How bad can an aircraft be? | The Blackburn Botha

There is a long list of aircraft designs that are considered bad, terrible and dangerous. However, usually at the top of that list is the Blackburn Botha, an aircraft that had many flaws and was hardly loved by crews. Work on the Botha initially began in 1935 when the RAF started looking for a new torpedo bomber/general reconnaissance aircraft. In fact, it was built to the same specification as the Bristol Beaufort, an aircraft that would be much more superior in every way to the Botha. Originally powered by Bristo Perseus engines these would prove to be woefully underpowered when in 1936 the Air Ministry changed the specification from a three-man crew to a four-man crew. However, while the Beaufort program as given the better Bristol Taurus engines the Botha had to lumber on with the Perseus engines. Still the design as ordered straight off the drawing baord. First flown in December 1938, issues with the design were quickly found. These included longitudinal instability, high stall speed and being underpowered. Still the Botha continued into RAF service. In RAF service it would only serve with frontline squadron before being quickly relegated to training units. It saw extensive service with a wide number of training units before eventually all were declared obsolete and sent to the scrappers in mid 1943. Even though it had many issues, the Botha would still see a production run of 580 airframes being built.
Links:
Purchase your official The Antique Airshow merchandise here: www.tomatoeins.com.au/s/shop
Disclaimer: All comments that are not from The Antique Airshow in the comment section are not opinions of The Antique Airshow.
Follow The Antique Airshow on Instagram: / tomato_eins
Enjoy and be sure to like and subscribe for more!✈
Sources:
Coming soon.
** I don't like to use Wikipedia but sometimes with these rare aircraft there is not many sources. However, I always check the references to ensure that the article is creditable.
#ww2aircraft #ww2 #aviationhistory #aircraft #britishhistory #blackburn #royalairforce #aviation #failedaircraft

[@charlesrousseau6837]

According to Eric Brown, the worst aspect of the Botha was that single engine level flight was virtually impossible, rendering the Botha to be practically a single engine aeroplane with twice the chance of engine failure, augmented by directional instability due to asymmetric thrust. If one of the underdeveloped engines failed, especially during takeoff, the crew were in serious trouble. Not a good proposition for trainee pilots.

[@AntiqueAirshow]

I haven't read Eric Brown's account on it, but I'm not surprised. It would be far from ideal for new pilots.

[@Robutube1]

...and yet they made 400+ of them. Defies logic. Interesting extra info Charlie - thanks!

[@kilianortmann9979]

It is fascinating how Blackburn seems to have only produced a single aircraft that was not considered meh, or outright bad and the Buccaneer must have taken all of the companies fortune with it, cause it subsequently was taken over.

[@AntiqueAirshow]

It is quite interesting. One wonders if there was something to do with the manufacturer or other factors outside their control.

[@michaelevans205]

It's all wrapped up in the forced mergers of the British aircraft industry. The government had decided that there really wasn't enough work for all the companies to continue independently so made a number of them merge. Blackburn were absorbed into Hawker Siddeley, hence the appellation Hawker Siddeley Buccaneer later in the type's career.

[@AntiqueAirshow]

@@michaelevans205 👍 Australia had a similar thing happen in years after the war. However it doesn't seem until a few decades after the war that it became a proper issue. Pretty much none of those companies exist, coming in under the umbrella of Boeing.

[@perrydowd9285]

It's a story you hear over and over when it comes to failed WWII designs. The powerplant has to be substituted (for whatever reason), and the resulting aircraft turns out to be a waste of money. Love your content bro!👍👍👍👍

[@AntiqueAirshow]

It is unfortunately. Another familiar storyline in a similar vain is the Air Ministry changing the requirements or dictating certain requirements. Thank you 👍✈️

[@billy4072]

I've said this before... a lot of young lives lost... putting this aircraft to training units... of all places. Strange world.

[@AntiqueAirshow]

Agree. The Lerwick is another example of a dangerous aircraft being used for training.

[@joeschenk8400]

The Botha is an obscure aircraft that I had come across only a couple of times. Thanks for the post and the great photos.

[@AntiqueAirshow]

It is quite obscure. 👍✈️

[@iffracem]

Blackburn has a reputation for building bad planes, but I think their biggest problem was not of their making. They just happened to be building planes for the absolutely stupid requirements of the Air Ministry at the time. Things like the engines to be used (often not fully developed, and unreliable), the weight, range, crew, etc were all dictated by the specifications, and were often mutually exclusive and often changed while the prototype was being built. Blackburn tried to accommodate the requirements, they probably should have said.. thanks, no thanks, as others often did.

