Tag:

aircraft

Operation Tidal Wave

by Till Daisd December 12, 2022

The USAAF lost 214 soldiers in Romania, according to the Romanian Gendarmerie, but several B-24 aircraft had crew members who were so badly burned that it was impossible to identify them

Operation Tidal Wave was one of the boldest and most controversial air raids of World War II.

The Ploesti oilfields in Romania served as both a major strategic air power target and Germany’s single most important fuel supply in 1943. However, the Tidal Wave raid, which used B-24s flown from Libya to destroy the refineries, ended up being one of the most expensive US Army Air Force (USAAF) operations to date, with roughly a third of the force being shot down. Although clearly valiant, the mission’s outcomes—for which five Medals of Honor were given—were in doubt. Initial evaluations claimed that 40% of Ploesti’s refinery capacity had been lost, however, subsequent research found that the damage was swiftly fixed and output levels increased.

According to Steven J. Zaloga in his book Ploesti 1943, Gen. Alfred Gerstenberg (who led the Luftwaffe in Romania from February 15, 1942, to August 27, 1944), in his initial report to Berlin, acknowledged the damage to the refineries but noted that it would not significantly affect the supply of fuel to Germany and its allies. The attack also resulted in devastating losses for the USAAF. Senior Romanian and German leadership met in Bucharest on August 3, 1943, to examine the takeaways from the Ploesti raid.

The meeting included Marshal Ion Antonescu, General de escadra Gheorghe Jienescu (Romanian Air Minister), General de divizie Gheorghe D. Marinescu (Romanian Air Defenses), German Ambassador Manfred Freiherr von Killinger, Gen Gerstenberg, Oberst Woldenga (German fighter forces), Gen Kuderna (commander of 5.Flak Division), and others.

Operation Tidal Wave: Why the 1943 Raid on Ploesti Oilfields Failed to Diminish the Supply of Fuel to Germany and its Allies — B-24 Liberator Through flak and over the destruction created by preceding waves of bombers, these 15th Air Force B-24s leave Ploesti, Romania, after one of the long series of attacks against the No. 1 oil target in Europe.

Even though the raid had significantly damaged the refineries, Gerstenberg pointed out that they were still in operation and that production might resume normally in a few weeks. Despite numerous recommendations for enhancing air defense, Ploesti’s Flak defense was determined to be the single most crucial cause of the raid’s demise. The conference felt that the Flak was too spread and that only about a third of the German and Romanian antiaircraft weaponry in Romania was concentrated in Ploesti and the Prahova valley.

Consequently, a program was started to focus the Flak defenses on the most critical places, including Bucharest, Ploesti, the Cernavoda bridge, the port of Constanta, and the manufacturing cities of Reqita and Brasov. As a result of the assumption that subsequent raids would come from high altitudes following the failure of the low-altitude raid, there was also universal agreement on the necessity for more antiaircraft guns, notably heavy batteries of 105mm. It would also be necessary to deploy more radar stations and increase the fighter force.

The FARR (Fortele Aeriene RegalenRomane, Royal Romanian Air Force) launched 54 flights with 13 kill claims while having 31 available aircraft and crews on August 1. In the proximity of Ploesti, the Luftwaffe operated 26 aircraft with crews, carried out 69 missions, and recorded 15 kills. The other five kills claimed by Jagdgeschwader are not included in this. 27 from the Greek base at Kalamaki/Tanagara attacked the retreating Tidal Wave force over the Ionian Sea.

Romanian assessments seriously downgraded the number of bombers lost to fighters. Many of the bombers that fighters claimed to have shot down had already been mortally injured by flak, and the fighters had only shown up to provide the finishing blow. After the Tidal Wave, one of the key technical assessments was that the fighter aircraft needed to be updated with a 20mm cannon because the machine-gun-equipped fighters could not damage a heavy bomber effectively enough.

An enormous overstatement was made by the Tidal Wave bomber crews when they claimed to have shot down 52 hostile aircraft. In the final battles over the Ionian Sea, the Luftwaffe lost two BF 109G-2 aircraft destroyed and four damaged from I./JG.4, and two Bf 109Gs destroyed and one damaged from JG.27. Night-fighter losses were one Bf 110E-4 destroyed and four damaged from NJG.6. Two JAR 80 fighters were lost by the FARR, three were damaged, and one Romanian Bf 110C was also destroyed. During the encounters, at least two Romanian Bf 109G-2s were also damaged.

According to Romanian reports, between 34 and 36 bombers were shot down over the country, 26 of which crashed outside of the city of Ploesti and nine of which crashed nearby. Due to numerous bombers disintegrating and burning after colliding with the refineries, the number of bombers varied. Officials from Romania sent the US a list of 25 mostly intact aircraft that could be recognized by serial number in 1944. According to estimations, fighters (12), balloon wires, and flak (20) were to blame for the bomber losses (4).

According to the first US assessment, fighters were mostly to blame for five to six of the losses above Ploesti, balloon cables for one, and one or two planes may have been destroyed by bomb explosions or other ground fires. The light 20mm and 37mm guns were blamed for the majority of the Flaknkills by both the Germans and the Romanians. Low-altitude engagements were not well suited for the 88mm guns. The USAAF suffered 214 deaths in Romania, according to the Romanian Gendarmerie, however other aircraft had crew members who were so badly burned that it was impossible to identify them.

The number of casualties on the ground varies between reports. Most recent sources state that there were over 300 fatalities and injuries. The B-24 crash into the women’s penitentiary, which resulted in 61 deaths and 60 injuries, was the single most expensive incident. Three 88mm guns and five 20mm guns were lost in terms of equipment. When their wires were damaged, seven barrage balloons were released, and five more were set on fire and destroyed.

Ploesti 1943 is published by Osprey Publishing and is available to order here.

Photo by U.S. Air Force

December 12, 2022 0 comment

History

When the only two Tupolev Tu-16 airstrikes against Israel were carried out by the Iraqi Air Force

by Till Daisd December 11, 2022

written by Till Daisd

Both Israeli Mirage pilots were scared away by Tupolev Tu-16 defensive fire from the tail-mounted barbette after their Shafrir Mk.1 air-to-air missile attack attempt failed

The Iraqi High Command in Baghdad gave Squadron Leader Farouk at-Tail, commander of the No. 10 Squadron, Iraqi Air Force (IrAF), the order to launch an air strike on Ramat David AB in northern Israel early on June 6, 1967 (the second day of the June 1967 Arab-Israeli War). Tail made the fast decision to send four crews and four Tupolev Tu-16 bombers into this operation as single ships, with a quarter-hour between each aircraft. Each bomber was equipped with six FAB-500 bombs (caliber 500kg).

