Crashed British Aircraft - The Great Escape (II)

[Guest]

Hello - I wonder if anyone can help -

A small episode during the trench warfare of October 1915 at Suvla Bay, Gallipoli intrigues me. A British plane crash landed in the middle of the Salt Lake and was subsequently shelled. The crew miraculously survived the crash and the shelling, scrambling free and struggling through the mud to get free. Does anyone know who the crew were, which Sqn and what type of plane? I previously posted this in the Gallipoli section and GWF colleagues have established that it was not a Wright Pusher. There is a possibility that it might have been a French aircraft as one account describe it as an Allied aircraft. The accounts differ slightly. I have highlighted some below that tell the tale.

Derbyshire Yeomanry War Diary - 13th October 1915 " [Reserve Area] Found 20 men to dig in Boycott trench 9:30-11:30 a.m. Allies aeroplane landed on Salt Lake (1/2 mile NW of trench) broken control. Was shelled and smashed by enemy guns"

Derbyshire Yeo War History: "On another occasion one of our own planes provided the excitement. When at 9,000 feet and well behind enemy the enemy lines its diving gear jammed, necessitating a forced descent. It appeared as if it must land behind enemy trenches but just cleared them, being fired at by everything which the Turk could bring to bear. It literally skimmed our trenches and took the ground in the mud of Salt Lake..... Turkish field guns immediately opened fire and made remarkable shooting, hitting it with the third or fourth shot and at the same time making what seemed very close shooting at the two airmen who were ploughing their way in thick deep mud back to Lala Baba but without hitting them"

Henry C Day SJ MC: "Another day the fall of a sea plane provided a thrill. The plane was high in the air when hit and soon gave evidence of loss of control. Starting to glide it descended rapidly in constantly narrowing circles. the end was a nose dive to earth half a mile away in the middle of the Salt lake. The plane was the largest of the few aircraft of the Gallipoli force and its loss was considerable. But this was a matter of less concern. At the moment all thought was taken up with the fate of the crew whom we judged to be destined for certain destruction. the sight of the crash was sickening. For several seconds there was silence as of death. Then a great cheer arose when four men were seen to extricate themselves from the wreckage and run for their lives. Our relief was intense. Cheer after cheer followed the retreating aviators as they made good their escape through the barrage. In calculating the chances of the crew we had omitted the nature of the ground, which fortunately at the time was a mud swamp. After the tension followed a period of amused interest during which the Turkish gunners from the Anafarta ridge fired persistently at the huge helpless monster outstretched on the plain. In spite of the target being a sitting one, they made the worst possible shooting. The machine was abandoned in the forenoon and the firing continued till evening. Yet at night a rescue party went forward took out the engine and bore it back in triumph uninjured" [Edit: It is my view that Day had a reputation as a rumour monger whilst at Gallipoli and his biography has a few inaccuracies, so despite this account being the most detailed, it is worth noting it sadly comes with a caveat regarding accuracy]

The Roughriders (A S Hamilton MM) " The Trenches were violently bombarded on the 13th, after the Turks had smashed up a British plane which made a forced landing on the Salt Lake..."

[Edit: additional ref] Two further accounts by members of the 3rd Light Horse Brigade of an aircraft being brought down at Suvla Bay on Wednesday 13th October 1915. 3rd LH Bde at that time were occupying Table Top.

Tpr Ronald Campbell ROSS No. 181. "D" Troop, "A" Sqdn, 8th LH Regt. From his diary entry of the 13th October: "“Turks brought down aeroplane.”

Captain Kenneth McKenzie, 3rd LH Bde HQ, Table Top, From his diary entry of Thursday 14th October, a report of the shooting down of an English aeroplane over the Salt Lake by the Turks:“British aeroplane came down on dry lake. Aviators ducked & plane shelled by Turks, smashing one wing. Brought in at dark".

[Edit: additional ref] 11th Manchesters War Diary 13th Oct: " One of our aeroplanes came down in Salt lake and shelled. Both aviators survived and aeroplane rescued after dark."

