombers had one rifle-calibre MG firing from underneath covering the Defiant's ideal line of approach/attack. One MG may not sound a lot....but the designers of the 1930s were aware that single rifle-calibre MGs HAD been a good defensive armament against attacking fighters in WWI that only had one or at the very most two forward-firing MGS to attack them with! To them - that single MG seemed enough!:mellow:And against a Defiant flying along underneath the gunner in a straight,steady line....it probably WOULD be enough! The SECOND problem was....Defiants had to be GOT into that position. When they were designed....and their quarry designed ...close fighter escort wasn't really on the agenda, especially in Germany. All sides still thought bombers in formation could cover each other with their single rifle-calibre MGs and thus close-in escort simply wasn't needed... And the Luftwaffe also had the idea that THEIR fighters would rove - "free hunt" - I.E. escort bombers loosely waiting for enemy fighters to come up to attack....then break off and fight a SEPARATE engagement with the enemy fighters So the "worst case" scenario that was envisioned was that the RAF's Spitfires and Hurricanes would have to draw off/swat away the Luftwaffe's roving escorts, giving the Defiants a free approach to the weak underside of their targets... ....and the BEST case scenario was of course that while an UNESCORTED bomber formation could cover each other laterally....their underbellies would still be relatively weak...and open to the Defiants. Just a pity noone really told the Luftwaffe to play along! :p Well said PR. Plus when the Defiant was designed single engined fighters over the UK was discounted. Germany was too far away and thought that France would lose a land battle did not enter into any defence strategy. Kev
It DID have forward-firing armament....the turret! The turret revolved 360 degress....BUT on an electrical mechanism that acted as the "interrupter" so that the gun would cut off when it passed in line with the tail! BUT when it rotated forward....the pilot had a lock-out lever down by the side of his seat that locked the traverse - it was an electrical traverse, when the pilot used the lever, the turret rotated then the current was cut when in-line ahead - and locked the elevation at 19 degrees...so that the bullet stream couldn't hit the prop. Engaging the lock-out lever ALSO slaved the electric firing control for the Brownings to a secondary button on his joystick. Fascinating, I had absolutely no idea! Have some awaiting painting, will let you know how they get on!
Plus when the Defiant was designed single engined fighters over the UK was discounted. Germany was too far away and thought that France would lose a land battle did not enter into any defence strategy. Not necessarily! 1/ The RAF offered THEIR tageting options to Cabinet in the autumn of 1935 - and they chose Option C, the sopending plan that by the autumn of 1939 would permit Bomber Command to hit targets in North Germany and the Ruhr! They HAD also been offered a spending option (huge LMAO) that would have allowed Bomber Command in 1939 to hit BERLIN and any other point in Germany regularly! 2/ When Walter Wever issued the O.R. for his "Ural Bomber" to German manufacturers - it had to hit both targets deep in Russia....and the North of Scotland! Well...Scapa Flow, obviously! And THAT was issued in the first half of the 1930s! 3/ The Luftwaffe clung to the idea of self-defending box formations for some time. there were plenty of unescorted raids over Poland, lots over France....and more than a few over the UK during the BoB! :mellow: Particulary by Dorniers, they were regarded as having a particularly formidable defence for this....and on two occasions during the BoB Huricane pilots who disobeyed orders to nibble away at the edges and DID intrude into the Dornier box formation - paid the ultimate price for it.
thank you all for the comments a very interesting aircraft i wont mention the Lysander and the Avro Anson for now
I have to admit (my taste in motorcycles is just as poor!) I have a soft spot for the Defiant. It's a good-looking aircraft - and technologically advanced in other ways than just its electrical turret control/firing system. Unlike the traditional metal tubing covered in wood lathing and doped linen of the Hurricane - the Defiant was a twin-shell monocoque; the two halves of the fuselage monocoque were bolted together. A second crewman, the turret itself, and four guns AND their ammo...guns and ammo weigh a LOT...must have been a terrible drag (sic!) As it was - the Defiant had a top speed of 302-304 mph, only 40 mph down on the Spitfire I/IA... I wonder how much it would have weighed and how fast it would have been if those guns had just been installed in the wing, and the second crewman and turret deleted??? If you think about it this way - by 1940 we could have had THREE factories/shadowfactories building competitive monoplane fighters! OR.... The original prototype K8310 had provision for small ordnance carried in recesses in the wings! :mellow: A little bit of weight jiggling...and we COULD have built a decent multi-role aircraft in 1938/39/40 - fast, four MGs, and a light bombing capability....
