Art Morneweck wrote:
> Scouting Force web site is being up-graded. It is well worth the wait.
> I seen it just before starting the up-date. B-17 Bomber pilots, after
> their 25 missions, were trained to fly the P-51 Mustang fighter plane.
> They then would fly a-head of the bombers and scout the target and
> tell bombers what they would run in-to
P-51 Scouts web site
http://www.littlefriends.co.uk/scouting.php
They are working on this site
TACTIC_P-51
GEORG-PETER EDER GOING THROUGH THE PACK, ...FLYING INVERTED THRU A FORMATION OF B-17'S, THIS WAS DONE SO AS TO MAKE A QUICK EXIT BY PUSHING THE STICK FORWARD TO DIVE AND GAIN SPEED SHOULD HE BE CHASED BY AMERICAN FIGHTERS."
I understand maintaining positive Gs - for both the airframe and the pilot's benefit in a high G turn - but I can't envision anyone consciously initiating and pressing home a gun run flying inverted as described in the narrative above? A normal 'heads up' gun run with a quick snap roll and inverted pull out through the vertical - yes, but inverted all the way - - clogged shell casing ejection chutes, etc.come reaily to mind.
Anybody ever hear of, or see, this tactic?
Whatever, it's an intersting picture that generated the thoughts above.
Not that uncommon of a tactic. It was used by both the Allies and Axis during WWII. The Austrailians used this tactic quite effectively in the Pacific against the Japanese bombers while flying their Curtiss P-40 Tomahawks. It gives the pilot an advantage to use the aircraft's energy egg (gravity) to escape and break off combat at will. Even P-47's from Hub Zemke's Wolfpack used this tactic quite effectively also when attacking large formations. The only drawback to using this tactic on piston powered aircraft is not to fly inverted for too long or else the pilot would starve the engine for oil. Some fighter aircraft were fitted with oil sump pumps later in the war to prevent engine damage cause from prolonged inverted flight. Another drawback on all aircraft would be the ammo belts might jamb up in the gun feeds therefore making the guns useless.
Andy I hasten to mention I never had the opportunity to try air to air combat, never saw a Germain plane during my 5 months in the 9th but, now, trains and tanks and other ground targets I could speak to with a little experience.
Concerning Georg-Peter Eders statement he would exit quickly by pushing the stick forward and dive just wouldn't work! If he did that he would be headed up in a dandy outside loop. Not the best evasive tactic to get away fast. Jims comments on comming in from above and diving through for speed to evade was adopted early on by the AVG Flying Tigers in their P40s as the best and only way they could out manuver the Jap aircraft. This is an old tactic that dates back to WW1.
I think there probably were many instances where fighters were firing from the INVERTED position but I seriously doubt if there was any intentional FLYING INVERTED ( negative G ) AND FIRING AT THE ENEMY as a routine practice. Aside from points you have made concerning the ammo feed and shell ejection and engine concerns of the average ww2 fighter, the problems the pilot would face would be considerable, hanging inverted on his harness trying to manuver and fire effectively would be beyond the skill level of the average fighter pilot of my aquaintance. Hub Zempke and one of his Squadron leaders Gabe Gabreski were in my POW camp when I arrived. Hub was the camp Commander and Gabe became a compound commander around January of 45. I had the pleasure of listening to their experiences and tactics and as you know pilots can't talk without using their hands and I don't ever remember either of them, or others, mentioning or demonstrating with hand motions, intentional INVERTED flying and firing as a tactic. Being inverted at times is a way of life for a fighter, but I have to believe during the actual firing there would be positive G force on the aircraft if at all possible regardless of the actual position of the aircraft.
Now that I've confused and amused I'll set back and see if I've started a small controversy.
Anyway, photographs/paintings being but a snap-shot in time, I'll chalk this one up to portraying Major Eder as being in the inverted at the end of a snap roll just prior to pulling the stick back and diving out the bomber stream. 'Carter's oil painting is wholly interesting despite his lack of air sense.
In the 'for-whatever-it's-worth' category, I've seen video's of CH-53 helicopters doing both a 360 roll and a 360 loop - strange sights indeed!
Remember talking to a C-47 pilot a few years ago who served with some Austrailians at a base on New Guinea. He told me those crazy Aussie pilots in their P-40's would sometimes buzz their field inverted at about 5 feet AGL then push the stick forward to climb back up into the vertical then roll out! He said those Aussie pilots were absolutely nuts with some of the aerial stunts they would pull over there!