Any help would be gratefully received. Any mistakes are mine. Thanks

Martin

[horatio2]

I have trawled through Ray Sturtivant's "Royal Navy Aircraft Serials and Units 1911-1919" and cannot find any reference to a British aircraft being lost as described. Nor does Samson in "Fights and Flights" mention such an incident. I would have expected such a loss to be recorded but Gallipoli records can sometimes be a bit sketchy. Almost inevitably the eyewitness accounts are at variance: the aircraft being described as "Allied", "British" and "French" with a crew of two or four, and being "high in the air when hit" (how did the eyewitness tell this?) or suffering a "broken control" or having "diving gear jammed" (I thought this was a submarine defect). All of which gives an impression of unreliability not unexpected in the absence of aviation specialists on the ground.

Overall I lean towards it having being a French aircraft. Who has a record of French losses?

[Guest]

I have trawled through Ray Sturtivant's "Royal Navy Aircraft Serials and Units 1911-1919" and cannot find any reference to a British aircraft being lost as described. Nor does Samson in "Fights and Flights" mention such an incident. I would have expected such a loss to be recorded but Gallipoli records can sometimes be a bit sketchy. Almost inevitably the eyewitness accounts are at variance: the aircraft being described as "Allied", "British" and "French" with a crew of two or four, and being "high in the air when hit" (how did the eyewitness tell this?) or suffering a "broken control" or having "diving gear jammed" (I thought this was a submarine defect). All of which gives an impression of unreliability not unexpected in the absence of aviation specialists on the ground.

Overall I lean towards it having being a French aircraft. Who has a record of French losses?

Horatio2 - thanks again. I would attach the greatest skepticism on Father Henry C Day's account. He was notorious for starting rumours of success to raise morale amongst the troops. I have compared his accounts of other events with War Diaries and histories and he nearly always seems to be at odds with the others on the detail. I get the strong impression that he was a compulsive exaggerator. He also plagiarised. What is frustrating is that he writes in considerable detail about events which give them an air of authenticity and accuracy. The more pithy War Diaries would seem to be more accurate. I have little doubt the event occurred as at least 2 War Diaries record the event. I suspect more diaries will have recorded it too. The DY History was written in 1929, some 14 years after the event using the War Diaries as a crib, and the Roughriders History was written in 1936, some 21 years after the event.

Thanks again for your input and for checking the sources you cite above.

MG

[Dolphin]

There's no loss that fits the description in The French Air Service Chronology 1914-1918, but perhaps Gallipoli losses weren't as well documented as their equivalents on the Western Front, or the airmen weren't injured, which might rule them out.

Gareth

[centurion]

Horatio2 - thanks again. I would attach the greatest skepticism on Father Henry C Day's account. He was notorious for starting rumours of success to raise morale amongst the troops. I have compared his accounts of other events with War Diaries and histories and he nearly always seems to be at odds with the others on the detail. I get the strong impression that he was a compulsive exaggerator. He also plagiarised. What is frustrating is that he writes in considerable detail about events which give them an air of authenticity and accuracy. The more pithy War Diaries would seem to be more accurate. I have little doubt the event occurred as at least 2 War Diaries record the event. I suspect more diaries will have recorded it too. The DY History was written in 1929, some 14 years after the event using the War Diaries as a crib, and the Roughriders History was written in 1936, some 21 years after the event.

Thanks again for your input and for checking the sources you cite above.

MG

Yes I was somewhat surprised at Yet at night a rescue party went forward took out the engine and bore it back in triumph uninjured. Even a rotary was a heavy object and would be difficult to manhandle across ordinary ground let alone through a mud bath.

I note that most accounts say "one of our" rather than British so they could mean an Allied aircraft so French would also apply.

[Guest]

There's no loss that fits the description in The French Air Service Chronology 1914-1918, but perhaps Gallipoli losses weren't as well documented as their equivalents on the Western Front, or the airmen weren't injured, which might rule them out.

Gareth

If we ignore Day's account, it is possible that the aeroplane was not shot down and just suffered mechanical failure, landed, shelled, damaged, then recovered. In this scenario I suspect it would not have been classified as being shot down, or a loss, especially if it had been repaired. On the earlier thread (Gallipoli) it was pointed out that airframes were cannibalised for repairs, so it is possible (I think) that this aircraft, although damaged was recovered and flew again. Thoughts?