I have to admit (my taste in motorcycles is just as poor!) I have a soft spot for the Defiant. It's a good-looking aircraft - and technologically advanced in other ways than just its electrical turret control/firing system. Unlike the traditional metal tubing covered in wood lathing and doped linen of the Hurricane - the Defiant was a twin-shell monocoque; the two halves of the fuselage monocoque were bolted together. A second crewman, the turret itself, and four guns AND their ammo...guns and ammo weigh a LOT...must have been a terrible drag (sic!) As it was - the Defiant had a top speed of 302-304 mph, only 40 mph down on the Spitfire I/IA... I wonder how much it would have weighed and how fast it would have been if those guns had just been installed in the wing, and the second crewman and turret deleted??? If you think about it this way - by 1940 we could have had THREE factories/shadowfactories building competitive monoplane fighters! OR.... The original prototype K8310 had provision for small ordnance carried in recesses in the wings! :mellow: A little bit of weight jiggling...and we COULD have built a decent multi-role aircraft in 1938/39/40 - fast, four MGs, and a light bombing capability.... I agree, it was not an ugly looking plane and it proved a headache for the Luftwaffe until they learned how to deal with it. I just wonder how it would have performed with wing mounted guns as well as the turret? Regards Tom
The Defiant when she left front line service trained many airgunners and in that role was a very useful aircraft. http://www.ww2talk.com/forum/searching-someone-military-genealogy/15778-family-war-3.html I have a reasonable museum photo of one floating around here somewhere.
My limited interest in the machine is because of this incident: From Somerset at War: 16.8.40 Aircraft Type - Defiant L7010 Location - In sea, St Audries Unit/Base - 5OTU, Aston Down Crew State/Names - 2K (killed) - Sgts J.D.Gwynne and W.C.Munro From West Somerset Free Press published Sat. 31 Aug 1940: DEATH OF AN AIRMAN A coroner's inquiry into the death of Serg Pilot John Draper Gwynne, RAF (20), whose body strapped in the cockpit of an airplane was discovered on South West Coast of England, showed that while the deceased and another sergeant were engaged in tactical exercises their 'plane crashed on the edge of some rocks and disappeared beneath the incoming tide. Multiple injuries had resulted in instantaneous death. The body of Gwynne's companion has not yet been recovered. In recording a verdict in accordance with the medical evidence, the Coroner pointed out that as Gwynne was carrying out instructions his death had taken place almost equally as a result of war service as if he had been engaged in other operations. The funeral took place on Thursday afternoon in a churchyard situated only a short distance from the scene of the accident. Six sergeants of the RAF acted as bearers and the full military honours accorded the deceased created a very impressive spectacle. From his death certificate: When and where died: Dead body found Twenty-fifth August 1940, Kilve Beach, Shinstow, R.D. Sex: Male Age: 20 years Occupation: Of Aston Down, Gloucester, Sergeant Pilot R.A.F. Cause of death: Multiple injuries through his aeroplane crashing into the rocks: Misadventure. J.H. Signature, description and residence of informant: Certificate received from Geoffrey Clarke Coroner for Western District of Somerset. Inquest held 26th August 1940. When registered: Twenty-eighth August 1940 Courtesy of Peter Clare: Date: 16-AUG-1940 Type: Boulton Paul Defiant Mk.I Operator: RAF 5 OTU Registration: L7010 Fatalities: Fatalities: 2 / Occupants: 2 Airplane damage: w/o Location: 1 mile off Watchet, Somerset - United Kingdom Narrative: Stalled & spun into sea, while on gunnery practice. From cwgc: Name: GWYNNE, JOHN DRAPER Rank: Sergeant (Pilot) Regiment/Service: Royal Air Force Volunteer Reserve Age: 20 Date of Death: 16/08/1940 Service No: 742137 Additional information: Son of David and Evelyn Gwynne, of Denham, Buckinghamshire. Casualty Type: Commonwealth War Dead Cemetery: WEST QUANTOXHEAD (ST. ETHELDREDA) CHURCHYARD [Have photo of grave] Name: MUNRO, WILLIAM CAMPBELL Rank: Sergeant (Air Gnr.) Regiment/Service: Royal Air Force Volunteer Reserve Age: 26 Date of Death: 16/08/1940 Service No: 755916 Additional information: Son of James Munro, and of Sarah Ann Campbell Munro, of Cathcart, Glasgow. Casualty Type: Commonwealth War Dead Grave/Memorial Reference: Sec. S. 1931 Div. Grave 2953. Cemetery: AYR CEMETERY, Ayrshire John was the last in his family, ie the only son and grandchild. His 2 uncles John and William Gwynne, both RFA, died 3 days apart in May 1915, his father served with AIF at Gallipoli and died after the war when John was 10. There is no-one left in this particular branch of my husband's family, John's unmarried aunt having died in 1965. A chance remark by her, "The wars wiped out my family" and remembered by my husband's uncle, enabled us to piece together a sketch of the family's history.
