The SAS Factory > Requests

baronbutcher's illustrated requests compilation (do not lock)

(1/7) > >>

baronbutcher:
INDEX OF AIRCRAFT:

American:
Vultee A-31 Vengeance
Lockheed Ventura/Harpoon

British:
Bristol Beaufort - included in 4.12 patch, reportedly.  ;)

French:
Amiot 143
Bloch MB.150 - series

German:
Arado AR 240
Dornier Do 217E
Dornier Do 217K & M - done, courtesy Team Daidalos. ;)

Italian:
Caproni Ca.135

Japanese:
Yokosuka D4Y Suisei 'JUDY' - done, courtesy of ten010, http://www.sas1946.com/main/index.php/topic,23904.0.html  :)
Kawasaki Ki-45 Toryu 'NICK'
Nakajima Ki-49 Donryu 'Helen'
Nakajima J1N Gekko ‘Irving’ - done, courtesy ten010, http://www.sas1946.com/main/index.php/topic,27209.0.html  :)
Kawasaki Ki-48 ‘Lily’
Mitsubishi G3M 'Nell'
Aichi E13A 'Jake'
Kawasaki Ki-32 - 'Mary'
Mitsubishi Ki-67 Hiryu 'Peggy' - done, courtesy ten010, http://www.sas1946.com/main/index.php/topic,30109.0.html  ;)
Nakajima C6N 'Myrt'

Russian:
Yermolayev Yer-2

(This topic will be left unlocked so baronbutcher can add more aircraft to the list) ;) rap

baronbutcher:
Yokosuka D4Y Suisei 'JUDY'

A aircraft that is greatly needed for the Pacific Battles. (Both inline and radial engine versions.)
Yokosuka D4Y Suisei 'JUDY'
D4Y
Role   Dive bomber
Manufacturer   Yokosuka
First flight   December 1940
Introduced   1942
Retired   1945
Primary user   IJN Air Service
Produced   1942-1945
Number built   2,038
The Yokosuka D4Y Suisei  "comet" was a dive bomber of the Imperial Japanese Navy. Its Allied codename was "Judy". The D4Y was one of the fastest dive-bombers in the entire war, and only the delays in its development hindered its service, while its predecessor, the more robust but slower Aichi D3A remained in service for years. Despite this limited use, the speed and the range of the D4Y was nevertheless valuable, and the type was used with success as reconnaissance aircraft as well as in kamikaze missions.
Design and development
Development of the aircraft began in 1938 at the Yokosuka Naval Air Technical Arsenal as a carrier-based dive bomber to replace the Aichi D3A. The design was heavily influenced by the Heinkel He 118 dive bomber. Two He 118s were provided by Nazi Germany.
The aircraft was a single-engine, all-metal low-wing monoplane, with a wide-track retractable undercarriage and wing-mounted dive brakes. It had a crew of two: a pilot and a navigator/radio-operator/gunner, seated under a long, glazed canopy which provided good all-round visibility. The pilot of bomber versions was provided with a telescopic bombsight. The aircraft was powered by an Aichi Atsuta liquid-cooled inverted V-12 in-line engine, a licenced copy of the German DB 601, rated at 895 kW (1,200 hp). The radiator was behind and below the three-blade propeller, as in the P-40.
It had a slim, elegant fuselage that enabled it to reach high speeds in horizontal flight and in dives, while low wing loading gave excellent maneuverability, with the Suisei having superior performance than contemporary dive bombers such as the SB2C Helldiver.In order to conform with the Japanese Navy's doctrine of ensuring that its aircraft could outrange potential enemies, weight had to be minimized with the result that the D4Y was not fitted with self-sealing fuel tanks and armor In consequence, the D4Y was extremely vulnerable and tended to catch fire when hit.
Bombs were fitted under the wings and in an internal bomb bay, something rare in a single-engine aircraft. It carried one 500 kg (1,100 lb) bomb, but there were reports that the D4Y sometimes carried two 250 kg (550 lb) bombs, for example during the attack on the light aircraft carrier USS Princeton. Only 30 kg (70 lb) bombs were carried externally. The aircraft was armed with two 7.7 mm (.303 in) machine guns in the nose, and one 7.92 mm (.312 inm) Type 1 machine gun in the rear of the cockpit. (The 7.92 mm/.312 in was carried because of its higher rate of fire.) Later, the 7.92 mm (.312 in) was replaced by a 13 mm (.51 in) Type 2 machine gun. This light gun armament was typical for a Japanese carrier-based bomber. The forward machine guns were retained in the kamikaze version.
The first D4Y1 prototype made its maiden flight in December 1940. After the prototype's successful trials, development continued, and the first problems appeared. During dive-bombing trials, the wings of the D4Y started to flutter, a fatal flaw for an airframe subject to the stresses of dive bombing. Because of this, initial production aircraft were used as reconnaissance aircraft, as the D4Y1-C, which took advantage of its high speed and long range, while not over-stressing the airframe. Production of the D4Y1-C continued in small numbers until March 1943, when the increasing losses incurred by the D3A resulted in production switching to the D4Y1 dive-bomber, the aircraft's structural problems finally being solved. Although the D4Y could operate successfully from the large and fast fleet carriers that formed the core of the Combined Fleet at the start of the war, it had problems operating from the smaller and slower carriers such as the Hiyo class which formed a large proportion of Japan's carrier fleet after the losses received in the Battle of Midway. Catapult equipment was therefore fitted, giving rise to the D4Y-1 Kai (or improved) model.
These early versions of the D4Y were difficult to keep in service because the Atsuta engines were unreliable and difficult to maintain in front-line service. From the beginning, some had argued that the D4Y should be powered by an air-cooled radial engine, a type Japanese engineers had experience with and trusted. The aircraft was therefore fitted with the reliable Mitsubishi MK8P Kinsei 62, a 14-cylinder two-row radial engine. This version was the Yokosuka D4Y3 Model 33. Although the new engine improved ceiling and rate of climb (over 10,000 m/32,800 ft, and climb to 3,000 m/9,800 ft in 4.5 minutes, instead of 9,400 m/30,800 ft and 5 minutes), the higher fuel consumption resulted in shorter range and a slower cruising speed, while the bulky engine obstructed the forward and downward view of the pilot, hampering carrier operations. These problems were tolerated because of the increased availability of the new variant.
The last version was the D4Y4 Special Strike Bomber. This one-seat kamikaze aircraft, capable of carrying one 800 kg (1,760 lb) bomb, was put into production in February 1945. It was equipped with three RATO boosters for terminal dive acceleration.[6] This aircraft was an almost ideal kamikaze model: it had a combination of speed (560 km/h/350 mph), range (2,500 km/1,550 mi) and payload (800 kg/1,760 lb) probably not matched by any other Japanese aircraft.
The D4Y5 Model 54 was a planned version designed in 1945. It was to be powered by the Nakajima JK9C Homare 12 radial engine rated at 1,361 kW (1,825 hp), would have a new four-blade metal propeller of the constant-speed type, and would have more armor protection for the crew and fuel tanks.
Ultimately, 2,038 of all variants were produced, mostly by Aichi.
Operational history
Lacking armor and self-sealing fuel tanks, the Suiseis did not do well against Allied fighters. They did, however, cause considerable damage to ships, including the carrier USS Franklin, which was nearly sunk by a single D4Y.
The D4Y was operated from the following Japanese aircraft carriers: Chitose, Chiyoda, Hiyo, Junyo, Shinyo, Shokaku, Soryu, Taiho, Unryo, Unyo and Zuikaku.
The D4Y1-C reconnaissance aircraft entered service in mid-1942, when two of these aircraft were deployed aboard Soryu at the Battle of Midway, where both were lost when Soryu was sunk.

