Stirling Squadron | 'Night Flight' over Europe (1944) 

Stirlings.

Which Squadrons was he assigned to?

@@PT-ij9hc sorry for the late reply, my Fathers Squadron was 299 and was in operation Varsity.

The improved versions were cancelled. The RAF didn't need another type of heavy, and Harris loved the Lancaster bomb bay. Plus a lower slower bomber really creates problems for a bomber stream and is horribly vulnerable going to Germany in the face of the German integrated air defences.

Many German night fighter techniques involved having aircraft already on patrol so the bigger issue wasn't so much time to altitude but much greater vulnerability to flak.

Crew flying other bombers supposedly cheered when they heard in the briefings that Stirlings would be flying nearby, as the Stirlings attracted the flak and night fighters, thus making things safer for the Lancs and Halifaxes.

​@@JeffreyWilliams-dr7qeNeither one seemed to care where or on whom the bombs fell.

@@JeffreyWilliams-dr7qe Thanks for your reply Jeffrey. Sometimes we forget that most of the casualties in WW2 were civilian "thanks" to modern weapon technology. Not to mention modern politics. I appreciate you agreeing with my previous post. I only wish that I wasn't right.

What precisely was beautiful about it, from an operational persepctive? It had a rubbish operational ceiling and rate of climb when bombed up leaving it vulnerable to all aspects of European weather, terrain, low and high level Flak, searchlight penetration and fighters. On top of that, its MTOW bomb load was rendered pathetic to offer any practical range to German targets, and its central ventral bombay design (plus that of its internal wing bays) constraining to what ordnance it could carry. The Stirling was a classic case of superb in concept, flawed in design, failed in execution. Noted that you did say "under rated (sic)" paraphrased 'in your opinion'.

@@theblytonian3906 All true, but it should be remembered that the Stirling was the only 4 engine heavy bomber we had and is a massive aircraft, much larger than a Lancaster or Halifax. The Lancaster developed from the dreadful Manchester which was a medium twin, and the Halifax also grew from a medium twin design. The Stirling was always supposed to be a 4 engine bomber and its wings were clipped, literally in fact, when the air ministry limited the wingspan to 100ft. Had they not done this and the 112ft wing from the Sunderland was used as intended (without the modifications needed to the section by shortening it) it may well have been a very different animal. The Lancaster also benefited from a catapult launch requirement for the Manchester, which gave a larger than normal bomb bay and stronger floor which allowed the design to be scaled up. The Halifax used the same bomb cell concept that was used on the Stirling and other earlier designs as bombs bigger than 500lbs didnt exist at the time. Technological development was extremely rapid and being designed in the mid 30's, the Stirling was left behind despite having good performance when initially designed, and then crippled by the air ministry 100ft spec. Still, it was a useful aircraft until the end of the war and its a shame none survive.

Perhaps "BEAUTIFUL" in the sense that it was the best & only 4-engine heavy available before the new generation Lancs & Halifaxes! A sight better than taking Whitleys, Manchesters, Hampdens, Blenheims & even Wimpys over the Reich in those early, dark days. Everyone had to "run what they brung" to the start of the war, but everyone also pursued improvements ASAP. Gotta love the Sterling for "cutting it"--barely-- before production could get up sufficiently on better types. I believe, when last used in Sept '44 at Le Havre, it was because it was "only" just across the Channel, so that the better "heavies" would be free to do the "heavy" lifting over Germany.

A Canadian pilot, Murray Peden, who flew the Stirling with 214 Squadron loved the aircraft and said it handled like a fighter. His book 'A Thousand Shall Fall' is superb, a must read.

Yes it doesn't seem to matter what type it is if she's looked after you you will have an emotional attachment.

The MkV was an excellent transport a/c and served well out East.

@@rogueriderhood1862I agree. It’s a great book!

Still lower than the casualties the British Army took on the first day of the Battle of the Somme. Those paltry deaths allowed Britain to pretend it was fighting a war, when the real fighters (the Soviets) were dying by the millions in the mammoth task of bleeding Gerry white.

