B25c Mitchell

[viking73]

Although it's not a bug per say, it is a mistake. Just found out that the B25c does not have a bombardier after a very long flight. (shows how much i fly it to level bomb) Why is that? The B25c had a plexiglass nose and a bombardier/navigator. The nose wasn't replaced until the XB-25G model was rolled out by North American. Although the B-25c had it's rear turret deleted it had a manned dorsal and remotely-operated ventral turrets. It makes no sense to have a formation and not have it set up with a bombardier. (F6) I can't believe HTC would make something up like this having been pretty factual in their planes.

[Krusty]

Only the glass-nosed version you choose in the hangar has the bombsight.

You choose the strafer and you don't get it, because 4x 50cal plus their ammo are in that spot.

[palef]

Krusty be nice.... Oh, hang on.

Sorry.

[Ghosth]

Krusty nailed it!

Besides that B25 loves to be flown NOE and does just fine in that role without a bombsight.

[Soulyss]

As mentioned the B-25C had a manned bombardier position unless it was removed in favor of the strafer gun package.  Many B-25C's were delivered from the factory with the ventral turret near all were removed once they reached line squadrons. 

The gunner had to indirectly aim the ventral turret through a remote sighting apparatus using mirrors that resulted which made operation very difficult and nearly impossible to actually hit anything.  I've even read reports of the operators suffering from nausea and vertigo while attempting to use it.

Wolf's book on the B-25, "B-25 Mitchell The Ultimate Look: From Drawing Board to Flying Arsenal" has the following.

A standard "Clear view" Bendix Type L power operated turret was installed on the top of the rear fuselage, which mounted a pair of .50 caliber machine guns. In addition, a pair of .50 caliber machine guns were mounted in a retractable, solid Bendix Type K remotely controlled ventral turret.  This turret could be retracted into the belly when not in use, with the gun barrels fitting into slots int he fuselage when the turret was in the fully up position.  The ventral turret would remain standard on the B-25C's and Ds.

Gunners did not consider the ventral turret to be effective, and there were many operating problems, so it was often removed from aircraft in the field, saving 700 pounds that could be used for additional fuel tanks installed in the area.  The turret often collected mud and dust when operating from unimproved airfields, which obscured it's sighting system.  Lowering the turret into position took 55 seconds, and if lowered too quickly, the retracting micro-switch could be damaged, and jam the turet in the down position, which would cause drag, and made maintaining position in formation difficult.  Before the turret could be used, the gunner needed to align the sight by using the aiming mirrors, but this procedure often caused optical distortion, making accurate tracking and firing at a moving target difficult. The periscope sighting system was unwieldy, as the gunner was cramped in an awkward stationary kneeling position, resting his chest on a padded support, and intently staring through the sight trying to coordinate the control handles while not being able to see the the the guns in his sight.  The gunner often became dizzy when tracking enemy fighters through the sight, and occasionally became so disoriented and even nauseous that he was unable to operate the turret.  In spite of having additional and larger sighting windows added, acquiring targets often proved far more difficult than with a turret having a clear dome.

This turret had a comparatively short AAF service life, and was discontinued during production of the B-25G-5 from aircraft 42-65001 onward.

[lyric1]

Wolf's book on the B-25, "B-25 Mitchell The Ultimate Look: From Drawing Board to Flying Arsenal" has the following.

The Bible on the B25.

[Baumer]

Wolf's book on the B-25, "B-25 Mitchell The Ultimate Look: From Drawing Board to Flying Arsenal" has the following.

Soulyss,

I agree the ventral turret had many short comings but here is another interesting passage from the same book by Bill Wolf on page 452.

 

RAF Mitchells were standard NAA production aircraft, and arrived equipped with Bendix ventral turret. The RAF decided to retain the turret, even though the A&AEE pointed out the shortcomings of its complex periscopic sighting system, its slow 55 second extension and retraction, and the eight mph reduction in speed when it was extended. Later, when Group 2 developed tight formations for its Mitchell squadrons, the gunners were able to master the complex ventral turret, and made it an indispensable component of the aircraft's defense.

