Re: BOB aircraft armour
 

Mod #273 - fit self sealing to lower tank, 27-7-40

Re: BOB aircraft armour
 

Then all of this raises a number of questions. If the modification of the inclusion of back armour was accepted in late 1939 , then why does it appear that it took so many months for this to apparently reach the factories and subsequently operational squadrons, I wonder? There are a number of anecdotal accounts in pilot memoirs which bemoan the lack of armour plating behind the head in early to mid 1940, so was it merely a case of it taking a number of months to introduce the addition and for it to be seen in numbers in operational squadrons or was this dragged out for some particular reason or fault?

Don't have the answers but interested to hear others views and opinions on this.

Re: BOB aircraft armour
 

The reference I know is from Fighter Pilot. 1 and 73 Sqs were the first deployed and took their prewar aircraft with them, so clearly would not have any such mod. I suspect it is partly the time to introduce the mod, and partly the time for such aircraft to get out to the frontline units in France - which for much of this time had very little attrition and hence no need for replacements. Do the other references come from squadrons early to deploy?

One reasonable point is that armour plate takes rather more time than simple alloys to produce and indeed to work to the desired shape and fittings. There may well have been priority problems: resulting in aircraft coming off the line fitted "for but not with".

It may have been a different matter for 607 (my own particular interest) which was equipped in the field with new P series Hurricanes in April 1940.

I quite agree that September to April does seem long: it would be interesting to find more about this. However, histories tend to be a bit vague about modifications in between the milestones of Mark numbers: which is why the rapid conversion to constant speed props in June 1940 stands out as so significant.

Re: BOB aircraft armour
 

Trust No1!!

"In Omnibus Princeps" - First in all Things or, as we saw it, Quicker by Bus!!

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v1...4/RAF2/no1.jpg

Re: BOB aircraft armour
 

From Ring`s old site.

As of May 10, 1940

no Spitfire Squadrons,
5 Hurricane Squadrons

have armor fitted. 2 Hurricane Squadrons will have armor fitted shortly.

http://i38.photobucket.com/albums/e1.../hsarmour1.jpg

Description of Spitfire I armor from German tech report.

- 4,3mm armor plate in front of fuel tank
- 3,5mm dural plate above top fuel tank (deflector plate)
- 38mm armored glass front, and 'davor Spaltabdeckplatte (4,5mm)'
- 6,2mm armored headrest
- 4,5mm plate behind pilots back

The whole thing weights 51 kg.

Thing that makes me wonder is the 4,5mm back plate. This doesn`t seem to be sufficient against any sort of AP munition.
As far as I know, the lower fuel tank on the Spitfire (or the upper?) was never self sealing for technical reasons, namely, the lack of space.


Armor on Bf 109s and especially, the 110 is a bit of a mystery. It is clear that early Emils did not have armor either. It is also clear that some sort of armor was fitted by December 1939, as the preliminary Emil E-1/E-3 manual issued on 16 December 1939 (kinda funny, considering the Emil was in production since late `38..) notes that the loading plans are not valid for aircraft with armor plates.. I presume the manual still had some early Ladeplan which were now obsolate, but not yet replaced. Pictures of BoB-period aircraft clearly show the armored headrest, too, and there are some pictures of armored glass fitted, the latter, however, appears to be rare; I suppose it was useful when fighting bombers, and RAF bombers seen in the daylight after France were rare, therefore, the armored glass was probably not preferred.

Foreign evaluation repororts are not very helpful, since both the British and the French had tested the same aircraft, Wnr 1304, and that aircraft was captured back in 1939, appearantly before armor was retrofitted, as it was noted by the French that it did not carry armor.

Re: BOB aircraft armour
 

Who was firing AP munitions when the armour was designed in 1939? The standard 109 armament of the time was 4x0.79mm mgs. 4.5mm would be enough to stop a direct hit by an mg bullet, and at least shrapnel from cannon. A direct hit by a 20mm might penetrate, but the early MG FF wasn't the most effective of aircraft cannon. I bow to superior knowledge of its penetrating abilities.

Like all things in aircraft design, it is a trade-off. Tanks don't fly.

Re: BOB aircraft armour
 

Thanks.

Re: BOB aircraft armour
 

Yesterday I received the following book from Midland Counties.

Knights of the Skies: Armour protection for British fighting aeroplanes.
Michael C. Fox, Air Research Publications 2006, ISBN 1-871187-50-8

I haven't finished it, but it certainly covers the time period concerned in this thread. It begins with the first British AA trials in 1910, and continues until the acceptance of the need for armour on British ground attack aircraft, immediately prior to the Hurricane Mk.IV and regrettably not covering the armour fitted to late Typhoons.

It looks to be very good indeed.