How to design a night fighter?

[BossGnome]

I was just wondering how, in 1942, people were supposed to design night fighters? Now, its easy, with infrared vision, etc etc, but back then, what specs made the aircraft flyable or unfliable at night? I remember reading that the A6M2 zero was almost worthless at night. Then what makes an aircraft type (especially on the part of the japanese and their low technology) "workable" at night?

[Brady]

In the game the Allies get a Havoc as the first NF in game Night fighter, it has no radar, the Japanese get an Irving again no radar, basicaly like many other planes flow by many other countries that were so equiped, that is no radar, they stumbled around in the dark and hoped to find a target, operations were largely restriced to favorable condations that included hopefully moon light to help them find their targets. Low techonalogy was the word of the day and the Japanese had no monopoly on it. They did have a very interesting landing system that helped their piolets land at knight though, something the allies did not have, at least the Japanese Navy did, the Japanese Navy did not use batmen like the US did aparently they had a light system that helped the men land and they used this on shore bases as well and they used it at night, i posted a quote or two on this in the past I will see if I cant find it.

................

Found it:

p.22 Imperial Japanese Naval Aviator 1937-45, Osamu Tagaya:

" Unlike carrier operations in the US and British Royal Navys, The IJN did not imploy a Landing signals officer to stand on the flight deck and manualy guied planes down. In the imperial Navy a system of lights near the stearn of the flight deck allowed the piolets to guied themselfs in for a landing. Their were two seperate rows of lights extending out from the side of the flight deck positioned at different heights, one red one blue. The Object was for the piolet to keep the two rows perfectly aligned with each other. This allowed his aircraft to descend at the proper five- to six degree angle for a successful touch down, If the row of red lights apeard higher to the piolet than the row of blue lights his approach was too low. Conversely, if the red lights were seen below the blue lights, he was to high. This system was also used for guiding piolets for night landings at airfields."

[ChezDaJez]

" Unlike carrier operations in the US and British Royal Navys, The IJN did not imploy a Landing signals officer to stand on the flight deck and manualy guied planes down. In the imperial Navy a system of lights near the stearn of the flight deck allowed the piolets to guied themselfs in for a landing. Their were two seperate rows of lights extending out from the side of the flight deck positioned at different heights, one red one blue. The Object was for the piolet to keep the two rows perfectly aligned with each other. This allowed his aircraft to descend at the proper five- to six degree angle for a successful touch down, If the row of red lights apeard higher to the piolet than the row of blue lights his approach was too low. Conversely, if the red lights were seen below the blue lights, he was to high. This system was also used for guiding piolets for night landings at airfields."

Sounds very much like the Fresnel lighting system we use now on carriers.

Chez

[Sardaukar]

in Europe there was also Wilde Sau operation by Germans:

From: WW II Guide

"Wilde Sau "Wild Boar"

To combat the widespread use of Window it was decided to light up the skies as brightly as possible during an air raid. Along with the fires started from bombing this provided enough illumination to allow single-engine day fighters to attack enemy bombers. Above a pre-arranged flak free altitude usually 15,000ft (4570m) these fighters would patrol waiting to pounce on bombers now clearly silhouetted. Major Hans-Joachim "Hajo" Herrmann, a veteran of 300 bombing missions against England and Malta, initiated the Wilde Sau idea. In addition to the above tactics Wilde Sau were given a large degree of freedom in seeking out and attacking enemy aircraft. Encouraged to use their own judgement and take the initiative even to the point of disregarding orders the Wilde Sau were freelancers in the night war. At first "Hajo" Herrmann formed a Kommando of twelve Fw 190A-4 fighters with 66 gallon drop tanks to increase their endurance. On July 3 the Kommado group shot down 12 RAF bombers over Colonge."

[m10bob]

The exhaust manifolds on those old engines all had special covers to prevent the exhaust flames from blinding the pilots.
The guns themselves also had similiar shields, (similar to the Enfield jungle carbine).
The crew themselves were given rigorous "optical" training and not allowed to "walk around while the sun was out".
Don't remember the books I got this from, but I did read it over the years.

http://www.wpafb.af.mil/museum/history/wwii/nf.htm

http://www.acepilots.com/planes/p61_black_widow.html

http://www.chez.com/warbirds/porter.html

http://www.usaaf.net/ww2/night/nightpg6.htm

[Rob Brennan UK]

I liked the idea of strapping a search light to the front of a hudson ( cant remember official designation) as a target illuminator for other gun equipped units to attack. ( Brit development against the Blitz)

Was completely useless in combat, but its an innovative idea for 1940. [:D][:D]

[keeferon01]

ORIGINAL: BossGnome

I was just wondering how, in 1942, people were supposed to design night fighters? Now, its easy, with infrared vision, etc etc, but back then, what specs made the aircraft flyable or unfliable at night? I remember reading that the A6M2 zero was almost worthless at night. Then what makes an aircraft type (especially on the part of the japanese and their low technology) "workable" at night?

