Saturday, March 14, 2020

Not All Merlin Powered Aircraft Are Created Equal...

Technicians working on a Merlin engine, c. 1939–1940

The Rolls-Royce Merlin engine is probably very familiar to most aficionados of Word War II aviation. It powered such famous aircraft as the Hawker Hurricane, the Supermarine Spitfire, the de Havilland Mosquito, and the Avro Lancaster bomber. The Lancaster being the most numerous user of that engine. (Well, the Lancaster is a bomber and it's got four engines.) The Packard built variant of the Merlin also powered one of the most iconic fighters of the Second World War (but you already mentioned the Spitfire... shh, I know), the North American P-51 Mustang.

However, the first operational aircraft to use the Merlin was the Fairey Battle.

The what Sarge?

The Fairey Battle, built by the Fairey Aviation Company, the same company that built the Fairey Swordfish of Taranto and Bismarck fame. However, unlike the "Stringbag," the Battle's operational history is somewhat less than stellar.

Wreckage of a Battle, France, May 1940.
(Source)

Oh wait, not that photo, this one...

RAF Fairey Battles of 218 Squadron over France, circa 1940.

It all started (well, the memory which sparked the post anyway) when I was (once again) a kid. I had a lot of those Ballantine's Illustrated History books. (See below, note the price $1! You can tell how long I've had that.)


When I say "a lot," I mean probably close to fifty of them. Lots of good pictures and maps, lots of good history. One in particular, this one -

(Source)
- had an account of a squadron of RAF Fairey Battles going out to hit a bridge in Belgium (as I recall) which was in the path of the German advance. Drop the bridge, slow the advance. As I recalled, none of those Battles returned to base, all were shot down. Well, I did some checking, my memory wasn't that bad -
On 12 May, a formation of five Battles of 12 Squadron attacked two road bridges over the Albert Canal; four of these aircraft were destroyed while the final aircraft crash-landing upon its return to its base. Two Victoria Crosses were awarded posthumously for the action, to Flying Officer Donald Garland and air observer/navigator sergeant Thomas Gray of Battle serial P2204 coded PH-K, for pressing home the attack in spite of the heavy defensive fire. The third crew member, rear gunner Leading Aircraftsman Lawrence Reynolds, did not share the award. Both fighters and flak had proved lethal for the Battles. Although Garland's Battle managed to destroy one span of the bridge, the German army quickly erected a pontoon bridge to replace it. (Source)
So it wasn't a full squadron, which would theoretically be twelve aircraft, divided equally into two flights, "A" and "B." So it was most of one flight and one actually made it home after being shot up by the Jerries.* While they did drop the bridge, the Germans replaced it rather quickly.

The Battle was obsolete by the start of WWII, but as an American SECDEF once stated, "You go to war with the army you have, not the army you might want or wish to have at a later time.**" So the Battles went to war whether they would be successful or not.

They had an auspicious start, during the "Phony War" of 1939 - 40, a Battle actually scored the first RAF aerial victory of WWII -
Initial wartime missions were to perform aerial reconnaissance of the Siegfried Line during daylight, resulting in occasional skirmishes and losses. On 20 September 1939, a German Messerschmitt Bf-109 was shot down by Battle gunner Sgt. F. Letchard during a patrol near Aachen; this occasion is recognised as being the RAF's first aerial victory of the war. Nonetheless, the Battle was hopelessly outclassed by Luftwaffe fighters, being almost 100 mph  slower than the contemporary Bf-109 at 14,000 ft. That same day, three Battles were engaged by German fighters, resulting in two Battles being lost. During the winter of 1939–1940, the Advanced Air Striking Force underwent restructuring; some of the Battle-equipped squadrons were returned to the UK while their place was taken by Bristol Blenheim-equipped squadrons instead. The activities of the Advanced Air Striking Force were principally restricted to training exercises during this time. (Source)
Can you imagine that German pilot's squadron mates, "He got shot down by a WHAT?"

No doubt wrong place, wrong time for the German pilot, perhaps a golden BB*** situation, not to take anything away from Sergeant Letchard's marksmanship. Perhaps the good sergeant was actually a crack shot and the German wandered too close. It happens.

Most Battle-equipped squadrons were eventually re-equipped with the Bristol Blenheim, but not in time for the disaster in France for some. The aircraft actually had a three man crew -

(Source)
That bomb-aimer position looks rather unpleasant!

Fairey Battle, K7650/63-M, of No. 63 Squadron, RAF Benson, November 1939.
No. 63 was the first operational squadron to be equipped with the type.

You can see the bomb-aimer and the gunner huddled way in the back of the cockpit with the gunner's hood closed. Cozy, neh? You can see the gunner with the hood open below. One rather hopes that it latches open and he didn't have to hold it open with his body!