Marianas During the Battle of the Marianas, the DY4s were engaged by U.S. Navy fighters and shot down in large numbers. The D4Y was faster than the F4F Wildcat, but not the new F6F Hellcat. The Japanese aircraft were adequate in 1943, but the rapid advances in American materiel in 1944 (among them, the introduction in large numbers of the Essex-class aircraft carrier) left them behind, while their inexperienced pilots were another disadvantage.
The U.S. Task Force 58 struck the Philippine airfields and destroyed the land air forces first, before engaging the Japanese naval aircraft. The result was what the Americans called "The Great Marianas Turkey Shoot", with 400 Japanese aircraft shot down in a single day. A single Hellcat pilot, Lieutenant Alexander Vraciu, shot down six D4Ys within a few minutes.
Leyte and Philippines
The D4Y was relegated to land operations where both the liquid-cooled engine D4Y2, and the radial engine D4Y3 fought against the U.S. fleet, scoring some successes. An unseen D4Y bombed and sank the Princeton on 24 October 1944. D4Ys hit other carriers as well, by both conventional attacks and kamikaze actions. In the Philippines air battles, the Japanese used kamikazes for the first time, and they scored heavily. D4Ys from 761 Kokutai may have hit the escort carrier USS Kalinin Bay on 25 October 1944, and the next day, USS Suwannee. Both were badly damaged, especially Suwannee, with heavy casualties and many aircraft destroyed. A month later on 25 November, USS Essex, Hancock, Intrepid and Cabot were hit by kamikazes, almost exclusively A6M Zero fighters and D4Ys, with much more damage. D4Ys also made conventional attacks. All these D4Ys were from 601 and 653 Kokutai. Lt. Yoshinori Yamaguchi's D4Y3 made a  suicide dive against USS Essex, 1256 hours, 25 November 1944.  The lack of self-sealing fuel tanks made the D4Y easy to ignite with a few rounds of incendiary tracers, so a stricken Suisei often developed a fiery tail reminiscent of its namesake.(Comet)
In defence of the homeland Task Force 58 approached southern Japan in March 1945 to strike military objectives in support of the invasion of Okinawa. The Japanese responded with massive kamikaze attacks, codenamed Kikusui, in which many D4Ys were used.
Carriers USS Enterprise and Yorktown were damaged by D4Ys of 701 Wing on 18 March. On 19 March, carrier Franklin was hit by another D4Y, despite heavy anti-aircraft fire. Franklin was so heavily damaged that she was retired until the end of the war. Another D4Y hit the carrier USS Wasp.
On 12 April 1945, another D4Y, part of Kikusui mission N.2, struck Enterprise, causing some damage.
During Kikusui N.6, on 11 May 1945, USS Bunker Hill was hit and put out of action by two kamikazes that some sources identify as D4Ys. This was the third Essex-class carrier forced to retire to the States to repair.
Night fighter
The D4Y was actually faster than the A6M Zero. Some were employed as D4Y2-S night fighters against the high flying B-29 Superfortress bombers late in the war, a unique role for a single-engine dive bomber. The night fighter conversions were made at the 11th Naval Aviation Arsenal at Hiro. Each D4Y2-S had all bomb equipment removed and a 20 mm Type 99 Model 2 cannon with its barrel slanting up and forwards installed in place of the gunner's cockpit. However, the lack of radar for night operations and slow climb rate, combined with the B-29's high ceiling, made the D4Y2-S ineffective as a night fighter. Little is known of their operations.
Last action
At the end of the war, there were still D4Ys in action against the U.S. Navy, and maybe the last of them were the eleven D4Ys that set off on a search mission on 15 August 1945. Led by Vice Admiral Matome Ugaki, all but three were shot down or crashed into the sea.
Operators
Japan
•   Imperial Japanese Navy Air Service
o   1st Koku Sentai
o   2nd Koku Sentai
o   3rd Koku Sentai
Variants
D4Y1
Prototype and first batch of serial produced dive bomber aircraft. Powered by 895 kW (1,200 hp) Aichi AE1A Atsuta 12 engine.
D4Y1-C
Reconnaissance version produced at Aichi's Nagoya factory.
D4Y1 KAI
Dive bomber with aircraft carrier catapult equipment.
D4Y2 Model 12
1,044 kW (1,400 hp) Aichi AE1P Atsuta 32 engine adopted.
D4Y2-C
Reconnaissance version of the D4Y2.
D4Y2 KAI Model 22
D4Y2 with aircraft carrier catapult equipment.
D4Y2a Model 12A
D4Y2 with the rear cockpit 13 mm (.51 in) machine gun.
D4Y2-Ca
Reconnaissance version of the D4Y2a.
D4Y2a KAI Model 22A
D4Y2a with aircraft carrier catapult equipment.
D4Y2-S Suisei-E
Night fighter with bomb equipment removed and a 20 mm upward-firing cannon installed.
D4Y3 Model 33
1,163 kW (1,560 hp) Mitsubishi Kinsei 62 radial engine adopted.
D4Y3a Model 33A
D4Y3 with the rear cockpit 13 mm (.51 in) machine gun.
D4Y4 Model 43 Special Strike Bomber
One seat kamikaze aircraft with 800 kg (1,760 lb) bomb and three RATO boosters.
D4Y5 Model 54
Planned version with Nakajima Homare radial engine, four-blade propeller, and more armor protection.
Specifications (D4Y2)
General characteristics
•   Crew: two (pilot & gunner/radio operator)
•   Length: 33 ft 6 in (10.22 m)
•   Wingspan: 37 ft 9 in (11.50 m)
•   Height: 12 ft 3 in (3.74 m)
•   Wing area: 254 ft² (23.6 m²)
•   Empty weight: 5,379 lb (2,440 kg)
•   Loaded weight: 9,370 lb (4,250 kg)
•   Powerplant: 1× Aichi Atsuta AEIA 32 piston engine, 1,044 kW (1,400 hp)
Performance
•   Maximum speed: 550 km/h (342 mph)
•   Range: 1,465 km (910 mi)
•   Service ceiling: 10,700 m (35,105 ft)
•   Rate of climb: 14 m/s (2,700 ft/min)
•   Wing loading: 180 kg/m² (37 lb/ft²)
•   Power/mass: 0.25 kW/kg (0.15 hp/lb)
Armament
•   2 × forward-firing 7.7 mm machine guns
•   1 × rearward-firing 7.92 mm machine gun
•   500 kg (1,102 lb) of bombs (design), 800 kg (1,764 lb) of bombs (kamikaze)

baronbutcher:
Kawasaki Ki-45 Toryu / NICKA beautiful Japanese twin. Good camo's. One of the ten most needed Japanese aircraft to almost complete the PTO. (Ki-44 Shoki, Ki-45 Toryu, D4Y 'Judy', J1N Gekko, Ki-48 'Lily', Ki-49 'Helen', G3M 'Nell', Ki-67 Hiryu, and F1M Pete Floatplane, Ki-32 Mary) I know a lot. The Allies need the SB2 Helldiver, TBD Devastator, P-61 Black Widow, B-24 D, A-36 Apache and Beaufort (RAAF,RAF) for the pacific.

In early 1937 Kawasaki was instructed by the Imperial Japanese army to initiate the design and development of a twin-engine fighter that would be suitable for long-range operations over the Pacific. The concept derived from army interest in developments taking place in other countries, and particularly in the Messerschmitt Bf 110. The first Kawasaki Ki-45 Toryu (dragon killer) prototype flew in 1939, a cantilever mid-wing monoplane with retractable tailwheel landing gear. A slender fuselage provided enclosed accommodation for two in tandem. Problems followed with the engine installation, and it was not until September 1941 that the Ki-45 KAIa entered production. Armament of this initial series version comprised one forward-firing 20mm cannon, two 12.7mm machine-guns in the nose, and a 7.92mm machine-gun on a flexible mount in the rear cockpit; there was also provision to carry two drop tanks or two 250kg bombs on underwing racks. The type entered service in August 1942 but was first used in combat during October 1942, soon being allocated the Allied codename 'Nick'. The Ki-45 KAIa was joined by a new version developed especially for the ground-attack/antishipping role, the Ki-45 KAIb. Standard armament comprised one 20mm cannon in the nose, a forward-firing 37mm cannon in the fuselage, and one rear-firing 7.92mm machine gun, plus the underwing provision for drop tanks or bombs; a number of alternative weapon installations were tried experimentally, including the use of a 75mm cannon for attacks on shipping.
The Ki-45 KAIa was, for its day, heavily armed and proved effective against the USAF's Consoldiated B-24 Liberators and, when these bombers were used more extensively for night operations, the Ki-45 was adapted to attack them. Thus the night-fighting capability of the type was discovered, leading to development of the Ki-45 KAIc night-fighter, which proved to be one of the most successful Japanese aircraft in this category. Ki-45 Toryus remained in service until the end of the Pacific war, production totalling 1,701 including prototypes, being used for the defence of Tokyo, and in the Manchuria, Burma and Sumatra areas of operations.
Ki-45 KAIc night fighter
 
Constant development frustrations delayed introduction into service of the Imperial Japanese Army's Kawasaki Ki-45 Toryu (dragon killer) until August 1942, its design having been initiated five years earlier, and it was not until 1944 that the night-fighter version, the Ki-45 KAIc, became operational as the only army night-fighter of the war. Retaining the two 805kW Mitsubishi Ha-102 radials of the previous Ki-45 KAIb heavy day fighter (an aircraft whose role was akin to that of the German Zerstorer), the Ki-45 KAIc was armed with a single forward-firing semi-automatic 37mm Type 98 cannon in a fairing under the fuselage, two oblique/upward-firing 20mm Ho-5 cannon in the centre fuselage, and a single hand-held machine-gun in the rear cockpit. It had been intended to fit airborne radar in the nose, and therefore no nose guns were included; however, production difficulties seriously delayed this equipment and it did not enter service, although a single aircraft flew with centimetric radar shortly before the end of the war. Production of the Ki-45 KAIc got underway at Kawasaki's Akashi plant in March 1944, the first aircraft being completed the following month. On 15 June American Boeing B-29s of XX Bomber Command launched their first raid on the Japanese homeland, and were intercepted by eight Toryus whose pilots shot down eight of the big bombers. At that time about 40 Ki-45 KAIc fighters had been completed, and the aircraft went on to serve with the 4th Sentai at Usuki in the Oita prefecture, the 5th Sentai at Usuki and Komachi in the Aichi prefecture, the 53rd Sentai at Matsudo in the Chiba prefecture, and the 70th Sentai at Kashiwa. Toryus shared the night defence of Japan with the navy's J1N1-S and Yokosuka P1Y1-S, and were probably the most successful in action against the massive American raids in the last six months of the war; the 4th Sentai alone was credited with 150 kills, of which 26 were gained by one pilot, Captain Isamu Kashiide, all despite the lack of any AI radar. Away from the homeland Ki-45 KAIc nightfighters also served with the 45th Sentai in the Philippines and New Guinea late in 1944, and with the 71st Dokuritsu Hiko Chutai at Singapore in August 1945. Production of the Ki-45 KAIc reached 477 aircraft before being terminated in December 1944. The type was codenamed 'Nick' by the Allies.


