Beaufighters are Medium Bombers!!!!
Moderators: Joel Billings, Tankerace, siRkid
Beaufighter VIc's are OK as they are now...
Hi all,
Beaufighter VIc's are OK as they are now...
In book that I own (British Aircraft of WWII) the Beaufighter VIc's
are exactly what they are - torpedo bombers (and thus level
bombers in UV).
In this book it is also written that Australian Beaufighter VIc's were
torpedo bombers as well and that this aircraft-torpedo match
was one of the best ship killing machines of the war ("Whispering
Death") and that they wrecked havoc on Japanese shipping.
Leo "Apollo11"
Beaufighter VIc's are OK as they are now...
In book that I own (British Aircraft of WWII) the Beaufighter VIc's
are exactly what they are - torpedo bombers (and thus level
bombers in UV).
In this book it is also written that Australian Beaufighter VIc's were
torpedo bombers as well and that this aircraft-torpedo match
was one of the best ship killing machines of the war ("Whispering
Death") and that they wrecked havoc on Japanese shipping.
Leo "Apollo11"
Prior Preparation & Planning Prevents Pathetically Poor Performance!
A & B: WitW, WitE, WbtS, GGWaW, GGWaW2-AWD, HttR, CotA, BftB, CF
P: UV, WitP, WitP-AE
AUSSIE AIRCRAFT
Apollo,
Its happened before and it will happen again.
With your books reference to the RAAF spec Beaufighter...Your book is wrong.
Just plain wrong.
If you need further explanation look at my postings direct off the Offical RAAF website.
I think they might have a pretty good idea what they flew during the war.
dont you think???
Its happened before and it will happen again.
With your books reference to the RAAF spec Beaufighter...Your book is wrong.
Just plain wrong.
If you need further explanation look at my postings direct off the Offical RAAF website.
I think they might have a pretty good idea what they flew during the war.
dont you think???
In the End, we will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends.
- Martin Luther King Jr. (1929-1968)
- Martin Luther King Jr. (1929-1968)
Re: Beaufighter VIc's are OK as they are now...
Apollo..................go back and read ALL the posts that were made after your original post. Never trust a single book as source material.Originally posted by Apollo11
Hi all,
Beaufighter VIc's are OK as they are now...
In book that I own (British Aircraft of WWII) the Beaufighter VIc's
are exactly what they are - torpedo bombers (and thus level
bombers in UV).
Leo "Apollo11"
Also the Beaufighter was made under licence by the GAF at Fishermans Bend in Victoria........your book would only show you British made aircraft. Like Stubby said.....goto the RAAF web site, and read.
Never argue with an idiot, he will only drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.
Hmmm...
Hi all,
What exact post you are reffering to here?
Leo "Apollo11"
Hmmm...Originally posted by stubby331
Apollo,
Its happened before and it will happen again.
With your books reference to the RAAF spec Beaufighter...Your book is wrong.
Just plain wrong.
If you need further explanation look at my postings direct off the Offical RAAF website.
I think they might have a pretty good idea what they flew during the war.
dont you think???
What exact post you are reffering to here?
Leo "Apollo11"
Prior Preparation & Planning Prevents Pathetically Poor Performance!
A & B: WitW, WitE, WbtS, GGWaW, GGWaW2-AWD, HttR, CotA, BftB, CF
P: UV, WitP, WitP-AE
Hia ll,
build Beaufighters. This has no relevance to UV since period
of time in UV is 1942-1943.
In UV time period Australian units used UK build Beaufighters.
Out of those 60 were Beaufighter VIc which were equipped
with UK/US torpedo capability. Those are modeled in UV.
BTW, I did quick search on internet and found:
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/pete.myrin ... mk-vi.html
This confirms exactly the data in my book.
I really don't see any problems here at all... everything is OK and
Matrix/2By3 did good job with Beaufighters in UV as far as I can
see...
Leo "Apollo11"
On top of 2nd page in this thread there is info about AustralianOriginally posted by stubby331
Apollo,
Top of page 2 and then again about half-way down.
build Beaufighters. This has no relevance to UV since period
of time in UV is 1942-1943.
In UV time period Australian units used UK build Beaufighters.
Out of those 60 were Beaufighter VIc which were equipped
with UK/US torpedo capability. Those are modeled in UV.
