During WW11 I lived near to an airfield which operated Douglas Boston/Havocs fitted with searchlights in the nose, I saw one 'light up' & what an impressive sight it made. has anyone any pics of these A/C please?
A bit off thread but the sort of thing that turns up on H & N to make it interesting...........While researching Greenviewpark's query, I came across this :
In "An illustrated History of the RAF" on the subject of the Boston 3.........
"It was the only machine in the RAF in which the pilot was not expected to be the last to bale out; a detachable control column was available in the upper gunner's compartment, in the hope that he could fly straight and level so that the pilot could avoid hitting the very high tailplane, (Does he mean fin ? virgo) after clambering out of his top hatch and diving off the trailing edge of the wing"
Can anyone confirm this, or is it a bit of lineshoot that over the years has become rooted as fact ? (It actually sounds a bit Monty Python !)
Anyone out there actually done it ?????????
Sorry, no photos of my own of the Turbinlite, however, a really excellent read "Pursuit Through Darkened Skies," by Michael(?) Allen has such a picture as well as a very good description of trying to use the concept on operations.
A subsequent development I think.................A Leigh light, not used for night-fighters, a la Boston, but with some success by Coastal Command in illuminating U-Boats for an attack. I remember reading the memoirs of a U-Boat crew commander describing his surfaced night-time transit/battery charge being suddenly interrupted by the dazzling beam of the Leigh-light followed by a stick of depth charges, (which sunk him)
A bit off thread but the sort of thing that turns up on H & N to make it interesting...........While researching Greenviewpark's query, I came across this :
In "An illustrated History of the RAF" on the subject of the Boston 3.........
"It was the only machine in the RAF in which the pilot was not expected to be the last to bale out; a detachable control column was available in the upper gunner's compartment, in the hope that he could fly straight and level so that the pilot could avoid hitting the very high tailplane, (Does he mean fin ? virgo) after clambering out of his top hatch and diving off the trailing edge of the wing"
Can anyone confirm this, or is it a bit of lineshoot that over the years has become rooted as fact ? (It actually sounds a bit Monty Python !) Anyone out there actually done it ?????????
There were a couple of other machines during the WWII period whose narrow fuselages made such rudimentary controls an attractive option, the Handley Page Hampden in the UK and the Heinkel He115 both featured basic flight controls for the dorsal gunner, but not to enable the pilot to escape, rather to assist in bringing the aircraft back should the pilot be incapacitated. FWIW I would imagine the dorsal gunners view would be so restricted as to make it impractical.
Thanks Guys For the pics. & info. The idea of the light came from Wg/Cdr. W Helmore, but proved to be very costly for us. 10 Sqds were formed , which only managed to destroy 1 Heinkel 111, -- 1 proable - & 2 damaged, our losses 31 A/c. during period 2/9/1941 to Jan 1943 = 31 A/C. some crews, also 1 of our ownStirlings shot down by them.
1451 Flight was formed also at Hunsdon, 22/5/1941 - operational 21/7/1941 soon became 530 Sqd. together with Hurricanes of 3 Sqdn.
538 Flight formed 29/9/1941 to become 538 Sqdn. under command of Sqdn/Ldr J B Nicholson ( the only Battle of Britain VC) ----killed in an accident 2/5/1945 while flying as passenger in a 355 Sqdn Liberator after a raid on Rangoon.
The Mosquito lights were built in Sept. 1942, but stopped on reports from Wg/Cmdr John 'Catseyes' Cunningham.
Let us hope that more pics will come to light, --- sorry, no pun intended!!
I suppose sticking a radar which at the time was heavy and delicate into a large aircraft and using it to illuminate a target for a 'homing' fighter made a lot of sense. I guess.
It was indeed spelled Turbinlite. That's a great photo but begs the question where was it taken? The aircraft behind appears to be a Hornet Moth and the gasometer looks like the one near Heathrow. Heston perhaps or Fairey's Hayes aerodrome?
Just checked some books and discovered that the Fairey Hayes site was a factory only, test flying being done from the company's Great West Aerodrome, later to become the basis for Heathrow. So could the Havoc be there?
I suppose sticking a radar which at the time was heavy and delicate into a large aircraft and using it to illuminate a target for a 'homing' fighter made a lot of sense. I guess.
But Turbinlite wasn't a radar - it was a big searchlight.
Airborne Radar in Blenheims & Beaufighters was already being used with some success before Turbinlite.
The obvious question is 'Why not dispense with the Hurricane & fit a cannon pack to the Boston?' Illuminate target & press gun button.
Their was an oil painting hanging in the Officers Mess at R A F Sealand showing the Douglas Havoc being modified to Turbinlite standard ,It quite intriqued me as this Station was usually associated with Tiger Moths at that time.
The Artist , Jim Chaplin , informed me that the the installation of the Turbinlite kit was in fact carried out there.A little known facet of R A F Sealands wartime history.
Somewhere I have a photo of the painting .
Hopefully another piece of the jigsaw .
Last edited by midnight retired : 23rd December 2009 at 08:01.
Ah yes, Jim Chaplin, my old art master and former Corsair pilot, not to mention Sealand gliding instructor! I have a blurry photo somewhere of a Turbinlite Havoc at Sealand.
My comment (made in 2007) was that at the time radar was heavy and most available fighters would have been unable to carry it. So stick a radar and a light into a bigger plane and use it to find the bomber and illuminate it might have made sense. Must have been bloody difficult for the fighter to keep station near the illuminating aircraft though prior to the big search light being switched on.
Looking at brook creek's photo, I was tempted to say it looked like an academic test of flat-plate drag, with four boffins in the foreground.
However, after looking at it again, is that John Cunningham, second from the right?
I wonder what the performance penalty of the Turbinlight installation was. I notice there are some slots in the cowling around the edge, presumably an attempt to reduce the turbulence.
).
What a cracking photo!
Linear Mode