Specification   
 MODEL   Ki-45 KAIc
 CREW   2
 ENGINE   2 x Mitsubishi Ha-102, 810kW
 WEIGHTS
    Take-off weight   5500 kg   12125 lb
    Empty weight   4000 kg   8819 lb
 DIMENSIONS
    Wingspan   15.02 m   49 ft 3 in
    Length   11 m   36 ft 1 in
    Height   3.7 m   12 ft 2 in
    Wing area   32 m2   344.44 sq ft
 PERFORMANCE
    Max. speed   540 km/h   336 mph
    Ceiling   10000 m   32800 ft
    Range   2000 km   1243 miles
 ARMAMENT   1 x 37mm cannon, 2 x 20mm cannons, 1 x 7.92mm machine-guns, 2 x 250kg bombs
More operational history info
 It was subsequently deployed in several theaters in the roles of interception, ground, ship attack and fleet defense. Its greatest strength turned out to be as an anti-bomber interceptor, as was the case of the Bf 110 in Europe. In New Guinea, the JAAF used the aircraft in an anti-ship role, where the Ki-45 was heavily armed with one 37 mm (1.46 in) and two 20 mm cannons and could carry two 250 kg (550 lb) bombs on hard points under the wings. 1,675 Ki-45s of all versions were produced during the war.
The first production type (Ko) was armed with two 12.7 mm (.50 in) machine gun in the nose, a single 20 mm cannon in the belly, and a trainable 7.92 mm (.312 in) machine gun in the rear cabin, and this was followed with the Otsu with the lower 20 mm cannon replaced by a 37 mm (1.46 in) tank gun, to counter B-17 bombers. While the firepower was devastating, manual reloading meant that only two rounds could be fired per minute. The next type (Hei) restored the 20 mm cannon, and this time placed an automatic 37 mm (1.46 in) gun in the nose. A later addition was twin obliquely-firing 20 mm cannon behind the cockpit and removal of the underside 20 mm guns.
Soon after entering service, the Ki-45 was assigned to home defense, and several were dispatched against the Doolittle raid, though they did not see action. The craft's heavy armament proved to be effective against the B-29 raids which started in June 1944. However, its performance was insufficient to counter B-29s flying at 10,000 m (32,800 ft). Modifications such as reduction of fuel and ordnance were attempted to raise performance to little avail, and in the end aircraft were used effectively in ramming attacks. An example of a ramming attack was the kamikaze attack on USS Dickerson on 2 April 1945 off Okinawa. The commanding officer and 54 crew were killed when a Toryu clipped the stacks from astern, and rammed the bridge. A second Toryu hit the foredeck, opening a 7 m (23 ft) hole in the deck. The ensuing fires demolished the ship, and after the surviving crew was rescued by fellow fast transports and ex-destroyers Bunch and Herbert, the ship was towed out to sea and scuttled.
In 1945, the forward and upward-firing guns showed some results with the commencement of night time bombing raids, but the lack of radar was a considerable handicap. By the spring of 1945, the advent of American carrier-based fighters and Iwo Jima-based P-51s escorting B-29s over the skies of Japan brought the Ki-45's career to an end.
The next version, the Kawasaki Ki-45 KAIc, was developed specifically as a night fighter, which were supposed to be equipped with centimetric radar in the nose; due to production difficulties, this did not occur. The aircraft took part in night defense of the Home Islands and equipped four sentais from the autumn of 1944 to the War's end. They obtained notable successes, and one sentai obtained 150 victories and downed eight USAAF B-29 Superfortresses in their first combat.
The Ki-45 was to be replaced in the ground-attack role by the Ki-102, but was never wholly supplanted by the wars' end.
Three Ki-45s fell into communist Chinese hands after World War II. Unlike most captured Japanese aircraft that were employed in the training role, the three Ki-45s were assigned to the 1st Squadron of the Combat Flying Group in March 1949 and were used in combat missions. These aircraft were retired in the early 1950s
Variants
Ki-45
Prototype aircraft
KI-45 Type 1
Modified operative models
Ki-45 KAI
Prototype aircraft
Ki-45 KAI
Pre-series aircraft
Ki-45 KAIa Toryu
Two-seat fighter Type 2 of Army (Mark A) initial model of series
Ki-45 KAIb
Mark B version against land or naval objectives; engines, Mitsubishi Ha-102 of 780 kW (1,050 hp).
Ki-45 KAIc
Mark C, a modified Model B, night fighter version, equipped with one 37 mm (1.46 in) Ho-203 cannon in ventral tunnel, two fixed 20 mm Ho-5 cannons in dorsal frontal position, and one 7.92 mm (.312 in) Type 89 machine gun in back position.
Ki-45 KAId
Mark D version against naval objectives, two 20 mm cannons and one 37 mm (1.46 in) cannon in the ventral position, one 7.92 mm (.312 in) machine gun in the back position.
Ki-45 II
Prototype only completed as the experimental prototype Ki-96.
Total production: 1,701 units.
Thanks  :)

