By: mhuxt
- 2nd June 2014 at 03:29Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I've never found any evidence of USAAF heavies carrying less than 4,500 lbs to Berlin, though I believe there was an obscure, not-often-carried all-incendiary load on the B-17 that was less than 4,000. As I say, I've never found any evidence it was carried to Berlin. I think the whole story comes from Don Bennett's book.
By: Dave Homewood
- 2nd June 2014 at 04:18Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
That is depicting a No. 487 (NZ) Squadron Mosquito. I did not know that they carried rockets on that squadron's aircraft. Can anyone confirm this please?
By: mike currill
- 2nd June 2014 at 11:25Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
[QUOTE=Snoopy7422;2141376]
The Beau was designed for quite a different role to the Mosquito too. The Mosquito could do anything the Beau could do, better, and was more inherently adaptable. Their roles only really coincided as night fighters and anti-shipping a/c. Whilst both could carry external bombs and rockets, the Beau was more commonly-equiped to carry a torpedo. (I think this was only done experimentally with the Mosquito.). The Mosquito really was the original MRCA.
Sorry the Bristol F2 was the original MRCA. Day/night fighter, light bomber, reconnaisance aircraft, ground attack aircraft.
With regard to the discussion about the differing demand on resources for the two types. I seem to recall reading somewhere that during a bombing raid Hermnn Goering was heard tom complain "here we are struggling to build enoght bombers while in England every furniture and cabinet maker is turning them out". I can't verify the truth of that one but it does rather illustrate the point.
By: Mo Botwood
- 2nd June 2014 at 12:15Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
LNSF
The Light Night Striking Force of Mosquitoes during one phase of the war made bombing raids to Berlin on 43 consecutive occasions without a break. Sometimes the same aircraft would make a second raid on the same night.
The Light Night Striking Force flew 553 sorties during April 1943 for the loss of only one aircraft.
The LNSF used to operate in the most appalling weather and one night Air Vice Marshal Donald Bennett was visited by Mrs. Ogden Reid of the New York Herald Tribune. She had asked to witness the start of a raid. This distinguished lady of the American press arrived with a member of the British Government and was immediately driven to the end of the runway by Bennett. Fog caused heavy bomber raids to be cancelled but as the mist swirled around the signal caravan at the end of the runway Mosquitoes could be seen taxying on from both directions to save time, lining up and taking off for Berlin in quick succession. She turned to Bennett and said, "I see they have got a bulge - they’re carrying a “Blockbuster” aren’t they?" She asked what it weighed and Bennett told her 4000 lbs which was 500 lbs more than a B-17 Flying Fortress could carry to Berlin. In any case, he pointed out; a Fortress would not accommodate a 4000 lb “cookie” because it was too large for its bomb bay. The famous Press lady pondered for a few moments before replying "I only hope the American public never realises these facts."
One young Mosquito pilot of those days was Wing Commander I. G. Broom (later Air Marshal Sir Ivor Broom DSO, DFC and two bars, AFC). “We did 25 nights to Berlin. You could fly there and be back in the mess before the bar closed. We could carry more to Berlin with a crew of two in a Mosquito than could a Flying Fortress with a crew of ten. They had to fight their way there and back in daytime. We went fast at night, at 28,000 ft.”
By: mhuxt
- 2nd June 2014 at 14:22Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
That is depicting a No. 487 (NZ) Squadron Mosquito. I did not know that they carried rockets on that squadron's aircraft. Can anyone confirm this please?
No, they didn't carry rockets. The only 2nd TAF Mosquito unit I ever read about using rockets was, IIRC from Sharp & Bowyer, 305 Sqn, which again from memory had a brief flirtation with them in July or August '44.
I built that kit many lifetimes ago, I believe the 262 is in the markings of KG51. The box cover uses artistic license, as they say.
