Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: zroostr on November 20, 2003, 04:32:19 PM
-
never heard too much about this plane but saw a history show today and it seems it was used pretty extensively in WWII so why isnt it in the game? is it because the moss is?
just curious ;)
-
name this patch
(http://www.332nd.org/dogs/sarge/pics/patch.jpg)
-
ya got me sarge. but i do hope it has something to do with a beaufighter group :)
-
no it has nothing to do with that...lol didnt feel like making a whole new post, thought I would jusat stick it here
-
man you cant hitchhike in meh thread :p :D
-
Naw, he brought a gun ... he's hijacking your thread. ;)
-
Hopefully the Beaufighter will be in AH2 as some stage.... either the Mk.X or the Mk.21 (preferably the latter).
(http://www.oldcmp.net/Images/neilsmith/sideview.jpg)
(http://www.oldcmp.net/Images/neilsmith/smalls23.jpg)
(http://www.raf.mod.uk/downloads/gallery/beausattack640.jpg)
-
Are those rockets or bullet tracers in pic 2?
-
Rockets
-
Why the beaufighter when the mossie is here? I believe the beaufighter was used in the PTO, but I'm not sure about the mossie.
I'm almost certain the beau was more durable ut a LOT slower...can anyone help me out here?
Gainsie
-
nice pics:aok
-
Originally posted by Red Tail 444
Why the beaufighter when the mossie is here? I believe the beaufighter was used in the PTO, but I'm not sure about the mossie.
I'm almost certain the beau was more durable ut a LOT slower...can anyone help me out here?
Gainsie
Why the Beaufighter when the Mossie is here? Same reason why you have different 109s, 190s, P51s, Spitfires etc., they all did the same job!
The Beaufighter was used in the Atlantic, Mediterranean and Pacific theatres, but mostly in the anti-shipping role or nightfighter.
The Beaufighter was slower than the Mosquito but much quieter and with the radial engines better in the anti-shipping role.
-
Originally posted by Replicant
Why the Beaufighter when the Mossie is here? Same reason why you have different 109s, 190s, P51s, Spitfires etc., they all did the same job!
The Beaufighter was used in the Atlantic, Mediterranean and Pacific theatres, but mostly in the anti-shipping role or nightfighter.
The Beaufighter was slower than the Mosquito but much quieter and with the radial engines better in the anti-shipping role.
yup thats what the show said. the beau was used for nightfighting and killing ships but was eventually replaced by the moss.
and i agree with you on the fact that even though the moss is there this was still a viable plane that was used quite a bit. i mean we have many 109's and 190 versions, what could it hurt to have the big brother of the mossie in the game.
-
I love the Beaufighter, and I would of rather sean it than the Mossie we got in AH, the Beaufighter would be very usefull in the CT and in Event's.
-
I'm all for a Beaufighter, a great historical plane. However in the MA it would sadly be a hangar queen.
Some data:
Performance (Mk X)
Maximum speed - 312 mph (502 km/hr)
Initial climb - 1, 850 feet (564 metres) per minute
Service ceiling - 26,500 feet (8077 metres)
Armament (Mk X)
Four x 20 mm Hispano cannon - fixed in underside of forward fuselage
(initially loaded with 60-round drums, later equipped with belt feed)
One 0.303-inch Browning or Vickers K, manually-aimed, in oberserver's position
(Fighter Command versions in general did not have this manually-aimed gun but had
six x 0.303 Browning machine guns in wings, four in outer starboard wing, two in outer port wing)
One 18"/ 1,605 (728 kg) or 22.5"/ 2,127 lb (954 kg) torpedo
Wing racks for eight rockets or 2 x 1,000 lb bombs
http://www.compass.dircon.co.uk/Beaufighter.htm
-
One of my favorate Beaufighter pick's:
(http://www2.freepichosting.com/Images/108826/0.jpg)
-
I don't think the Mosquito replaced the Beaufighter in the anti-shipping role because it was better, just cheaper and easier to maintain. The Mosquito started replacing the Beaufighter from around late 1944/45 so Merlin engines were in easy supply. The Mossies were made out of wood and so cheaper to manufacture plus easier to repair. Okay, the Mossie was faster but in the anti-shipping role that wasn't really an issue. The Beaufighter could also carry a Torpedo if necessary which the Mossie couldn't.