baronbutcher:
BRISTOL BEAUFORT
A aircraft that I would love to see and that is needed for the Pacific Theatre and earlier European Theatre of operations.
The Bristol Type 152 Beaufort was a British large twin-engined torpedo bomber designed by the Bristol Aeroplane Company, and developed from the earlier Blenheim light bomber.
Beauforts were most widely used, until the end of the Second World War, by the Royal Australian Air Force in the Pacific theatre. Most of these planes were manufactured under licence in Australia. Beauforts also saw service with the Royal Air Force's Coastal Command — including Commonwealth squadrons serving with the RAF — and then the Fleet Air Arm from 1940, until they were withdrawn in 1944.
The Beaufort was not an entirely successful aircraft. Although designed as a torpedo-bomber it more often flew as a level-bomber. The Beaufort also flew more hours in training than on operational missions and more were lost through accidents and mechanical failures than were lost to enemy fire. However the Beaufort did spawn a long-range heavy fighter variant called the Beaufighter, which proved very successful and many Beaufort units eventually converted to the Beaufighter.
Design and development
The Beaufort came from Bristol's submission to meet Air Ministry Specifications M.I5/35 and G.24/35 for a land-based twin-engined torpedo-bomber and general reconnaissance aircraft respectively. With a production order following under Specification 10/36, the Bristol Type 152 was given the name Beaufort. The competing torpedo bomber entry from Blackburn was also ordered as the Blackburn Botha. In an unprecedented step both designs were ordered straight off the drawing board, an indication of how urgently the RAF needed a new torpedo bomber. Three hundred and twenty Beauforts were ordered. Initially, because of their commitment to the Blenheim, Bristol were to build 78 at their Filton factory, with the other 242 being built by Blackburn. These allocations would be changed later.
Although the design looked similar in many ways to the Blenheim, it was somewhat larger, with an 18 in (46 cm) increase in wingspan. With the fuselage being made longer in the nose and taller to accommodate a fourth crew member, it was also considerably heavier. The larger bomb-bay was designed to house a semi-recessed torpedo, or it could carry an increased bomb load. Due to the increased weight the Blenheim's Bristol Mercury engines were to be replaced by the more powerful, sleeve valve, Bristol Perseus. It was soon determined that even with the Perseus, the Beaufort would be slower than the Blenheim and so a switch was made to the larger Bristol Taurus engine, also a sleeve valve design.[1][4] For these engines, chief designer Roy Fedden developed special low-drag NACA cowlings which exhausted air through vertical slots flanking the nacelles under the wings. Air flow was controlled by adjustable flaps.
The basic structure, although similar to the Blenheim, introduced refinements such as the use of high-strength light alloy forgings and extrusions in place of high-tensile steel plates and angles; as a result the overall structural weight was lighter than that of the Blenheim. In addition, the wing centre section was inserted into the centre fuselage and the nacelle structure was an integral part of the ribs to which the main undercarriage was attached. Transport joints were used on the fuselage and wings: this allowed sub-contractors to manufacture the Beaufort in easily transportable sections, and was to be important when Australian production got underway.
The Vickers main undercarriage units were similar to, but larger than those of the Blenheim and used hydraulic retraction with a cartridge operated emergency lowering system.
The first prototype rolled out of Filton in mid-1938. Problems immediately arose with the Taurus engines continually overheating during ground testing. New more conventional engine cowlings with circumferential cooling gills had to be designed and installed, delaying the first flight which took place on 15 October 1938. As flight testing progressed it was found that the large apron-type undercarriage doors, similar to those on the Blenheim, were causing the aircraft to yaw on landing. These doors were taken off for subsequent flights. On the second prototype and all production aircraft more conventional split doors, which left a small part of the tyres exposed when retracted, were used.
The results of high level bombing tests carried out at Boscombe Down at an altitude of 10,000 ft and an airspeed of 238 mph showed that the Beaufort was in the words of the test pilot: "An exceptionally poor bombing platform, being subject to an excessive and continuous roll which made determination of drift particularly difficult." After 1941, British Beauforts were fitted with semi-circular plates on the trailing edges of the upper wing behind the engine nacelles to smooth airflow and improve directional stability.
With Blenheim production taking priority and continued overheating of the Taurus engines there were delays in production, so while the bomber had first flown in October 1938 and should have been available almost immediately, it was not until November 1939 that production started in earnest. Several of the first production Beauforts were engaged in working-up trials and final service entry began in January 1940 with 22 Squadron of Coastal Command.
British Beauforts
A total of 1,013 Taurus powered Mark Is were produced and a number of changes were introduced into the line:
•   The original curved perspex bomb aimers nose panels were replaced by flat, non-distorting panels from the 10th production aircraft.
•   Successive Marks of Taurus engines were installed: starting with the Taurus III, the more reliable Taurus IIs were used whenever possible. Initially Beauforts with the Taurus II engines were designated Beaufort Mk II, while those with other Taurus Marks continued to be Beaufort Is. Finally all Taurus-engined Beauforts became Mk Is with the introduction of the Wasp-powered Beaufort Mk II. The Taurus IIs were modified to IIA, which became the Taurus VI. All of these versions produced 860/900 hp (640/670 kW). The final marks of Taurus engines used were the more powerful 1,130 hp (840 kW) XII and XVIs. The Taurus engines drove de Havilland Type DH5/19 constant speed propellers.[ 
•   Extra .303 in (7.7 mm) Vickers GO machine guns were fitted; two on a gimbal mounting in the forward nose and single guns on pivots on either beam.
•   A remotely controlled .303 in (7.7 mm) Browning machine gun was fitted, firing to the rear under the nose. Housed in a clear blown transparency, it was found to be of little use and most operational units soon discarded them.
•   Fairey-Youngman pneumatic dive brakes were fitted to the wing trailing edges of several Beauforts. After adverse reports from pilots these were locked shut. However it was found that the curved alloy extensions on the trailing edges improved the flight characteristics and similar panels were fitted on all later production Beauforts.
When it became apparent that the Taurus engines had problems, planning commenced to re-engine the aircraft with 1,200 hp (900 kW) Pratt & Whitney R-1830 Twin-Wasp radials, which were of similar diameter and slightly lighter. These engines drove Hamilton Standard bracket-type variable pitch propellers. However there was no guarantee that supply of the Twin Wasp would not be cut off, and production reverted to the Taurus-engined Mark Is after 165 Beaufort Mark IIs had been built, starting with AW244 which first flew in September 1941. Performance with the Twin-Wasps was marginally improved: maximum speed went up from 271.5 mph (437 km/h) to 277 mph (446 km/h) and the service ceiling increased from 16,500 ft (5,030 m) to 18,000 ft (5,486 m). However normal range was reduced from 1,600 mi (2,580 km) to 1,450 mi (2,330 km).[1][10] Other modifications introduced on the Mk II and continued on late Mk Is were:
•   A new direction finding loop aerial, enclosed in a clear, tear-drop fairing on the top of the cabin, replaced the elongated strip type.
•   ASV Mk III was added with yagi antennae under the nose and wings.
•   A Bristol B1 Mk V turret with two .303 in (7.7 mm) Browning machine guns was fitted.
The final British-built version of the Beaufort was the Pratt & Whitney-powered T Mark II, with 250 produced from August 1943. In this version, the turret was removed and the position was faired over. The last ever Beaufort was a T II which left the Bristol Banwell factory on 25 November 1944.
Australian-built Beauforts As the design for the Beaufort began to mature, the Australian Government invited a British Air Mission to discuss the defence needs of Australia and Singapore. It was also a step towards expanding Australia's domestic aircraft industry. The Beaufort was chosen as the best General Reconnaissance (G.R) aircraft available and, on 1 July 1939 orders were placed, for 180 airframes and spares, with the specially formed Beaufort Division of the Commonwealth's Department of Aircraft Production (DAP). The Australian made variants are often known as the DAP Beaufort.
The Australian Beauforts were to be built at the established DAP plant in Fisherman's Bend, Melbourne, and a new factory at Mascot, New South Wales; to speed up the process drawings, jigs and tools and complete parts for six airframes were supplied by Bristol. The bulk of Australian-built Beauforts used locally available raw materials.
One of the decisive factors in choosing the Beaufort was the ability to produce it in sections. Because of this railway workshops were key subcontractors:
•   Chullora NSW: Front fuselage, undercarriage, stern frames, nacelles.
•   Newport Workshops: Rear fuselage, empennage.
•   Islington Workshops, South Australia: Mainplanes, centre-section.
Taurus engines, aircraft components and the associated equipment were shipped out to be joined, in October 1939, by the eighth production Beaufort L4448. With the outbreak of war the possibility that supplies of the Taurus engines could be disrupted or halted was considered even before the British government placed an embargo on exporting war materials with the Blitzkrieg on France, the Netherlands and Belgium in May 1940. It was proposed that a change of powerplant could be made to the Pratt & Whitney Twin Wasp, which was already in use on RAAF Lockheed Hudsons. Orders for the engine were placed and a factory was set up at Lidcombe, New South Wales and run by General Motors-Holden Ltd. The locally built engines were coded S3C4-G, while those imported from America were coded S1C3-4. Three-bladed Curtiss-Electric or Hamilton-Standard propellers were fitted to all Australian manufactured Beauforts. In early 1941, L4448 was converted as a trials aircraft and the combination was considered a success. There were a number of advantages that the Australian Twin-Wasp Beauforts enjoyed over their British Taurus engined counterparts. These included greater engine reliability, fully feathering propellers which improved single-engined safety, improved tropical performance and increased range. The Taurus engines on many of the early Beauforts proved to be maintenance intensive and unreliable and were often prone to overheating in tropical climates. Also the lack of fully feathering propellers on many Taurus engines meant the loss an engine was fatal, since the escalating weight of operational Beauforts combined with the drag of an unfeathered propeller eroded the single-engined safety margin. Other Australian improvements included new tail dihedral which improved directional stability, side looking radar, fully enclosed landing gear and Browning 12.7mm machine guns in the wings. The first Australian-assembled Beaufort A9-1 flew on 5 May 1941 with the first Australian-built aircraft A9-7 coming off the production line in August. Australian Beauforts were manufactured in the following series:
•   Mk V: (50) Pratt & Whitney S3C4-G with Curtiss Electric propellers
•   Mk VI: (40) Pratt & Whitney S1C3-G with Curtiss Electric propellers
•   Mk VII: (60) Pratt & Whitney S1C3-G with Hamilton Standard propellers
•   Mk VA: (30) Pratt & Whitney S3C4-G with Hamilton Standard propellers
•   Mk VIII: (519) Pratt & Whitney S3C4-G with Curtiss Electric propellers
•   Mk IX: (46 conversions) Pratt & Whitney S3C4-G with Curtiss Electric propellers
A distinguishing feature of Australian Beauforts was a larger tailfin, which was used from the Mk VI on. Armament fit also varied from British aircraft: British or American torpedoes were able to be carried and the final 140 Mk VIII were fitted with a locally manufactured Mk VE turret with .50 cal machine guns.
The Mk XI was a transport conversion, stripped of armament, operational equipment and armour and rebuilt with a redesigned centre fuselage. Maximum speed was 300 mph (480 km/h) and a payload of 4,600 lb (2,100 kg) could be carried.
Production of the Australian Beaufort ended in August 1944 when production switched to the Beaufighter.
Contemporary aircraft
The Beaufort was one of a handful of aircraft used during the Second World War which were designed from the outset as land-based, twin-engined torpedo carrying bombers; the only other purpose built twin engine torpedo/reconnaissance bombers to reach operational service were the larger Mitsubishi G3M and G4M "Attack Bombers" used by the Imperial Japanese Navy. The contemporary Blackburn Botha, which was designed to the same specifications as the Beaufort, proved to be underpowered and deficient in other ways and was never used operationally in its intended role. Another twin engined aircraft designed and used as a torpedo bomber was the Heinkel He 115 seaplane. Other land-based twin- and multi-engine torpedo bombers, such as the Heinkel He 111 and Savoia-Marchetti S.79 were conventional bombers adapted to carry torpedoes. The Bristol Brigand was a development of the Beaufighter for torpedo work. The Short Sturgeon was another British twin engined torpedo bomber
For its envisaged role the Beaufort's performance and armament was considered adequate at the time. Few light or medium twin-engine bombers designed in the 1930s carried more than a handful of light, rifle-calibre machine guns and few of them had a higher maximum speed than the Beaufort. When faced with modern fighter opposition, as encountered around the coasts of German–occupied Europe and Japanese-occupied parts of Asia and the Pacific, the light armament and a speed deficit of over 70 mph (110 km/h) made the Beaufort an easy target. Even with the Twin-Wasps, which were the most powerful engines installed, the Beaufort was underpowered and, in the event of the loss of one engine, it was impossible to keep the aircraft flying for any length of time. For an aircraft operating in a maritime environment this often meant the crew as well as the airframe were lost.
On the plus side was the Beaufort's rugged construction and air cooled radial engines, which had no vulnerable cooling systems. These features meant that many heavily damaged Beauforts were able to get their crews back to base.
Operational history
Europe Although it did see some use in the torpedo bomber role, notably in attacks on the battlecruisers Scharnhorst and Gneisenau while in port in Brest, the Beaufort more often used bombs or mines while in European service. It saw considerable action in the Mediterranean theatre, where it helped put an end to Axis shipping supplying Rommel in North Africa.
By early 1940, 22 Squadron was fully equipped, although a great deal of training in the specialised art of torpedo-dropping was needed by the crews. Because of this, and because of a shortage of torpedoes the squadron's first operations consisted of laying magnetic mines ("Gardening" in RAF parlance) and dropping conventional bombs. The first operation took place on the night of 15/16 April when nine Beauforts successfully laid mines in the Schilling Roads (north of Wilhelmshaven). One Beaufort failed to return. In the meantime A second unit 42 Squadron was also re-equipped with Beauforts, starting in April.
On one of its first bombing operations, on 7 May 1940, a Beaufort dropped the first British 2,000 lb (910 kg) bomb, aiming at a German cruiser anchored off Norderney.
The first RAF torpedo attack of the war came on 11 September 1940, when five aircraft of 22 Squadron attacked a convoy of three merchant ships off Ostend. One torpedo hit a 6,000 ton (5,440 tonne) ship. Four days later, the first "Rover" was mounted; a Rover was an armed reconnaissance mission carried out against enemy shipping by a small number of aircraft operating independently. "Rovers" became a major part of Beaufort operations over the next next 18 months.  Other more hazardous operations were to follow, with one Beaufort pilot being awarded a posthumous VC.
The only other UK based units to be equipped with the Beaufort, 86 Squadron and 217 Squadron, were operational by the middle of 1941.
Torpedo dropping
A successful torpedo drop required that the approach run to the target needed to be straight and at a speed and height where the torpedo would enter the water smoothly: too high or too low and the torpedo could "porpoise" (skip through the water), dive, or even break up. Height over the water had to be judged without the benefit of a radio altimeter and misjudgement was easy, especially in calm conditions. For the Beauforts using the 18-inch (450-mm) Mk XII aerial torpedo, the average drop-height was 68 ft (21 m) and the average range of release was 670 yd (610 m). During the run-in, the aircraft was vulnerable to defensive anti-aircraft fire, and it took courage to fly through it with no chance of evasive manoeuvres. The Beaufort's optimum torpedo dropping speed was a great deal higher than that of the Vildebeests it was replacing and it took practice to accurately judge the range to, and speed of, the target ship. A ship the size and speed of the Scharnhorst, for example, would look huge, filling the windscreen at well over 1 mi (1.6 km) and it was easy to under-estimate the range. In action, torpedoes were often released too far away from the target, although there were instances of torpedoes being released too close.
Once the torpedo had been dropped, if there was room, a sharp turn away from the enemy was possible: more often than not the aircraft had to fly around or over the ship, usually at full-throttle and below mast height. A sharp pull-up could be fatal, as it could expose a large area of the aircraft to the guns.
 
