In view of today’s weather forecast we will be open at the Green, but there will be free entry, with much reduced attractions, and I guess not much flying. Hooligan’s Leonides was a fine example of the instant conversion of money into noise. We would like to thank UK Gliderborne for putting on several battles even though the ‘Germans’ never turned up (You can never trust those Germans) I hope the Red Berets’ march on Wombourne was successful last night and they found their objective, a chip shop open on Easter Sunday !

These pictures were taken some time ago. Much of what is depicted is no longer there. There have been thefts of large items quite recently. One wonders if spreading clips like this will only encourage more.

This is a cracking idea. I have also just devised a consortium to build a flying Boulton Paul Defiant. I will provide details of where to send the money once the glue argument has been solved; for indeed, there are wooden parts to a Defiant.

If enough money is sent in we might even build two.

And I thought the Balliol centre console I was working on yesterday was in a bad way ! I.m glad I don’t have to straighten that one !

The Defiant did not normally need depression on the guns, because attacks were usually made from underneath, or in crossover passes. At no time during the daylight battles over Holland, Dunkirk and during the Battle of Britain did bombers dive to low altitude to protect themselves, they maintained their formation. On 29th May 1940 in its second sortie over Dunkirk No.264 Squadron saw a large number of Ju.87s making diving attacks on the beaches. Sqd Ldr Hunter wisely did not try to attack the dive bombers in the dive, but flew to low altitude and waited for them to pull out. The Stukas were then shot from the skies as the Defiants drew alongside and poured fire into each one in turn. A total of 18 Stukas were claimed, though it has since been proved that this number was greatly exaggerated, probably as more than one Defiant was attacking each target without necessarily realising it.

Whenever No.264 Squadron attacked unescorted bombers they shot them down with alacrity, that was what they were designed for. When they were themselves attacked by Bf.109s they could protect themselves very effectively. They achieved what they were supposed to do, its just that single seat fighters were just as effective against bombers, contradicting the theory which had spawned the turret fighter in the first place.

Underside defence on bombers was supposed to be undertaken by retractable turrets (eg. BP Type K) but these turrets were cancelled just as they were being put in production. There was then a Spec. for low-drag underside turrets with periscope sighting (eg. BP Type R) but these were cancelled just as the prototypes had been proven. Underside defence was thus reliant on the other turrets and when the Type B (The redesigned Defiant turret with 25 degrees of depression) was cancelled the Halifax was going into service with no underside defence worth speaking about. Thousands of Bomber crew paid for this Air Ministry muddle with their lives.