Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Military Aviation
Reload this Page >

Mossie : The Plane That Saved Britain

Wikiposts
Search
Military Aviation A forum for the professionals who fly military hardware. Also for the backroom boys and girls who support the flying and maintain the equipment, and without whom nothing would ever leave the ground. All armies, navies and air forces of the world equally welcome here.

Mossie : The Plane That Saved Britain

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 18th Jul 2013, 11:57
  #21 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Among these dark Satanic mills
Posts: 1,197
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
the B17 for example could only manage a 4000 lb bomb load
True, but bear in mind that the B-17 was meant to be a twin-engined aircraft but Boeing decided to hang four engines on it to give it more range and height. The B-17 was also from a much earlier era which explains why it was so inferior (B-17 first flight mid-1935, Mosquito end of 1940).

I would contend that without the war in the air, the German invasion of Russia could well have been decisive in their favour. As it was it was a close enough run thing. Yes the distances and weather worked in Russia's favour, but so did massive western military supplies and reduced German ones culminating in the strategically decisive Battle of Kursk. Quite a lot of that could be put down to the western war in the air, don't you think?
With respect I disagree - by February 1943 when the last Axis troops at Stalingrad surrendered (marking the end of German advances), and July 1943 when the Germans lost at Kursk (marking the beginning of the Soviet push westwards), the bomber campaign in the west had yet to get into its stride and the number of German aircraft in the west was fairly modest - certainly nowhere near enough to make a difference at Kursk even had the Germans sent all their units east. A cursory glance at a map of Asia shows what a tiny part of the Soviet Union the Germans managed to invest - the furthest they got was approx 1/7 of the landmass and that was just one spearhead in the Caucasus, not a broad and even advance along the whole front. No doubt the supply of western munitions helped, but the basic fact is that Hitler's gamble about the 'whole rotten edifice' was (thankfully) wrong, and the sheer expanses of Russia and the weather alone would have sealed the deal.
TorqueOfTheDevil is offline  
Old 18th Jul 2013, 12:41
  #22 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: In the State of Denial
Posts: 1,078
Likes: 0
Received 146 Likes on 28 Posts
I used to know a guy who'd been an apprentice at De Havillands in Hatfield in 1945. On VE Day he was told to go & get some wood for a celebratory bonfire so he took an axe & chopped up a Mosquito......he said that he now weeps every time he thinks about it.

In his defence he said that there were around 40 Mosquitos parked on the airfield & with the ending of the war they were not really going to be needed.
Ken Scott is online now  
Old 18th Jul 2013, 13:06
  #23 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: South of England
Age: 74
Posts: 627
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes on 4 Posts
Wensleydale, the "Cheesy" remark was meant in the best of all possible taste.

About 1978 I bought a river boat from a boatyard in Market Harborough. Chatting to the gaffer he mentioned that he used to own a workshop in the East end of London making Art Deco furniture. Gracefully curving plywood strips using steam and pressure.

I asked him why he stopped and he told me the workshop was requisitioned and he spent the rest of the war making engine cowlings for Mosquitos.

Rgds SOS
SOSL is offline  
Old 18th Jul 2013, 13:51
  #24 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Next to Ross and Demelza
Age: 53
Posts: 1,235
Received 52 Likes on 21 Posts
Hindsight is 20-20 vision, but I still find it amazing that de Havilland's had to really fight to get the Mosquito accepted by the Air Ministry. All bombers had to big, made of metal, and have lots of guns, and because the Mosquito wasn't any of those things...

I often wonder how different the bomber offensive may have been had the Air Ministry not been so blinkered, and had decided to order the Mosquito into production much earlier than it had, and possibly instead of so many four-engine bombers.
Martin the Martian is offline  
Old 18th Jul 2013, 13:57
  #25 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Somewhere flat
Age: 68
Posts: 5,565
Likes: 0
Received 45 Likes on 30 Posts

Wensleydale, the "Cheesy" remark was meant in the best of all possible
taste.
No offence taken, old chap.
Wensleydale is online now  
Old 18th Jul 2013, 14:30
  #26 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia - South of where I'd like to be !
Age: 59
Posts: 4,261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Martin

"Hindsight is 20-20 vision" and the rest of what you said.

Applies to a lot of things in the war.
500N is offline  
Old 18th Jul 2013, 15:02
  #27 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Hong Kong
Age: 56
Posts: 1,445
Received 3 Likes on 2 Posts
I think one issue to be considered with regard the bombing force is that the diversity of the attacks on Germany from the west; day, night, heavy bombers, medium, fast, light, tactical, strategic...split the German defences. If 'only' Mosquitoes were the force the Nazi's would have concentrated on weapons to combat that threat.
Load Toad is offline  
Old 18th Jul 2013, 15:13
  #28 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia - South of where I'd like to be !
Age: 59
Posts: 4,261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Here is a question I would like to know.

With the Mossie being made of wood, was it visible on radar like
a big metal bomber ?

Or did it just give a much smaller blip ?
500N is offline  
Old 18th Jul 2013, 15:22
  #29 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Canada
Age: 69
Posts: 248
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Re Load Toad's point.