Did the RNAS and RFC keep War Diaries? I assumed they did but this is not my area of expertise... MG

P.S. The muddy conditions are consistent with the previous day's weather - a rainstorm.

[Guest]

Yes I was somewhat surprised at Yet at night a rescue party went forward took out the engine and bore it back in triumph uninjured. Even a rotary was a heavy object and would be difficult to manhandle across ordinary ground let alone through a mud bath.

I note that most accounts say "one of our" rather than British so they could mean an Allied aircraft so French would also apply.

Centurion - See post 1. After posting I edited it and added the 11th Bn Manchester's War Diary account which also says it was rescued... .. I share your skepticism but a stranded airframe and engine would have been a valuable asset, more so given the lack of aeroplanes in theatre - heavy horse teams, RE, manpower etc. The resources were there to recover it, despite the difficulty. The Turks hardly ever fired their big guns at night at Suvla for fear of being located, so it is plausible that it was recovered at night. MG

[Jasta72s]

The Turkish Army Report of 15 October 1915 was published in Germany with the following text:

"An der Dardanellenfront bei Anafarta beschädigte unser Feuer am 13.Oktober ein feindliches Flugzeug, das östlich Tuzlagölü niederstürzte und schließlich von unserer Artillerie vernichtet wurde."

"On the Dardanelles Front near Anafarta our [artillery] fire damaged a hostile airplane on 13 October. The hostile airplane fell east of Tuzlagoelue and was finally destroyed by our artillery."

Tuz Gölü means „Salzsee“ (German), Salt Lake (English).

This should be the above described incident.

[Guest]

The Turkish Army Report of 15 October 1915 was published in Germany with the following text:

"An der Dardanellenfront bei Anafarta beschädigte unser Feuer am 13.Oktober ein feindliches Flugzeug, das östlich Tuzlagölü niederstürzte und schließlich von unserer Artillerie vernichtet wurde."

"On the Dardanelles Front near Anafarta our [artillery] fire damaged a hostile airplane on 13 October. The hostile airplane fell east of Tuzlagoelue and was finally destroyed by our artillery."

Tuz Gölü means „Salzsee“ (German), Salt Lake (English). This should be the above described incident.

Jasta72s -

Many thanks for this. Wonderful to see the same reports coming in from the other side. Thank you for translating it too. East of Salt Lake is where the British reserve trenches were in 'A' Sector. These are the trenches that the plane just missed as it came in to crash land, so it all fits extremely well. Regards MG.

[AEGJ1]

Hi Folks

Was the French army's input to Gallipoli not all on the Asian side?

If so, it seems doubtful they would have an aircraft at Suvla.

[centurion]

Hi Folks

Was the French army's input to Gallipoli not all on the Asian side?

If so, it seems doubtful they would have an aircraft at Suvla.

Gallipoli isn't that big so a disabled plane could come down almost anywhere

[horatio2]

This is not the event under discussion but does throw some light on the question. In "Fights and Flights" Flight Commander Samson records this from a month earler:

" August 19th was a black day. I set off with Jopp on an Henri Farman to carry out a reconnaissance over the Suvla area. We hadn't been over there for more than half an hour when we got hit in the engine by a piece of shrapnel, which stopped it completely. I had to make a landing on the only patch of good ground I could discover, just south of the Salt Lake, and well within our lines. The ground was fairly steep, and as soon as we came to rest the aeroplane ran backwards downhill again [so it was not a seaplane]; but finally came to rest quite undamaged. On examination I found that the magneto was completely smashed up.

"Within two minutes of our landing the enemy guns started on us, and Jopp and I had to make for cover in a small gulley."

Two points of interest: firstly this FL of a Henri Farman also cannot be identified in "RN Aircraft Serials"; secondly Samson does not relate the very similar prang in October (perhaps because he was not personally involved).

"RN Aircraft Serials" lists several aircraft which were deleted in December 1915 but none (apparently) as the result of a 'Suvla incident'.

The mystery continues but I think an RNAS aircraft is back in the frame, given the gaps in the record.

[centurion]

Looking at this from the Sherlockian viewpoint of "when you've eliminated the impossible.." The French were not much into float planes (as opposed to flying boats) at the time, most French built float planes being sold to other countries. The only French manned floatplanes at the Dardenelles were a small number of Nieuport IVs (ironically having originally been ordered and paid for by Turkey) . All survived the campaign. So we can eliminate the French in this case.

