Northrop P-61 Black Widow - Defender After Dark
Вставка
- Опубліковано 11 вер 2024
- 🇺🇸The Northrop P-61 was a night fighter designed to fulfill a largely overlooked gap in America’s air defenses in the years prior to its entry into the Second World War. Ambitious and groundbreaking, the P-61 would be the first fighter aircraft designed to carry a radar and was to be equipped with a state of the art remotely operated turret. However, the aircraft suffered numerous technical problems which led to many delays in its development, and several faults made their way into operational aircraft. Despite its quirks, the plane proved to be popular with its pilots, effective in service, and far more capable in its mission than preceding American night fighters, while also proving itself effective in roles not envisioned at the time of its design.
Based on an article by Henry H. with illustrations by Ed Jackson
plane-encyclop...
If you liked this video, please consider donating on Patreon or Paypal!
Patreon: / tankartfund
Paypal: www.paypal.me/...
Our website: plane-encyclop...
Facebook: / planeencyclopedia
Instagram: @plane_encyclopedia
Discord: / discord
Email: info@plane-encyclopedia.com
Based on an article by Henry H.
Narrated by Butane
Edited by Turn
Sources
Primary:
Ashkenas, I L. The Development of a Lateral Control System for Use with Large Span Flaps. No. 1015. NACA, 1946.
Pilot’s Flight Operating Instructions Army Model P-61A Airplane. (T. O. NO. 01-15FB-1). Commanding General, Army Air forces. January 15, 1944.
Pilot Training Manual for the Black Widow P-61. Office of Assistant Chief of Air Staff Training. 1944
Handbook of Operating Instructions for Radio Set SCR-720-A and Radio Set SCR-720-B. AN 08-10-181. Joint authority of the Commanding General, Army Air Forces, and the Commanding General, Army Service Force. (1943).
Northrop P-61 Black Widow Pilot's Flight Operating instructions. T.O No. AN 02-35VC-3. USAF, July 1945
Introduction Survey of Radar Part II. Air Publication 1093D Volume 1 First Edition. Air Ministry, June 1946.
Secondary:
Boiten, Theo. Nachtjagd Combat Archive 1944 Part Four. Surrey: Red Kite, 2021.
Boiten, Theo. Nachtjagd Combat Archive 1944 Part Five. Surrey: Red Kite, 2021.
Braham, Roscoe R. “Thunderstorms and the Thunderstorm Project”
Brown, Louis. Technical and Military Imperatives: a Radar History of World War II. Taylor & Francis, 1999.
Dean, Francis H. America's Hundred Thousand: the US Production Fighter Aircraft of World War II. Schiffer Publ., 1997.
Kolln, Jeff. The 421st Night Fighter Squadron in World War II. Schiffer Pub., 2001.
McFarland, Stephen Lee. The U.S. Army Air Forces in World War II: Conquering the Night: Army Air Forces Night Fighters at War. Air Force History and Museums Program, 1998.
Pape, Garry R., and Ronald C. Harrison. Queen of the Midnight Skies: the Story of America's Air Force Night Fighters. Schiffer Publishing Ltd., 1992.
Price, Alfred. Instruments of Darkness: the History of Electronic Warfare. Greenhill, 2005.
Thompson, Warren E. P-61 Black Widow Units of World War 2. Osprey, 1998.
“WW2 People's War - Reg EVERSON'S STORY.” BBC. BBC. Accessed August 1, 2021. www.bbc.co.uk/....
My Dad was a crew chief on the P-61 with the 427th NFS in the CBI. He loved the aircraft. Dad was the one man ground crew for his aircraft. Maintenance was more intensive on the 61 due mainly to it's much more sophisticated systems. Many of the pilots in their unit had the turrent removed as it wasn't really needed. That would give the aircraft 10-15 mph more airspeed, plus the 4 x 20mm cannon were all that was needed. The top turrent was mainly to defend against attacking enemy fighters, which seldom happened in actual combat missions. In short.....for it's designed mission.....detect and destroy enemy aircraft, the P-61 was an excellent aircraft. That was the opinion of my Dad and others who actually followed the aircraft into battle. Not third hand opinions of those who never served with the aircraft let alone real air combat experience. True, with a nightfighter, glorious dogfights were mostly didn't happen. Realistically.....ground would vector the nightfighter to the bogie's general area....the planes radar op would pickup the target and direct the pilot close enough for a visual conformation. Pilot would usually maneuver below an behind the target....then open fire. Most likely, the enemy never knew the nightfighter was stalking them.
The very first model I ever made was a p-61. Beautiful and deadly aircraft for sure.
In my opinion, this was one of the most beautiful aircraft to serve in the latter part of WWII.