Together with Flt Lt Majid Turki, Tail piloted the first Tu-16. They traveled to Mafraq AB (now known as Salti AB) in Jordan at a high altitude before making a steep descent to save fuel. He increased his speed to 900 km/h as soon as he entered Israeli airspace, then began a climb to look for his intended target. The crew then reported having found Ramat David AB and released its bombs without any disturbance, around 0500hrs local time.

Israeli accounts claim that the crew actually struck an unspecified military installation close to Ta’amach, which is 10 kilometers (6.2 miles) southeast of Afula; the attack destroyed many structures, resulted in the deaths of two Israeli soldiers, and injured five others. The other two Tu-16s had less luck; they were both forced to return to Ton Habaniyah early after having to abort their missions because of mechanical issues. Sqn Ldr Hussein Mohammad ‘Kaka’ Hussein piloted the Tupolev Number 4, with Flt Lt Alwan serving as co-pilot, Flt Lt Rashid, Flt Lt Kargoli, and Flt Lt Sabih serving as navigator-gunners 1 and 2, respectively.

Like Tail before him, Hussein silently began a similar rise and entered Israeli airspace. But for some reason, his group was unable to launch an attack on the intended target. In defiance of directives not to attack civilian targets, it dropped its warlord shortly after 6:00 a.m. over the center of Netanya, a coastal town in northern Israel, killing one person and injured 21 others. Hussein and Alwan then redirected their bomber back into Israeli airspace while flying over the Mediterranean Sea. At that point, two Israeli Defense Force/Air Force (IDF/AF) Mirage IIICJ aircraft attacked them.

What specifically transpired after then is a subject of some debate. The Shafrir Mk.1 air-to-air missiles fired by the Mirages in one version of the story missed their target, and the two pilots were subsequently scared off by Sabih’s defensive fire from the barbette mounted on the back of the aircraft. They claimed that Sabih and Kargoli had fired from their barbettes on the aircraft and installations they observed below. Hussein and Alwan then flew their bomber directly over Ramat David AB while being pursued by two Mirages.

An Israeli air-to-air missile should have struck the lone Tu-16 shortly after that. The bomber was still under control and trying to flee in an easterly direction, Hussein said over the radio. He should have avoided a military base in Megiddo, where his bomber is said to have been shot down by an IDF-operated 40mm Bofors L/70 anti-aircraft gun. The bomber destroyed two teams of 120mm mortars and three barracks when it fell into a military storage facility, killing not only its crew but also between 11 and 14 Israeli soldiers in addition to its own crew members.

These two were the only Tu-16 airstrikes against Israel that are known to have taken place.

The photograph below was taken in 1965 and shows one of the Tu-16s from No. 10 Squadron together with the majority of its pilots. With the material at hand, I am unable to confirm the involvement or the death of any “Hussein ad-Dahy” in the airstrike on Ramat David on June 6, 1967. However, it’s possible that the pilot of the lost Tupolev bomber went by that complete name.

Iraqi Air Force Performed the Only two Tupolev Tu-16 Air Strikes Ever Conducted against Israel

Photo by U.S. Air Force

December 11, 2022 0 comment

History

Famous German Ace Adolf Galland recounts his final combat mission

by Till Daisd December 11, 2022

written by Till Daisd

“As usual in a dogfight, I was tense and excited. I forgot to release the second safety catch for the rockets. They did not go off. I was in the best firing position, I had aimed accurately and pressed my thumb flat on the release button -with no result. Maddening for any fighter pilot,” Adolf Galland

General der Jagdflieger Adolf Galland, one of the key players in the Luftwaffe from 1942 to 1944, was relieved of his duties at the start of 1945. He was soon given the go-ahead to establish Jagdverband 44, his own squadron of Messerschmitt Me 262 jet fighters.

He would fly his final mission with this unit, according to Dan Sharp’s book Spitfires over Berlin, as Galland himself wrote in The First and The Last: “On April 26, I set out on in my last mission of the war. I led six le jet fighters of the JV 44 against a formation of Marauders. Our own little directing post brought us well into contact with the enemy. The weather: varying, clouds at different altitudes, with gaps, ground visible in about only three-tenths of the operational area.

“I sighted the enemy formation in the district of Neuburg on the Danube. Once again I noticed how difficult it was, with such great differences in speed and with clouds over the landmarks, to find the relative flying direction between one’s own plane, and that of the enemy, and how difficult it was to judge the approach.

“This difficulty had already driven Lutzow to despair. He had discussed it repeatedly with me, and every time he missed his run-in, this most successful fighter commodore blamed his own inefficiency as a fighter pilot. Had there been any need for more confirmation as to the hopelessness of operations with the Me 262 by bomber pilots, our experiences would have sufficed.

“But now there was no time for such considerations. We were flying in an almost opposite direction to the Marauder formation. Each second meant that we were 300 yards nearer. I will not say that I fought this action ideally, but I led my formation to a fairly favorable firing position.

“Safety catch off the gun and rocket switch. Already at a great distance, we met with considerable defensive fire. As usual in a dogfight, I was tense and excited. I forgot to release the second safety catch for the rockets. They did not go off. I was in the best firing position, I had aimed accurately and pressed my thumb flat on the release button -with no result. Maddening for any fighter pilot.

The ringmaster’s Grand Finale: Legendary German Ace Adolf Galland tells the exciting story of his last combat mission — *B-26 Marauder*

“Anyhow, my four 30mm cannons were working. They had much more firing power than we had been used to so far. At that moment, close below me, Schallmoser, the jet-rammer [he had accidentally rammed a USAAF P-38 Lightning with his Me 262 in a previous mission], whizzed past. In ramming, he made no distinction between friend or foe.”

Flying in “White 14,” Schallmoser launched his R4M rockets, blowing up one of the B-26s.

Galland wrote: “This engagement had lasted only a fraction of a second – a very important second o be sure. One Marauder of the last string was on fire and exploded. Now I attacked another bomber in the van of the formation. It was heavily hit as I passed very close above it.

“During this breakthrough, I got a few minor hits from the defensive fire. But now I wanted to know definitely what was happening to the second bomber I had hit. I was not quite clear if it had crashed. So far I had not noticed any fighter escort. Above the formation I had attacked last, I banked steeply to the left, and at this moment it happened: a hail of fire enveloped me. A Mustang had caught me napping.”

