MB 200. Another French dinosaur.
In a previous article, I wrote that French bombers were roughly divided into three categories: those that weren't decommissioned, those that entered service but didn't replace the first group, and those that never should have been accepted into service. I placed the subject of this article in the first category, but further research revealed that it could almost as easily have been placed in the third. Unlike the Amiot 143, it was developed very quickly—in fact, this was its main advantage—and quickly became obsolete.
Marcel Bloch's company, Société des Avions Marcel Bloch, began work on a future bomber in 1932 as part of a program to create a bomber to replace the aging Lioré et Olivier LeO.20. It's unclear whether the design would be a day bomber (B4, a four-seater day bomber) or a night bomber (BN5, a five-seater night bomber). Most sources favor the latter, which makes sense, as the Amiot 140 day bomber program was already progressing, albeit at a leisurely pace. Furthermore, the aircraft's outdated design hinted at nighttime use.
Marcel Bloch's company had been founded quite recently, in 1929, and by 1932, it had distinguished itself primarily with two tri-engine colonial aircraft, the MB.70 and MB.120, which had proven themselves, primarily for their durability and ease of control. The prototype retained many of the features of these machines—an all-metal high-wing monoplane with a fixed landing gear. The rectangular fuselage (a plus for manufacturability, and therefore for the price of the product, a minus for aerodynamics) with load-bearing skin and external stiffeners had two dorsal manually controlled machine gun turrets and a ventral semi-retractable canopy. Together, they provided 360° defense with virtually no blind spots—naturally, thanks to aerodynamics.
Marcel Bloch MB 120
Surprisingly, little is known about the design of the MB 200-01 prototype, as well as subsequent production aircraft. There was likely some design similarity to the subsequent MB 210, but since even the geometric dimensions differed, it is unlikely to have been significant. Therefore, a detailed description will not be provided; a very rough layout diagram from airwar.ru will suffice. The prototype was equipped with 14Kdrs engines under NACA cowlings, producing 750 hp for takeoff, 800 hp nominal at 3,85 km, and 850 hp short-term at 3,4 km. As far as can be determined, the prototype did not have contra-rotating engines (such as the 14Kdrs and 14Kgrs). Fuel capacity was 1380 liters in four wing tanks.
The three machine gun positions had a massive supply of rounds—1200 per gun. At least, that's what all sources claim. However, the machine gun type differs: 7,5mm Darne in most sources, and twin Lewis (7,7mm) in the layout diagram. However, production aircraft still had three standard MAC Mle 1934 (7,5mm). While the Darne machine guns used belts of 150 to 500 rounds, the Lewis and MAC were fed from drums of 97 and 100 rounds, respectively. In total, the aircraft had to carry a whopping 36 drums. The forward upper mount was operated by the navigator/bombardier, the rear gunner by the gunner, and the radio operator/gunner, if necessary, sat in a lowering tray. However, production aircraft almost always flew with a crew of 5 people, i.e. the front machine gun mount was serviced by a separate gunner, and the navigator-bombardier was not distracted from his numerous duties by anything.
MB 200. Layout diagram
The ordnance load was carried both in the bomb bay and on external hardpoints. The bomb bay could accommodate 50 and 100 kg bombs, with up to 8 of the latter. Two bombs of 100, 200, or 500 kg caliber were carried under the fuselage. However, the maximum combat load (CL) was 1200 kg, but in reality, they tried to keep it under a ton. Some sources claim that later, with more powerful engines, the maximum CL reached 1400 kg. There is no information about the sight, but it was most likely a standard (and outdated) STAè sight.
Thanks to its relatively simple design, the prototype was built fairly quickly and made its maiden flight on June 26, 1933. The aircraft proved to be relatively light and easy to fly, despite a slight lack of power, easy to maintain, and likely relatively inexpensive. Therefore, the French Air Force command overlooked its lack of speed and noticeable performance lag compared to the Amiot 143. After official testing, it was accepted into service in December 1933, and by January 1934, an order for 32 aircraft had been placed. According to some sources, it was equipped with the same engines, while others say it was equipped with 14 Kirs/Kjrs. The latter pair of engines produced 850 hp at takeoff, a nominal 870 hp at 3,2 km, and briefly 940 hp at 2,6 km. The letters i in the designation meant left rotation, and j meant right rotation (“r” meant gearbox, and “s” meant supercharging).