Attacks on capital ships
Some of the Beaufort's most notable actions were attacks on warships of the German Kriegsmarine:
•   On 21 June 1940, nine Beauforts of 42 Squadron attacked the Scharnhorst off the Norwegian coast. No torpedoes were available at RAF Wick and a dive bombing attack was carried out using two 500 lb (230 kg) bombs. The Beauforts encountered Bf 109s protecting the battlecruiser and only four of them returned. Shortly after this the Beauforts were grounded for modifications to their Taurus engines.
•   In early April 1941, after an air raid on Brest by Bomber Command, the Gneisenau had to move out of her dry-dock because of an unexploded bomb. Photo reconnaissance revealed that the ship was in the inner harbour. An estimated 1,000 flak guns of all calibres protected the base and, adding complication to the danger, was the realisation that Gneisenau was only about 500 yd (460 m) from a harbour mole, requiring extremely accurate torpedo drops. Finally, the aircraft would be forced into a steep banking turn during the escape to avoid rising ground surrounding the harbour. In spite of the dangers 22 Squadron, based at RAF St Eval was ordered to make a torpedo attack, timed to take place just after dawn on 6 April 1941. It was planned to attack the torpedo nets, which were thought to be protecting the ship, using three Beauforts armed with bombs; another three Beauforts would then attack the ship with torpedoes. However, following heavy rain that had drenched the airfield, the bomb-carrying aircraft became bogged down. Because of a sea mist the other three Beauforts arrived at Brest independently; one, flown by F/O Kenneth Campbell, managed to penetrate the harbour and torpedo the Gneisenau, but was shot down immediately afterwards. Campbell was awarded the VC and his Observer, Sergeant J.P. Scott of Canada, the DFM. The other two crew members were Sgts R.W. Hillman and W. Mallis.
•   On the night of 12/13 June 1941, 13 Beauforts of 42 Squadron, based at RAF Leuchars and a detachment of five Beauforts of 22 Squadron, operating from Wick, were sent out to find the heavy cruiser Lutzow and an escort of four destroyers which had been sighted near Norway. At midnight a signal from a Blenheim of 114 Squadron confirmed the position of the ships, but underestimated their speed. Most of the Beauforts failed to find the ships except for one 42 Squadron aircraft piloted by Flight Sergeant Ray Loviett, who had become separated from the main force. His attack took the Lutzow by surprise (the Beaufort had been mistaken for a Ju 88 which was known by the ships to be on patrol in the area) and, without a defensive shot being fired, Loviett's torpedo hit her on the port side. Lutzow was under repairs for six months. During the famous Operation Cerberus, the "Channel Dash" by Scharnhorst and Gneisenau and the heavy cruiser Prinz Eugen which took place from 12 February 1942, three Beaufort units, with a total of 33 serviceable aircraft, were available: 22 Squadron was under orders to move to Singapore. 42 Squadron, based at Leuchars in Scotland, were supposed to move to Manston but had been delayed by snow. 86 and 217 squadrons were in position to attack the German ships. For various reasons only 11 Beauforts sighted the battlecruisers and launched torpedoes. Three were shot down.
One of the conclusions reached by a later Court of Inquiry was that a faster, longer-ranged torpedo bomber than the Beaufort was needed: Bristol already had under way a torpedo carrying conversion of their Beaufighter, itself a development of the basic Beaufort airframe, and were later to produce the Brigand.
•   The final major operation to feature Beauforts before they were moved to other theatres, was an attack on the heavy cruiser Prinz Eugen. A report reached Coastal Command on 16 May 1942 that this ship, escorted by two destroyers, was off Trondheim steaming south-west at high speed. A strike force was formed consisting of 12 Beauforts of 42 Squadron, with six Blenheims of 404 (RCAF) Squadron and four flak-suppression Beaufighters, two each from 235 Squadron and 248 Squadron. When the Prinz Eugen was sighted it was discovered that she was escorted by four destroyers. The Beaufighters went in first, raking the ships with cannon fire, as the Blenheims made dummy torpedo runs to further distract the gunners. Some Bf 109s (more than likely from I./JG 5) appeared and the Blenheims attempted to fend them off as the Beauforts started their attack. Three Beauforts were shot down by defensive fire from the ships before they could launch their torpedoes and the nine torpedoes which were launched failed to hit the target. One Beaufort, already damaged by flak, was then attacked by three Bf 109s: in spite of further heavy damage, the pilot made a successful crash-landing back at base. In the meantime another strike force of fifteen Beauforts from 86 Squadron was sent too far north by a reporting error. They too were attacked by Bf 109s: four Beauforts were shot down (in return the crews claimed to have shot down five fighters) and, of the 11 Beauforts remaining, seven were forced to jettison their torpedoes.
In spite of its failure, this operation set the pattern for Coastal Command for future operations: Beaufighters were used for the first time in the flak-suppression and escort roles and there had been diversionary tactics used to try and reduce attention on the attacking torpedo aircraft. It also marked the end of Beaufort operations from Britain.
The remaining Beaufort squadrons now started moving east:
•   42 Squadron left Scotland in June 1942 bound for Ceylon, but operated in North Africa until December.
•   86 Squadron Beauforts and aircrews moved to the Mediterranean in July and the unit was reduced to cadre: In October it was re-equipped with Liberator IIIs. One ex-86 Squadron Beaufort flight, along with one from 217 Squadron, joined up with a flight from 39 Squadron on Malta, later becoming a part of a reconstituted 39 Squadron.
•   217 Squadron's ground echelon left for Ceylon in May 1942 while the Beauforts flew out via Malta. In August 217 Squadron, minus a Beaufort flight, moved on to Ceylon to be re-equipped with Hudsons. 22 Squadron at various times operated Beauforts out of Vavuniya and Ratmalana, Ceylon.
Mediterranean and Malta
The first Beaufort unit in the Mediterranean was 39 Squadron which had reformed in Egypt in January 1941. Initially equipped with Blenheims and Marylands the unit started re-equipping with Beaufort Is the following August.
The first operation in which Beauforts took part was an attack on an Italian convoy on 28 January 1942. The three Beauforts of 39 Squadron included in a large strike force succeeded in crippling the 14,000 ton (12,700 tonne) merchant ship Victoria (Count Ciano in his diaries called her "The pearl of the Italian Merchant Fleet"), which was then sunk by Albacores.
In another operation during the early hours of 15 June 1942, nine Beauforts of 217 Squadron, which had just flown in from England, took off from RAF Luqa, Malta to intercept ships of the Regia Marina which had sailed from Taranto. Few of the Beaufort crews had experience in night-flying: four aircraft failed to find the agreed rendezvous point and set out independently. One, flown by Flying Officer Arthur Aldridge discovered the Italian Fleet some 200 mi (320 km) to the east of Malta. Like Loviett's attack on the L?tzow, his Beaufort was mistaken for a friendly aircraft by Italian lookouts. Aldridge successfully torpedoed and crippled the heavy cruiser Trento. The anti-aircraft fire started only after Aldridge had escaped.
The main formation of Beauforts came in to attack guided in by the gunfire. In the confusion and the smokescreen which had been laid down by the Italian warships, 217 Squadron claimed several torpedo hits for one Beaufort which, because of heavy damage, belly-landed at Luqa. None of the other ships were hit. Trento was later sunk by two torpedoes fired by the submarine HMS Umbra, which had witnessed the aerial attack.
By July 1942, 86 Squadron Beauforts and crews had arrived on Malta and were soon absorbed into a reconstituted 39 Squadron, at first under the command of the inspirational Wing Commander Patrick Gibbs, while 217 squadron moved on to Ceylon. Most of the Beauforts used were the Twin-Wasp powered Mk. IIs which were modified with tropical sand filters over the carburettor air intakes. These created a great deal of drag, slowing down the aircraft and reducing range.
Over the next 11 months, the Beaufort force, now usually accompanied by Beaufighters, was instrumental in crippling the convoy supply lines which were vital to Rommel's Afrika Korps. At night, torpedo carrying Wellingtons of 38 Squadron[21] also played an important part in attacking convoys. Some important ships destroyed or badly damaged were:
•   MV (Motor Vessel) Reichenfels, 7,744 tons (7,025 tonnes): 21 June.
•   MV Rosalino Pilo, 8,300 tons (7,530 tonnes): 17 August.
•   Tanker Pozarica, 7,800 tons (7,925 tonnes): 21 August.
•   Tanker Dielpi, 1,500 tons (1,360 tonnes) : 27 August.
•   Tanker San Andrea, 5,077 tons (4,606 tonnes) : 30 August. (Gibbs' last operation.)
•   Tanker Proserpina, 5,000 tons (4,530 tonnes) : 27 October.
•   Tanker Thorsheimer, 9,955 tons (9,031 tonnes): 21 February 1943.
In June 1943, 39 Squadron, the last operational Beaufort unit, converted to Beaufighters.

