hounsell%nmerh6@uunet.UU.NET (Rob Hounsell) (01/20/90)
From: Rob Hounsell <!hounsell%nmerh6@uunet.UU.NET> I'd like to know what the general differences are between "interceptor", "air superiority", "pursuit", and "intruder" aircraft. What are their various roles? I've seen references to all these in various places, but never an explanation. For instance, I used to have a plastic model of the deHaviland Mosquito, which I built in the "Intruder" config. (green-grey camouflage on top, flat black underneath, so I assume it's for use around dusk)..... Rob -- +-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Rob Hounsell | | | UUNET: ...!chekov!mcrae!hounsell | if !(engage(brain) | know_facts()) { | | INTERNET: hounsell@nmerh6 | assert(drivel); | | PHONE: (613) 765-2904 | } | | ESN: 395-2904 | | +-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) (01/24/90)
From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) >From: Rob Hounsell <!hounsell%nmerh6@uunet.UU.NET> > I'd like to know what the general differences are between "interceptor", "air >superiority", "pursuit", and "intruder" aircraft.... Interceptors defend friendly territory against bombing attacks. Air- superiority aircraft maintain control of the air above a battlefield. "Pursuit" is basically a very obsolete synonym for fighters in general and air-superiority aircraft in particular. Intruder aircraft went out over enemy territory at night to hang around airfields and shoot down enemy aircraft returning from missions (when their crews were tired and they were short on fuel and ammunition) (works great as long as you can remain undetected while loitering around hostile airfields; more or less obsoleted by the rise of radar). Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry henry@zoo.toronto.edu
whh@PacBell.COM (Wilson Heydt) (02/06/90)
From: whh@PacBell.COM (Wilson Heydt) In article <13565@cbnews.ATT.COM> stick@clmqt.marquette.Mi.US (Stickster) writes: > Mosquitos were ideal intruder aircraft. Hard to detect, hard to >catch, and maneuverable enough for the tricky art of low-level. > >[mod.note: Correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't Mosquitos generally >used as high-altitude aircraft ? For the early part of the war, >at least, they could fly higher and faster than the German night-fighters. >- Bill ] The first 50 Mosqiutoes ordered were to be as-- 20 Light Bombers 20 Night Fighters 10 Photo Recon This while the RAF observer sent to see the first demo watched the test pilot doing aerobatics over the field. The Mosquito was used in just about every imaginable way--including: Bombing (100-lb initially to 400-lb by the end of the war.) Night Fighter. Fighter-Bomber. Anti-Shipping (53-mm cannon--a modified 6-pounder anti-tank gun) Photo Recon The Pathfinder force was particularly fond of the Mosquito. One version of the plane was built--though never used--to be carrier based with folding wings. These planes were later refitted with fixed wings and sold to the Iraelis--who used them in combination with P-51 Mustangs in 1956. (Probably one of the best balanced-- not to mention fastest--piston driven light attack forces ever assembled.) For a real flavor of combat in the Mosquito read "Terror in the Right Hand Seat." --Hal ======================================================================= Hal Heydt |Surely the end of the world is at hand: Analyst, Pacific*Bell | Children no longer obey their parents 415-823-5447 | and *everyone* wants to write a book. whh@pbhya.PacBell.COM | --from a Babylonian clay tablet
GSINCLAIR@VAXC.CC.MONASH.EDU.AU (Geoff Sinclair) (02/07/90)
From: Geoff Sinclair <GSINCLAIR@VAXC.CC.MONASH.EDU.AU>@vaxc.cc.monash.edu.au In article <13565@cbnews.ATT.COM>, our moderator writes: > > [mod.note: Correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't Mosquitos generally > used as high-altitude aircraft ? For the early part of the war, > at least, they could fly higher and faster than the German night-fighters. > - Bill ] For the record the Mosquito existed in (at least) the following versions, Night Fighter, II, XII, XIII, XVII, XXX Unarmed Bomber IV, V, VII, IX, XVI, XX, XXV Fighter Bomber VI, XVIII (TseTse with 57mm gun) Photo Recon I (plus other marks) The Fighter Bomber versions were used for day strikes as well as intruders and anti shipping strikes. In the end, after considerable argument about risks of letting the Germans see the latest British radar, a few of the night fighters were used to escort night bomber formations. The Bomber versions were used in day and night attacks (The Light Night Strike Force), as well as pathfinders. The end of the war stopped a carrier based version from being developed. Even BOAC (now British Airways) used some to fly to Sweden. In summary the plane could simultaneously lay good claim to be the best night fighter, best light bomber, best fighter bomber, best photo recon and fastest war plane all at the same time. Low level attacks became a specialty of some Mosquito squadrons. In the end they became quite good at such strikes as bombing Gestapo occupied buildings, even bouncing the bombs off the roadway in front of the building and through the front wall. That way collateral damage was minimised. Geoff Sinclair Internet: GSINCLAIR@vaxc.cc.monash.edu.au or GSINCLAIR@vaxc.cc.monash.oz PSImail: PSI%0505235621000::GSINCLAIR
whh@PacBell.COM (Wilson Heydt) (02/12/90)
From: whh@PacBell.COM (Wilson Heydt) In article <13763@cbnews.ATT.COM> whh@PacBell.COM (Wilson Heydt) writes: > >Bombing (100-lb initially to 400-lb by the end of the war.) Make that 1000 to 4000. Somewhere a zero got dropped. . . --Hal ======================================================================= Hal Heydt |Surely the end of the world is at hand: Analyst, Pacific*Bell | Children no longer obey their parents 415-823-5447 | and *everyone* wants to write a book. whh@pbhya.PacBell.COM | --from a Babylonian clay tablet