By: Arclite03
- 4th June 2014 at 12:29Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Massively off track - I preferred the earlier Mosquito kit as it was easy to make albeit it not a very accurate representation of the real thing, the later Airfix Mossie did not fit together at all well but was a better representation of the real thing - I think Airfix re-issued the earlier version................due to public demand :-)
By: Spartabus
- 4th June 2014 at 13:37Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I recall 6" cruiser, but give no guarantees that my memory isn't at fault.
Moggy
Hi folks,
just chipping in with my ha'ppney worth but this is an oft repeated factoid which I have also seen applied to Hurricanes and Typhoons. I think it refers to the energy (the impact and and the explosion combined) rather than just the explosive power.
I seem to remember reading somewhere that the later model Beaufighter was a more stable and predictable platform at lower altitudes than the Mosquito, but for the life of me I cannot remember where it was.
By: j_jza80
- 4th June 2014 at 18:45Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I recall 6" cruiser, but give no guarantees that my memory isn't at fault.
From the Sharp & Bowyer book:
"... more usually, 60lb. semi A.P. high-explosive-headed rockets, a salvo from which was equivalent to a broadside from a cruiser. On receipt of intelligence a handful of Mosquitoes could deliver, hundreds of miles away, equivalent fire power to a cruiser force, but with more tractability. They could repeat the dose a few hours later."
By: Snoopy7422
- 5th June 2014 at 15:09Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Some great posts here on these two great aircraft.
One point mentioned earlier was that the construction of the Mosquito represented some sort of 'cul de sac'..... Actually, I have to disagree. In reality it was light years ahead, since it was a fully Composite aircraft. As well as more conventional metal elements, it was made-up of factory-moulded sections. Not only that, areas such as the fuselage utilised moulded sandwich construction, which again, presaged modern techniques. Don't be blinded by the fact that the primary composite element was wood. Wood was, and still is a great material for aircraft purposes, it's just that today, we can synthesise it very effectively....
There were so many wonderful first-hand accounts in the S&B book. One I still recall, was that a Mosquito returning from a low-level raid over occupied Europe was hit by enemy fire. One engine/propeller was damaged and required to be feathered as it was tearing itself out of it's bearers. Despite this, a safe return was accomplished and the pilot reported that their IAS never at any point dipped below 200mph. The pilots concluded that the Mosquito was a '...great single engined aircraft..'..!
The Mosquito was often also quite easy to repair. One Mosquito lost about 6 '- 8' off a wing. After discussions with the factory, a DH team turned-up and quickly rebuilt the wingtip and returned the a/c to service without ever needing to remove the wing.
A pals father was in the RAF. He'd been a chippie before the outbreak, so he was posted to an operational Mosquito unit. He said that by and large, the aircraft was very quick and easy to repair and get back into service. There were proscribed limits and schemes of course.
Some aircraft are great. Some achieve fame, but relatively few are such thoroughbreds in the same way the Mosquito was. If ever an aircraft truly deserved the accolades heaped upon it by history, this aircraft shines out. Let's hope that we'll see one back in UK skies, it's very sorely missed and a gaping hole for such an important type.
By: Art-J
- 5th June 2014 at 16:56Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
While we're at it, 60 lbs warhead sounds more comparable to 5 inch shell (average 55 lbs for famous US semi-auto guns mounted on DDs) rather than 6 inch shells (twice heavier by default), let alone 8 inch ones (300 lbs and higher). I'd take the "equivalent to a broadside from a cruiser" quote with a pinch of salt... unless You Britons armed Your light and heavy cruisers with 5 inch guns only ;).
Books about US planes and armament tend to compare salvo of similar sized HVAR rockets to a broadside from a destroyer, and that, in my opinion, sounds more plausible.
"Tiny Tim" rocket on the other hand, that is another story...
By: hampden98
- 5th June 2014 at 17:52Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
So could a squadron of Mosquito's fly high and fast enough to avoid German fighters in daylight?
If caught they could jettison their bomb and dogfight?