[@tokyobutakun]

My late dad who lived in Blackpool until he was old enough to join the RAF during WW2 told me that he and his mates used to watch test flights of newly built Bothas over the sea to see how many of them would fall into the waves below ...

[@AntiqueAirshow]

Oh gosh, that is very interesting. Says a lot about the aircraft

[@Trevor_Austin]

The criminally useless aircraft also operated from RAF Morpeth located at Tranwell, a few miles to the south west of the town. They were used by the RAF’s No. 4 Air Gunnery School. Collisions with other Bothas, both on the ground and in the air was their speciality. They may have done some training as well but I think these aircraft were more dangerous than the elements and enemy combined. Why did we order and build so many? A brief look at what passes to be our Civil Service today will answer that question.

[@philipdove6987]

Albert shippin who went on to fly Westland Whirlwinds and Beaufighters once told me the only reason that he survived two engine training at Squires gate was that his flight did not use Bothas. He said the aircraft was a killer and those responsible for it's design and service with the RAF deserved to be shot.

[@AntiqueAirshow]

That is very interesting to read. The Botha was not very loved and always carried a bad reputation.

[@mountkeen8701]

Blackburn seemed to specialise in problem aircraft - they either took forever to develop and were obsolete when introduced or they were just plain awful. A glaring exception being the Buccaneer.

[@DB.scale.models]

Yes, it is very much seams like that.😮

[@AntiqueAirshow]

It does seem like that. I guess its just the way things go sometimes

[@michaelevans205]

They built mainly naval aircraft. And the Admiralty seems to have had the notion that their planes should be constructed along the lines of a Dreadnought! Strength was never an issue with Blackburn aircraft! Now, performance?!?😂

[@AntiqueAirshow]

@@michaelevans205 That is very interesting and would make a lot of sense.

[@truetoffee8684]

It makes you think how many aircraft were produced that never did the job they were designed for and declared obsolete or not acceptable. This aircraft for example was built in it's hundreds, plus the many other designs built that didn't come up to scratch amounts to a vast waste of money, time and resources that in wartime are the difference between achieving victory or being on the losing side.

[@sugarnads]

They had NOTHING else. What were they gonna build? They needed aircraft. Not wondrous mythical in the future shit.

[@theflyingfool]

Three crashed in Snowdonia during the war. One aircraft stalled onto a flattish hill and all crew survived, but the other two flew into hills in cloud and there were no survivors.

[@AntiqueAirshow]

Very sad. They were dangerous aircraft once the thing stalled. RIP, Lest we forget.

[@theflyingfool]

@@AntiqueAirshow In this instance it was probably a combination of smooth grassy or bushy terrain plus the fuselage angle relative to the slope that saved the crew.

[@AntiqueAirshow]

@@theflyingfool Interesting, make sense

[@pickeljarsforhillary102]

Many Botha's died bringing us this information.

[@AntiqueAirshow]

hahaha yes unfortunately they did. And all for a piece of junk 😂

[@randlerobbertson8792]

My dad worked on these at RAF Bircham Newton and yes as part of his war stories he told me as a kid, he said the two biggest death traps he ever worked on were, the Blackburn Botha and the Saro Lerwick when he was transferred to coastal command.

[@AntiqueAirshow]

That is very interesting to read. I'm not surprised, those two machines were pretty awful. The Lerwick was just as bad if not worse than the Botha. Only upside was that it wasn't produced in anywhere near are many numbers as the Botha.

[@Zoydian]

On a positive note: if you could learn to fly in a Botha, you were definitely a damn good pilot. Sad that none is preserved.

[@AntiqueAirshow]

Agree. Definitely one way to learn. I agree. Even though it was a bad aircraft, would still be very interesting to see one on display.

[@petesheppard1709]

It was actually a nice-looking aircraft. The comments about poor pilot visibility seem odd. It looks to me like like vision all around the forward hemisphere was far better than the Bristols or Mosquito, with their far-forward set engines

[@AntiqueAirshow]

Yeah I see what you mean. It doesn't look like a terrible aircraft. The main issue with visibility was that if you looked sideways the engines severely impeded the pilots vision. If you look at something like the Mosquito the pilot still has the ability to look over the wing and out the side. The Botha you couldn't.