I was unable to find any information on testing of the first, or the three (or four) subsequent MB 200 prototypes. Therefore, the listed specifications refer to production aircraft, presumably with 14 Kirs/Kjrs engines. The empty weight of the aircraft, according to various sources, ranged from 4150 to 4300 kg, takeoff weight from 6750 to 7280 kg, and maximum takeoff weight up to 9280 kg. The maximum speed, again according to various sources, ranged from 285 km/h to 295 km/h at an altitude of 4,3-4,5 km. The ceiling was from 6900 to 8000 meters, and the aircraft climbed to an altitude of 4 km in 11 minutes. Normal range was about 1000 km. The wing area was 67 m², almost a third less than that of the Amiot 143.
In 1934, the Société des Avions Marcel Bloch company didn't yet have production facilities—it essentially consisted of a design bureau and a workshop for experimental and small-scale production—so construction was entrusted to the Potez group. The first aircraft in this series took to the air on September 27, 1934. In other words, the MB 200's production preceded the Amiot 143 by almost a year. Almost at the same time, on November 23, the MB 210 (though its first prototype also featured fixed landing gear in "trousers"—like fairings) made its maiden flight. Its performance significantly surpassed that of both competitors, but production of the first two had already begun.
In August 1934, the French Air Force ordered another 70 MB 200s, and another 108 in April 1935. Only four of these were produced by Marcel Bloch; production of the rest was spread across other companies: 19 by Breguet, the same number by Loire, 45 by Hanriot, and 111 by Potez. In other words, all the companies, each with their own machine tools, easily mastered production, which speaks both to the comparative simplicity of the design and to the semi-artisan nature of the production. The final 10 were delivered to the Air Force by the nationalized SNCASO association in July 1936. Other sources indicate that 208 aircraft were built in France, but this is unlikely to be significant.
By the end of 1934, 20 bombers had already been built, and the first aircraft began arriving in combat units. The downside of such speed was the need for modifications (quoting airwar.ru):
To combat engine vibration, the engine mounts were reinforced and shock absorbers were added. To increase wing rigidity, the ribs were reinforced, and the spacing between them in the outer wings was further reduced. The center section and landing gear were also reinforced. The Elektron fuel tanks were replaced with duralumin ones.
Again, it is unknown whether the modifications were carried out only by Potez, or whether bulletins had to be sent to all manufacturers.
But in 1936, a more serious problem emerged: the MB 200 bomber (as well as the MB 210) suffered a series of crashes due to engine fires. A certain dubious journalist named Carbuccia launched a campaign in his (radical nationalist) newspaper that made the term "flying coffins" fashionable. Prior to this, Bloch had refused to buy advertising space in his paper. Frankly, I couldn't find any specific information about MB 200 crashes related to engine failures that year, but it's clear that there were some. Bloch responded by accusing the engine manufacturer, Gnome et Rhône, of poor workmanship. However, the French historian aviation In his article "Business Strategies and International Innovation: French Aircraft Engine Manufacturers (1918–1940)," E. Chadot unequivocally asserted that the problem was not with the engines: after investigation, it was discovered that the crashes were the result of a defect in the piping system of the airframe itself. However, at least two subsequent crashes occurred due to engine failures.
Be that as it may, the bombers continued to be used. Moreover, in 1935, Potez managed to sell a production license to Czechoslovakia, where they were built by local firms Aero Vodochody and Avia. A total of 73 aircraft were produced before the occupation, differing in many details from the French prototype. Since this series is about French aviation, I won't dwell on these details. Perhaps the only difference is that in Czechoslovakia, the aircraft received the same nickname, "flying coffins," but for a different reason: their less powerful engines made flight with one engine inoperative practically impossible. However, from the beginning of the occupation, the Nazis seized all the aircraft and used them for training.
