![]() |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
Even as a night fighter, they weren't too successful, with only four brownings against all that armour plate. The lack of forward firing guns was a big mistake, but even with them, it wouldn't have been manoeverable enough to vie with 109's with all that weight to carry around. The turret and gunner I mean. I reckon it was designed by people of a similar mindset to those who thought the 'big wing' was a great idea. Poor old Defiant. ![]() |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
The idea sounds neat though, the defiant flying infront and below the bomber with gunner shooting into exposed cockpit and engines at angles where these weren't usually armored.
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
It's part of why I find the early war period so interesting: a lot of concepts that had been established before the war were put to test, with often disastrous results (I realize the poor guys suffering from those concepts didn't find that nearly as interesting back then...). That includes the Defiant as well as the German Zerstörer concept, or the idea that B-17 formations would be able to defend themselves without escorts. Some of those planes could be adapted successfully to other roles; as for the Defiant, I think using it as a nightfighter was only slightly more efficient than scrapping them.
Still love crap planes though, and agree it would be nice to fly it one day, no matter how unlikely that is. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
Such a strange concept with hindsight, but at the time was thought viable, except strangely enough by Hugh Dowding. He was sceptical of them from the word go, and was soon proved 100% correct. Can't help being a bit fond of the old pig though. ![]() |
#5
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
![]() Just kidding.
__________________
All CoD screenshots here: http://s58.photobucket.com/albums/g260/restranger/ __________ ![]() Flying online as Setback. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I'm quite fond of both those old pigs then!
![]() |
![]() |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|