Air Combat Report

Post Reply
Dave_Richardson
Squadron Leader
Squadron Leader
Posts: 378
Joined: Sun Nov 21, 2010 5:53 pm
Location: Hull

Air Combat Report

Post by Dave_Richardson »

I've just found this air combat report for my uncle's aircraft on The National Archives website and I wonder if you knowledgeable chaps could help me out with a couple of the abbrevaitions?

On the first line, I think it is I.A.S.
and on the sixth line -I.F.F.

I'm guessing that E/A is Enemy Aircraft?

TIA

Dave

Image

Theletterwriter
Warrant Officer 1st Class
Warrant Officer 1st Class
Posts: 87
Joined: Sun Aug 22, 2010 9:44 pm
Location: Glasgow

Re: Air Combat Report

Post by Theletterwriter »

Dave

IAS is Indicated Air Speed. IFF is Identification Friend or Foe which was a signal the RAF introduced earlier in the war to identify RAF planes on radar.

Best wishes

Douglas

User avatar
K4KittyCrew
Air Chief Marshal (RAAF)
Air Chief Marshal (RAAF)
Posts: 3635
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 10:55 am
Location: Gold Coast, Queensland - Australia

Re: Air Combat Report

Post by K4KittyCrew »

Hi Dave, welcome back and many 'Happy Returns' on your birthday, mate.
John

IAS - Indicated Air Speed
IFF - Identification Friend or Foe. Electronic equipment is used to avoid friendly fire incidents where units on the same side attack one another by mistake.
K for Kitty Crew - Winthorpe, 1661 HCU's - stirlingaircraftsoc.raf38group.org/
630 Squadron - East Kirkby
" There is nothing glorious about war with the exception of those who served us so valiantly"

Dave_Richardson
Squadron Leader
Squadron Leader
Posts: 378
Joined: Sun Nov 21, 2010 5:53 pm
Location: Hull

Re: Air Combat Report

Post by Dave_Richardson »

Hi Chaps

Thanks for the info.

Thank's for the good wishes John, it's good to be back.

Dave

jamesinnewcastle
Flight Lieutenant
Flight Lieutenant
Posts: 349
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2010 12:31 am

Re: Air Combat Report

Post by jamesinnewcastle »

Hi

This is quite an old thread but I was interested to read that the crew believed that IFF would affect the operation of the searchlights and have noted it formally.

I have just read a book by R. V. Jones - Most Secret War. In it he describes how it became a popular rumour that the IFF transmissions could affect the enemy searchlights and how this actually wasn't the case. He knew that the Germans were in fact homing in on the IFF transmissions and that any long term use of it would be disasterous as you were effectively attracting night fighters while not helping yourself with the coning - as proved to be the case in the report.


Cheers
James

User avatar
smudgersmith218
3 Group Researcher
Posts: 952
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 6:58 pm
Location: LONDON

Re: Air Combat Report

Post by smudgersmith218 »

Gents,

I have the Air 50 Combat Reports for 95% of Bomber Command squadrons. SADLY they are on micro film :( :( making reproduction very near impossible ( local libray did away with the viewer / copier )

Apart from paying a silly sum of money is there any device which is on the open market (and affordable ) I can purchase to copy these docs :o :o

Cheers

Smudger
No.218 (Gold Coast) Squadron 1918-1945
The Nomads

jamesinnewcastle
Flight Lieutenant
Flight Lieutenant
Posts: 349
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2010 12:31 am

Re: Air Combat Report

Post by jamesinnewcastle »

Hi Smudger

How wide is the microfilm? There are plently of 35mm negative readers for standard negatives (between 30 and 120 squid). There is no reason why you couldn't pass your negative through one of these manually and manipulate the resultant file as necessary with a software package, it may need cropping for example - it would reproduce as a positive.

A fully blown 'reader' probably has a mass of mechanical transport systems projection lamps and other paraphinalia you really don't need if you are going to an electronic file.

If they are of an odd size then a home made one of translucent plastic over a light, simple guides and a digital camera on a tripod (set to macro) will get you 'negatives' which you can reverse with a software package. Actually you may not even need the translucent plastic, a brightly lit white wall might suffice.

Really all you are doing is taking a (digital) photo of the (backlit) film itself, something to hold the microfilm itself (minus cartridge) is really all you need.

It's a pain to do it manually but probably much cheaper.You only need to do it once.

Just an idea!

James Heath Robinson

Post Reply