Technical Sergeant Henry Dietz, a former weapons instructor, had targeted Galland as he attempted to evaluate the harm he had done to his most recent victim after he had been injured by defense fire from one of the B-26s.

Dietz recalled: “Probably the most important thing I remembered from gunnery school was to fire short bursts and forget about the tracer bullets – just use your sights.

“That day, we were flying as flight leaders, and we were about 10 minutes from the target. I flew in the waist position from where I could see all the mechanical parts of the aircraft. I had never seen a jet before. Galland slowed down to the speed of the B-26 so that he could observe and take score. I thought `dummy’. He was flying low, right into the sights of my machine gun. I shot a burst. Nothing happened. A little higher, a little lower, I just kept shooting.”

1st Lt. James Finnegan of the 10th Fighter Squadron, 50th Fighter Group, the pilot of a Republic P-47 Thunderbolt escort fighter, had also spotted Dietz as he opened fire on Galland’s aircraft.

Finnegan later remembered: “I was leading the top cover of P-47s that was escorting the B-26s to their target. As I gazed down I saw two objects come zipping through the formation, and two bombers blew up immediately.

“I watched the two objects go through the bomber formation, and thought ‘That can’t be a prop job, it’s got to be one of the 262 jets’. I was at about 13,000ft and estimated them to be at about 9000-10,000. They were climbing, and I pulled a split-S toward the one that turned left, and almost ended up right on top of him – about 75 yards away.

“I gave a three-second burst and saw strikes on the right-hand engine and wing root. I was going so fast, I went right through everything, and guessed my speed at about 500mph. I recorded it as probable. I was flying a D-model Thunderbolt with a bubble canopy, a natural metal finish, and a black nose. The 262 had green and brown mottled camouflage with some specks of yellow. That turned out to be my last flight in a P-47.”

Galland wrote: “A sharp rap hit my right knee. The instrument panel with its indispensable instruments was shattered. The right engine was also hit. Its metal covering worked loose in the wind and was partly carried away. Now the left engine was hit too. I could hardly hold her in the air.

“In this embarrassing situation, I had only one wish: to get out of this crate, which now apparently was only good for dying in. But then I was paralyzed with the terror of being shot while parachuting down. Experience had taught us that we jet fighter pilots had to reckon on this. I soon discovered that my battered Me 262 could be steered again after some adjustments.

“After a dive through the layer of cloud, I saw the Autobahn below me. Ahead of me lay Munich and to the left Riem. In a few seconds, I was over the airfield. It was remarkably quiet and dead below. Having regained my self-confidence, I gave the customary wing wobble and started banking to come in.

“One engine did not react at all to the throttle. I could not reduce it. Just before the edge of the airfield I, therefore, had to cut out both engines. A long trail of smoke drifted behind me. Only at this moment, I noticed that Thunderbolts in a low-level attack were giving our airfield the works.

“Now I had no choice. I had not heard the warnings of our ground post because my wireless had faded out when I was hit. There remained only one thing to do: straight down into the fireworks. Touching down, I realized that the tyre of my nosewheel was flat. It rattled horribly as the earth again received me at a speed of 150mph on the small landing strip.

“Brake! Brake! The kite would not stop. But at last, I was out of the kite and into the nearest bomb crater. There were plenty of them on our runways. Bombs and rockets exploded all around; bursts of shells from the Thunderbolts whistled and banged.

“A new low-level attack. Out of the fastest fighter in the world and into a bomb crater, that was an unutterably wretched feeling. Through all the fireworks an armored tractor came rushing across to me. It pulled up sharply close by. One of our mechanics. Quickly I got in behind him. He turned and raced off on the shortest route away from the airfield. In silence, I slapped him on the shoulder.

“He understood better what I wanted to say than any words about the unity between flying and ground personnel could have expressed.

“The other pilots who took part in this operation were directed to neighboring airfields or came; into Riem after the attack. We reported five certain kills without loss to ourselves. I had to go to Munich to a hospital for treatment of my scratched knee. The X-ray showed two splinters in the kneecap. It was put in plaster. A fine business.”

Oberstleutnant Heinz Bar took over operational command of JV 44 with Galland now out of commission and Steinhoff still in the hospital (he was hurt in an accident on takeoff with his Me 262 on April 16). The unit was given orders to go to Salzburg-Maxglan on April 28. There, it was to conduct operations from woodland positions alongside the Munich-Salzburg Autobahn. This turned out to be JV 44’s last move.

On May 4, as the Americans closed in, the unit destroyed its Me 262s by placing grenades in their engine intakes. The remaining pilots were apprehended and brought in for interrogation. The following day, Galland submitted to American forces and JV 44 was no more.

Spitfires Over Berlin is published by Mortons Books and is available to order here along with many other beautiful aviation books.

Photo by U.S. Air Force Noop1958 and German Federal Archive via Wikipedia

December 11, 2022 0 comment

History

The first dogfight between two of the best fighters ever constructed was between the Tempest V and the Fw 190D-9

by Till Daisd December 10, 2022

written by Till Daisd

Flg Off Paul Breger, who had bailed out of his Fw 190D-9 in response to the attack by the Green Section, was struck by Bevan Hall’s spiraling Tempest as he descended. The fighter exploded as it struck the ground on the road between Handorf and Dorbaum. Breger crashed to the ground burning up his parachute, while Hall was later discovered dead

The Tempest V and Fw 190D-9, arguably two of the best fighters ever built, set new standards for operational efficiency and aircraft design during World War II. At this late point of the war and in their positions, they did in fact represent the cutting edge and apex of their respective countries’ piston-engined aircraft development. In late summer 1944, the long-nosed Fw 190D-9 made its maiden appearance on the frontline. Thanks to its powerful Jumo 213 engine, it swiftly outperformed the majority of the fighters the RAF, USAAF, and Soviet Red Air Force could field and was an immediate match for even the Griffon-engined Spitfire XIV and the P-51D/K.

Early in 1944, the Tempest V was sent into service, outfitting eight squadrons. When the fighter was sent out to intercept V1 flying bombs over southern England, it quickly established itself as a reliable performer. As the Allied armies advanced throughout northwest Europe beginning in the fall of 1944, the Tempest V also outfitted squadrons of the 2nd Tactical Air Force.

The first dramatic test between the Tempest and the “Dora” occurred on December 27, 1944, in clear skies, when eight aircraft from No. 486 Sqn on an armed reconnaissance to the Paderborn area encountered the 60 or so D-9s from III./JG 54 on a significant airfield protection flight for Ar 234s, according to Robert Forsyth’s book Tempest V vs Fw 190D-9. The D-9s were in a staggered formation at a height of between 6,500 and 10,000 feet, led by the Stabsschwarm, while the Tempests were flying in two “finger-four” sections of four aircraft.