During the Pacific War, the Beaufort performed a vital role for the RAAF. With the United States unable to supply many aircraft to Australia, the DAP Beaufort became a mainstay of the RAAF during 1941-44.
The first six Australian built Beauforts reached Singapore just after the Japanese invasion of Malaya in December 1941. It was soon decided that these Beauforts were under-armed and their crews were insufficiently trained and they were soon returned to Australia. Production continued to increase, reaching almost one a day in 1943. The Beaufort served with 19 squadrons and played an important role in the South West Pacific Area, as a maritime patrol and strike aircraft and bomber. Beauforts sank an impressive tonnage of merchant and naval shipping.

Variants
Beaufort I
Torpedo bomber, reconnaissance version for the RAF, powered by two Bristol Taurus sleeve valve radial engines. This is the first British production version.
Beaufort II
Torpedo bomber, reconnaissance version for the RAF, powered by two Pratt & Whitney Twin Wasp radial piston engines.
Beaufort III
Unbuilt version. It was intended to be powered by two Rolls-Royce Merlin XX inline piston engines.
Beaufort IV
One prototype only; powered by two Bristol Taurus XX radial piston engines.
Beaufort V
This was the first Australian built version, it was powered by two Pratt & Whitney R-1830-S3C4-G Twin Wasp radial piston engines; 50 built in Australia.
Beaufort VA
Similar to the Beaufort Mk V, but fitted with a larger tail; 30 built in Australia.
Beaufort VI
This version was powered by two Pratt & Whitney R-1830-S1C3 Twin Wasp radial piston engines; 40 built in Australia.
Beaufort VII
This version was fitted with Hamiliton Standard propeller; 60 built in Australia.
Beaufort VIII
Improved version fitted with an ASV radar, it could carry American or British mines or torpedoes; 520 built in Australia.
Beaufort IX
46 Beaufort aircraft were converted into light transport aircraft for the RAAF.
List of Bristol Beaufort operators
 Australia
  Canada
  New Zealand
  South Africa
  Turkey
  United Kingdom
Specifications (Beaufort)
General characteristics
•   Crew: 4
•   Length: 44 ft 2 in (13.46 m)
•   Wingspan: 57 ft 10 in (17.63 m)
•   Height: 14 ft 3 in (4.34 m)
•   Wing area: 503 ft² (46.73 m²)
•   Empty weight: 13,107 lb (5,945 kg)
•   Loaded weight: 21,230 lb (9,629 kg)
•   Powerplant: 2× 1,130 hp - 843 kW Bristol Taurus VI, 14-Cylinder engines.
2x 1,200 hp - 895 kW Pratt & Whitney Twin Wasp, 14-Cylinder engines.
, () each
Performance
•   Maximum speed: 271.5 mph (236 kn, 420 km/h) at 6,500 ft (1,981 m).
•   Cruise speed: 255 mph at 6,500 ft (221 kn, 410 km/h) at 6,500 ft (1,981 m)
•   Range: 1,600 mi (1,400 nmi, 2,600 km)
•   Service ceiling: 16,500 ft (5,030 m)
•   Wing loading: 42.2 lb/ft² (206 kg/m²)
•   Power/mass: 0.106 hp/lb (175 W/kg)
Armament
•   Guns:
o   3 × .303 in (7.7 mm) Vickers GO machine guns (two in dorsal turret, one in port wing).
o   1 × .303 in (7.7 mm) Browning machine gun in rear-firing chin blister
•   Bombs:
o   1 × 1,605 lb (728 kg) 18 in (457 mm) Mk XII torpedo or.
o   2,000 lb (907 kg) of bombs or mines.
Thanks for looking.  :)

baronbutcher:
ARADO AR 240Two interesting Luftwaffe aircraft although not essential still love to see one (or two!): preference for the Arado Ar 240.