By: John Green
- 5th June 2014 at 17:58Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Re 53
My personal interpretation is that the missile armed Mosquito or Beaufighter dleivered the same destructive power as the broadside from a six inch cruiser.
The British Navy had both light and heavy cruisers armed with a main armament of either six or eight inches. Examples would be Ajax, Achillies and Exeter who did battle with the German battlecruiser Graf Spee and the Belfast which was involved in the destruction of the German battlecruiser, Scharnhorst.
I think that the Ajax and Achillies had six inch weaponry but the Exeter and Belfast had 8 inch. Something like that. Either way, for a Mosquito or Beaufighter to have such a devastating aerial broadside must have come as a rather unpleasant surprise - if you were on the receiving end.
By: Beaufighter VI
- 5th June 2014 at 18:07Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
If you want a good read about the Beaufighter try;- "Beaufighters in the Pacific" by N M Parnell. First published in 1980 as, "Whispering Death", this is much revised version published in 2005. Covers operations by Australian crews of No. 30 and No. 31 Sqdn, and 77 Wing, 1942 to 1945.
Guns, bombs, rockets and napalm.
By: j_jza80
- 5th June 2014 at 19:29Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
So could a squadron of Mosquito's fly high and fast enough to avoid German fighters in daylight?
If caught they could jettison their bomb and dogfight?
The Sharp & Bowyer book lists an extensive number of kills for Mosquitos, including a considerable number of FW190s. While it could be foolish to try a one on one turning fight against a single seat fighter, it illustrates that they were capable of taking on the best the Luftwaffe had to offer. Remember, a single burst from the Mosquitos guns would be devastating against any aircraft.
By: dhfan
- 6th June 2014 at 01:52Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The quote as I recall it was "broadside from a light cruiser" which suggests 6" but where I read it and even if I remember correctly is long gone.
Despite my admiration for all things DH, given a dogfight between a Mosquito FB.VI and an FW190, I think I'd rather be in the '190.
As far as outrunning is concerned, I think it mainly applied to the bombers which of course was the original intent. I'm not sure I've ever known whether it was permanent or temporary but for certainly for some time at least any Mossie shot down counted as two kills.
It's so long since I built either of the 1/72nd Airfix Mosquitos I can't remember the fit now. The main thing to me was the ridiculous wheels on the early kit which were difficult to see past. For an aircraft that had very distinctive fat tyres, bike wheels stood out like a sore thumb. I guess as an early kit, nobody had thought then of moulding them as two parts - or it could have been too expensive to tool.
By: David Burke
- 6th June 2014 at 16:28Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The Mosquito used techniques which were first used in the construction of the Albatros. It was not a revolution in construction -rather D.H using one of its existing skills. Whether they would have used wood if there hadn't been the threat of a strategic metal shortage is open to debate. The construction of the streamlined Flamingo straight after the Albatros showed that the company chose whether through cost or ease to embrace metal monocoque as keenly as wood.
Whether we would have seen a metal Mosquito if the opportunity was there is an interesting concept.
By: John Green
- 6th June 2014 at 18:05Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Re 59
Wise comments. I can hear the clucking of 'chickens coming home to roost', eh Bruce !
Does anyone know whether that unit at wartime Farnborough, responsible for evaluating the performance of Allied a/c against their Axis opponents, ever did a comparison between the Mosquito and an Me 109 and Fw 190 ?
By: Snoopy7422
- 6th June 2014 at 18:34Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
So could a squadron of Mosquito's fly high and fast enough to avoid German fighters in daylight?
If caught they could jettison their bomb and dogfight?
As a high level bomber, the mosquito operated primarily at night.
Daylight operations by both bomber version and armed fighter-bomber versions were often at low level. The Mosquito was not a dogfighting machine, but could prevail if the circumstances were right. If single seat fighters were encountered, the Mosquitos best defence was speed.
However, the PR versions of the Mosquito ranged all over Europe in daylight at very high altitudes and losses were very low, which speaks for itself.