To the right and left of the Stab were, 9., 11. and 12. Staffeln, while flying top cover was 10. Staffel led by Leutnant Peter Crump, a 24-victory ace — all of his kills had been claimed in the West while flying with II./JG 26 and included Spitfires, Mustangs, P-47s, and a Mosquito.

The two units met over the Munster area. The massive German formation was instructed to change direction from the southwest to the northeast after ground control reported the location of the Tempests. Hauptmann Robert “Bazzi” Weiss, a Knight’s Cross holder whose personal victory tally stood at 122 at the time, was the Gruppenkommandeur. As a result, the lower Staffeln was segregated from Crump’s Staffel. The pilots’ predicament was rendered even worse when, as Crump ordered them to reverse, they lost communication, scattered, and fell behind the rest of the Gruppe, leaving them extremely exposed to attack.

Tempest V vs Fw 190D-9: The Story of the First Dogfight between Two of the Finest Fighters Ever Built

Sqn Ldr Keith Taylor-Cannon, also known as “Hyphen” to his teammates, was in charge of the Tempest squad. He was from Oamaru, New Zealand, and had participated in the downing of a Me 262 and a Ju 188. ‘We were flying at 10,000ft and sighted the Huns in two gaggles at “12 o’clock” to us,’ he later reported, ‘one formation of 15 109s andn190s at 9,000ft, with the top cover of 20+ 109s and 190s and at approximately 14,000ft.’

As Green Section ascended to engage 10./JG 54, Taylor-Cannon led Red Section into the German aircraft. The lower-flying Staffel of D- 9s was then passed by the Tempests as they drew up in line behind and slightly below it. ‘After breaking, I got on the tail of an Fw 190 and opened fire at 200 yards range,’ recounted Taylor-Cannon. ‘I observed strikes, and as I pulled up sharply to avoid it, I saw the Fw 190 blow up in mid-air. A general dogfight ensued.’

Pit Offs Sid J. Short and Keith A. Smith, both V1 aces, both claimed to have shot down a Fw 190. According to the reporting:

‘I got into line astern, slightly above an Fw 190, and opened fire with a short burst from about 400 yards using half-a-ring of deflection. I closed the range, and when within 200 yards fired a short burst and another at a very close range of 20 yards using a full ring of deflection. The Fw 190 blew up — I could not avoid the explosion but broke to starboard as I flew through it.’

Short noted in his Combat Report:

‘I selected an Fw 190 and commenced firing from about 200 yards range in line astern, allowing five degrees of deflection. I held my fire for about two seconds and saw large puffs of grey-colored smoke coming from beneath the fuselage. By this time I had a Me 109 [sic] on my tail firing at me so was forced to break to port and spun off. I did not see what happened to the Fw 190, but Red 4 — Flg Off Smith — saw it catch fire and the pilot bail out. After spinning off I recovered the spin and regained my section.’

Meanwhile, Green Section had engaged Crump’s Staffel. Flt Lt E. W. Tanner described how he:

‘. . . closed in behind a straggler of the enemy formation and identified it as an Fw 190 with a long-range tank. I fired a short burst from 200 yards range, allowing slight deflection and about five degrees off line astern but observed no strikes. Green 4 [Flg Off Smith] passed me very closely and I saw him open fire at the same aircraft from about 50nyards range. I saw the Fw 190 blow up in mid-air. The Hun formation had broken so I climbed up through it and saw a long-nosed 190 flying across my nose at about 60 degrees and about 200 yards range. I opened fire, allowing 2 1/2 rings of deflection, and saw strikes on the tail unit, large pieces of which fell off. I saw the 190 roll over on its back and dive steeply to earth. Flg Offs Stafford and Danzey saw it going down vertically without its tail unit and pieces coming away from the fuselage. I milled around with the Section and then pulled up above the main gaggle. I spotted a 109 [sic] on the tail of a Tempest, so I dived on the 109 and opened fire at about 400 yards, holding the burst until 150 yards. I saw strikes along the cockpit and saw the nose of then109 go down as if the stick had gone violently forward. I was being engaged by about four other enemy aircraft so could not follow the 109 down, but Green 4n[Flg Off Smith] saw it tumbling down end over end.’

The Tempest pilots completed their task quickly and effectively, shooting down three Fw 190D-9s flown by Feldwebel Karl Dahn, Feldwebel Arnfried Kohler, and Oberleutnant Paul Breger, all of 10./JG 54. With second-degree burns on his face and shrapnel in his foot, Kohler parachuted to the ground. Breger experienced particular bad luck. In order to place himself onto the tail of a Tempest that was following another D-9 in his Schwarm, Peter Crump had to make a tight maneuver. V1 ace Flg Off Bevan Hall of the Green Section, who had stepped in to help Flg Off Jack Stafford, was piloting the RAF fighter. According to Stafford, ‘a 109 [sic] jumped on my tail and stayed there shooting, although without hitting me.’

Crump registered strikes on Flg Off Hall’s Tempest, forcing him to bail out of his stricken machine as it fell away in a vertical dive. Paul Breger, who had bailed out after the attack by the Green Section, was struck by the spiraling Tempest moments later as he was floating downward through his parachute. The fighter exploded as it crashed into the ground on the road between Handorf and Dorbaum. Breger crashed to the ground burning up his parachute, while Hall was eventually found dead.

Crump saw the D-9 of Unteroffizier Max Mittelstadt of 10 Staffel crash land with its Jumo 213 on fire as the dogfight raged and drifted over Munster-Handorfnairfield. Oil sprayed across Mittelstadt’s windscreen as he attempted to land his aircraft. Mittelstadt was a former flight instructor from JG 103. He attempted to gaze out while opening his canopy but was instead hit in the face with additional boiling oil. At the conclusion of his very first combat mission, Mittelstadt crash-landed and lost consciousness as he was being extricated from the wreckage of his now-wingless D-9 by another pilot.

Feldwebel Walfried Huth, a member of 12./JG 54, crashed and died at Telgte, and Unteroffizier Kurt Hein’s D-9 sustained damage. One German pilot wrote in his diary following the encounter, ‘I just escaped from a wild dogfight with my skin. Our formation disintegrated completely, no trace of an “air battle”, just wild confusion. Another mentioned in a letter home must praise my machine.’ No. 486 Sqn ended up shooting down five Fw 190D-9s and damaging another for the loss of Fig Off Bevan Hall and his Tempest. Because the soldiers of the battered 10./JG 54 were so traumatized by their ordeal, Bazzi’ Weiss made the decision to put them on leave for a few days.