[Guest]

This is not the event under discussion but does throw some light on the question. In "Fights and Flights" Flight Commander Samson records this from a month earler:

" August 19th was a black day. I set off with Jopp on a Henri Farman to carry out a reconnaissance over the Suvla area. We hadn't been over there for more than half an hour when we got hit in the engine by a piece of shrapnel, which stopped it completely. I had to make a landing on the only patch of good ground I could discover, just south of the Salt Lake, and well within our lines. The ground was fairly steep, and as soon as we came to rest the aeroplane ran backwards downhill again [so it was not a seaplane]; but finally came to rest quite undamaged. On examination I found that the magneto was completely smashed up.

"Within two minutes of our landing the enemy guns started on us, and Jopp and I had to make for cover in a small gulley."

Two points of interest: firstly this FL of a Henri Farman also cannot be identified in "RN Aircraft Serials"; secondly Samson does not relate the very similar prang in October (perhaps becasue he was not personally involved).

"RN Aircraft Serials" lists several aircraft which were deleted in December 1915 but none (apparently) as the result of a 'Suvla incident'.

The mystery continues but I think an RNAS aircraft is back in the frame, given the gaps in the record.

How I love this forum.... many thanks Centurion, Horatio2 et al.... I had no idea that Samson had a forced landing at Suvla......as an aside, one of the Yeomen on the ground near Salt Lake was Capt Wedgwood Benn (Middlesex Hussars) who was to later fly as an observer with Samson and get the DSO and DFC for his troubles. I wonder if they first met when Samson pranged and landed. Capt William Wedgwood Benn and the Yeomanry had only landed at Suvla the day before and would have been in the vicinity of Lala Baba and GHQ on the19th. Lala Baba is the only slope South of the Salt Lake. The remainder is billiard-table flat ... There would have been little other opportunity for them to meet given their very different locations. Benn was later Lord Stansgate and served again in the RAF in WWII. ....er....In fact as I write this I am having a Doh!! moment about the 13th October crash... Benn would have witnessed it...

Wedgwood Benn's autobiography "In the Side Shows"; "Our growing boredom was temporarily releived one day by the fall of an aeroplane which descended from a great height into the Salt lake behind Chocolate Hill in full view of the Turkish Gunners on the Anafarta ridge. The aviators escaped at once but the Turks took on the job of destroying the huge helpless object sprawling in the mud. Seventy-five shells were spent on it, but by night our men came and took out the engine and bore it away uninjured".

Benn's accounts of other events are generally quite accurate. One other interesting link Samson's "Fights and Flights" was published in 1930 by Ernest Benn, William Wedgwood Benn's brother who took over the family publishing business. MG

[centurion]

How I love this forum.... many thanks Centurion, Horatio2 et al.... I had no idea that Samson had a forced landing at Suvla......as an aside, one of the Yeomen on the ground near Salt Lake was Capt Wedgwood Benn (Middlesex Hussars) who was to later fly as an observer with Samson and get the DSO and DFC for his troubles. I wonder if they first met when Samson pranged and landed. Capt Wedgwood Benn and the Yeomanry had only landed at Suvla the day before and would have been in the vicinity of Lala Baba and GHQ on then19th. Lala Baba is the only slope South of the Salt Lake.... There would have been little other opportunity for them to meet given their very different locations. Benn was later Lord Stansgate and served again in the RAF in WWII. ....er....In fact as I write this I am having a Doh!! moment about the 13th October crash...

Wedgwood Benn's autobiography "In the Side Shows"; "Our growing boredom was temporarily releived one day by the fall of an aeroplane which descended from a great height into the Salt lake behind Chocolate Hill in full view of the Turkish Gunners on the Anafarta ridge. The aviators escaped at once but the Turks took on the job of destroying the huge helpless object sprawling in the mud. Seventy-five shells were spent on it, but by night our men came and took out the engine and bore it away uninjured".

Benn's accounts of other events are generally quite accurate. MG

Benn with Baker as pilot pioneered parachuting Italian agents behind the lines, became a radical Liberal politician after the war and lumbered us with Tony!

