defiant-o-phobes

[ATAG_Dutch]

Originally Posted by The Kraken

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.

Don't get me wrong, if we get this as a flyable sometime, with the possibility of multicrewing, I'd love to get an inkling of what it was like to fly it in anger.

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.

[major_setback]

Originally Posted by Dutch_851

Don't get me wrong, if we get this as a flyable sometime, with the possibility of multicrewing, I'd love to get an inkling of what it was like to fly it in anger.

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.

Dowding was certainly not a pig!



Just kidding.

[Friendly_flyer]

Originally Posted by meplay

Hi FF, i was just wondering what the 'Daffy' is?

As Moggy said it was the planes nickname. I get these annoying habits from reading "FlyPast" too much

On a related note:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rKYL0tW-Ek

[AWL_Spinner]

Re: effectiveness as a night fighter. I've shamelessly bumped an earlier post on the topic containing an excellent first-hand account. There's also interesting mention of De Wilde ammo.

[MB_Avro_UK]

Hi all,

The Defiant was designed to intercept unescorted German bombers in daylight.

At the time of it's conception in the mid-1930's, it was not anticipated that France would be defeated.

It was expected that German bombers would have to fly from Germany. And without escort.

British experience in WW1 was that two gunned forward firing fighters such as the Camel were not effective against Gotha bombers attacking London.

The Defiant fully met the Air Ministry requirements at that time. But times changed. France was defeated and German bombers were now escorted by Me 109s.

Interstingly, the best pilots in the RAF and the Luftwaffe during the 1930's were assigned to bombers. How times changed!

Best Regards,
MB_Avro.

[ATAG_Dutch]

Originally Posted by major_setback

Dowding was certainly not a pig!



Just kidding.

I'm quite fond of both those old pigs then!

[Moggy]

Originally Posted by major_setback

I think Oleg might be too busy with updates/bugs and the next releases of the game etc.

We could really do with some sort of outlet for supplying various third party companies and amateur modellers with this type of information. The Anson could easily be made flyable too.

I certainly don't mind helping commercial companies if it means we get more aircraft to fly.

Oh absolutely but there's no harm in asking. On a related subject, are there any sims which have the Defiant flyable or even in game, I'm struggling to think of any?

[JMB]

Originally Posted by TUSA/TX-Gunslinger

Are you talking about the newest video's?

The scene in which the Bf-110 dives in on the port high side of the Defiants and and then down and under?

I think that I read that video was made on "arcade" settings, which would explain why the Defiant gunner didn't shoot during the approach.

For myself, I don't ever plan to attack a Defiant unless it's head on or from below. Start my dive early - go a good bit under his tail at high speed, then come up under.S!

Gunny

Watch out Gunny, that approach could be dangerous



Commando books eh, bless em.

All that picture needs is a 'Gott in Himmel' in a speech bubble appearing from that 109 cockpit and it would be complete

JMB.

[Avimimus]

Originally Posted by Moggy

I haven't heard of this happening, what's your source for this? I know the guns could be trained and fired forward at an angle of 19° or above. I also know there was a switch in the turret to allow the pilot to fire the guns in case the gunner was wounded in action and unable to do so. Although again, I haven't heard of this happening during the war.

Unfortunately, it was an editorial quip made in a book I read several years ago. It was probably based on one or two incidents at the beginning of the war.

However, it appears that the guns could be fixed to fire forward (if the turret was facing directly forward, the guns could be lowered so that they had no elevation). This allowed the airplane to fight conventionally.

Originally Posted by Friendly_flyer

One of the aspects I really look forward to is to try out if some of the pre-war ideas would actually work. The Daffy was intended to destroy un-escorted bomber formations. It was in a sense an answer to the "the bomber will always get through" doctrine. During 1940, the Daffy was thrown against fighters with disasterous results, the original concept was never tried out. Now, with FMB and/or some mates over for a LAN party, we can put the original idea to the test: Daffy against Schnellbombers (Do 17 would do nicely)!

Yes, it is great to test these old concepts isn't it? Try taking a flight of Gladiators against a TB-3 formation in Il-2 (or setting an SB squadron against pre-war fighters)...

[He111]

Originally Posted by JMB

Watch out Gunny, that approach could be dangerous



Commando books eh, bless em.

All that picture needs is a 'Gott in Himmel' in a speech bubble appearing from that 109 cockpit and it would be complete

JMB.

No need to show your belly to the world, In reality I could imagine rolling a heavy aircraft with a turret would be sluggish and full of peril! Just bank port or starboard which would achieve 2 things (1) evade enemy fire, (2) allow gunner full view to what's below. Trails done before the defiant was made operational, between a spit and defiant, found that the spit pilot had difficulty attacking the defiant without being within the deffys field of fire. Unfortunately german aces hadn't read this report! ..

He111.