The air gunner of a Battle mans the aircraft's defensive weapon,
a single pintle-mounted rapid firing Vickers K machine gun, France, 1940.

The bomb aimer position in the Battle was in the aircraft's floor.
Note the CSBS Mk. VII equipment****.

The Battle looks like a 1930s era aircraft, something right on the verge of being modern, but not quite there yet. To me it always looked rather liked a "stretched" Hurricane. With a crew of three and a bomb load of up to 1,500 pounds, even with a Merlin engine she was probably seriously underpowered.

Wartime colour photo of Hurricane IIC BE500 flown by Sqn Ldr Denis Smallwood of 87 Sqn
in the RDM2 ("Special Night") scheme and used on intruder operations 1941–1942.

They look kind of similar around the nose and back to the very front of the cockpit. Well, to me at any rate. A cool looking aircraft. (Again, maybe it's just me.)



Have to love the folks who restore these old aircraft, warms the cockles of this old Sarge's heart...


The Fairey Battle

General Characteristics:
  • Crew: 3
  • Length: 42 ft 4 in
  • Wingspan: 54 ft 0 in
  • Height: 15 ft 6 in
  • Wing area: 422 ft²
  • Empty weight: 6,647 lb
  • Loaded weight: 10,792 lb
  • Powerplant: 1 × Rolls-Royce Merlin II liquid-cooled V12 engine, 1,030 hp (768 kW)
Performance:
  • Maximum speed: 257 mph (223 kn, 413 km/h) at 15,000 ft (4,600 m)
  • Range: 1,000 mi (870 nmi, 1610 km)
  • Service ceiling: 25,000 ft (7,620 m)
  • Climb to 5,000 ft (1,520 m): 4 min 6 sec
Armament:
  • Guns:
  • 1 × .303 in (7.7 mm) Browning machine gun in starboard wing
  • 1 × .303 in (7.7 mm) Vickers K machine gun in rear cabin
  • Bombs:
  • 1,000 lb (450 kg) bombs internally (4 × 250 lb (110 kg) bombs) or
  • 1,500 lb (680 kg) bombs externally


Suggested reading:

* British WWII slang term for the Germans. The Germans referred to the Brits as "Tommies."
** I met Secretary Rumsfeld on a flight from DC to Little Rhody, I liked him.
*** A golden BB is that one-in-a-million shot that brings down an aircraft. Fly in contested airspace you'll find that there are a lot of things flying throughj the air which are not compatible with safety of flight.
**** CSBS = Course Setting Bomb Sight

44 comments:

  1. Those Ballantine's books brings back memories, had a long shelf full of those, Battles, Campaigns, Weapons...... Ya, the Battle and the Defiant, a couple of aircraft types that weren't......uh..... optimal for combat. Of course the USA had the Buffalo and the Devastator aircraft, those were two that were dogs....woof woof. Unfortunately the aircrew paid the price for lousy planes. Well done post Sarge.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And the B-18 Bolo. And the Hudson. And the non-turbo powered P-38. Or the non-turbo Warhawk. We produced quite a few non-viable aircraft.

      And anything from Brewster...

      Delete
    2. Often we don't know any better until we get in a shooting war. No internal gun on the early F-4s, all the "experts," (bomber pilots and shoe clerks) said that missiles would do the trick.

      Not.

      Delete
    3. Even the B-52 was slated to have its guns replaced by AIM-4 Falcons. Fortunately, sanity was quickly restored.

      Delete
    4. The AIM-4? Might as well throe rocks at 'em!

      Delete
    5. The Brewster Buffalo may have been a dog during its service with many nations but the Finnish Air Force was able to rack up a remarkable 26:1 kill ratio against the Soviets from 1941 to 1945.

      - Victor

      Delete
    6. The Finns used the Buffalo to good effect!

      Delete
  2. Hey AFSarge;

    Those books bring back memories, LOL. I recall during the battle of France, the Fairy Battles were thrown into it trying to stop the German Advance. Britain sacrificed a lot of young men trying to stiffen the spine of their erstwhile ally. France was done before the shot was fired, I have some books that talked about the French in the 1930's, the societal rot was apparent and the French were already beaten. It took the fire of the occupation for the French to get their spine back.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The French hadn't recovered from WWI (or the Napoleonic wars for that matter).

      Delete
    2. And the political in-fighting was brutal. Farcical, even.

      Delete
  3. First photo--those are definitely MECHANICS, not "technicians"... :)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I didn't write the caption, not sure what the RAF called their engine guys in WWII. My own service seemed to like changing the names of things every decade or so. Mid-level "techs" went from mechanics to craftsmen to whatever.

