DH 98 Best Bomber WWII

I just came across some info today that said the US 'Carpetbaggers' flew mossies as well, late war, so it could be that the consensus is due to, or perhaps proved by it being in such widespread use.

Anyone know if the Soviets got any as lend lease?

 

Not to throw a dead mouse into the punch bowl, but if this aircraft was so great and could do so wide a variety of combat roles, does it not beg the question why did England build so many other types of aircraft or aquire US made planes. What I mean to ask is there a production or resource reason that would limit the number of Mosquito's that could realisticly be made. I seem to recall that during the time of the American Revolution , Go Patriots, that the Royal Navy was finding it more difficult to aquire the wood needed to fill all her ship needs and that was one of the reasons for the desire to hold onto her American colonies. Could something similar be the case? If so cancell my order of Mosquito's.

 

most of the wood came from Canada IIRC which wasn't short of it.

as to why any others;

there was probably no consensus about it being the best until after the war
it couldn't carry the largest bombs
one of the beauties of the plane was it could be built by furniture workshops and Goering's 'piano factories', but to get a metal plane factory to build it would have been difficult and time consuming
engines as always were probably the limiting factor early war
the Americans were just giving their planes away

 

Production of Mosquitoes was never a major problem - but production of skilled Mosquito crews was.....

( Don't forget also that Mosquitoes were built in Cnada and Mosquito engines were built in Detroit...)

 

Belasar wrote:

I don't know the answer to your question about production, your point is an interesting one and deserves further research. I would say that, IMO, best all around doesn't mean best for every situation. The allies had the resources to make specialty aircraft that were better at a specific task or addressed a specific need longer range, or heavier payload, or heavier defensive armament. I think where the "Mossie" excelled was that she could do many tasks well. Maybe not quite as well as a specific aircraft designed to fill a narrow specific role, but when required she could take on the mission and do a good job not a marginal one.

 

does that mean that it was harder to fly a mossie than any other type?

 

I don't think that it was harder to fly than others, just that there were several types of aircraft competing for a limited number of pilots. Along that line, you would need to train the pilots in several different attack missions, so it might take longer to produce a pilot who is capable to fly the many missions of the Mosquito, or you could have him specialize in one or a few. You would still need to train fighter pilots, but having no other bombers to fly, pilots for the "Mossie" should be easier to come by. Let's not forget that RAF pilots were also training here in the US too.

 

Most is correct, but not all. The plywood was a balsa wood sandwich with the balsa being the "meat" in the middle. I'll have to look it up, but as far as I recall the veneer for the sandwich was produced in the USA and shipped to Canada for construction. I cannot recall if it was poplar or spruce, but poplar sticks in my mind for some reason.

I'm not sure how much poplar Canada sprouts, but their balsa production is nill. The USA imported it from South America, and had for decades as I recall. It might have been something as "capitalist" as pre-existing contracts for balsa wood deliveries that put the US in the mix while we were still not "involved" directly.

I know it took, literally an act of Congress for Argentine beef to be included into our Lend-Lease supplies to the UK, don't know how the other would fit in.

 

Actually, to do it well, yes. It was a very light aircraft with very powerful engines and the assymetric 'swing' on landing and takeoff was hard to master. A fair few lot crews died in Mossie accidents of one kind or another, including - possibly - Guy Gibson. Not a forgiving aircraft and not one for the 'beginner'.....

 

Wasn't there something about this on another thread recently - think it may have been about wooden aircraft production and the horten but forget exactly what - i think there was a link to all that sort of detail - probably from you ?

 

thanks Martin - I was aware that the mossie crews were generally better but thought it was due to the missions rather than the planes - do you think that a mossie only fleet would have been limited then for pilots - wouldn't a reasonable in reality lancaster pilot be able to fly a mossie if that was what he trained for to start with?

if you think not then that is a good down point on the mossie-meter

also could there have been a 'basic' version with perhaps lesser hp engines for some missions/beginners etc.

 

Looking at cost benifit, risk-reward, perspective there could be a valid argument for employing DH-98's over conventional heavy bombers like the Stirling, Halifax and Lancaster. Yes the heavies carried a bigger load per plane, but each aircraft needed 4 engines and a crew of 6 to 8 men to fly it to its target and back. Two DH-98's would have the same number of engines, but 2/3rds to 1/2 of the crew. Further as it was both faster and more nimble than the heavies, and a fair number of German interceptors so it would seem to be more survivable than the heavies. Even if the combined bomb load of 2 DH-98's is less than a single heavy, does not its other advantages make up for it?