Tempest V vs Fw 190D-9 is published by Osprey Publishing and is available to order here.

Photo by U.S. Air Force and Royal Air Force

December 10, 2022 0 comment

History

When RAF Wellington bombers strafed Italian ocean liners Rex and Conte di Savoia

by Till Daisd December 10, 2022

written by Till Daisd

In order to target the Italian liners Rex and Conte di Savoia, which were being employed as troop ships to North Africa, two aircraft flew very low, to roughly 300 feet and 390 feet, respectively

Bomber Command’s operations in Italy are frequently described by eyewitnesses as being tedious and taking a long time (around 9 hours), with only the thrill of seeing the snow-covered Alpine peaks and the brief drama of hitting the target serving as breaks.

However, the previous Italian raids in 1940 and 1941 frequently turned out to be far wilder adventures. Individual aircraft chose their own route to the target, and once there, they often engaged in “further activities” such as the low-level shooting-up of flak positions, airfields, road convoys, moving trains, or ocean liners, as described by Richard Worrall in his book The Italian Blitz 1940–1943.

Early in December 1940, the “Italy assignment” was handed to 3 Group, which flew the Vickers Wellington Mk Ic, as 4 Group had been taken off Italian operations due to the need to conserve its Whitley Mk Vs for significant fire-raising missions against German cities.

The operational directives from HQ Bomber Command stated that they were to attack Italian targets, but only with a maximum of 15 aircraft; they were given a fixed list of German targets from which to choose alternatives if the weather prevented attack upon Italian objectives, but it was obvious that the latter was the priority. When 15 aircraft were assigned to bomb the Royal Arsenal in Turin on December 4th, the 3rd Group launched its first Italian operation. Wellingtons were also sent to Italy on December 18th, December 21st, and January 11th and 12th, 1941.

The oil refineries at Porto Marghera, close to Venice, were to be attacked the following night by seven Wellington aircraft. The bombers made direct strikes on the target area: one 1,000 lb bomb dropped from 700 ft. generated a big explosion with reddish/white smoke and flames to 400 ft.; additional bombs caused oil storage tanks to burst; and a sizable building to fall and disintegrate.

A British Beaufighter aircraft pulls up after attacking the Italian ocean liner *Rex* with cannon fire and rockets, location: coast between Izola and Koper/Capodistria, present-day Slovenia.

The target area was characterized by aircrews as being a mass of flames fifteen minutes into the strike. However, the aircraft of 3 Group had only traveled a short distance (a round trip of 1,500 miles) to discharge their modest bombloads (at that range of about 1,500lb). With little chance of being intercepted – in early 1941 the Regia Aeronautica had yet to train for the night-fighter role – the Wellingtons used their machine guns to strafe the oil refinery and flak positions.

In order to target the Italian liners Rex and Conte di Savoia, which were being employed as troop ships to North Africa, two aircraft flew very low, to roughly 300 feet and 390 feet, respectively. According to the raid report, a second Wellington that was returning struck the Padua aerodrome from an astounding 20 feet away.

Such behavior perfectly captures the daring, if occasionally careless, the endeavor of the initial bomber raids on Italy. Although the daylight operation to Milan by the Lancasters of 5 Group on October 24, 1942, which culminated in some low-level flying and machine gun strafing, would be the final “wild ride,” operations did become a lot more organized, more controlled, and, ultimately, more devastating from autumn 1942 onward.

Regarding the two Italian liners, the Rex would be sunk near Trieste on September 8, 1944, when the RAF attacked it along with Beaufighters from the South African Air Force. German forces destroyed the Conte di Savoia in Venice on September 11, 1943, but it was later salvaged and demolished in 1945.

The Italian Blitz 1940–43 is published by Osprey Publishing and is available to order here.

The night RAF Wellington bombers strafed Italian ocean liners (used as troop ships to North Africa) Rex and Conte di Savoia — The Italian liner REX, lying on her side and on fire in Capodistria Bay, south of Trieste, two days after the attack by Bristol Beaufighters of the Mediterranean Allied Coastal Air Force which capsized her.

Photo by Crown Copyright

December 10, 2022 0 comment

History

The B-52 ‘Flak-Bait II,’ the U.S. warplane that flew the most combat missions in WWII

by Till Daisd December 9, 2022

written by Till Daisd

Flak-Bait II now shares a name with the first bomber and its history

A Martin B-26 Marauder by the name of Flak-Bait had completed 207 missions by the time World War II came to a close in 1945, more than any other American aircraft. However, as Master Sgt. Ted Daigle, 307th Bomb Wing, in the article Spirit of B-26 Marauder lives on at Barksdale AFB, its achievement was lost to history until three Barksdale Air Force Base crew chiefs named a B-52 Stratofortress after the record-setting B-26.

During the war, Flak-Bait lived up to its name. It received hits on almost every mission, and German 88mm guns twice destroyed its electrical system and once took out its hydraulics. It only used one engine to return home on two additional sorties. By the conclusion of the war, the aircraft had taken more than 1,000 hits. There was not a single panel on it that was unharmed.

Meet B-52 ‘Flak-Bait II,' the BUFF named after the B-26 ‘Flak-Bait,’ the U.S. warplane that flew the most combat missions in World War II — Flak-Bait II, a B-52 Stratofortress assigned to the 307th Bomb Wing, sits on the flight line at Barksdale Air Force Base, Louisiana, May 22, 2020. The jet’s crew chief recently renamed it in honor of a B-26 Marauder that flew more combat missions than any other U.S. aircraft in World War II. (U.S. Air Force photo by Master Sgt. Ted Daigle)

It was disassembled after the war and transported in crates to the storage site in Washington, D.C., for the National Air and Space Museum. It was kept in storage for many years, and the current generation of bomber aircrew had mostly forgotten about its name and past.

That is until 11th Aircraft Maintenance Unit crew chief Senior Airman Joshua Rich came upon the name. Rich was in command of a newly painted B-52 and was looking for a new name for it with the assistance of his two crew chiefs from the 307th Aircraft Maintenance Squadron, Staff Sergeant William Etheridge, and Tech Sergeant Patrick Deslauriers.

Rich accidentally proposed the moniker Flak-Bait when they first started naming things because he was unaware of the B-26 and its past. Rich was unable to explain how he came up with the name.

“It was something that was just in my head,” he explained. “I was a big airplane buff as a kid, so maybe it was something I read about in my childhood.”