Posts: 286
By: mhuxt - 2nd June 2014 at 03:29 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I've never found any evidence of USAAF heavies carrying less than 4,500 lbs to Berlin, though I believe there was an obscure, not-often-carried all-incendiary load on the B-17 that was less than 4,000. As I say, I've never found any evidence it was carried to Berlin. I think the whole story comes from Don Bennett's book.
Posts: 5,592
By: Dave Homewood - 2nd June 2014 at 04:18 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
That is depicting a No. 487 (NZ) Squadron Mosquito. I did not know that they carried rockets on that squadron's aircraft. Can anyone confirm this please?
Posts: 8,505
By: mike currill - 2nd June 2014 at 11:25 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
[QUOTE=Snoopy7422;2141376]
The Beau was designed for quite a different role to the Mosquito too. The Mosquito could do anything the Beau could do, better, and was more inherently adaptable. Their roles only really coincided as night fighters and anti-shipping a/c. Whilst both could carry external bombs and rockets, the Beau was more commonly-equiped to carry a torpedo. (I think this was only done experimentally with the Mosquito.). The Mosquito really was the original MRCA.
Sorry the Bristol F2 was the original MRCA. Day/night fighter, light bomber, reconnaisance aircraft, ground attack aircraft.
With regard to the discussion about the differing demand on resources for the two types. I seem to recall reading somewhere that during a bombing raid Hermnn Goering was heard tom complain "here we are struggling to build enoght bombers while in England every furniture and cabinet maker is turning them out". I can't verify the truth of that one but it does rather illustrate the point.
Posts: 216
By: lmisbtn - 2nd June 2014 at 11:48 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I thought the Beau was known for it's undesirable ditching characteristics, to the point of having a poem written about it...
www.johnderbyshire.com/Readings/beau.html
Posts: 82
By: Mo Botwood - 2nd June 2014 at 12:15 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
LNSF
The Light Night Striking Force of Mosquitoes during one phase of the war made bombing raids to Berlin on 43 consecutive occasions without a break. Sometimes the same aircraft would make a second raid on the same night.
The Light Night Striking Force flew 553 sorties during April 1943 for the loss of only one aircraft.
The LNSF used to operate in the most appalling weather and one night Air Vice Marshal Donald Bennett was visited by Mrs. Ogden Reid of the New York Herald Tribune. She had asked to witness the start of a raid. This distinguished lady of the American press arrived with a member of the British Government and was immediately driven to the end of the runway by Bennett. Fog caused heavy bomber raids to be cancelled but as the mist swirled around the signal caravan at the end of the runway Mosquitoes could be seen taxying on from both directions to save time, lining up and taking off for Berlin in quick succession. She turned to Bennett and said, "I see they have got a bulge - they’re carrying a “Blockbuster” aren’t they?" She asked what it weighed and Bennett told her 4000 lbs which was 500 lbs more than a B-17 Flying Fortress could carry to Berlin. In any case, he pointed out; a Fortress would not accommodate a 4000 lb “cookie” because it was too large for its bomb bay. The famous Press lady pondered for a few moments before replying "I only hope the American public never realises these facts."
One young Mosquito pilot of those days was Wing Commander I. G. Broom (later Air Marshal Sir Ivor Broom DSO, DFC and two bars, AFC). “We did 25 nights to Berlin. You could fly there and be back in the mess before the bar closed. We could carry more to Berlin with a crew of two in a Mosquito than could a Flying Fortress with a crew of ten. They had to fight their way there and back in daytime. We went fast at night, at 28,000 ft.”
JohnB
Posts: 286
By: mhuxt - 2nd June 2014 at 14:22 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
No, they didn't carry rockets. The only 2nd TAF Mosquito unit I ever read about using rockets was, IIRC from Sharp & Bowyer, 305 Sqn, which again from memory had a brief flirtation with them in July or August '44.