BTW Mr. Wolf lives about 3 miles from my parents in AZ, I've been over to his house and talked with him several times. His collection of documents puts everyone's I know to shame. 

I sure wish we had the ventral turret as an option in the hanger.

[Soulyss]

Soulyss,

I agree the ventral turret had many short comings but here is another interesting passage from the same book by Bill Wolf on page 452.

 
BTW Mr. Wolf lives about 3 miles from my parents in AZ, I've been over to his house and talked with him several times. His collection of documents puts everyone's I know to shame. 

I sure wish we had the ventral turret as an option in the hanger.

That's rather interesting about the RAF, I'm really curious about how they were able to overcome the short comings of the design.  From what I've read it just sounds like a horrible piece of equipment.

[Baumer]

I'm looking for the exact passage, but it might also be in "Aerial Armament in World War II" also by Wolf.

Somewhere he stated that the main problems the RAF overcame were in 2 main area's.

First, turret extension retraction, the USAAF procedure was for each B-25 to extend and retract the turret as needed. Because of the slow movement and the drag penalty it made keeping formation very difficult (as well as missing attacks due to slow speed). The RAF solution to this was very simple, after takeoff extend the turret and leave it down, for the whole flight (and just accept the slower formation speed). LOL

Second, another major USAAF issue with the turret was maintenance of the optic system. Given the grass/mud fields the USAAF was using during the Mitchells early deployment, it created an extra problem after taking-off from a wet field and messing up the periscope glass. This couldn't be cleaned in flight so imagine the frustration of extending the turret and getting into position only to not see anything. The RAF (for the most part) didn't have this problem as the B-25's were usually operated off of paved runways.

I'm not sure if they addressed the nausia, but them Brits are tough, maybe the stiff upper lip helped keep breakfast down!   

[Soulyss]

 


Kind of interesting, especially when you look at other similar cases.  The USN considered the F4U completely unsatisfactory for CV operations for a few years, but that didn't stop the Brits either.

[Guppy35]

Soulyss,

I agree the ventral turret had many short comings but here is another interesting passage from the same book by Bill Wolf on page 452.

 
BTW Mr. Wolf lives about 3 miles from my parents in AZ, I've been over to his house and talked with him several times. His collection of documents puts everyone's I know to shame. 

I sure wish we had the ventral turret as an option in the hanger.

THe other nice option the RAF Mitchells had involved the many Squadrons of Spitfires that covered them into and out of the targets

My Spit XII drivers did this on many occasion during 43-44 as the bombers in essence were the bait to try and get the 109s and 190s to come up and play.

[Nemisis]

As a little foot note, you can nearly flatten a town with B-25's carrying the 500lb bomb loadout. Landed 7000-something damage and a kill in one.

[RTHolmes]

My Spit XII drivers did this on many occasion during 43-44 as the bombers in essence were the bait to try and get the 109s and 190s to come up and play.

"Circus" raids right? one of historical mission profiles that works great in the MA

[Guppy35]

"Circus" raids right? one of historical mission profiles that works great in the MA

Ramrods in 1943 anyway

Scanned from a Spit XII drivers logbook I have.  This is for September 43.  They escorted the mediums often.  The ratio of fighter escorts to bombers was large too.  At that point they'd have fighters sweep out front, close escort, high cover, rear cover etc.  Usually Spit Vs would be the close escort, with Tiffie fighter bombers out front with the Spit XIIs and Spit IXs and VII as high cover.  24 Mitchells might have 6 or more squadrons of Spitfires covering them in and out.

[Ack-Ack]

My Spit XII drivers did this on many occasion during 43-44 as the bombers in essence were the bait to try and get the 109s and 190s to come up and play.

The P-38 sqadrons in the New Guinea area used the B-25 for the same thing, bait the Japanese to up from Rabaul so the Lightnings could have something to play with.


ack-ack