The crew chief learned about the bomber’s past thanks to an internet search for the name and they became hooked. The Airmen chose to recreate the original plane’s nose painting and give the B-52 the designation Flak-Bait II. None of them had ever renamed a jet, therefore the steps to do it were quite unusual.

The crew chiefs made the choice to get in touch with the Smithsonian Air and Space Museum to find out if they required authorization to use the name. They didn’t and the museum curator was enthusiastic about the concept. Officials from the Smithsonian Institution advised Etheridge to contact Roberta Dow-Faulkenberry, the B-26 Marauder Historical Society’s secretary, for assistance in duplicating Flak-nose Bait’s decoration.

Since 1980, Dow-Faulkenberry has researched the history of Flak-Bait. She estimates that she has spent several hundred hours researching the bomber. When Etheridge contacted her, she was delighted to assist.

“It’s amazing that we are actually bringing our first-generation aircrew back into the light,” she said. “There aren’t very many of them left.”

The original Flak-Bait has been preserved for a few years now at the Mary Baker Engen Restoration Hangar at the Udvar-Hazy Center of the National Air and Space Museum in Chantilly, Virginia. It was proposed to display Flak-Bait and Flak-Bait II together, but the B-52 was too big to maneuver the center’s flight line. However, Flak-Bait II now shares a name with the first bomber and its history.

December 9, 2022 0 comment

History

Japanese Zero-sen naval aviators used the outmoded V formation against allied fighters

by Till Daisd December 8, 2022

written by Till Daisd

An Allied fighter pilot who managed to get an A6M in his gunsight would typically find himself quickly targeted by the remaining two members of the shotai.

Imperial Japanese Naval Air Force (IJNAF) A6M Zero-sens employed the three-aircraft shotai (tactical formation) during World War II in the Pacific, which was organized in an echeloned V formation as depicted in the following image.

How Japanese Zero-sen naval aviators turned the obsolete V formation into a formidable tactics in dealing with allied fighters during the early stages of the Pacific War

Although the three-aircraft shotai was an antiquated formation by European standards, the Japanese naval aviators made it highly functional by virtue of their exceptional teamwork and keen situational awareness, as explained by Peter Ingman in his book P-40E Warhawk Vs A6M2 Zero-sen East Indies and Darwin 1942. Typically flying without communications, pilots were very aware of the positions and combat circumstances of the other two shotai members.

When combined with the exceptional maneuverability of the Zero-sen, these tactics proved formidable for any adversary during the early stages of the Pacific War. The brief engagement between IJNAF A6M2 Zero-sen and USAAF P-40E Warhawks on February 20, 1942, demonstrated how fast the remaining two shotai would attack an Allied fighter pilot who was able to get an A6M in his gunsight.

Japanese troops had landed on Bali and Timor on that day, cutting off the air route between Darwin and Java and isolating the latter. IJN vessels off Bali supporting the invasion were a great target for American aircraft flying over Java, so seven A-24 Banshee dive-bombers from the 91st BS launched with a powerful escort of 16 P-40Es from the 17th PS (Prov).

When the formation was approaching the target at 14,000 feet and just as the final three A-24 pilots started to push over in their dives, Zero-sens of the 3rd Kokutai bounced it from above. Although none of the A-24s were shot down by the Zero-sens in the ensuing battle, four P-40E aircraft were lost (and a fifth was so badly shot up that it crashed back at Ngoro), and Capt. Charles Sprague, the CO of the 17th PS (Prov), was killed.

In contrast, US fighter pilots employed four-aircraft flights of two pairs during the early Pacific War (as shown in the image below).

The group’s original strategy was to climb as quickly as they could in the direction of the bombers. However, it was discovered that using “dive and zoom” strategies gave the heavier US fighters a noticeable speed advantage against the lightweight Zero-sens when diving. These updated strategies, when executed properly, effectively countered the Zero-sens sen’s agility.

P-40E Warhawk Vs A6M2 Zero-sen East Indies and Darwin 1942 is published by Osprey Publishing and is available to order here.

Photo by Osprey Publishing and Kogo via Wikipedia

December 8, 2022 0 comment

History

A monument for the F-14 fighter used by the US Navy and the 68 Naval Aviators who perished

by Till Daisd December 7, 2022

written by Till Daisd

The memorial will honor the renowned Grumman fighter plane in addition to the people who manufactured and maintained the aircraft flew it and gave their lives doing so

A monument honoring the F-14 Tomcat fighter plane will be erected on Virginia Beach’s oceanfront, according to The Virginian-Pilot on May 25, 2020. The memorial will honor the renowned Grumman fighter plane in addition to the people who manufactured and maintained the aircraft, flew it and gave their lives doing so.

A granite obelisk with four sides will serve as the memorial. A variety of pictures of the aircraft in use will be shown on panels along with information on how it was used and who maintained it. In actuality, a panel will remember the 68 pilots who lost their lives.

The F-14 Tomcat operated as an advanced interceptor and air superiority fighter, capable of striking six enemy aircraft simultaneously at a range of over 100 miles with the AIM-54 Phoenix missile. It is arguably the most well-known US Navy fighter because of its starring role in Top Gun.

A fleet defense fighter that could engage high-altitude bombers from well beyond visual range was necessary because Soviet long-range patrol and bomber aircraft during the Cold War had advanced. The famous F-14 Tomcat, according to the National Naval Aviation Museum, was Grumman’s response. With this hefty load, an interceptor’s fast speed was required, therefore Grumman created the F-14’s very effective variable-sweep wing, which allows it to fly at a variety of airspeeds.

The Navy’s search for an advanced carrier-based air superiority fighter led to the evaluation of General Dynamics’ F-111B, an aircraft that would promote the Department of Defense’s aim of commonality with the Air Force and its F-111A. When the F-111B was found to be too heavy for carrier operations after being upgraded to fulfill Navy mission requirements, the contract was terminated in April 1968. The Navy then launched a new design competition for what was known as the VFX program, with McDonnell Douglas and Grumman serving as its two main rivals.

Grumman’s Model 303 suggested a variable-geometry, two-seat, twin-engined design centered on the Hughes AWG-9 weapons system while McDonnell Douglas studied a navalized version of the F-15. Grumman’s earlier XF10F Jaguar, which had only been constructed as a prototype, had given it significant experience with “swing-wing” technology. The selection of Pratt & Whitney TF-30 turbofans, which are comparable to those used in the F-111, was required by the necessity for quick development and fielding of the aircraft.