[@petesheppard1709]

@@AntiqueAirshow Thanks!

[@kilianortmann9979]

It looks like a less refined version of the Grumman S-2/C-1.

[@jonathanklein383]

Amazing how so many crappy planes were sent to training units. "Fly this and don't die you can fly anything! "

[@bradevans7935]

Not just that, but also a case of anything 'better' being needed for front-line service. It also makes you wonder how bad whatever the Botha replaced in the training units was.

[@AntiqueAirshow]

It really is and I can't quite understand why. No wonder there was incidents in training.

[@AntiqueAirshow]

It does. Surely it couldn't have been that much worse

[@philiphumphrey1548]

The propeller blades are more or less in line with the cockpit windows. Looks to me like an accident waiting to happen sooner or later.

[@AntiqueAirshow]

Definitely not ideal. You also have to wonder how loud it must have been in the cockpit. I know the Vickers Vimy (WW1 bomber) had propellors very close to the cockpit to the point supposedly pilots would get a headache on long flights

[@lambastepirate]

Great vid, Thanks

[@AntiqueAirshow]

Thank you 👍✈️

[@mikeholland1031]

A shame. Not a bad looking plane. Makes you wonder if more powerful engines would have made much difference.

[@AntiqueAirshow]

It does make one wonder. Definitely would be interested to see how it performed with better engines.

[@FlywithMagnar]

A ferry pilot wrote that the fuel selector valves were not visible from the pilot's seat...

[@AntiqueAirshow]

I've head that too. I read somewhere that it was possible for a pilot to knock the fuel tank switches off but still start the engines. Not long after take-off the engines would fail. All came down to a poor design of the cockpit

[@WilmerCook]

Blackburn always makes aerodynamic windshields.

[@AntiqueAirshow]

Yes they have some, lets say intersting designs.

[@user-en9zo2ol4z]

Pleased to hear from you,

[@andrewrobinson5837]

In defence of Blackburn, their previous aircraft did have a reputation for being solid and reliable. One wonders what different power-plants would have done for this aircraft. Also, pronounced 'boh-tuh'.

[@AntiqueAirshow]

Yes that is true. They also licensed built aircraft during the war which was no doubt vital for Britain. I have wondered that. Would a more powerful powerplant help to alleviate some of the other problems. Yeah I've now realized I got that wrong. I based my pronunciation off other videos that mentioned the Botha and they all utilized the bo-tha pronunciation. Looks like we are all wrong on KZbin. 😅👍✈️

[@steveshoemaker6347]

Thanks again my friend... Shoe🇺🇸

[@AntiqueAirshow]

✈️👍

[@raymondyee2008]

Omg the Botha. It was blasted on Hush Kit and BlackTail channels on YT.

[@philliprobinson7724]

Hi That dorsal gun turret would be interfering with the airflow around the too-small fin/rudder. No wonder single engine stability was compromised. Cheers, P.R.

[@AntiqueAirshow]

Yep that makes sense, and would no doubt have been exacerbated with engines that are underpowered

[@philliprobinson7724]

@@AntiqueAirshow Hi T.E. And with the D.H. 98 Mosquito so fast it didn't need defensive armament there was no point in repowering or eliminating the bugs. Cheers, P.R.

[@AntiqueAirshow]

@@philliprobinson7724 Yeah exactly. Why waste valuable war materials on a design that wasn't really working, when better aircraft were being produced 👍✈

[@philliprobinson7724]

@@AntiqueAirshow (Crackle crackle) Come in Number One Tomato. Big Banana here, are you receiving me? (crackle) Have sighted you on radar. Can confirm your position, why waste valuable war materials on such an ordinary design when there were some really "way out" designs to waste materials on? Check out the Miles M39B Libellula, or the Curtiss XP55. WW2 was the aircraft designer's paradise period, they got military funding for just about any design they could dream up. It wasn't only aircraft, one British/US plan was to make giant aircraft carriers from icebergs strengthened by frozen wood pulp. (I kid you not, it was so the Arctic convoys to Russia could have air defense.) However not every cracked pot idea holds water, and for every Barnes Wallis there's a plethora of Geoffrey Pyke's. Keep up the good work, and chocks away. P.R.