FIRST UP: The Arado Ar 240 was a German twin-engine multi-role heavy fighter aircraft developed for the Luftwaffe during World War II by Arado Flugzeugwerke. Its first flight was in 1940, but problems with the design hampered development and it remained only marginally stable through the prototype phase. The project was eventually cancelled, with the existing airframes used for a variety of test purposes.
Design and development
The Ar 240 came about as the response to a 1938 request for a much more capable second generation heavy fighter to replace the Messerschmitt Me 110, which was becoming outdated. Both Arado and Messerschmitt responded. Messerschmitt's response, the Me 210, was a totally new design, but thanks to Messerschmitt's experience with the Zerstorer ("Destroyer") concept, it would be able to enter service quickly. Arado's design was considerably more ambitious for the smaller firm, a dream project of Arado's chief designer, Walter Blume, since the mid-1930s. While it would take some time before deliveries of the Arado design could begin, the Reichsluftfahrtministerium (German War Ministry, RLM) was nevertheless interested enough to order prototypes of both designs.
The Arado Ar 240 was designed to an RLM 1938 response to replace the twin engine, two seat Messerschmitt BF 110 Zerstorer heavy fighter, being made obsolete by the changing face of war. The Arado firm and the Messerschmitt firm (the latter already experienced in such a design) were tabbed for developing the BF 110's eventual replacement with Messerschmitt holding the edge. In the end, the Messerschmitt design was accepted as the Me 210 while the Arado design was relegated to nothing more than a test airframe for the company's future designs. The Ar 240 was done in by its overly ambitious and complicated design and poor flight characteristics though it did exhibit exceptional performance capabilities nonetheless.
[
Prior to this point, Arado had invested heavily in several lines of basic research. One was the development of the "Arado travelling flap" which offered excellent low-speed lift performance. Another was ongoing work into the design and construction of pressurized cockpits, which dramatically lower pilot fatigue for any flight above about 4,500 m (14,760 ft). Finally, they had also invested in a technically advanced remote-control defensive gun system, which they had been experimenting with for several years. The system used a gunsight located in the rear cockpit, operated by the navigator/gunner, which had optics on both the top and bottom of the aircraft allowing aim in any direction. The gunsight was hydraulically connected to well-streamlined "pancake"-shaped turrets on the top and bottom of the aircraft. For the Ar 240 design, the Arado engineers combined all this research into a single airframe.
For outright performance, they used as small a wing as reasonable, thereby lowering parasite drag (at the expense of greater lift-induced drag). Normally this would make the plane have "impossibly high" landing speeds, but this was offset by the use of a huge travelling flap and leading edge slats for high low-speed lift. When the flaps were extended, the upper portion of the ailerons would remain in place while the lower portion extended rearward, essentially increasing the wing area.
The Daimler-Benz DB 601 inline engines were conventionally installed and equipped with a three-blade fully-adjustable propeller. The radiators were somewhat unique however, quite similar to those fitted to the Junkers Ju 88 which pioneered them, consisting of an annular block located in front of the engine, but with the Ar 240 partially covering each of them in an oversized propeller spinner, with the air entering through a large hole in the front of the spinner and exiting out the cowl flaps. As with the Jumo inline-powered versions of the Ju 88, this made the plane look as if it was mounting a radial engine, and the Ar 240, like later Jumo inline-powered fighter aircraft from the Focke-Wulf firm (the Fw 190 D, Ta 152 and twin engined Ta 154) also benefitted from the simpler setup of an annular radiator just forward of the engine.
The fuel cells in the wings were provided with a newly developed self-sealing system that used thinner tank liners, allowing for more fuel storage. The liners could not be easily removed as they stuck to the outer surface of the tank, so in order to service them, the wing panelling had to be removable. This led to a complex system for providing skinning stiff enough to be handled in the field, complicating construction and driving up weight.
As with all German multi-use aircraft designs of the era, the aircraft was required to be a credible dive bomber. The thick wing panelling wasn't suitable for piercing for conventional dive brakes, so a "petal"-type brake was installed at the extreme rear of the fuselage which opened to the sides when activated. When closed the brake looked like a stinger, extending beyond the horizontal stabilizer and twin fins.
Finally, the cockpit was fully pressurized. This would not have been easy if the armament had to be hand-operated by the gunner, as it would have required the guns to penetrate the rear of the cockpit canopy. However, the remote control system allowed for them to be located in turrets in the unpressurized rear of the fuselage.
All of this added weight combined with the small wing led to a very high wing loading of 330 kg/m² (221 lb/ft²), compared to an average of about a 100 for a single-seat fighter.
Testing and evaluation
Technical specifications were first published in October 1938, followed by detailed plans later that year. In May 1939, the RLM ordered a batch of six prototypes. The first Ar 240 V1 prototype, DD+QL, took to the air on 25 June 1940, and immediately proved to have poor handling in all axes, and it also tended to overheat during taxiing.
The handling was thought to be the result of the ailerons being too small given the thick wing, so the second prototype was modified to have larger ones, as well as additional vertical fin area on the dive brakes to reduce yaw. In addition small radiators were added to the gear legs to improve cooling at low speeds, when the gear would normally be opened. Ar 240 V2, KK+CD, first flew on 6 April 1941, and spent most of its life at the factory as a test plane.
Ar 240 V3 followed, the first to be equipped with the FA 9 rear-firing armament system, developed jointly by Arado and DVL, armed with a 7.92 mm (.312 in) MG 81Z machine gun. Ar 240 V4 was the first to include an operational dive brake, and flew on 19 June 1941. Ar 240 V5 and V6 followed in December and January, including the upgraded FA 13 system using two 13 mm (.51 in) MG 131 machine guns in place of the MG 81Z for a considerable boost in firepower.

More info
Design of the Arado Ar 240 was headed up by Walter Blume, whose vision of this aircraft came about some years before. The design was to feature several groundbreaking components that included a fully pressurized cockpit for two, remote-controlled operated armament and a specially designed lift flap with a small overall wing surface area for low-speed venturing. In addition to its heavy fighter role, the Ar 240, like the Me 210 submitted design, was to be an inherently capable dive bomber design as well, complicating the Ar 240 design further with the introduction of a dive braking system. The end product, with all that the Arado team wanted to - and were forced to - fit into it, was a progressively heavy-laden design.
Externally, the Ar 240 followed a traditional twin-engine layout for the time. Engines were held out and away from the fuselage on a middle-mount monoplane wing assembly with the engine nacelle edge meeting up to the front of the cockpit nose and extended past the wing trailing edges. the fuselage was of a thin pencil-like design meeting in a tail section extending past the "T" style elevator and vertical fins with an additional vertical fin added to the extreme fuselage end. Crew accommodations amounted to two personnel - a pilot and a navigator/gunner - in a pressurized cockpit. The navigator/gunner was responsible for manning the two remote-controlled fuselage barbettes, each mounting twin 7.92m MG81 machine guns. An additional 2 x 7.92mm MG17 machine guns were available in fixed positions as well.
Models in the series became a list of prototype ventures from V-1 to V-6 each progressively featuring a new major component (the first prototype becoming airborne in 1940). With the arrival of the Ar 240A-0 series, the system had reach production stages. The definitive design would end up being the multi-purpose Ar 240C series of which several major variants would be developed.
Performance from a series of Daimler-Benz engines were impressive. The noted DB601A was of an in-line engine type, though designed in such a way as to appear as standard radials. Each engine amassed some 1,075 horsepower allowing for speeds of up to 384 miles per hour, a service ceiling of over 34,000 feet and a range of over 1,200 miles. As impressive as those statistics were, the Ar 240 still suffered from poor in flight characteristics that went on to doom the design. Nevertheless, the system was used in the unarmed reconnaissance role over England during the operational trials phase of the system's development at a time when few other two-engine platform types offered up such range. Reports of production totals amounted to a measly 14 systems in circulation.
Variants
Ar 240 A-0
Four pre-production aircraft.
Ar 240B
Proposed version
Ar 240 C-1
Heavy fighter version.
Ar 240 C-2
Night fighter version.
Ar 240 C-3
Light bomber version.
Ar 240 C-4
High-altitude reconnaissance version. The project was abandoned in favour of the Ar 440.
Ar 440
Improved variant with the fuselage stretched by 0.9m (35.5 in) and powered by the 1900hp (1417kW) DB 603G, the production aircraft would have had two 2000hp (1491kW) DB 627A/B engines. Prototype converted from a prototype Ar 240, total of four built in 1942. The type did not enter production and the programme was cancelled in 1943.
Specifications (Ar 240 A-0)
General characteristics
•   Crew: Two
•   Length: 12.8 m (42 ft 0? in)
•   Wingspan: 13.33 m (43 ft 9 in)
•   Height: 3.95 m (12 ft 11½ in)
•   Wing area: 31.3 m² (337 ft²)
•   Empty weight: 6,200 kg (13,669 lb)
•   Loaded weight: 9,450 kg (20,833 lb)
•   Powerplant: 2× Various Daimler-Benz V12 engines
Performance
•   Maximum speed: 618 km/h (334 kn, 384 mph) at 6,000 m (19,700 ft)
•   Cruise speed: 555 km/h (300 kn, 345 mph)
•   Range: 2,000 km (1,240 mi)
•   Service ceiling: 10,500 m (34,500 ft)
•   Rate of climb: 545 m/min (1,790 ft/min)
•   Climb to 6,000 m (19,700ft): 11 min
Armament
•   2 × fixed 7.92 mm (.312 in) MG 17 machine guns
•   Two remote-control barbettes with 2 × 7.92 mm (.312 in) MG 81 machine guns
•   3.968 lb (1.800 kg) bombs
FOCKE WULF FW 191
Second up: The Focke-Wulf Fw 191 was a prototype German bomber of World War II. Two versions were intended to be produced, a twin-engine version using the Junkers Jumo 222 engine and a four-engine variant which was to have used the smaller Daimler-Benz DB 605 engine. The project was eventually abandoned due to technical difficulties with the engines.