      Delete
    2. I came here point that out too. I was an aircraft mechanic (Flight Mechanic was my qualification in the helos) when I retired from the Coast Guard in 1997. In 1999 they turned everyone into some type of a technician.

      Delete
    3. Don't worry, some perfumed prince will change it back, eventually. No doubt they'll call them "engineers" at some point...

      Delete
  4. Count me as one of the kids who read those books, although I don't think I had fifty. But it was only 25 years after V-J Day so the number available is pretty easy to understand.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm not sure what happened to all of mine. I only have about ten or so readily at hand.

      Delete
    2. I had practically every BB book published on WW 2 on every subj from 1954-1962 when I went away to college. Unfortunately KATRINA left the majority a sodden mess when part of our old slate roof was blown off..

      Delete
  5. I had a lot, too. I think they even had some at the school library. I read everything in the "WW2" corner of Stubbs Elementary. That was where the action was.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Poland ordered 100 Battles just prior to invasion, but it was over before they could arrive...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hard to tell. Polish Bomber Brigade, counting just 36 medium and 50 light bombers managed to delay German panzers long enough to allow hasty improvised defence of Warsaw. While not turning anything, 4 weeks defence of capital was huge morale boost.

      Delete
    2. True, they wouldn't turn the tide probably but you never know.

      Delete
  7. As usual your posts are educational for me. I had no idea that the Battles had a three man crew. I always thought it was just the pilot and gunner. Definitely wouldn't have wanted the "Bomb-Aimer's" job. A lot of "pucker factor" there knowing you're in a very vulnerable position with no chute!! They should have named him the Kamikaze instead of Bomb-Aimer.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Perhaps another one to file under "He got shot down by a WHAT?"--

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boulton_Paul_Defiant

    Well, in daylight anyway.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hhmm, I do like the turret, however...

      No forward firing armament? Really bad idea. Heck, even the Stuka had forward firing guns. (To pot the moron who flies in front of you accidentally I suppose, Lord knows the Ju-87 isn't going to get on anyone's tail intentionally.)

      Delete
  9. The Battle might have made a relatively okay night fighter, except for the very anemic firepower that it carried. Seriously, though, yeah, it sucked.

    Though I can see making an executive transport out of it. Carry 4-5 people in relative comfort at decent speed. But nobody asked me.

    juvat and Sarge, check your email. Tuna, I forgot everyone's real names and was too lazy to look it up, so just ignore the email.

    Happy Corona-Lent! You know, stay away from people for 40 days and then, poof, arise from the dead...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Except that the executives would have the guy shot for suggesting they use it as an executive transport...

      The panic would be funny if it wasn't so, ya know, panicky.

      Delete
    2. Beans, copy. Sarge, I wouldn't want to be th Bombardier in that Fairey Battle. With a service altitude of 25k, that hole he looked through would have been frostbite inducing.

      Delete
    3. Hadn't thought of the frostbite aspect, but yeah, it would be!

      Delete
  10. I was looking at that bomber-aimer position and my first thought was "Wow! Hope they didn't fly into any AAA (BOO HISS says juvat) cause that guy would have a high chance of getting hit first.

    Or what about flying into turbulence?? Could be an uncomfortably bumpy ride.

    Definitely would not want folks who didn't like tight spaces for sure in that position!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I hadn't thought of AAA (BOO HISS) but yeah, no thank you!

      Delete
  11. The Nakajima B5N Kate was pretty similar, all in all, but somewhat better proportioned to my eye.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The Kate did have better lines, a better looking aircraft.

      Delete
  12. I bought the Okinawa volume, just last month!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. They have a lot of them on Amazon, at reasonable prices no less!

      Delete
  13. I always thought the Battle was a decent looking bird. Back in our days as kids, my younger brother/roommate (The Famous One) built a Battle as one of his first model kits. I'm sure that model pulled quite a number of aerodynamically impossible maneuvers during room dogfights with my BF-109 model of similar scale.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ah yes, the dogfights we had as a kid, anything was possible. So it seemed when we were young.

      Sigh...

      Delete
  14. Always interesting to me how the pace of technological development ebbs and flows paradoxically during peacetime and wartime, and how the stories we tell ourselves are certainly true fall like autumn leaves at the first cold kiss of war's savage reality. The Battle was thought to be one hell of a light bomber, even by the Luftwaffe. Until the stuff got real.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. When the fit hits the shan, the theoretical must give way to reality.

      Delete

Just be polite... that's all I ask. (For Buck)
Can't be nice, go somewhere else...

NOTE: Comments on posts over 5 days old go into moderation, automatically.