It is still disputed which was the best night fighter of WW2, the P-61 Black Widow or the Heinkel 219 UH. A comparison between the two would be very interesting.
As a fan of both, that would be an interesting comparison. The He 219 was an attractive and forward-looking aircraft, but I’ve come to understand that its service record wasn’t particularly impressive. One of those machines whose legend doesn’t stand up to the scrutiny of more modern scholarship.
Mosquito hands down.
P-61 flight crews trained at Kissimmee Field, Florida until the 349th was transferred to California. In the early 50's, Don "Big Daddy" Garlits ran his Swamp Rat on the runways at Kissimmee.
One of my favorite planes! Excellent
I knew a lot of the P-61 personnel back when I did research for my P-61 projects. The biggest problem the P-61 had was Command. They did not have a clue how to use it, unlike the RAF and Luftwaffe who made night fighting an art form. This hampered the aircraft from being as good as it could have been.
Very well researched and presented!
I wish I had one of these 1:25
You don't have the SKILLS to fly that one!!! Get Neil Armstrong, he can fly anything!!!
Thanks for the channel and content. When describing the planes, can you add metric dimensions/values for us outside US as well?
Please keep the videos coming. I appeciate it.
fun fact when col muccis 6th ranger bttn was raiding camp cabanatuan to free pows, they called in a p-61 to distract camp guards and keep them looking up while they crawled into position.
Would like a video of the British Westland Whirlwind, a nice curves lady plane that no one talks about
P.S. just found your channel and would like to give some ideas and help to the grow of the channel by subscribing and sharing since I found it interesting
Seems to me the third crewman should be a navigator
I enjoyed it, U could at a few more pictures, or possibly video? And it's o.k to cut out some parts, deemed less critical to the story? Also, I have request, interwar years Aviation 1918-1939
Fiesler 103??? 12:03 you mean the V-1. The Fiesler 103 was a manned V-1, developed to work out kinks in the V-1 design.
The Fiesler Fi-103 is the V-1. The Fi-103R or Reichenberg is the manned version of the V-1 .
It needed two 30mm tail cannons, and more .50 cal. machines guns. And some nose mounted cannons.
That would have made it even heavier, slower and less maneuverable. You couldn't put any armament in the nose because that is where the radar is located. 4 X 20 mm cannons were perfectly adequate for the job. In fact that was the ideal armament for Allied night fighters (think Beaufighter and Mosquito). The .50 cal barbettes (they weren't rotating turrets) were removed on many of the aircraft that went into service due to the lack of need for additional firepower and the undesirable turbulence created by that bulge on the top of the aircraft. Naturally, their removal also reduced the weight of the aircraft which was a bit underpowered for its size to start with.
@@thegreatdominion949 Nah, the P-61 had room for tons more armament.
They could've move the radar dome to make room for 4 x 30 mm cannons.
The P-61 wasn't known for great maneuverability.
@@ricktaylor3748literally none of what you wrote was true. The radar couldn't simply "be moved back". Every radar in the history of fighter aircraft is mounted foremost in the nose for a reason. 30mm cannons in the tall? Absolutely no point for BIGGER guns in a part of the time that would almost never be facing anything that needed that kind of firepower. The P-61 was also widely acknowledged as extremely maneuverable for a plane of its size, and adding unneeded weapons would just have hurt that. A 61 literally maneuvered a Japanese plane into crashing into the ocean without firing a shot.
@@jameshall1300 The radar can be located inside or outside the fuselage. The P. 61 needed all the firepower it could get.Twin 30mm canons nd severs .50 cal machine guns would make it n extreamely deadly aircraft. The P 38 was far more maneuverable. Why do you think the À C 130 Gunship is so heavily armed ? thirr À 9 el
@@ricktaylor3748 you really don't understand anything about aircraft design, do you? It's never just as simple as "durrr, stick more guns in and it go boom better".
Doesn't matter how great the aircraft is, if you can't keep more than half of your fleet operational (not to mention the amount of maintenance needed to even accomplish this) then it's inherently a bad plane. Instead of worrying about improving performance, they should've focused on serviceability in the later models...
If you need a narrarator with a more traditional deeper narrarator type voice, I do good work for a reasonable wage.
It's an all-volunteer outfit. Go to the website and see how to get involved.
Unfortunately PE is unable to pay the YT team because the channel is too small and no ad revenue. But once that starts rolling in, it will be used to pay narrators and video editors
Pratt & Whitney 2800 double wasp.....
Much better than the Whitney double wasp
😉 Promo-SM!!!
The NF mosquito was much more effective & cost a lot less to implement! The P61 was a big fat failure..... Too big, too heavy and way too slow & only in time to catch the end of the conflict!
@CUTECATSTUDIOS >>> 👍👍