BTW, I did quick search on internet and found:
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/pete.myrin ... mk-vi.html
This confirms exactly the data in my book.
I really don't see any problems here at all... everything is OK and
Matrix/2By3 did good job with Beaufighters in UV as far as I can
see...
Leo "Apollo11"
Prior Preparation & Planning Prevents Pathetically Poor Performance!
A & B: WitW, WitE, WbtS, GGWaW, GGWaW2-AWD, HttR, CotA, BftB, CF
P: UV, WitP, WitP-AE
Aust spec
No Leo.
The RAAF did not employ them as Torpedo bombers. Whether they had the capability or not is irrelevant.
THE AUSTRALIANS USED THEM AS GROUND ATTACK FIGHTERS.
THE RAAF PAGE SPEC WHICH IS HALF WAY DOWN THE 2ND PAGE AS I MENTIONED DETAILS THIS!!!!
TO EMPLOY THEM IN UV AS TORPEDO BOMBERS IS WRONG, INACCURATE, BOLLOCKS, WHATEVER ADJECTIVE YOU PREFER....
READ THE POST!!!!!
Simply saying that 60 of the 217 british built, australian specified fighters had the capability is not a good enough response.
The RAAF did not employ them as Torpedo bombers. Whether they had the capability or not is irrelevant.
THE AUSTRALIANS USED THEM AS GROUND ATTACK FIGHTERS.
THE RAAF PAGE SPEC WHICH IS HALF WAY DOWN THE 2ND PAGE AS I MENTIONED DETAILS THIS!!!!
TO EMPLOY THEM IN UV AS TORPEDO BOMBERS IS WRONG, INACCURATE, BOLLOCKS, WHATEVER ADJECTIVE YOU PREFER....
READ THE POST!!!!!
Simply saying that 60 of the 217 british built, australian specified fighters had the capability is not a good enough response.
In the End, we will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends.
- Martin Luther King Jr. (1929-1968)
- Martin Luther King Jr. (1929-1968)
Leo.
2 points for you to ponder.
1.
Can you find me 1 example of any pacific theatre of operation RAAF Beaufighter ever launching a torpedo attack. I've never read of it and im Australian who lost a great uncle in the RAAF during the war and have been reading about the RAAF for years.
2.
If im wrong (which i am not) and they were used as torpedo bombers, why did they not use torpedos during the battle of the bismark sea, probably the biggest sea action the beaufighters ever saw.
2 points for you to ponder.
1.
Can you find me 1 example of any pacific theatre of operation RAAF Beaufighter ever launching a torpedo attack. I've never read of it and im Australian who lost a great uncle in the RAAF during the war and have been reading about the RAAF for years.
2.
If im wrong (which i am not) and they were used as torpedo bombers, why did they not use torpedos during the battle of the bismark sea, probably the biggest sea action the beaufighters ever saw.
In the End, we will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends.
- Martin Luther King Jr. (1929-1968)
- Martin Luther King Jr. (1929-1968)
The RAAF
Leo
If I am wrong and you and Matrix are right. Could you write to the RAAF and tell them their website is wrong.
If I am wrong and you and Matrix are right. Could you write to the RAAF and tell them their website is wrong.
In the End, we will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends.
- Martin Luther King Jr. (1929-1968)
- Martin Luther King Jr. (1929-1968)
Originally posted by Apollo11
This confirms exactly the data in my book.
Leo "Apollo11"
That the problem Leo.....to research how the Beaufighters were used in RAAF service in WW2 you have to go to the horses mouth...........in other words, read the accounts of the RAAF squadrons that flew the Beaufighters. Just because the RAAF Beaufighters were equipt to launch Torps does not mean that they were used operationally. Now IIRC the only RAAF Beaufighter squadron that did use torps was one that was with Coastal Command in the UK.
I said it before, do not rely on just one source (in your case a book and one web site). Have a good look at sites that deal with AUSTRALIAN Beaufighters.
May I sugest the following book to you which I think you will find a bit more detailed:-
"Whispering Death - A History of the RAAF's Beaufighter Squadrons" by Neville Parnell
Never argue with an idiot, he will only drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.
Come on guys. Give Leo a break. The poor guy is just trying to back up Matrix. Having said that though, Leo, they are absolutely right and if this aircraft type is to be modelled correctly, then FIghter-Bomber is the way to go.