So if he says huge - it must have been one of the larger float planes. Unfortunately the ony floatplane in theatre that could be called huge was the Wight Pusher which someone has already eliminated. I wouldn't have thought the Sopwith Folder qualified as huge.

[michaeldr]

Good to see so much interest here, however it is beginning to get complicated

Was the French army's input to Gallipoli not all on the Asian side?

No, they were there for only about 48 Hours as a diversion at Kum Kale. The rest of the time, until they left for Salonika, they occupied the right (east) of the line at Helles. The French air contribution was based at Tenedos after the RNAS vacated the base there and moved to Kephalo on Imbros

The particular plane in question here was apparently shot down by ground fire and therefore does not warrant (as far as I can see) a mention on this site http://www.tayyareci.com/hvtarihi/canakkale/index.asp

However there is much useful information here

[it has been recommended before

 

Didn't Klaus publish something (in German) on the air war over Gallipoli?

[Guest]

Benn with Baker as pilot pioneered parachuting Italian agents behind the lines, became a radical Liberal politician after the war and lumbered us with Tony!

So if he says huge - it must have been one of the larger float planes. Unfortunately the ony floatplane in theatre that could be called huge was the Wight Pusher which someone has already eliminated. I wouldn't have thought the Sopwith Folder qualified as huge.

I am not familiar with Samson's Fights and Flights and I am sure he was a man of integrity, but the similarity between his forced landing on Aug 19th and the forced landing on Oct 13th is noteworthy. I have transcribed a very large number of the War Diaries of for units at Suvla in August and there is no mention of the crash landing of the 19th.... which seems strange given he landed slap in the middle of the relatively small battle area. I am trawling again.... MG

[Jasta72s]

I am not familiar with Samson's Fights and Flights and I am sure he was a man of integrity, but the similarity between his forced landing on Aug 19th and the forced landing on Oct 13th is noteworthy. I have transcribed a very large number of the War Diaries of for units at Suvla in August and there is no mention of the crash landing of the 19th.... which seems strange given he landed slap in the middle of the relatively small battle area. I am trawling again.... MG

At least the report of the Ottoman Army for 19 August 1915 mentions a forced landing:

19.August. Am Nachmittag [18.] wurde ein das Meer vor dem rechten Flügel unserer Stellung bei Sedd-ül-Bahr überfliegendes feindliches Wasserflugzeug durch unser Geschützfeuer beschädigt, fiel ins Wasser und wurde von Torpedobooten abgeschleppt.

19 August. On the afternoon of the 18th, a hostile seaplane was damaged by our cannon fire while flying over our right flank of our positions near Sedd uel Bahr. The seaplane fell into the sea and was towed away by a torpedo boat.

Hope this helps as well.

[centurion]

At least the report of the Ottoman Army for 19 August 1915 mentions a forced landing:

19.August. Am Nachmittag [18.] wurde ein das Meer vor dem rechten Flügel unserer Stellung bei Sedd-ül-Bahr überfliegendes feindliches Wasserflugzeug durch unser Geschützfeuer beschädigt, fiel ins Wasser und wurde von Torpedobooten abgeschleppt.

19 August. On the afternoon of the 18th, a hostile seaplane was damaged by our cannon fire while flying over our right flank of our positions near Sedd uel Bahr. The seaplane fell into the sea and was towed away by a torpedo boat.

Hope this helps as well.

I think it further thickens the fog. Its clearly not Samson's forced landing - a day early and a seaplane not a landplane and its not the one on the 13th either because that was not towed away.

[fetubi]

Regarding Samson on August 19th I was lucky enough to be given a photocopy of his log book from a chum at the IWM about 20 years ago. It really is more like his Unit's war diary, which he kept, and Samson records he was in HF #24 with Jopp and, having set off at 9am on a Spotting and Reconn exercise, after an hour they "Came down Suvla." That's his downed aircraft on the 19th.

Turning to October 13th...

we have the following entries:

Sqn Cdr Davies is up alone in something numbered N 26 for a recon of the Suvla area but comes down after 25 minutes and abandons his aircraft due to engine trouble. Sounds like that's it. (Is it the Nieuport with fin code 26 mentioned in Miscellany p431 of Sturtivant and Page's magnificent RNAS Serials and Units? This a'c was tested on Tenedos 3.9.15 and then went to Imbros.)