Well put, sir. I hadn't thought of that premise, to my chagrin.
54Phan is offline  
Old 18th Jul 2013, 15:32
  #30 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
re the effect of the war in the air on the Russo-German front it is true that a lot - maybe 200,000 plus, German troops were diverted to AA duties but tehy were mainly the elderly, the very young and the not so fit

What the Germans needed at Kursk was more tanks - production of which wasn't really affected until late 44 early 45
Heathrow Harry is offline  
Old 18th Jul 2013, 15:44
  #31 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Wildest Surrey
Age: 75
Posts: 10,820
Received 98 Likes on 71 Posts
I had the pleasure of being an ATC cadet at Bovingdon in the mid 60s when they were making 633 Squadron,(not to be confused with the later 'Mosquito Squadron')and was able to closely examine the 12 Mossies they had assembled. One was just a nose section probably for cockpit shots, about 4 or 5 were flyable and the rest were just static. The tragedy was the one they used for the crash sequence. The bullet holes were stuck on plywood but you had to get really close to see this. Next day I wasn't there when John Crewdson opened up the thottles to go across the grass then simply retracted the undercarriage, thereby destroying a valuable aircraft which might have been restorable at least to static condition.
chevvron is online now  
Old 18th Jul 2013, 15:53
  #32 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Among these dark Satanic mills
Posts: 1,197
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
What the Germans needed at Kursk was more tanks
...and anti-tank aircraft, of which there were none at all on the Kanalfront. There were a few in Sicily which had escaped from the fall of North Africa, but again the Allied bomber offensive can't really be credited with reducing the numbers of these aircraft in time for Kursk.
TorqueOfTheDevil is offline  
Old 18th Jul 2013, 16:00
  #33 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia - South of where I'd like to be !
Age: 59
Posts: 4,261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
"about 4 or 5 were flyable"

How can we go from 4 or 5 flyable in the 60's
to having to have one rebuilt in NZ ?

What happened to the flyable aircraft ?
(Excluding the last one that crashed)
500N is offline  
Old 18th Jul 2013, 16:07
  #34 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Wildest Surrey
Age: 75
Posts: 10,820
Received 98 Likes on 71 Posts
Several of them had only just retired from target towing duties at Exeter. One was left behind after filming and flew out in about 1967. They drilled a hole in the tailplane and got several gallons of rainwater out even though it had been hangared. It was in the same hangar as the gliders of 613 VGS Detatched Flight, and we all took the opportunity to climb in and try it for size (bl00dy small hatch and I was only 144lb in those days)

Last edited by chevvron; 18th Jul 2013 at 16:15.
chevvron is online now  
Old 18th Jul 2013, 17:16
  #35 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Hove
Age: 72
Posts: 1,026
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
One fact which tells a story is loss rate.

From The Bomber Command War Diaries these are losses as a percentage of sorties.

Lancaster 2.20%
Halifax 2.28%
Wellington 2.92%
Stirling 3.39%
Manchester 5.04%
Hampden 2.56%
Blenheim 3.62%
Mosquito 0.65%
clicker is offline  
Old 18th Jul 2013, 17:45
  #36 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: raf
Posts: 610
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by 500N
Here is a question I would like to know.

With the Mossie being made of wood, was it visible on radar like
a big metal bomber ?

Or did it just give a much smaller blip ?
In this interesting documentary, Northrop-Grumman rebuild a wooden ww2 aircraft and test it.


Last edited by gr4techie; 18th Jul 2013 at 17:46.
gr4techie is offline  
Old 18th Jul 2013, 19:07
  #37 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Squalor
Posts: 174
Received 23 Likes on 13 Posts
No expert, but i think a couple of metal props whirling round would light up your radar tube a treat.

wets
Wetstart Dryrun is offline  
Old 18th Jul 2013, 19:14
  #38 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia - South of where I'd like to be !
Age: 59
Posts: 4,261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I thought Mosquito props were made of wood ?
500N is offline  
Old 18th Jul 2013, 19:28
  #39 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 33,056
Received 2,927 Likes on 1,250 Posts
The flier is up for sale having been rebuilt in NZ, but it is doubtful if it could ever fly in the UK as the CAA I believe do not recognise the rebuild as it wasn't done under their supervision, I think that is why it never came here as originally intended when it was going to fly to the USA..

The Ex Spartan one should fly soon in Canada

The one that went to Kermit Weeks from the UK flew a couple of times then was put on display in his museum, never to fly again.

Interesting if you do not know, the actual fuselage is built on concrete formers, the two halves are then fitted out and then the two sides are joined together.



The New Zealand company has more coming too, they had a set of moulds made up so can manufacture fuselages, one of the problems with the old ones was the glues de laminating.
NutLoose is offline  
Old 18th Jul 2013, 19:45
  #40 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Bedford
Posts: 330
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
People not 'planes

While it's a interesting discussion, no single aircraft type saved Britain.

What saved us were the people that crewed them: those lucky enough to be assigned to a competent machine like a Mosquito, Spitfire, Lancaster, etc. and those who climbed into Battles, Hampdens, Rocs, Manchesters, Defiants etc. to face god knows what.

Without the people who designed, built, flew, serviced and supported them no 'plane got off the ground. Respect to them all.
oncemorealoft is offline  


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.