What was the first allied plane to use radar, off the top of my head I cant remember.

[herwin]

ORIGINAL: BossGnome

I was just wondering how, in 1942, people were supposed to design night fighters? Now, its easy, with infrared vision, etc etc, but back then, what specs made the aircraft flyable or unfliable at night? I remember reading that the A6M2 zero was almost worthless at night. Then what makes an aircraft type (especially on the part of the japanese and their low technology) "workable" at night?

You need target acquisition and target kill capability. Defense wasn't a major issue. Prior to airborne radar, target acquisition usually meant ground controlled intercept. Target kill meant firepower.

The USN night carriers used airborne radar platforms (TBFs) for acquisition and fighters for the kill (F6Fs).

[BossGnome]

so bascially up until the allies start using a radar a "night fighter" is just basically a normal plane with some nighttime trained pilots and some fire suppressors to keep the pilot's night vision?

[Brady]

They had cupolders instaled as well...........

[ChezDaJez]

Then what makes an aircraft type (especially on the part of the japanese and their low technology) "workable" at night?

So long as the aircraft is a good flyer, it doesn't matter whether its day or night. It doesn't care.

The pilot however does care.... a lot! It's somewhat ironic that the Japanese were ahead of us in the field on nightblindness and night vision adaptability prior to the war but didn't teach their pilots night adaptability. They had researched and identified vitamin A as a primary vision aid along with a few others. They applied this knowledge to their naval lookouts but not pilots.

They did field a night fighter unit flying Ki-45 Niks in early 43 but it had no means of detecting another aircraft other than visual. I have not read of any great successes by these planes until very late in the war and even then the few shootdowns they had could hardly qualify as a great success.

Chez

[Ideologue]

ORIGINAL: Ron James

What was the first allied plane to use radar, off the top of my head I cant remember.

Some iteration of a Bristol Beaufighter, if I recall. I believe a few were equipped with AI radar in late 1940.

[Ideologue]

The bad thing about NFs in WitP is that they are almost completely worthless, even relatively advanced ones like the late-war Mosquitos or the Black Widow, and even moreso than I'd expect they were historically.

Given a thousand sorties, they can't hit airfields or ports at night more than four or five times, and usually then only at significantly greater operational loss to their own. They can't, despite their widespread use in the ETO for such missions, be used for city attack, either. I've never actually conducted an air-to-air engagement with them.

I dunno, I know night fighters were more of a European weapon, but they seem mostly for flavor here.

Any ideas on how to use 'em more effectively?

[Mike Scholl]

ORIGINAL: Ideologue

The bad thing about NFs in WitP is that they are almost completely worthless, even relatively advanced ones like the late-war Mosquitos or the Black Widow, and even moreso than I'd expect they were historically.

Given a thousand sorties, they can't hit airfields or ports at night more than four or five times, and usually then only at significantly greater operational loss to their own. They can't, despite their widespread use in the ETO for such missions, be used for city attack, either. I've never actually conducted an air-to-air engagement with them.

I dunno, I know night fighters were more of a European weapon, but they seem mostly for flavor here.

Any ideas on how to use 'em more effectively?

Try using them for CAP. They are night FIGHTERS, not pathfinders.

[Ideologue]

Not much to defend from, though.

[BossGnome]

anyone ever try using them simply as normal fighters? if theres nothing coming at you at night, simply use them during the day no?

[wild_Willie2]

anyone ever try using them simply as normal fighters? if theres nothing coming at you at night, simply use them during the day no?

They get clobbert by almost everything else, they are slower and less manuverable than "day" fighters.....

[Reg]

ORIGINAL: Rob Brennan UK

I liked the idea of strapping a search light to the front of a hudson ( cant remember official designation) as a target illuminator for other gun equipped units to attack. ( Brit development against the Blitz)

Was completely useless in combat, but its an innovative idea for 1940. [:D][:D]

The aircraft were Boston/Havocs. See the links below

Turbinlite

Turbinlite Squadron Histories
See No. 530 to 539 Squadrons (Don't forget to follow the Aircraft and Markings links)

[Hipper]

By 1942 nightfighters were quite old hat !

I think the first ones that make their appearance in this theatre should be the AI beafighters protecting calcutta in 1943 !

but AI radar had been in use to varying degrees of effectiveness since winter 1940/41

I have had some successes with the Night fighting blenheims in Singapore but the key is pilot experience

Cheers

Hipper

[m10bob]

By 1942 nightfighters were quite old hat !

I think you might have a time trying to convince members of P 61 squadrons of this.?[8D]

http://home.att.net/~jbaugher1/p61_9.html

http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/ ... 7thaf.html

http://www.zenoswarbirdvideos.com/MoreP-61Stuff.html

http://www.wpafb.af.mil/museum/research/p61.htm

http://www.acepilots.com/planes/p61_black_widow.html