So, the Beaufighter had much more things that could go wrong, whearas the Mossie was in huge mass production and easier to maintain and why I think it superceded the Beaufighter.
-
what a beautiful plane.
we want more pics
we want more pics
we want more pics
we want more pics
-
Originally posted by zroostr
even though the moss is there this was still a viable plane that was used quite a bit. i mean we have many 109's and 190 versions, what could it hurt to have the big brother of the mossie in the game.
For the record, I wasn't making an argument against it's addition. I fly the beau in -shhhhh- Target Rabaul, and I enjoy it.
Gainsie
-
hmmmm you stole your thread back...:lol
-
Originally posted by Sarge1
hmmmm you stole your thread back...:lol
yeah but i had some interested and interesting folks help out :D
btw, the use of the torp sounds pretty sweet with that plane. get a gang of em together and you could prolly sink a whole fleet in one pass :aok
-
http://www.diggerhistory.info/pages-air-support/ww2-allied/beaufighter.htm
http://members.tripod.com/Air_Museum_ww2/id80.htm
http://www.aviationartprints.com/beaufighter.htm
<>
If i remember well one model had also a
75mm cannon.
-
Mossie looks better. Way better. :p
Less stocky..
(http://www.warbirdalley.com/images/Mosquito-RR299.jpg)
(http://members.aol.com/famjustin/MOSS4.JPG)
-
Originally posted by Hades55
If i remember well one model had also a
75mm cannon.
Nope - no British plane carried a 75mm. The Mossie FB XVIII (aka Tsetse) carried the 57mm Molins gun for anti-ship/sub purposes (see: http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk/Molins.htm for details and pics) and one Beau was used to test the Vickers and R-R airborne anti-tank 40mm guns (one of each) but none carried anything bigger than the 20mm in service.
Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition website (http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk) and Discussion forum (http://forums.delphiforums.com/autogun/messages/)
-
Thanks for the link tony :)
I had shoot with this 6pdr 5 times.
Its amazing how straight ballistics has and
his kick.
At the shoot it can come 45deg up :)
Two hits on target and 3 very near.
3 km dist.
(missed less than 1 meter).
This is a perfect cannon for planes and i dare to say its good even in air to air until
2 km and against bombers, let the anti tank use, witch would be the best Anti Tank (air) weapon of WWII.
Im wondering why they had not use it.
Maby it was the strong kick ?
-
Yup, the Molins 57mm equipped Mossie was used before they were equipped with rockets, in other words rockets replaces the 57mm!
As for the Beaufighter, the Mk.X had the 4 x 20mm, 6 x .303 forward firing, but the Mk.21 (Australian variant) had 4 x 20mm and 4 x .50 forward firing. Hence why I'd like the Mk.21! :)
-
3 words for you replicant
HEAD ON DWEEB :D
-
The 57mm was far more accurate than RPs, but was less flexible in that RPs could be fitted to just about anything and didn't need a special model of plane. This is from 'Flying Guns: World War 2' by Emmanuel Gustin and myself:
"Finally, it is worth mentioning the other big gun used operationally by the RAF, the Molins 6pdr fitted to the Mosquito Mark XVIII, or "Tsetse". This was designed as an automatic anti-tank gun for the army but subsequently developed for aircraft use, still as an anti-tank weapon. The massive recoil was absorbed by an 80 cm recoil movement, which as with the Class S kept the peak loads very low. The RAF ordered 36, the first being delivered in July 1943, with a total of 27 being constructed. Before they saw action, requirements changed yet again and they were handed over to Coastal Command for anti-submarine and anti-shipping duties, so they were never used in the anti-tank role for which they had been designed. They undoubtedly would have been effective in terms of both power and accuracy. The 2.8 kg shot, fired at 890 m/s, was capable of penetrating 82 mm / 450 m / 60º and 71 mm at 900 m when fired on the ground; obviously it would improve on this when fired from the air. A War Office report stated that four rounds were normally fired per attack, of which an average of 1.3 could be expected to hit a 3 m2 target. This is equivalent to a 33% hit rate against a tank, usefully higher than the Hurricane IID (presumably because of the fuselage mounting and much higher muzzle velocity)."
