The problem being that no fighter can take off clime engage chase and kill a bomber unless its already been detected and there is a GCI system to control the intercept. Prior to that you are operating a standing patrol burning fuel in the hope you will get a visual sighting. Chain Home ( which as a GCI system rather than a detection only system) is a game changer precisely because it allows the defending fighters ton sit on the ground fuelled up and fly to a precise point in order to engage. Prior to that the defender with an unknown fuel reserve an depending on the relative positions of the aircraft has a limited time of engagement with forward firing guns. The concept of the Defiant is enable a longer engagement time by zero deflection shooting at a +19 degree angle, ideally. A concept which is repeated in the Schrage Musik armament arrangement and maybe the P61.
The is btw is entirely different from the Me110 which does hark back to the WW1 two seaters which has its main armament fixed forward and a singe rifle calibre mg for defence in the back.
And green gives 172mph cruise. so go figure.
And it was a bad idea, just not a stupid idea at the time. What then follows is as much about production and workforce management as the combat capabilities of an aircraft that barely sees combat in the original role. Don't forget this is peacetime contracting with no idea when war will break out. The contract is let. The subcontracts are let, and the resource is finite You are paying for Defiants as ordered in some way whatever so if you've got a lemon make lemonade. And as it happens as a Night fighter, gunnery trainer, ECM platform and target tug it turns out to be useful. No need to acquire a diffierent aircraft or divert production of a more modern combat aircraft so soon. And yes its making the best of things but there is a war on and priorities.
And the ECM platform is is an actual thing 515 Sq with mandrel and moonshine, 151 Sq is listed as nightfighter radar countermeasures.
Incidentally I would also class the Ju88 in the same way, its intended as an unescorted fast bomber, which fails because of GCI radars, an the germans then rerole to do other things, inc being a puny medium bomber with escorts.
Explaining away the next four attempts at a schnellbomber is harder.
But those guns have nothing in common with the ww2 gun except calibre, which is a function of the ergonomics of manual ammunition handling. They seem to have made use of machinery calibrated previousy used but thats all.
21 of them - and its a useful recon vehicle all the others are delivered pre war or taken from pre war colonial duties.
Shell in UK parlance is HE ( shot is the AP) and there was one developed for the 2lb but deemed inneffective although AT units allegedly kept some for close protection Which is probably what the Australians used. The shell is a graze fuze and the idea was to bounce it off the ground and then explode, which requires a very accurate estimate of distance to be effective and ofc if the target is an AT gun with a shield or some kind of emplacement requires an even grater accuracy to be effective. Vs infantry in the open, as a close protection weapon maybe, but then the Aussies were mounting anti submarine weapons on Matildas and the American units in the pacific regarded the 37mm as the best AT gun ever, because it has canister round, a 2lb with a minimal delay time fuze would have a similar utility or graze. Tank units in the desert apparently preferred to load up with AP.
Again the sources commonly quoted on this are actually 3 guys Wardrup, ?Crisp and Moorehead who get continually requoted by later writers. Perfectly valid sources but have a limited perspective. The same thing happens in regard to the US tank destroyer force, there is one very well written book which happens to give an entirely wrong impression of the intent and practice of the TD force because thats the writer's incorrect impression. There is a guy writing a the desert war based on actual contemporary documentation but he is on vol 1 and its £280 on amazon.
I've seen a lot of weird looking tanks in here as well as serious discussion, though, and whilst it isn't entirely related, check out this one the Italians designed for WW1. Meet the Ansaldo Magrini, one of Italy's first tank designs from WW1:
