Belly Defence

[Denonline]

Whatever efforts were made, the only evidence that we became aware of being the rear turret clear vision panel and the banking port/stbd enabling the mid upper to search beneath. We were also told that 49 squadron were being equipped with .50's in the rear turret.

Dennis

[smudgersmith218]

Hi Dennis,

How you getting on with them books, I have another pile your welcome too. !!!

Regards

Steve

[PAFG]

Hi Steve, I posted this letter before on LAF, some time ago (see bottom of post). It shows clear concerns about losses to attacks from below in June 1943.

This concern goes hand-in-glove with ACM Harris suddenly pushing 'field of view' as the paramount criteria in bomber defence. Bottomley (ACAS Ops) wrote to ACAS (TR) on 13 June 1943 that he'd met CAS and Harris the day before to discuss percentage losses in the Ruhr campaign. They were hoping that greater concentration of the stream would reduce this. Bottomley adds:

'Thepoint however which [Harris] made most emphatically was that our casualties could only be saved under present conditions if better facilities were provided whereby rear gunners were given a better downward and rearward view with clear vision. He said that he had emphasised this view to the Air Ministry with monotonous regularity...no satisfaction...[so] he had approached turret manufacturers directly...'

Harris wrote to AM Sir Douglas Evill (VCAS) on 15 June 1943 (what VCAS's staff officer refers to as an 'explosive postagram') demanding a conference on bomber defence and suggesting the agenda. This went ahead on 24 June 1943 under Evill's Chairmanship. The minutes record:

'The C-in-C said... the existing turrets were useless for night operation because of the lack of downward view...Basically the fighter had the advantage over the bomber...The method of attack adopted by enemy night fighters was to position themselves almost vertically below the bomber so that it flew into the stream of bullets...The gunner being thus almost unable to see the fighter the bomber pilot was unaware that he was being attacked before the shots began to take effect. The opinion of his O.R.S. was that approximately 2/3rds of our losses on night sorties were due to enemy fighters but personally he thought it was nearer 9/10ths... To achieve 100% downward and rearward view he would be prepared to sacrifice other requirements, even to the extent of the guns themselves, and regard the turret as a position of observation only...'

Immediate actions agreed at the conference were a downward observation station in each heavy bomber and the design of an observation bubble with two hand-held guns to replace the rear turret.

Actions agreed for 1944 included prioritising development of the Rose Turret.

The conference also discussed the defensive arrangements for B3/42 (called the Lancaster IV at this stage), which were to include 20mm cannon in the rear engine nacelles sighted remotely by a rear gunner in an observation turrret.

Although Harris is fired up at this stage, and the discussion rumbles on into 1944, the success of Hamburg, the heavy operational effort in the autumn and the Berlin campaign in the winter seem to soak up his energies and there's not so much direct input from him that I can find, and little changes even as losses to upward firing guns soar in the later Berlin campaign. The fitting of under-turrets gets underway in autumn 1943, but there's a problem with finding gunners plus squadrons are disappointed with the turret design itself and the acceleration of the deployment of H2S and Fishpond gets priority.

I don't follow the logic of RJ Smeed (ORS at HQBC) on page 1. He gives a similar account as the C-in-C's regarding the methods of attack from below, but concludes that this 'completely removes' the possibility of upward firing guns. It doesn't.

Richard

Upward firing guns p1 (468 x 600).jpg

Upward firing guns p2 (600 x 365).jpg

Upward firing guns p3 (600 x 347).jpg

[PAFG]

As a postscript to the correspondence in the previous post, here's the 21 July 1944 recognition of fixed, upward firing 20mm cannons in Me110, Do217, Ju88 and He129 aircraft. They were so close to deducing this in summer 1943, but not quite close enough... ...what if?...

Richard

Upward firing guns p4 (482 x 600).jpg

[PAFG]

Three steps forward, two steps back...

Just noticed this in V (5) Group News, March 1944:

G. 5 Gp News Mar 44 p3b (600 x 328).jpg

It seems Harris's drive on downward vision was bearing results at the factory, but priorities were changing again. This at the end of a six week period that embraces the Command's first, second and third worst losses of the war. It may even have been written the day the Daily Express published a report stating that night bombing was now too costly and that Bomber Command should join the Americans in daylight. One day, I'll get to the bottom of who authorised this report, but for the moment suffice to say that all other press comments of the period that I've seen reflect briefings by Air Ministry, H.Q. B.C. or subordinate commanders.

Cheers,

Richard

[Denonline]

Steve, I have learnt so much that I didn't know I didnt know Looking forward to the next visit of the mobile bookshop.

Dennis

[paul61]

"Martin Middlebrooks book on the Nurenburg raid talks of the Canadian Group fitting ventral turrets, against bomber command wishes and suffering a much lower loss rate."





Just how widespread was the practice of fitting single guns in the belly is hard to tell as they were unofficial modifications and hence probably not recorded."


Dave

The whole question of additional defence either in terms of calibre or positioning is one interwoven with bureaucracy and arguments at all levels of Bomber Command, sadly the crews paid the penalty ultimately.

Some found it more of a psychological advantage than anything else, it was basically useless at night ( I have been told ) and during daylight raids the additional crewmember and weight of gun, ammo etc was not considered worth while ( I have been told )

I am not aware of any claims by any group using the mid under, like to be proved wrong.

Cheers

Smudger

Steve/ Dave,
I know this is and older post but, it still caught my eye as my Dad's sqdn.(420 @ Tholthorpe) used the single .50 cal in their Halli's under "Gondola" for approx 6 months from spring till fall of 44.
My late friend, Ted Lewis (Ted was instrumental in the building and funding of Elvington's Halifax) ,did the majority of his tour in this position.
I have a combat report (somewhere!) describing their repelling of several fighter attacks while coordinating the mid under and the front gun......very rare indeed!
My late friend, R/G F/L James Scannell DFM DFC, 89 ops. with 35, 405 & 617, told me that the 6 Group mid unders were the envy of all bomber command sqdns @ this time.
If someone could assist me, I'll post the combat here?
Cheers.
Paul

[K4KittyCrew]

Hi Paul, you are welcome to post it here or start a new post in the 'General' section.
Cheers mate.
John