By comparison, RPs had a 5% hit rate against tanks in training, and 0.5% in combat. The reason why the Tsetse wasn't used for ground attack was probably that it was considered too vulnerable to ground fire because of its size.
Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition website (http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk) and Discussion forum (http://forums.delphiforums.com/autogun/messages/)
-
For what it's worth, the Beau in some ways makes better sense to have to start then the Mossie. Early nightfighter, lots of ground attack in North Africa, where the Mossie didn't go. Lots of work in the Pacific, The Aussies produced their own Beaus. The Mossie couldn't handle the humidity and heat in the Pac as the wood often delaminated with disasterous results. Yes some made it, but not in the numbers of the Beau. And of course all those anti-shipping Beaus, running into Norway etc to clobber all they could see.
Of course having both the Beau and the Mossie would be great too :)
Where the Mossie looks sleek and powerful, the Beau looks rugged and powerful.
Both great planes.
Dan/Slack
-
If I recall right, Beau was quite complex plane to produce, which meant it was expensive.
IIRC 3 spitfires could be built in the time it takes to build one beau.
-
I'm all for the Beau....
(http://f4.grp.yahoofs.com/v1/cI3CPzuhe256dVS1ZmsEl3ayadgGFp3vZhQxxaml-_a6pdd9-gzO0ymZEQYBltQo29V62Lcg23Pg_Jae5YEvOb7SnTCsHw8YHg/pic-beau.jpg)
A RAAF Beaufighter Mk21 will do nicely...
Tronsky
-
I doubt that the Beaufighter would be a Hangar Queen in AH.
Hehe, still remember all those people who said that the Hurricane would be a Hangar queen. Naaa....nothing with a nosemount of 4 Hizookas plus a torpedo will be a hangar queen.
I guess the Beau would be used quite a bit in the anti-shipping role, - being the only torp carrying plane to be able to "bite" after the torp is gone.
Hehe, imagine the whines: "You frigging HOing Beau dweeb"
-
PERK THE BEAUFIGHTER!!
-
Hi everyone,
Does anyone have the exact propeller diameter and the reduction gear ratio for the Bristol Hercules as used on the Beaufighter I?
I have been unable to find a Bristol Hercules power curve, too, so if someone could help me there ... :-)
What I wonder is why the Beaufighter speed at sea level is so high - that would indicate a rather funny looking engine curve.
Is the performance of the Beaufighter IC known? I just read that the Mark I didn't live up to calculated performance.
What was the weight of a IC, to raise another question?
Searching the web, I was suprised how little information there is on the Beaufighter ...
Regards,
Henning (HoHun)
-
I recall that due to engine shortages, some Beaufighters were mounted with Merlins. The Performance dropped.
I'll look up what and when and what sqn, maybe it can be chased from there.
-
Beaufighter was used extensivly by coastal cammand, and towards the end of its career, even carried a torpedo. I think with 4 20mm cannons and 6 303 mgs+ missles, it would be a welcome addition to the AH plane set. WIDOWMAKERS:p
-
Originally posted by Flyboy
we want more pics
we want more pics
we want more pics
we want more pics
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/68_1107170847_bfig_war[1].jpg)
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/68_1107170833_beaufighter[2].jpg)
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/68_1107170805_beaufighter[1].jpg)
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/68_1107170788_beau4med[1].jpg)
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/68_1107170774_beau3med[1].jpg)
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/68_1107170735_b_beaufighter_bounce[1].jpg)
-
Originally posted by Angus
I recall that due to engine shortages, some Beaufighters were mounted with Merlins. The Performance dropped.