[@AntiqueAirshow]

@@philliprobinson7724 Hearing you loud and clear Big Banana. They certainly are some interesting designs. I guess though when your country's at war innovation is always welcomed. I have not heard about the iceberg runways, but they are certainly lets say an interesting idea. Thanks 👍✈

[@kellybreen5526]

Despite its spelling, I think it is pronounced ‘Boater” I believe it is named after a Boer leader.

[@richardrowland2898]

Known as the 'Why bother'.

[@AntiqueAirshow]

Yeah that is the correct pronounication. Named after a South African general I based my pronunciation off other videos that mentioned the Botha and they all utilized the bo-tha pronunciation. Looks like we are all wrong on KZbin. 😅👍✈️

[@kellybreen5526]

@@AntiqueAirshow Subscribed and love your content.

[@AntiqueAirshow]

@@kellybreen5526 Thank you, appreciate it 👍✈

[@stop-the-greed]

Ohhhh please do the dh chipmunk. ❤

[@AntiqueAirshow]

I'll add it to the list 👍✈

[@neiloflongbeck5705]

How was it so bad? It was made by Blackburn and the Air Ministry changed the specification.

[@AntiqueAirshow]

Yep I guess with that going against it, it actually wasn't that bad

[@kidmohair8151]

the tube'y'all dropped you off my list....

[@MrDavidht]

Why name it after a Boer General?

[@bobmarshall3700]

Maybe they should have been called the "Bother"?

[@keithtarrier4558]

Never heard of it. Never thought I would say this about an aircraft but... That plane sucks! Very interesting again!

[@AntiqueAirshow]

👍✈️

[@DavidMartin-ym2te]

I am afraid you are well out with your dates: my father was an SE instructor on Bothas and his last flight in one at 11 Radio School Hooton Park was on 23 July 1944. He had over 400 hours in them.

[@AntiqueAirshow]

Ah yes my apologies about this. I've double checked my sources and in August 1943 the type was declared obsolete and most sent to the scrappers. It wasn't until September 1944 that the final one was retired. Apologies about this error, it seems I just got a little confused. That is very interesting and fascinating. If you don't mind me asking, what did your father think of the Botha?

[@DavidMartin-ym2te]

@@AntiqueAirshow He hated them! He always used to say Blackburn never made a good aircraft! He wasn't the pilot of course, but occasionally had to fly in the so-called "Botha" turret during gunnery duty which was a sod to get into and all-but impossible to evacuate with full flying kit once in the air. Never had an accident in them (although a few returns with dodgy engine oil pressure), so I suppose they couldn't have been that bad.

[@AntiqueAirshow]

@@DavidMartin-ym2te That is really interesting. Doesn't sound much fun. Thanks for sharing 👍✈

[@HarborLockRoad]

Too bad, it was a nice looking aircraft.. odd it flew so bad, considering the layout of parts resembles the martin B10, which wasnt known to be a lousy handling plane . Well, at least Blackburn made nice license built swordfish!

[@AntiqueAirshow]

Yeah it does look alright and pretty standard. Sometimes though the internal design can have a huge impact as well as the systems it uses.

[@HarborLockRoad]

@@AntiqueAirshow yes, we can see that in the fairey albacore and the breda be 88!

[@AntiqueAirshow]

@@HarborLockRoad 👍✈

[@MrDino1953]

There was something seriously wrong with the British aircraft development and procurement system. It kept on being terrible even after the war. A similar malaise descended on the British automotive industry. Maybe it was all just end-of-empire fatigue as Britain lost its position as a world power.

[@richard63]

More likely there were too many old fuddy duddies in charge whose ideas never got past WW1.

[@johnjephcote7636]

There was something strange about the continuing production of a/c that were either obsolete or known to be useless. The Battle and the Blenheim are examples. Why they continued to be produced in large numbers when orders could be cancelled by diktat and materials were becoming scarce, amazes me.

[@AntiqueAirshow]

@johnjephcote it is rather interesting and doesn't make much sense. I'm surprised the Botha was ordered in such large quantities especially considering the Beaufort was built to the same specification and had much better performance. Surely at the very least they could have diverted the Botha contract to Beauforts. On an interesting side note though it sometimes made sense to continue to build obsolete aircraft. In Australia additional orders of the CAC Boomerang (a stopgap Aussie built fighter) was placed even though by then Australia had enough Boomerangs to fullfill the roles it was utilized for. This was mainly to keep the workforce at CAC engaged and skilled while the government and CAC prepared and geared up for the next aircraft they would manufacture (this would turn out to be the Mustang).