 

Well, don't forget that Gibson was an excellent Lanc' pilot !

But seriously, 4-engined 'heavy' pilots were derided at the time as being 'bus drivers'. The Mossie was a different kettle of fish altogether. True, excellent pilots ( eg Mickey Martin, Leonard Cheshire ) would do a great job in both ( or in fact, anything that flew). But most Bomber Command Lanc pilots were just average - which wasn't good enough for Mossie ops.

As for the 'basic' Mossie, I think that the Nachtjagd and flak would have put paid to that idea....

This probably isn't the place to discuss it, but the 'all-Mossie' bomber force idea does have validity and has been much considered since the war. I think at the time the idea was just too radical - too far from established doctrine. 'Pathfinder' Bennett was the main proponent of Mossie night-bomber ops and he was widely loathed by the RAF/Air Ministry hierarchy. Additionally, industry was fully geared to large-bomber production by the time the 8 Group 'Berlin Express' operations were underway....so it must remain a 'what if?'......

 

didn't the Germans essentially come to the same 'Schnellbomber' theory, largely based around the Dornier, but I'm not certain it can be exactly compared to a mossie force?

all the advantages seem worthwhile;

less escort requirements, less fuel (I think)/kg of bombs, fewer crew/kg of bombs, less predictable night raid times, shorter and less robust runways, less chance for nightfighters to 'wolfpack' (or whatever the air term equivalent is), less reduction in capacity per out of service for maintenance plane, more flexibility in route planning, better low level capabilities, lower radar returns etc.

seems like there must have been a reason more than just Bennett's unpopularity for them not to try at least one 'Massed Mossies' raid to see how it went - perhaps they did try? can't find any info.

 

I can see some short comings with the Mosquito.

With just a two man crew and limited space it has limited navigation capacity. Certainly, some were modified for pathfinding using specialized equipment but that is different from having a dedicated navigator aboard for long distance flights.

The aircraft had issues, as did most wooden aircraft, when used in high humidity hot tropical areas. These aircraft tended to deteriorate much faster in those conditions.

It wasn't ameniable to modification over much of the aircraft. For example, the rear half of the fuselage was largely unavailable for modification due to the nature of the plane's construction.

Wooden aircraft are more vulnerable to battle damage than metal aircraft are. In the Mosquito's case the wooden shell is a major strength item. Damage to the skin has more effect than on a stressed skin metal aircraft.

I also doubt that the British aircraft industry could have easily switched to building these aircraft enmasse. The plywood construction techinques are are completely different from stressed skin aluminum construction. They require different tooling, different jigs and large molds. All of that would have to be produced along with retraining the workforce in the new manufacturing techniques.
It is likely that the British made a consciencous decision to not expand production of the aircraft on that basis.

 

Martin, are you not aware of the LNSF, the Light Night Striking Force? It's often lost in the history of the Pathfinders, but by 1945 the LNSF was carrying out massed night ops' on their own, the RAF mustered 1,500 Mossie bombers. In fact, the last raid of the European War was launched by the LNSF, when seven squadrons were tasked against Kiel for the night of the 6th/7th of May to prevent the Flensburg government decamping for Norway! It was recalled just an hour into the flight.

By the very last months of the war, the Heavy bomber Force had become a very clumsy tool, and the flexibility of the LNSF far outweighed them. The Heavy Force's last operation, for instance, was on the nights immediately BEFORE the Kiel operation, when they were used for mining in the Kattegat!

 

Great info PR - here's some more detail;

 

I hadn't forgotten - 8 Group 'Berlin Express' was the LNSF !

But - there were only ever 8 LNSF Squadrons operational ..... and they didn't have 120+ aircraft each ( spare a thought for the poor groundcrew )

 

Martin, the term LSNF sometimes "wobbles" in memoirs and histories to cover both the LSNF 8 squadrons and 8 Group's total of 11 Mossie units out of its 19-squadron count of the Pathfinder Force by 1945 The LSNF (I prefer Bennett's term FNSF, "Fast Night Striking Force") if anything was characterised by its habit of dropping larger ordnance, especially its trademark 4,000lb HC cookies - which it did 36 times in succession on Berlin in 1945 as you know; overall, in the first five months of 1945 Mosquitos dropped 2,959 Cookies on German targets.

 

I'd always read Sitka Spruce. Which is native to the Northwest (Alaska, British Columbia, Washington, Oregon, and Northern California)
Picea sitchensis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
plants.usda.gov/plantguide/pdf/cs_pisi.pdf