The new “Tomcat,” which continued Grumman’s practice of naming its aircraft after felines, took to the skies for the first time in December 1970. The first F-14As were delivered to the Navy in June 1972 after going through a number of modifications during flight testing, with Fighter Squadron (VF) 124 being assigned the responsibility of crew training. VF-1 and VF-2 were the first operational squadrons to receive the new aircraft on the West Coast, while VF-14 and VF-32 were the first squadrons assigned to the Atlantic fleet on the East Coast. The Marine Corps was getting ready to launch VMFA-122 at NAS Miramar in 1974 when it was decided to stick with modified variants of the trusty F-4J Phantom II.

In August 1981, two Libyan Su-22 planes were shot down by an F-14 over the Gulf of Sidra. It saw considerable duty in the Gulf War, Iraq, and Afghanistan. In 2006, the final F-14s were taken out of service.

Photo by U.S. Navy

December 7, 2022 0 comment

Military

What we know about the B-21 Raider Stealthy

by Till Daisd December 7, 2022

written by Till Daisd

The B-21 Raider, the world’s newest stealth heavy bomber, was eventually made public by Northrup. The B-21 builds upon the success of its illustrious predecessor, the B-2 Spirit, which was also created by Northrup, and is named in honor of Jimmy Doo Little’s B-25 raiders, which memorably struck Imperial Japan shortly after the events of Pearl Harbor during World War II.

The B-21’s technology is thought to be at least two generations superior to the B-2’s, which is astounding given that the B-2 is still one of the world’s most stealthy platforms despite having been in use for more than two decades. Northrop Grumman was given the engineering contract for the B-21 by the USAF in 2015, and the critical design assessment was finished in 2018.

On December 2, 2022, the B-21 Raider was introduced to the public. Compared to the B-2, the B-21 is smaller and can carry less cargo. At first glance, the payload of the B-21 appears to be a disadvantage, but when you consider that the B-21 will be more stealthy given its advanced design and materials, this should allow it to penetrate deeper into contested airspace and hit targets with even greater precision as compared to today’s bombers. The payload of the B-21 is currently estimated to be above 30,000 pounds.

The Air Force is also budgeting for 100 B-21s, which is five times as many as B-2s now in service. By having more B-21s, the Air Force will be able to deploy them internationally and put them within two hours of any target. The B-21 Raider will actually be a part of a larger family of systems for a conventional long-range strike, including intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance or ISR electronic attack, communication, and other capabilities. The Raider is also designed to accommodate manned or unmanned operations, making it an extremely effective deterrent.

The B-21 is referred to as dual-capable when it comes to weaponry, which means it can use either conventional or nuclear munitions. The B61 variable yield nuclear fuel could be a potential payload. Gravity Bomb, Directed Energy Weapons or lasers could be used by future weapon systems, such as the B-21, as well as long-range standoff nuclear cruise missiles, long-range anti-ship missiles, conventional free-fall bombs, and laser-guided bombs to hit or disable targets. Additionally, it is said that the Raider has the same engines as the F-35.

If you want to learn more about adaptive engines, you can read about the now-in-use Pratt & Whitney F-135 series engines or the under-development adaptive cycle engines like GE’s XA-100 that are also intended to be used in the F-35. The B-21 and F-35 will benefit from lower costs and higher mission-capable rates because of the employment of similar engines. The B-21 might also be used as a mothership for swarms of tradable drones of varying sizes, either as a fighter screen for the bomber or as a networked hub for strike aircraft. Radar on the B-21 would enable this prospective application.

A stealth bomber was only revealed to the general public twice in history. Some of you may recall the first occasion of this kind, which took place in November 1988 when the B-2 Spirit was revealed to the public. The YB-35 and YB-49 piston engine flying wing concepts from Northrop were far earlier than the B-2, which is without a doubt the company’s most popular flying wing design. These two concepts were developed in the 1940s, long before the idea of stealth aircraft was even conceived.

Reduced Parasitic Drag weight from non-lift-generating components, such as vertical tail surfaces, was the driving force behind the development of flying wings. Theoretically, a flying wing might transport larger cargoes further, faster, and for less cost than current designs. Despite never being put into production, it was discovered during flight tests that these early flying-wing bombers had a modest radar cross-section. This would affect the stealth qualities of the two in a few decades; more on that later. Although it’s difficult to understand now, the B-2’s introduction in 1988 effectively marked the world’s first glimpse of a stealth aircraft.

Even though the F-117 Nighthawk had been in use for a while, the public didn’t really start to notice it until the Gulf War in 1991. However, the B-2’s effect was felt practically immediately.

Actually, the airframe design and materials are the two essential elements that enable America to restore its competitive edge in stealth farming technology. Similar to its predecessor, the B-21 will have flying wings. But we need to quickly review the history of stealth technology, which strangely started in Russia, in order to comprehend why a flying wing is so effective for stealth. Petr Ufimtsev, a Soviet mathematician, wrote a paper titled “Method of edge waves in the physical theory of diffraction” in 1971.

The paper was mostly overlooked in Soviet Russia, but Wright-Patterson Air Force Base’s international technology branch translated it the same year it was published. Dennis Overholser, an engineer at Lockheed Skunk Works.

The F-117 Nighthawk, also known as the Hopeless Diamond, was created as a direct result of a mathematical calculation created by Dennis Overholser, a Lockheed Skunk Works engineer, that used the theories from the paper to compute the radar cross-section or RCS of a three-dimensional object. The F-117’s numerous jagged angles and surfaces for radar deflection or diversion were a direct result of the limited computational capability at the time as well as the essential aerodynamic design trade-offs.

It’s interesting to note that Northrop competed in the project to create the Nighthawk, a stealth aircraft, but lost to Lockheed. However, Northrop kept working on the Cell technology and created the B-2 Spirit using the knowledge gained from the fighter competition and the ever-increasing computational capacity of computers. The B-2 is more streamlined and curved than the Nighthawk in part because of this; the idea is the same, it’s just that the B-2 has a lot greater resolution. This is analogous to how early digital photographs appeared pixelated or blocky, but now ultra-high quality images look realistic. Each picture has square pixels. The more recent photos simply create the image by assembling millions of much smaller blocks.

As previously established, the B-2 is still among the most stealthy aircraft in use today. In fact, even though they are smaller and more recent designs than the B-2, the F-22 Raptor and the F-35 Lightning are not as difficult to spot as the B-2. This is especially true for fighter aircraft, which, unlike bombers, are required to be able to execute daring maneuvers if close-range combat, often known as dogfighting, occurs. The twin vertical tails used by the F-22 and F-35 enable extreme maneuvering but reduce their RCS (Radar Cross-Section). Despite efforts by the designers of the Lightning and Raptor to lessen this design penalty, the vertical tails nonetheless reduce RCS on both aircraft.

