BBadonov
The first 27 were basically B.2s, with what we called Avon Mk.1s, limited integral wing fuel tanks (total was 14.6k LB), and bugger-all avionics. The remaining 21 B.20s were based on the B.6, with Avon 109s, increased integral fuel ...
On 45 Sqn at Tengah 1962-4, I thought we had a rather guarded relationship with the Canberras at Butterworth (2? Sqn RAAF). They seemed a bit grumpy and their mess was a bit dull. We never seemed to operate together as we did with the RNZAF B12s on their regular deployments into theatre.
I have a clear (if unreliable) memory that, while the Aussie aircraft had the engines of the B6 type, very importantly they lacked the stronger wing that we assumed was essential for low-level work. The integral wing fuel will have taken some of the load, of course.
Fairly soon after I arrived on 45 Sqn, before we swapped our B2s for the B6 type (actually B15s), we lost a lovely crew when its aircraft broke up while bombing on China Rock. So there was a sense that the Aussies were unnecessarily inviting bad luck by persisting with the old and weaker airframe. I have always assumed that a weaker airframe would have cramped their style when they were later deployed to Vietnam.
Perhaps the Aussies operated rather staidly to compensate. That would fully explain why brash young chaps like me were a bit sniffy of of them and why (if true) the B20 fleet, in peace and conflict, maintained a better loss rate than the RAF and USAF Canberra forces.