[@WilmerCook]

Does Blackburn make stealth bombers today? Just kidding!

[@AntiqueAirshow]

That would be an interesting design to see

[@bengreen171]

fyi, I think it's pronounced with the first syllable like 'boat' - it's named after the Boer South African general.

[@johnjephcote7636]

My father (b.1907) pronounced it like 'Boater'.

[@bengreen171]

@@johnjephcote7636 yeah, that's certainly the pronunciation I'm familiar with from when South African politics was prominent back in the 1980's. I wasn't sure about how it might have been anglicised by 1930's RAF officials - you can never be quite sure how foreign words are affected by the filter of 'received pronunciation'.

[@AntiqueAirshow]

@ben green agree on second thought I think it should be pronounced bowtuh as it was named after the South African general. I went for my pronounication after watching a few videos that mentioned the Blackburn Botha. They seemed to all pronounce it as bo-tha. So I guess all of us on KZbin have it wrong😅

[@bengreen171]

@@AntiqueAirshow Pronunciation can be a real (if completely petty) problem for youtube creators who get their information from written material. I still remember a mate of mine telling me about this new book he'd read about wizards - one of the characters was a girl called 'her-me-own'. Everyone does it, and it doesn't really affect the quality of your video - it just winds up pedants like me. You make good content - don't mind me ;)

[@AntiqueAirshow]

@@bengreen171 It sure can be, and something that has plagued a many of my videos (My Westland Lysander video is a great demonstration of that😂). Hahaha that is very funny. Thank you👍✈ I do appreciate being corrected as it helps me to learn and change👍✈

[@dad2jmcnb]

Does anyone know if he is pronouncing Botha correctly or not? I've always said it with a long o sound, kinda bow-tha and now I don't know which of us is correct. 😆

[@AntiqueAirshow]

I actually think we are both wrong to be honest. The Botha is said to have been named after the South African general/politician Louis Botha which is pronounced bow-tuh. I found and watched a few videos that mentioned the Blackburn Botha to try and get my pronunciation correct. However, it looks like we all on KZbin have it wrong 😅

[@dad2jmcnb]

@@AntiqueAirshow LOL! White people continuing to pronounce foreign names wrong, even of other white people! 😆

[@admiralbenbow5083]

What do you expect from an aircraft named after a S African ?

[@brianwillson9567]

Please. ‘Boater’ not ‘botha’.

[@davidwheatcroft2797]

Blackburn never made a good aircraft. A series of duds!

[@Locomattive8572]

Not true, they made some quite successful aircraft between the Wars. The Skua for instance. The Beverley was really like by its crews too. Looks old fashioned compared the it’s rival the C130. But it did do it’s heavy lift rolls very well and most crews really like them.

[@davidwheatcroft2797]

@@Locomattive8572 The C130 still flying. The Skua? Usual British garbage. Like Lucas electronics, SU carburettors. The British H bomb - I saw one being loaded on a Victor in the 60s. Just an A bomb with a bit of deuterated paraffin around it. What was wrong with these slack arses? The Triumph Herald? Ha, ha.

[@johnjephcote7636]

Strange that both the Swordfish and Buccaneer were designated NA39.

[@awatt]

​@@davidwheatcroft2797 Concorde. No other country has come close to making a supersonic transport plane. Not even close. 🇬🇧

[@davidwheatcroft2797]

@@awatt My brother part of the Concorde design team. Very nice a/c; been on a few; met the British investigating team after the Paris crash......it was 11,000lbs over weight; took off with a tail wind; tanks overfilled; 7kg sim left off undercarriage; co-pilot's medical weeks out of date; the engineer shut down 2 donkeys when the manual stated, "Do NOT shut down an engine below 100ft".. Bloody slack arse frogs!..

[@billpugh58]

Why waste only 6 minutes on it? Give it at least 30! You hardly bothered did you?

[@AntiqueAirshow]

Because there is hardly enough source material to make a video that long. It would have to diverge from the Botha alot. Also there wouldn't be enough photos or videos for such a length, would have to repeat much of it. I think 6 minutes is perfect amount of time to discuss this aircraft. Even a 6 minute video requires a lot of work from me.

[@dustpanandthebrush5293]

A strange but fasanating aircraft, l6202 crashed near me in north Wales due to its poor rate of climb a lot of wreckage left

[@AntiqueAirshow]

That is interesting. Its qualities were quite poor and unfortunately many crashed