And as for the person who said that the Beau was a failure -
BLASPHEMER!!!!!!!
The Mosquito was not the replacement for the Beau. The Mosquito began life as a reconaissance aircraft, then grew into a bomber and then Intruder.
The Beaufighter began as a Night Fighter and then grew into a Fighter, Ground Attack and finally as a Torbeau, mainly with the Bannf wing flying strikes into the North Sea.
Much as I have an admiration for the Mossie, I would not have fancied flying the wooden wonder at low altitude against ground troops. A good way to get aerated
And as for the person who said that the Beau was a failure -
BLASPHEMER!!!!!!!
The Mosquito was not the replacement for the Beau. The Mosquito began life as a reconaissance aircraft, then grew into a bomber and then Intruder.
The Beaufighter began as a Night Fighter and then grew into a Fighter, Ground Attack and finally as a Torbeau, mainly with the Bannf wing flying strikes into the North Sea.
Much as I have an admiration for the Mossie, I would not have fancied flying the wooden wonder at low altitude against ground troops. A good way to get aerated
Hi all,
IMHO, all I wrote is accurate and I never negated that you are wrong - I just
said that Matrix/2By3 did things OK.
How can the above statement (which says that we both are right) be OK?
Well... because this is a game (and one of the very best)...
In this game we can do things that were not done historically but which could
have been done historically.
And that's that. Period.
I do believe you guys that RAAF possibly never had any torpedo run with their
UK made Beaufighter VIc's but this does not negate the fact that they had this
capability.
So... the few things we need to agree here are:
#1
RAAF Beaufighter VIc's were UK made (Australian production was later in war
and out of UV scope: 1942/1943).
#3
RAAF Beaufighter VIc's had both torpedo and bomb capability and thus, in UV
game, the best suited description for them are "Level Bomber". If you would
make them "Fighter / Bomber" then you would loose in game capability of them
dropping bombs from level flight and their torpedo capability (and gain
strafing capability - but, in UV game, which would be better: torpedo attack
or strafing?).
Can we agree on the above?
Leo "Apollo11"
Gentleman... I think this is big misunderstanding...Originally posted by Raverdave
Just because the RAAF Beaufighters were equipt to launch Torps does not mean that they were used operationally.
IMHO, all I wrote is accurate and I never negated that you are wrong - I just
said that Matrix/2By3 did things OK.
How can the above statement (which says that we both are right) be OK?
Well... because this is a game (and one of the very best)...
In this game we can do things that were not done historically but which could
have been done historically.
And that's that. Period.
I do believe you guys that RAAF possibly never had any torpedo run with their
UK made Beaufighter VIc's but this does not negate the fact that they had this
capability.
So... the few things we need to agree here are:
#1
RAAF Beaufighter VIc's were UK made (Australian production was later in war
and out of UV scope: 1942/1943).
#3
RAAF Beaufighter VIc's had both torpedo and bomb capability and thus, in UV
game, the best suited description for them are "Level Bomber". If you would
make them "Fighter / Bomber" then you would loose in game capability of them
dropping bombs from level flight and their torpedo capability (and gain
strafing capability - but, in UV game, which would be better: torpedo attack
or strafing?).
Can we agree on the above?
Leo "Apollo11"
Prior Preparation & Planning Prevents Pathetically Poor Performance!
A & B: WitW, WitE, WbtS, GGWaW, GGWaW2-AWD, HttR, CotA, BftB, CF
P: UV, WitP, WitP-AE
Posted by Apollo11,
Mate,
I would agree with you that some of the Beaufighter's that turned up in Oz were VIc's. No one's doubting you on that. However, as all the indignant's are pointing out, they were never used that way over here.
I take your point about how a game should allow you to do things that were not done historically, but not at the cost of losing what was actually done historically. The trouble is, since the Beaufighter is modeled in UV as a level bomber, you have no ability to use it as it was by the aussies in real life, as a fighter bomber (re : possum's opening complaint - no LRCAP ability, can't use 'em as escorts, etc). That would naturally make us a bit indignant since we all grew up over here listening to the true story of the Aussie "whispering death", as we were being bounced up and down on grandad's lap (dirty old bugger).
