I was reading a locally published book on Halfpenny Green the other week where I think it mentions the crews had to put up with Bothas for a while and really didn’t enjoy it. What then were the contributory factors toward its poor safety record?
The power issue is well-documented but was this due to a heavy airframe, draggy design or not enough oomf for the engines of the period?
I’ve also heard tales that it was rushed into service and had teething/design flaws, e.g. bad stability problems if the CofG shifted. What then were they other key areas, beside powerplant, that made it less than a desirable design?
By: TEXANTOMCAT - 23rd June 2017 at 16:10
Nice work sir!
By: NeilH - 23rd June 2017 at 13:54
Will do but don’t hold your breathe!
Here’s my last vac, HP Sparrow.[ATTACH=CONFIG]254259[/ATTACH]
By: TEXANTOMCAT - 23rd June 2017 at 12:55
Respect for a Vacform Botha! You clearly must have a masochistic side! 🙂 Please post pics when you’ve finished! TT
By: NeilH - 23rd June 2017 at 09:58
Thanks Duggy, that’s a good clear shot. Definitely observers window, one the other side too. The way light is coming through it suggests it has a window in the bottom face too so the observer can look down.
Also interesting that your photo shows fuel ejection pipes at the rear of the nacelles but photos earlier in the topic do not!
By: steve_p - 23rd June 2017 at 02:40
Observer’s window.
By: Duggy - 22nd June 2017 at 23:51
From the SDASM archives.
Might help with some other details.
And what is that fairing behind the cockpit???
By: NeilH - 22nd June 2017 at 14:50
These are excellent thanks. Also had a look at other Botha images on the site there are some really good ones of the turret.
By: posart - 22nd June 2017 at 13:53
Don’t know if these will help, enlargements from a couple of pictures in our ww2images.com library.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]254240[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]254241[/ATTACH]
By: Malcolm McKay - 22nd June 2017 at 13:02
[Thanks TT I have that aeroplane issue and its the best source of info available; I’ve scoured the photos looking for conclusive proof of porthole numbers and came to exactly the same conclusion as you, 5 on the port side 4 on s’board because the door is in the way of one. I think that’s the way I will go.]
That was the major defect of the Botha – it has a door so some poor ******* was tempted get in and try and fly it.
By: NeilH - 22nd June 2017 at 12:36
Thanks TT, I’ve seen the Flight Archive article and there’s some excellent interior and detail shots
By: NeilH - 22nd June 2017 at 12:34
Thanks TT I have that aeroplane issue and its the best source of info available; I’ve scoured the photos looking for conclusive proof of porthole numbers and came to exactly the same conclusion as you, 5 on the port side 4 on s’board because the door is in the way of one. I think that’s the way I will go.
By: Tin Triangle - 22nd June 2017 at 12:24
Just been perusing the Botha Database in the Feb ’13 Aeroplane which shows a number of Botha banking shots, unfortunately generally poor quality or heavily shaded! The best shows W5065 taken from below, port, and in front , one can just make out five portholes (two close together under the trailing edge of the wing either side of a panel joint, and three more widely spaced in front of that. There is also something which could be a sixth further forward again, although it’s two smaller, non-round dark patches. A later side view of a parked Botha from the starboard front quarter shows four portholes on the starboard side, I think the place of the aftmost window to port is taken by the entry door (which is windowless).
Let me know by PM if you want any scans, it also has some excellent interior shots of the prototype.
By: Cherry Ripe - 22nd June 2017 at 10:06
I vaguely remembered a spread of Botha details photos in the Flight archive, starts from here for four pages:
https://www.flightglobal.com/FlightPDFArchive/view/1941/1941%20-%202289.html
As usual the fuselage sides are generally obscured but one shot does show three small windows to starboard, tucked under the wing. Might be some other useful shots there for you.
In another issue was an unusual view of the split bomb-bay.
By: NeilH - 22nd June 2017 at 09:09
Thanks Brataccas but I’m not entirely convinced plus they are hard to make out. Where did the computer image come from and what’s it based on? Now if it was an actual photo from that angle….
By: Keefy041 - 22nd June 2017 at 00:03
Jesus a Contrail vacform Botha , best of luck and lots of respect , not made a vacform for years
By: brataccas - 21st June 2017 at 20:06
.
By: Arabella-Cox - 1st April 2009 at 12:59
The yard at Mag Elektron had several very corroded throttle boxes in the early 1980s.
There is one nicely restored one in our collection, plus another very poor example, useful only for spares.
I recall seeing others at aerojumbles and occasionally on eBay, so they are still out there somewhere.
I also remember the wreck on Bleaklow in The Peak District, being quite extensive in the 1970s. I think I read that it had later been buried to keep souvenir hunters away?
By: Phantom Phil - 1st April 2009 at 12:59
Many thanks Jon H.
Anyone want to add some more???
By: Jon H - 1st April 2009 at 12:55
http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showthread.php?t=72564&highlight=botha
By: Whitley_Project - 22nd July 2007 at 21:04
Blackburn Botha – surviving parts
The Botha thread got me thinking about surviving sections of Botha – there are a few sections still left on hillsides and I saw the remains of a throttlebox on ebay a few years ago but these are the only parts I am aware of.
Can anyone add to the list or provide more info/photos on what remains?
It would just be interesting to see what is out there. I’ll start a new thread for it.
Sign In
July 20, 2007 at 8:12 pm