Valiant in Battles
The Fate of Fairey’s Light Day Bomber

Valiant in Battles. This was the motto one of the first RAF Squadrons (no. 105) to equip with Fairey’s sleek new light bomber. The pilots who flew the Fairey Battle were indeed quite valiant and demonstrated great bravery, even skill flying their mounts in the opening years of the ‘European War.’ Unfortunately, like the light cavalry immortalized in The Charge of the Light Brigade, they were doomed to virtually the same fate.

The Battle was born in response to Specification P.27/32 (later P.23/35) for a replacement for the biplane light bombers then in service. The new design epitomized the new aeronautical concepts emerging in the 1930’s - streamlined, cantilever, low-wing monoplane of all-metal construction. To enhance its performance, Fairey designed the plane around the new in-line Rolls-Royce engine later famous as the Merlin I. When flown against RAF fighters in 1937, the Battle was clearly a generation ahead of the Gloster Gladiators and Gauntlets then in service. By September 1939, the RAF had over a thousand Battles on hand.

The Fairey Battle’s first taste of blood, however, was a bittersweet one. Still looking relatively modern against the Gladiators and Hurricanes accompanying it to France, the Battle was nonetheless vulnerable even on routine reconnaissance missions during the "Phony War, " despite the bravery exhibited by its pilots. For example, on September 20, 1939, three Battles on a daytime reconnaissance mission were intercepted by enemy fighters; two Battles were shot down but the rear gunner of one, a Sgt. Letchford, destroyed one of the enemy fighters. A week later, Sgt. Vickers of Battle K9271, mortally wounded already, shot down a Bf 109 while his own pilot was attempting to crash-land the mortally stricken Battle they were in. Vickers was awarded the Medaille Militaire by the French just before he died as recognition of his bravery. Despite the Battle’s obvious shortcomings during this time, British factories were still mass-producing this obsolete aircraft.

The nadir of the RAF’s experience with the Battle finally came with the German invasion of France in the Spring of 1940. On May 10, thirteen of thirty-two aircraft sent to destroy German columns marching through Luxembourg were shot down; the following day, seven of eight failed to return on the same attack run. Neither attack slowed the German advance; many aircraft simply failed to reach the target. The attacks on the bridges over the Albert Canal to halt the German advance on Brussels were similarly disastrous. Belgium had already lost a third of its Battle light bombers attacking the same target, and the Brits fared little better. No. 12 Squadron volunteered for the near-suicidal mission, losing virtually all of their aircraft. However, Flight Officer Garland and his gunner, Sgt. Gray valiantly fought through thick flak to destroy the bridge before being shot down. It was a Pyrrhic victory, for the Germans by this time had captured other bridges as well. Finally, on May 14, in a desperate attempt slow the German advance, 63 Battles and 8 Bristol Blenheims were sent to destroy the Sedan bridgehead; thirty-five Battles and five Blenheims failed to return to base. In the rapid retreat which marked the rest of the campaign in France, at least another thirty were destroyed to prevent them from falling into German hands.

After the debacle in France, the Battle was quickly withdrawn from frontline service, although No. 1 Group re-formed with Battles in England (substantially bolstered by two Polish squadrons) and continued bombing raids on the German invasion barges then collecting in the northwestern Continental ports. However, even here the Battle soon became history, being completely replaced by the fall by Vickers Wellingtons. The Battle’s last frontline contribution came on bombing raids conducted on October 15 and 16 of 1940. Thereafter, a few were relegated to coastal reconnaissance duties but far from action. The last squadron to use Battles in an active role was No. 98 Squadron, flying patrols in the North Atlantic in the spring of 1941 by No. 98 Squadron, based in Iceland. Most of the remaining Battles were modified to serve as target tugs or trainers. As the Battle was at least a reliable, stable, and easy-mannered flying machine, it served well in this role, ending up in Canada, Australia, and South Africa as part of the Commonwealth Training Plan.

Why was this beautiful bird was so ineffective? To understand this, we must understand the evolution of the RAF’s light day bomber. And, to understand this, we need to return to World War I

The RAF in World War I had an abominable experience with offensive aerial operations. British tactical bombers suffered from two main disadvantages: Too slow to evade enemy fighters, and too lightly armored to survive groundfire at low altitudes. The solution, therefore, was a fast aircraft, able to get in and out of the battle quickly. To be fast, they were lightly armored and armed, carrying only a light bombload and little defensive armament. To avoid intense groundfire, they simply stayed at medium altitude. Not particularly effective even in World War I, they at least survived. On the other hand, the psychological impact of German Gotha bombers over London cast a long shadow over British bombing philosophy. The development of the light attack aircraft stagnated in Britain while Bomber Command concentrated on big, large bombers.