I built that kit many lifetimes ago, I believe the 262 is in the markings of KG51. The box cover uses artistic license, as they say.
Posts: 70
By: Arclite03 - 4th June 2014 at 12:29 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Massively off track - I preferred the earlier Mosquito kit as it was easy to make albeit it not a very accurate representation of the real thing, the later Airfix Mossie did not fit together at all well but was a better representation of the real thing - I think Airfix re-issued the earlier version................due to public demand :-)
Posts: 313
By: Spartabus - 4th June 2014 at 13:37 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Hi folks,
just chipping in with my ha'ppney worth but this is an oft repeated factoid which I have also seen applied to Hurricanes and Typhoons. I think it refers to the energy (the impact and and the explosion combined) rather than just the explosive power.
I seem to remember reading somewhere that the later model Beaufighter was a more stable and predictable platform at lower altitudes than the Mosquito, but for the life of me I cannot remember where it was.
Posts: 1,542
By: j_jza80 - 4th June 2014 at 18:45 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
From the Sharp & Bowyer book:
Posts: 797
By: Snoopy7422 - 5th June 2014 at 15:09 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Some great posts here on these two great aircraft.
One point mentioned earlier was that the construction of the Mosquito represented some sort of 'cul de sac'..... Actually, I have to disagree. In reality it was light years ahead, since it was a fully Composite aircraft. As well as more conventional metal elements, it was made-up of factory-moulded sections. Not only that, areas such as the fuselage utilised moulded sandwich construction, which again, presaged modern techniques. Don't be blinded by the fact that the primary composite element was wood. Wood was, and still is a great material for aircraft purposes, it's just that today, we can synthesise it very effectively....
There were so many wonderful first-hand accounts in the S&B book. One I still recall, was that a Mosquito returning from a low-level raid over occupied Europe was hit by enemy fire. One engine/propeller was damaged and required to be feathered as it was tearing itself out of it's bearers. Despite this, a safe return was accomplished and the pilot reported that their IAS never at any point dipped below 200mph. The pilots concluded that the Mosquito was a '...great single engined aircraft..'..!
The Mosquito was often also quite easy to repair. One Mosquito lost about 6 '- 8' off a wing. After discussions with the factory, a DH team turned-up and quickly rebuilt the wingtip and returned the a/c to service without ever needing to remove the wing.
A pals father was in the RAF. He'd been a chippie before the outbreak, so he was posted to an operational Mosquito unit. He said that by and large, the aircraft was very quick and easy to repair and get back into service. There were proscribed limits and schemes of course.
Some aircraft are great. Some achieve fame, but relatively few are such thoroughbreds in the same way the Mosquito was. If ever an aircraft truly deserved the accolades heaped upon it by history, this aircraft shines out. Let's hope that we'll see one back in UK skies, it's very sorely missed and a gaping hole for such an important type.
Posts: 1,542
By: j_jza80 - 5th June 2014 at 15:18 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Even though a UK still seems quite unlikely, at least we have a Beau that's well on the way. :)
Posts: 34
By: Art-J - 5th June 2014 at 16:56 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
While we're at it, 60 lbs warhead sounds more comparable to 5 inch shell (average 55 lbs for famous US semi-auto guns mounted on DDs) rather than 6 inch shells (twice heavier by default), let alone 8 inch ones (300 lbs and higher). I'd take the "equivalent to a broadside from a cruiser" quote with a pinch of salt... unless You Britons armed Your light and heavy cruisers with 5 inch guns only ;).
Books about US planes and armament tend to compare salvo of similar sized HVAR rockets to a broadside from a destroyer, and that, in my opinion, sounds more plausible.
"Tiny Tim" rocket on the other hand, that is another story...
Posts: 2,536
By: hampden98 - 5th June 2014 at 17:52 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
So could a squadron of Mosquito's fly high and fast enough to avoid German fighters in daylight?