Design and development
In July 1939, the RLM issued a specification for a high-performance medium bomber (the "Bomber B" program). It was to have a maximum speed of 600 km/h (370 mph) and be able to carry a bomb load of 4,000 kg (8,820 lb) to any part of Britain from bases in France or Norway. Furthermore, the new bomber was to have a pressurized crew compartment, remotely-controlled armament and was to utilize two of the new 1,864 kW (2,500 hp) class of engines then being developed (Jumo 222 or Daimler Benz DB 604). Arado, Dornier, Focke-Wulf and Junkers participated in. The Arado Ar E340 was eliminated. The Dornier Do 317 was put on a low-priority development contract; and the Junkers Ju 288 and Focke Wulf Fw 191 were chosen for full development.
Dipl. Ing E. Kösel, who also worked on the Fw 189 reconnaissance plane, was supposed to have led the design team for the Fw 191. Overall, the Fw 191 was a clean, all-metal aircraft that featured a shoulder-mounted wing. Two 24-cylinder Jumo 222 engines (which showed more promise than the DB 604 engines) were mounted in nacelles on the wings. An interesting feature was the inclusion of the Multhopp-Klappe, an ingenious form of combined landing flap and dive brake, which was developed by Hans Multhopp. The entire fuel supply was carried in five tanks located above the internal bomb bay, and in two tanks in the wing between the engine nacelles and fuselage.
The tail section was of a twin fins and rudders design, with the tailplane having a small amount of dihedral. The main landing gear legs retracted to the rear and rotated 90° to lie flat in each engine nacelle, much like the main gear on the production versions of the Ju 88 already did. Also, the tailwheel retracted forwards into the fuselage. A crew of four sat in the pressurized cockpit, and a large Plexiglas dome was provided for the navigator; the radio operator could also use this dome to aim the remotely-controlled rear guns.
The Fw 191 followed Luftwaffe practice in concentrating the crew in the nose compartment. This was pressurised for high-altitude operations.[2] The proposed operational armament consisted of one 20 mm MG 151 cannon in a chin turret, twin 20 mm MG 151 in a remotely controlled dorsal turret, twin 20 mm MG 151 in a remotely-controlled ventral turret, a tail turret with one or two machine guns and remotely-controlled weapons in the rear of the engine nacelles. However, different combinations were mounted in the prototype aircraft. Sighting stations were provided above and below the crew compartment.
The aircraft had an internal bomb bay. In addition, bombs or torpedoes could be carried on external racks between the fuselage and the engine nacelles. The design was to have had a maximum speed of 600 km/h (370 mph), a bomb load of 4,000 kg (8,820 lb), and a range allowing it to bomb any target in Britain from bases in France and Norway.
Failure and End of Program
It is said that the installation of so many electric motors and wiring led to the nickname for the Fw 191 of "Das fliegende Kraftwerk" (the flying powerstation). This also had the detrimental effect of adding even more weight to the overburdened airframe, plus there was also the danger of a single enemy bullet putting every system out of action if the generator was hit. Dipl. Ing Melhorn took the Fw 191 V1 on its maiden flight early in 1942, with immediate problems arising from the lower rated engines not providing enough power, as was anticipated. One surprising problem that was encountered were the Multhopp-Klappe, which presented severe flutter problems when extended, and pointed to the need for a redesign. At this point, only dummy gun installations were fitted and no bomb load was carried. After completing ten test flights, the Fw 191 V1 was joined by the similar V2, but only a total of ten hours of test flight time was logged. The 1,864 kW (2,500 hp) Junkers Jumo 222 engines which would have powered the Fw 191 proved troublesome. In total only three prototype aircraft, V1, V2 & V6, were built. The project was crippled by engine problems and an extensive use of electrical motor-driven systems. Problems arose almost immediately when the Jumo 222 engines were not ready in time for the first flight tests, so a pair of 1,193 kW (1,600 hp) BMW 801MA radial engines were fitted. This made the FW 191 V1 seriously underpowered. Another problem arose with the RLM's insistence that all systems that would normally be hydraulic or mechanically activated should be operated by electric motors.
At this point, the RLM allowed the redesign and removal of the electric motors (to be replaced by the standard hydraulics), so the Fw 191 V3, V4 and V5 were abandoned. The Fw 191 V6 was then modified to the new design, and also a pair of specially prepared Jumo 222 engines were fitted that developed 1,641 kW (2,200 hp) for takeoff. The first flight of the new Fw 191 took place in December 1942 with Flugkapitän Hans Sander at the controls. Although the V6 flew better, the Jumo 222 were still not producing their design power, and the whole Jumo 222 development prospect was looking bad due to the shortage of special metals for it. The Fw 191 V6 was to have been the prototype for the Fw 191A series.
Since the Jumo 222 engines were having a lot of teething problems, and the Daimler Benz DB 604 had already been abandoned, a new proposal was put forth for the Fw 191B series.
The V7 through V12 machines were abandoned in favor of using the Fw 191 V13 to install a pair of Daimler Benz DB 606 or 610 engines, which were basically coupled pairs of either DB 601 or 605 12-cylinder engines. Their lower power-to-weight ratio, however, meant that the armament and payload would have to be reduced. It had already been decided to delete the engine nacelle gun turrets, and to make the rest manually operated. Five more prototypes were planned with the new engine arrangement, V14 through V18, but none were ever built.
One final attempt was made to save the Fw 191 program, this time the Fw 191C was proposed as a four engined aircraft, using either the 999 kW (1,340 hp) Jumo 211F, the 969 kW (1,300 hp) DB 601E, the 1,099.9 kW (1,475.0 hp) DB 605A or the 1,099.9 kW (1,475.0 hp) DB 628 engines. Also, the cabin would be unpressurized and the guns manually operated; a rear step in the bottom of the deepened fuselage being provided for the gunner.
Unfortunately, at this time, the whole "Bomber B" program had been canceled, due mainly to no engines of the 1,864 kW (2,500 hp) class being available, which was one of the primary requirements in the "Bomber B" program. Although the Fw 191 will be remembered as a failure, the air frame and overall design eventually proved themselves to be sound, only the underpowered engines and insistence on electric motors to operate all the systems eventually dooming the aircraft. All in all, there were only three Fw 191s ever built (V1, V2 and V6), and no examples of the Fw 191B or C ever advanced past the design stage. The project was eventually scrapped.
General characteristics
•   Crew: 360kg/794lb*
•   Length: 18.45 m (60 ft 6 in)
•   Wingspan: 25 m (82 ft)
•   Height: 4.80 m (15 ft 9 in)
•   Wing area: 70.5 m² (759 ft²)
•   Empty weight: 11,970 kg (26,389 lb)
•   Loaded weight: 19,575 kg (43,155 lb)
•   Powerplant: 2× Junkers Jumo 222 liquid-cooled engines, 1,641 kW (2,200 hp) each
Performance
•   Maximum speed: 620 km/h @ 6,350 m (385 mph @ 20,800 ft)
•   Range: 3,600 km (2,237 mi)
•   Service ceiling: 9,700 m (31,824 ft)
•   Rate of climb: 6.1 m/s (1,200 ft/min)
•   Wing loading: 278 kg/m² (57 lb/ft²)
•   Power/mass: 170 W/kg (0.10 hp/lb)
Armament
•   2 × 7.92 mm (.312 in) MG 81 machine guns in chin turret
•   2 × 7.92 mm (.312 in) MG 81 machine guns in remote-controlled turret at rear of each engine nacelle
•   1 × 20 mm MG 151/20 cannon and 2 × 13 mm (.51 in) MG 131 machine guns in dorsal turret
•   1 × 20 mm MG 151/20 cannon and 2 × 13 mm (.51 in) MG 131 machine guns in ventral turret
•   4,200 kg (9,240 lb) of bombs (Two torpedoes could also be carried internally)
•   * In the original Focke-Wulf Fw 191 w/Jumo 222 factory documents this is the weight allocated for crew

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page