Because of this, the majority of sixth-generation ideas include a tailless or flying wing configuration. With exceptionally advanced flight control systems, it is believed that a vertical tail is not necessary, even for a highly agile fighter. To return to the bombers, the B-21 builds on the knowledge gained from the B-2 in this regard. Just consider the developments in computing technology since 1988; the Raider is probably the most stealthy aircraft on the market today, despite having an appearance that is identical to the Flying Wing design.

A benefit of the B-21 will include next-generation radar-absorbing materials or Ram code structures in addition to the Raider’s shape. According to reports, modern Ram Coatings are rated to absorb between 70 and 80 percent of incoming radar radiation.

These coatings, however, are very pricey, difficult to apply, and vulnerable to harm from the elements or even routine flight operations. Ram Coatings have largely been the subject of ongoing research to increase their cost-effectiveness and durability due to these limitations. The alternate high-frequency material, or AHFM, which has been used on the B-2 bomber fleet since around 2004, is one example of a more recent Ram coating.

This more recent material provided the same performance while costing less to maintain. The redesigned B-21 design has adopted recent advancements made to the coatings and coding systems. According to estimates, today’s more modern coatings might absorb up to 90% of focused energy while costing less, taking much less time to install, and being easier to maintain. The improved airframe design and these more recent coatings make it obvious that the B-21 will have a very small radar signature.

Amazingly, the B-21 debuted at the same Palmdale site where the B-2 did back in 1988. It may only come along once in a lifetime to have the chance to see aviation history being made. At a time when geopolitical unpredictability is reigniting the world, the introduction of the Raider will help America preserve its competitive edge because of the B-21’s enhanced health characteristics and large fleet size. A global fleet of stealth bombers capable of launching an undetected attack on any target within two hours is essentially an incredibly potent deterrent. Like the B-2 before it, it appears that the B-21 will once more usher in a new era of strategic deterrence.

The Next Generation Air Dominance or End Guide Fighter and the Navy’s fax fighter will likely follow the B-21 into service in the middle of the 2020s. It’s interesting to note that the B-21 Raiders did not plan to replace the B-52, only the B-2 and B-1.

December 7, 2022 0 comment

History

Eric ‘Winkle’ Brown and the Seafire ‘crabbed’ landing

by Till Daisd December 6, 2022

written by Till Daisd

Brown avoided the curved approach in favor of a landing technique known as the “crabbed” landing on most, if not all, of the Seafire carrier tests he conducted

The front-line Fleet Air Arm Squadrons were there when the naval version of the legendary Spitfire finally entered service after a long and occasionally challenging voyage. The Seafire was far from ideal as a naval fighter since it lacked endurance and was challenging to land on a carrier, but it gave the Royal Navy an interceptor with a superlative performance in the air, helping to turn the tables on the enemy as the Allies went on the offensive.

The Seafire saw action in Malaya and Korea while serving in the Second World War from the North Atlantic to Japan and into the 1950s. Captain Eric Melrose “Winkle” Brown, widely regarded as Britain’s greatest-ever pilot, conducted a significant portion of the Seafire’s deck landing assessment while at the Royal Aircraft Establishment and the FAA Service Trials Unit, according to Naval aviation historian Matthew Willis’ account in his book Supermarine Seafire.

Brown was chosen to conduct deck-landing trials on an escort carrier in September 1942, obviously with the impending invasion of North Africa in mind. Despite the carrier not being ready for deck landings, the wires not being raised, and the ship’s head not even totally pointed into the wind, as described in the book Wings of the Navy, he flew his Seafire Ib to HMS Biter and landed without any issues. Three months later, Brown used the L IIc to make many landings and takeoffs aboard HMS Activity.

According to Brown, the FAA was persuaded to switch all Mk IIs to the low-altitude variant by the Merlin 32-engined L IIc’s takeoff performance during these testing. Early in 1943, he served as RATOG. Later that year, in June, he conducted deck-landing tests with the Mk III, and in August, he conducted low-wind landing tests aboard HMS Fencer, Tracker, and Pretoria Castle according to conditions anticipated during the Salerno landings, which turned out to be accurate. Considering the difficulties encountered during that procedure. Brown conducted additional low-wind speed landing tests with strengthened, modified aircraft, this time on the HMS Ravager, slowing the ship down one knot at a time until his propeller eventually “pecked” the deck, and a different aircraft was required.

The story of legendary test pilot Eric ‘Winkle’ Brown and the Seafire ‘crabbed’ landing — *Eric Melrose ‘Winkle’ Brown*

Brown eschewed the curved approach in favor of a technique known as the “crabbed” landing on the majority, if not all, of the carrier tests he conducted. He described it thus: “As I closed towards the stern, I swung the nose to starboard with the rudder, and counteracted the swing by putting on the slight opposite bank. In this way, I made the Seafire crab in sideways so that I had a view of the deck over the leading edge of the wing.” Brown, a skilled pilot with the ability to maintain the delicate balance necessary to fly obliquely, found that this strategy worked effectively since it would increase drag and allow a slower landing speed. The technique, however, was criticized as being too challenging for the typical service pilot to understand. Jeffrey Quill recommended that “Pilots had to be trained to employ a curved approach to the deck as the crabbed approach was acceptable only for skilled and experienced pilots.”

Brown was appointed Chief Naval Test Pilot of the RAE in 1944 after his predecessor perished while attempting to land a Seafire aboard a carrier. In October/November 1944, Brown performed the Mk XV’s initial deck landing before collaborating with Quill on the type’s deck landing trials.

Brown has been erroneously associated with the controversy surrounding the Seafire’s service use approval and its ensuing career of accidents. Henry “Hank” Adlam of the Fleet Air Arm was harsh in his criticism of Brown for approving the Seafire for service usage and for recommending the “crabbed” landing method. The Seafire was in fact certified as suitable for deck landing by Lieutenant-Commander Bramwell, and the ‘crabbed’ approach was never recommended in favor of the curved one.

Similar to many FAA pilots, Winkle thought the Griffon-engined Seafire behaved brilliantly in the air but had significant limitations as a deck-landing fighter. He called the Seafire “sheer magic.”

Supermarine Seafire is published by Mortons Books and is available to order here along with many other beautiful aviation books.

Photo by Imperial War Museum via Wikipedia

December 6, 2022 0 comment

Newer Posts

Older Posts