Though we rightly hold Eric Winkle Brown in high esteem, it as a test pilot and an operational FAA pilot. What he never was,
AFAIK, was an operational dive bomber pilot. We are blessed indeed to have here one of our own, and he has added greatly to our understanding of that rare and esoteric occupation. Captain Brown praises, it seems, the VV4's performance in that regard as superior to the earlier Marks. At the same time he states that its natural dive angle to be about 70 degrees. From what Danny tells us, those earlier marks had a dive angle of 90 degrees, ie truly vertical. So no throw forward; where the a/c nose points is where the released bomb will strike. Now, perhaps the error induced by the 70 degree dive is relatively slight. Perhaps it can be corrected for to some extent, but when you are in the Japanese bunker busting business anything off target is a miss.
Danny's chariot must have been a real challenge with one's view permanently obscured by that massive nose high radial, other than when it was doing the job it was designed for, ie diving vertically at the enemy. It was, as he has told us, a one trick pony, but that one trick was invaluable in Burma and I suspect would have been less successful using the Mk4. It would also appear that Captain Brown's account of the VV genesis is at variance with Peter C Smith's, but that is perhaps to quibble rather. I would though take issue with his dismissive remarks of the Mk's 1, 2, and 3. They weren't designed to be 'nice' aircraft. They were designed to be very accurate dive bombers, a job they did with great effect that won them the approval and gratitude of their customers, the men of the 14th Army.
I second Danny's thanks to Megan for the quote he posted, and also to welcome our new member, jjjackson, to our virtual crew room and to thank him for his fascinating link.