If caught they could jettison their bomb and dogfight?
Posts: 6,535
By: John Green - 5th June 2014 at 17:58 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Re 53
My personal interpretation is that the missile armed Mosquito or Beaufighter dleivered the same destructive power as the broadside from a six inch cruiser.
The British Navy had both light and heavy cruisers armed with a main armament of either six or eight inches. Examples would be Ajax, Achillies and Exeter who did battle with the German battlecruiser Graf Spee and the Belfast which was involved in the destruction of the German battlecruiser, Scharnhorst.
I think that the Ajax and Achillies had six inch weaponry but the Exeter and Belfast had 8 inch. Something like that. Either way, for a Mosquito or Beaufighter to have such a devastating aerial broadside must have come as a rather unpleasant surprise - if you were on the receiving end.
Posts: 554
By: Beaufighter VI - 5th June 2014 at 18:07 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
If you want a good read about the Beaufighter try;- "Beaufighters in the Pacific" by N M Parnell. First published in 1980 as, "Whispering Death", this is much revised version published in 2005. Covers operations by Australian crews of No. 30 and No. 31 Sqdn, and 77 Wing, 1942 to 1945.
Guns, bombs, rockets and napalm.
Posts: 1,542
By: j_jza80 - 5th June 2014 at 19:29 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The Sharp & Bowyer book lists an extensive number of kills for Mosquitos, including a considerable number of FW190s. While it could be foolish to try a one on one turning fight against a single seat fighter, it illustrates that they were capable of taking on the best the Luftwaffe had to offer. Remember, a single burst from the Mosquitos guns would be devastating against any aircraft.
Posts: 2,915
By: dhfan - 6th June 2014 at 01:52 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The quote as I recall it was "broadside from a light cruiser" which suggests 6" but where I read it and even if I remember correctly is long gone.
Despite my admiration for all things DH, given a dogfight between a Mosquito FB.VI and an FW190, I think I'd rather be in the '190.
As far as outrunning is concerned, I think it mainly applied to the bombers which of course was the original intent. I'm not sure I've ever known whether it was permanent or temporary but for certainly for some time at least any Mossie shot down counted as two kills.
It's so long since I built either of the 1/72nd Airfix Mosquitos I can't remember the fit now. The main thing to me was the ridiculous wheels on the early kit which were difficult to see past. For an aircraft that had very distinctive fat tyres, bike wheels stood out like a sore thumb. I guess as an early kit, nobody had thought then of moulding them as two parts - or it could have been too expensive to tool.
Posts: 9,780
By: David Burke - 6th June 2014 at 16:28 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The Mosquito used techniques which were first used in the construction of the Albatros. It was not a revolution in construction -rather D.H using one of its existing skills. Whether they would have used wood if there hadn't been the threat of a strategic metal shortage is open to debate. The construction of the streamlined Flamingo straight after the Albatros showed that the company chose whether through cost or ease to embrace metal monocoque as keenly as wood.
Whether we would have seen a metal Mosquito if the opportunity was there is an interesting concept.
Posts: 6,535
By: John Green - 6th June 2014 at 18:05 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Re 59
Wise comments. I can hear the clucking of 'chickens coming home to roost', eh Bruce !
Does anyone know whether that unit at wartime Farnborough, responsible for evaluating the performance of Allied a/c against their Axis opponents, ever did a comparison between the Mosquito and an Me 109 and Fw 190 ?
Posts: 797
By: Snoopy7422 - 6th June 2014 at 18:34 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
As a high level bomber, the mosquito operated primarily at night.
Daylight operations by both bomber version and armed fighter-bomber versions were often at low level. The Mosquito was not a dogfighting machine, but could prevail if the circumstances were right. If single seat fighters were encountered, the Mosquitos best defence was speed.
However, the PR versions of the Mosquito ranged all over Europe in daylight at very high altitudes and losses were very low, which speaks for itself.