@@javiergilvidal1558 I take your point about the massive losses on the Eastern Front suffered by civilians and the Red Army, but "allowed Britain to pretend it was fighting a war" is harsh. Although the British army was not active in Western Europe between June 1940 and June 1944 they were fighting in other places - particularly North Africa, Burma and Italy, the RAF were bombing Europe, and the Royal Navy and merchant fleet suffered heavy losses in the Atlantic and on the Arctic convoys.

Hi Roger, I have also known many WW2 airmen, now passed, who never spoke of their experiences. It's their absolute right if course to deal with that period of time as they choose, but also a pity in a way because it precludes us from giving them the full recognition they deserve, but perhaps that is why they chose silence. Anyway I also enjoyed the film.

That's interesting! My uncle was with 199Sqn at Lakenheath as a FE in 1943. His primary crew pilot was F/O Hagues with whom he also did all his training, but also flew with pilots W/C Bray, PO Humphries and F/S Kyle in Stirlings. No connection by any chance? 🙏 Also have the Squadron photo if you want to DM?

It's a "Stirling", not a "Sterling" .🙄

@@narabdela 10/10, go to top of the class.

It didn't help that the specifications said it had to fit in a 100ft hanger, limiting it's wingspan to 99ft. With a larger wingspan this may have been able to climb higher than its original max altitude,16,500 ft . Though it was also limited by it's bomb bay which although it could carry up to 14 x 1,000lb bombs, couldn't accomidate the larger 4,000lb 'cookie'. As you said a remarkable aircraft, limited by design.

Still used for radio countermeasures by 100 Group Bomber Command. Also flying over occupied Europe on arms and supplies drops for SOE could be as risky.

I can't remember when, or if, they withdrew them from 'gardening' missions...dropping naval mines. They were apparently quite good at that too, but so was the Lanc'. Was a glider tug too (perhaps its best role?), a lot were lost during Op Market Garden trying to resupply the Paras at Arnhem.

Oh yeah, no pressure….😂

They were very brave men flying with limited resources.

@@simonclark29041978And somebody will say the same in another 75 years.

Think about the fact that most of these chaps were too young to vote and in civilian life no one would lend them a car , yet here they are flying 50 tons of aeroplane wth 5 or 6 tons of bombs deep into Germany.

It was the fictional airfield used in Tee Emm, the often humourous Training Memorandum, and usually the home (when he wasn't helplessly lost - again) of Pilot Officer Percy Prune.

I say old man! I never got lost!! The road signs were taken down. It was a security measure you know!

I have a copy of Prangmere Mess by Anthony Armstrong. Long time since I read it, I recall being suitably amused by it.

New zealand...

🤔 One of the aircrew had a New Zealand shoulder badge. It is visible in the ops room sequence.

And Canadian, along with the Kiwi, not an Aussie. Think I heard a Scot and a Taffy, too.

Definitely South African or Rhodesian. Not Australian, Canadian or New Zealand

The bomb aimer is pretty clearly Canadian.

What on earth is a 'sterling'? 🤔

That's a lie that was scotched decades ago. In 1936 the Type C hangar was introduced which had doors that could open to 120 feet. 1936 was the year the specification of the Stirling was issued (B.12/36) as well as the one that lead ti the Halifax and Lancaster via a diversion to Manchester (P.13/36). The real reason for the 100 foot wingspan limit was to limit the size of the aircraft as it was considered that to manually fly anything larger would be too much for a single pilot.

There is no evidence that the wings were clipped to fit hangars. The Stirling was as a massive aircraft with a lot of features not demanded of the later ‘heavies’.

Got to admit I thought it was the hanger theory as well. Thanks for the correction.

@@geordiedog1749 you can search a thread on PPRUNE aviation history and nostalgia for a lot of info about it

@@andrewmountford3608 the Manchester and the HP.56 were also designed with catapult assisted launches in mind.

Didn't really encourage me either way. Mind you I kept expecting a Night Fighter to attack and chase them off course so that they really needed to map read to get home!

I remember working with a man who had been a mid upper gunner on (maybe) a Lancaster. He told me a tale of setting of on a raid and the crew turned on to the Tommy Handley BBC comedy show. (Wartime -and after, BBC listeners will well remember that one). So they then failed to hear a recall message and flew on. after landing they blamed it on a failure of the radio.

Yes, there is.