If UV allowed an aircraft to be used in either role, then everyone would be happy. Since it's not the case, if its going to have only one role, it should be the historical one (Aussie not Pommie).
In this game we can do things that were not done historically but which could.
And that's that. Period.
I do believe you guys that RAAF possibly never had any torpedo run with their UK made Beaufighter VIc's but this does not negate the fact that they had this capability.
Mate,
I would agree with you that some of the Beaufighter's that turned up in Oz were VIc's. No one's doubting you on that. However, as all the indignant's are pointing out, they were never used that way over here.
I take your point about how a game should allow you to do things that were not done historically, but not at the cost of losing what was actually done historically. The trouble is, since the Beaufighter is modeled in UV as a level bomber, you have no ability to use it as it was by the aussies in real life, as a fighter bomber (re : possum's opening complaint - no LRCAP ability, can't use 'em as escorts, etc). That would naturally make us a bit indignant since we all grew up over here listening to the true story of the Aussie "whispering death", as we were being bounced up and down on grandad's lap (dirty old bugger).
If UV allowed an aircraft to be used in either role, then everyone would be happy. Since it's not the case, if its going to have only one role, it should be the historical one (Aussie not Pommie).
Have no fear,
drink more beer.
drink more beer.
I'm totally in agreement with the argument for the Beaufighter as a strike fighter. I don't know too much about their use in the SWPAC area, even though my uncle spent two years putting engines in them on New Guinea or somewhere, but their use by the RAF in Europe shows the way. In the strike wings, they led the bombers in and shredded the flak ships; very effective if what I've read is any guide, and I'm sure that fits with what I've read about their employment in the Pacific, barge busting and so on. Oh, and to the guy who reckons the Beau was a failure, maybe you should ask the gunners on convoy escorts in the Channel; and ask the Kriegsmarine why they often had 15-20 flak ships escorting 2-3 merchantmen.......they'll tell you what it was like on the wrong end of that blunt nose full of guns.
We want Beau FIGHTERS!!!!!!!
We want Beau FIGHTERS!!!!!!!
Battleaxe Rules!
"If UV allowed an aircraft to be used in either role, then everyone would be happy. Since it's not the case, if its going to have only one role, it should be the historical one (Aussie not Pommie)."
Well said Drongo.!!!
As a matter of interest my Great uncle served in UK bomber command 466 squadron RAAF. Was killed in action over Germany 5th Nov 44 flying as a Warrant officer tail gunner in a Halifax.
Bring on the Beau FIGHTER !!!!
Well said Drongo.!!!
As a matter of interest my Great uncle served in UK bomber command 466 squadron RAAF. Was killed in action over Germany 5th Nov 44 flying as a Warrant officer tail gunner in a Halifax.
Bring on the Beau FIGHTER !!!!
In the End, we will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends.
- Martin Luther King Jr. (1929-1968)
- Martin Luther King Jr. (1929-1968)
Posted by stubby331
I would say your Great uncle had one of the most dangerous roles of WWII. All respect to him.
Because half my mob were German, my grandfather was only allowed to serve in the Pacific (they didn't trust him to fight his "bruders"). My other grandfather was of pommie linage. He could be trusted to shoot anyone.
Beaufighter, Beaufighter, Beaufighter....Oi, Oi, Oi!!!
As a matter of interest my Great uncle served in UK bomber command 466 squadron RAAF. Was killed in action over Germany 5th Nov 44 flying as a Warrant officer tail gunner in a Halifax.
I would say your Great uncle had one of the most dangerous roles of WWII. All respect to him.
Because half my mob were German, my grandfather was only allowed to serve in the Pacific (they didn't trust him to fight his "bruders"). My other grandfather was of pommie linage. He could be trusted to shoot anyone.
Beaufighter, Beaufighter, Beaufighter....Oi, Oi, Oi!!!
Have no fear,
drink more beer.
drink more beer.
what say you Matrix
What say you Matrix??????
How much importance do you place on historical accuracy??
I would like to hear from anyone from matrix regarding this matter.
Please?
How much importance do you place on historical accuracy??
I would like to hear from anyone from matrix regarding this matter.
Please?
In the End, we will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends.
- Martin Luther King Jr. (1929-1968)
- Martin Luther King Jr. (1929-1968)