The Fairey Battle was simply designed to obsolete specifications. It carried a 1,000 lb. bombload - insignificant for all but close support operations. However, to be fast, armor and defensive armament were sacrificed. The Battle had only a single forward-firing gun, and one or two rear-firing guns, which were even further hampered by a large tail and a ventral blind spot. More agile than its bigger 2- and 4-engine cousins, with a two- or three-man crew, it still was not fast enough to evade fighters and bomb effectively, and this was discovered soon enough in France. Most operations therefore took place at low altitude where even small arms fire could bring it down. Even before World War II began, the Air Staff recognized its obsolescence. However, political pressure to expand the RAF immediately was intense in 1937-8, and no other candidates were ready to enter production. Besides, they thought, building Battles would at least keep the labor force together when newer aircraft were ready.

By comparison, the role of the light attack aircraft evolved in other countries. The dive bomber allowed accuracy while minimizing exposure to groundfire. The Junkers Ju 87 Stuka, for example, had similar performance to the Battle but was a far more effective weapon, despite being technologically inferior. It was the Soviets, however, who took the concept to its logical conclusion, designing a tough aircraft able to survive in a close support role. Just a couple of years after the Battle first flew, the Il-2 - externally similar to the Battle - was introduced. The highly successful Il-2 Shturmovik was, however, virtually a flying tank compared with the Battle - able to take punishment as well as dish it out.

What was the legacy of the Fairey Battle? 2,419 airframes were ultimately built, including 18 built under license in Belgium; the Polish Air Force in exile, and Turkey also used small numbers of Battles. Unfortunately, the airplane itself probably hindered the Allies in combat situations more than it helped. Not only was it unable to perform the duties required of it against the Germans, but it also drained resources from other badly needed projects. During the critical first year of the war, over 1,000 Battles were still being built, depriving fighter production of much-needed Merlin engines! The Battle of Britain may not have been so harrowingly narrow a victory had that production been put into Spitfires. However, it was still a mechanically sound, reliable, and easy-to-fly machine and, after France, did serve the Allies well in at least a training role.

The basic design of the Battle survived to reappear in future aircraft, notably the Fairey Fulmar and Barracuda naval aircraft (not impressive performers either), and finally producing an effective aircraft in the Firefly, which did well in the ground attack role in Asia, both during the War and afterwards. The grandson of the Battle was the Gannet (straighten it out, thin it out, put a long glazed canopy on it . . . yep, the family resemblance is there) which gave exemplary service through three decades. For all its faults, then, the Battle was at least an aircraft design with great potential, held back only by faulty strategic planning.

Throughout the whole story of the Fairey Battle, though, one thing tends to get lost and we must never forget. Above all, the Fairey Battle should not be remembered not as the grandfather of Fairey’s successful naval aircraft nor for its dismal failure in France, but for pilots who flew it, and trained in it. The exceptional bravery of the pilots who flew it combat was a shining example for "the few" who won the Battle of Britain and turned the tide of war. Later, legions of Commonwealth pilots who cut their flying teeth on the training versions would, with the Americans and Soviets, finally overwhelm the mighty Luftwaffe. All these pilots were, truly, valiant in Battles.

References

Angelucci, Enzo, and Paolo Matricardi. Combat Aircraft of World War II 1938-1939. New York: Military Press, 1987.

Koniarek, Dr. Jan. Polish Air Force 1939-1945. Carrollton, Texas: Squadron/Signal Publications, 1994.

Gunston, Bill. Bombers of World War II. London: Salamander Press, 1979.

Nesbit, Roy Conyers. An Illustrated History of the R.A.F. Godalming, Surrey: CLB Publishing, 1990.

Boyne, Walter. Clash of Wings: The Air War, 1939-1945.

Moyers, Phillip J.R. RAF Bombers of World War II, vol. I. New York: Doubleday, 1971.

Donald, David, ed. The Complete Encyclopedia of World Aircraft. Liverpool: Orbis Publishing, 1997.

Green, William and Gordon Swanborough. Flying Colors. London: Salamander Press, 1997.