I'll look up what and when and what sqn, maybe it can be chased from there.
It was not so much the shortages of engines but the possible shortages of engines. The The Mk II did not have the same performance as the Herc powered a/c. The nacelles were the Lancaster's outboard nacelles.
The first flight of a Merlin Beau was June 14 1940.
-
THX Milo.
Will look up some anyway.
It was AFAIK 100 sqn, - they later switched over to mossies.
And Frank...Nice pictures!!!!!:) :)
-
Thought so :)
-
got to love the beau... it just oozes meaness....and the bristol engines always look too good to be true..
i don't think it will be a hanger queen...no more so than the il2...
-
Originally posted by SELECTOR
i don't think it will be a hanger queen...no more so than the il2...
It is much less survivable than a Mossie and the Mossie is a hangar queen. The Mossie's teeth are also just as sharp.
It should be added, but it will be a hangar queen.
-
Naaaaa
It won't
Not any more than the Il-2
However, how about an Il-10 ??
-
Did Il-10 see combat in WW2? even in Manchuria, Aug. '45? Not that I have anything against a 20mm rear gun.
-
if the beu' will have atorp loadout.. it will be uswed in the MA even MORE then the mossie.
-
Originally posted by Flyboy
if the beu' will have atorp loadout.. it will be uswed in the MA even MORE then the mossie.
Why?
I'd take the Ju88 with 2 torps over it.
You aren't going to survive the run.
The Ju88 has the formation option.
The Ju88 is better defended from the rear.
The Ju88 is as tough or tougher than the Beau.
The maximum drop speed on the torp disallows the Beau from using it's higher speed, and the Ki-67 is faster than the Beau.
It would have higher usage than the Mossie for a max of one tour.
-
I think ot being used for 1 tour is ridiculous. After dropping its torp it would still have missles and cannon/mgs. Ever sink a cruiser with a 110? It is really quite easy. It is also much faster than the ju88 or the ki67. imagine trying to stop 3 or 4 used in synch by a squad. As for the rear defense, it does have a single 50 cal. It would be good for gv killing also:aok WIDOWMAKERS
-
teufl,
It is faster than the Ju88, if you didn't have to worry about the torp breaking up on entry, but you do, so it isn't in practical terms. It is slower than the Ki-67 at best altitude, it may be slightly faster at sea level. And you will not survive the torpedo run to use the cannons or rockets.
I agree it should be added, but it won't do as well as you guys think. If it is as undermodeled as the Mossie is, it'll do even worse.
-
Drop the Torp, then HO everybody :D
-
Originally posted by teufl
I think ot being used for 1 tour is ridiculous. After dropping its torp it would still have missles and cannon/mgs. Ever sink a cruiser with a 110? It is really quite easy. It is also much faster than the ju88 or the ki67. imagine trying to stop 3 or 4 used in synch by a squad. As for the rear defense, it does have a single 50 cal. It would be good for gv killing also:aok WIDOWMAKERS
Only the later models had a Vickers K gun in the observers position. The Beau did not carry a torpedo and rockets.
-
lol, please look at above listings/pictures for pictures of missle and topedo carrying beaufighter, Teufl WIDOWMAKERS
-
teufl,
There are no pictures in this thread of a Beau carrying both a torp and rockets. The are pictures with rockets and a picture with a torp, but none with both.
-
Originally posted by teufl
lol, please look at above listings/pictures for pictures of missle and topedo carrying beaufighter, Teufl WIDOWMAKERS
(http://www.wlb-stuttgart.de/seekrieg/4409-bilder/beaufighter.jpg)
(http://www.bibl.u-szeged.hu/bibl/mil/ww2/kepek/planes/pics/beaufighter11.jpg)
-
Does anyone have climbing specs for the Beau?
-
Originally posted by Angus
Does anyone have climbing specs for the Beau?
W. Green says 1600ft/min, initial, for the TF X while carrying a torp.
-
Hmm, well, guess that's allright.
-
RAAF Beau to AH2!!!! :)