There is conflicting information about the use of several French MB 200s in the Spanish Civil War (airwar.ru):
The "Bloks" took part in the Spanish Civil War. The first two aircraft were airlifted there on August 20, 1936, and two more were shipped later in disassembled form. Republican pilots used these aircraft to carry out reconnaissance and bombing missions in the Madrid area.
Other sources claim that Spain only had MB 210s.
There were also attempts to use the aircraft as an airborne command post—the idea was for a member of the fighter group's staff, flying a multi-engine aircraft, to coordinate and direct the fighters' maneuvers. While the concept seemed reasonable (these are our modern flying command posts), its implementation proved extremely difficult, as it not only relied on the fighters' radio equipment, which was not particularly reliable at the time, but also could only operate in clear weather. Furthermore, the MB 200's extreme vulnerability made it a prime target. In early 1937, eight fighter squadrons had 24 such command aircraft. As far as can be determined, an attempt was initially made to transfer these functions to three-seat Potez 631 fighters, but by the end of 1938, the idea was finally abandoned.
The MB 201 deserves special mention. Here's what the French Wikipedia (and a number of other sources) says:
In 1935, an amendment to existing Air Force orders called for the delivery of 30 MB.200 aircraft without defensive armament or a ventral bomb bay, the fuselage of which was modified to carry 10 passengers. These aircraft (Nos. 31–39, 54–58, 67–70, 72–78, and 131–135), which were actually distributed among bomber groups equipped with MB.200s, were equipped with inline Hispano-Suiza engines. They were used for a variety of missions, including communications and passenger transport, mail delivery, crew training, and so on.
The only problem is that even on the website of the Dassault company, i.e. the successor of Marcel Bloch, there are no photographs or any information about this car.
In total, MB 200 bombers served in 10 or 11 bomber groups (GB), each with between 13 (usually by roster) and 15 aircraft. However, as early as 1936, they began to be replaced by the more modern MB 210. Nevertheless, by September 1939, the French Air Force still had 169 MB 200s, 92 of which were in front-line service, i.e., in seven groups, four of which were in France and three in the colonies.
Unlike the Amiot 143, the MB 200's participation in World War II was extremely limited. Daytime reconnaissance flights without fighter escort ended on September 9th, quite predictably—two aircraft were shot down, and a third crashed on landing. One French blogger claims seven out of nine aircraft were shot down, but this likely includes the more modern MB 131s, which also suffered losses that day. A tragicomic detail: the bombers carried observer pilots, tasked with sketching, particularly of railway stations. This creative endeavor cost the lives of the colonel, the group commander, several squadron commanders, and rank-and-file pilots.
After this, the withdrawal of bombers from combat units accelerated sharply—to flight schools, transport, liaison, and other missions. However, the MB.200 did fly a few night sorties during the Phoney War and the May campaign. In the spring of 1940, most groups that had previously flown the MB.200 received new aircraft. The exceptions were the Syrian GB I/39 and the Tunisia-based GB I/25. Its aircraft, that of GB I/25, patrolled the Mediterranean until the fall of France. According to airwar.ru, one such patrol ended badly:
On June 13, an MB.200 collided with an Italian Savoia S.79 bomber over the sea. Both crews opened fire. The Italians prevailed—the "bloch," with its engine on fire, made an emergency landing near Cape Metifon.
Which is not surprising, actually – the Savoia-Marchetti SM.79 was superior in almost all respects.
A number of MB.200s continued to serve in the Vichy Air Force in support roles, and aircraft of GB I/39 carried out several night raids on enemy positions in June 1941 during the conflict with the British and Free French forces in the Levant. The group's last combat sorties were on June 9: during an attempt to attack British supply ships near Sidon, four of the six aircraft managed to take off, two of which were shot down by fighters; the ships were undamaged. The last of the French MB.200s served with the Free French Air Force as a liaison aircraft until at least November 1943.
Information