Later in the day FLt Newton-Clare and Capt Walser are spotting between 2.30 and 3-35pm in Farman M 4 and are noted "landed Suvla"

Hope this helps.

Regards,

Trevor

[James A Pratt III]

The French air unit of the Galipolli campaign was MF 98T. There has been very little writen on this unit. They did lose a number of aircraft during the campaign but I don't think anyone knows how many or what dates. Also this unit and the RNAS did sometime switch each others aircraft. So they could have lost an aircraft on this date. This is one unit someone needs to write a unit history of.

[centurion]

Regarding Samson on August 19th I was lucky enough to be given a photocopy of his log book from a chum at the IWM about 20 years ago. It really is more like his Unit's war diary, which he kept, and Samson records he was in HF #24 with Jopp and, having set off at 9am on a Spotting and Reconn exercise, after an hour they "Came down Suvla." That's his downed aircraft on the 19th.

Turning to October 13th...

we have the following entries:

Sqn Cdr Davies is up alone in something numbered N 26 for a recon of the Suvla area but comes down after 25 minutes and abandons his aircraft due to engine trouble. Sounds like that's it. (Is it the Nieuport with fin code 26 mentioned in Miscellany p431 of Sturtivant and Page's magnificent RNAS Serials and Units? This a'c was tested on Tenedos 3.9.15 and then went to Imbros.)

Later in the day FLt Newton-Clare and Capt Walser are spotting between 2.30 and 3-35pm in Farman M 4 and are noted "landed Suvla"

Hope this helps.

Regards,

Trevor

There was an N26 but this was a Norman Thompson Flying boat - a training aircraft for Felixstowe pilots and in use much later than 1915

[horatio2]

In his book Samson states:

"Davies in his Nieuport had an unpleasant experience, as through engine failure he had to come down into the sea about 5 miles from Imbros. Fortunately a trawler was close at hand, and after picking him up tried to tow the half-submerged aeroplane to the shore; after about ten minutes the aeroplane broke up and sank. The trawler skipper then turned round to Davies and said "Bain't nobody else in the machine, Mister, be there?" Davies thought this was a bit late in the day to ask."

So it cannot have been this Nieuport with a single pilot.

Thank you for drawing attention to Sturtivant's "Miscellany" which, I am sure, hides a lot of 'unknown' data, possibly including the subject of this topic. He lists "local number" M.4 as "M.Farman. No information".

[Dolphin]

The Cross & Cockade book Nieuports in RNAS, RFC and RAF Service indicates that 16 Nieuport XH floatplanes, with French serial numbers N11 to N23, plus NB1 - NB3, were used by the RNAS in the Mediterranean. I wonder if the N26 that we're trying to identify might also have been a French serialled aeroplane used by the RNAS.

I don't think that this machine would have been the '26' mentioned in Sturtivant & Page, which became N1, as N1 was operating off the El Arish area in September 1915, and then off Beersheba in November. However, not all of its movements are shown in the Nieuports book.

Gareth

[Guest]

All - many thanks for your informative input. It seems that there are a few separate incidents and Suvla Bay/Salt Lake seems to have been a preferred landing spot as it was within Allied held territory and suitably flat. I imagine that mechanical failure was reasonably common so forced landings would not be unusual and therefore not always recorded. If I can summarise:

1. 13^th October 1915. Suvla Bay. There are seven eyewitness accounts (5 British,one Australian and one Ottoman Army) that a plane had a forced landing (likely due to hostile fire) into the area of the Salt Lake.

a.

Nationality.

The airplane was described as being Allied or British. The British using French aircraft might be a source of the confusion.

b.

Type.

The plane was variously described as being 'large','huge' and 'the largest of the few aircraft of the Gallipoli force" which might suggest a seaplane. We are still uncertain if it was a seaplane or a wheeled aircraft. The Wright Pusher seems to have been eliminated as a candidate as there were allegedly none in theatre at the time.

c.

Shelling.

Most accounts record the aircraft was shelled and damaged whilst in the mud of the Salt Lake.

d.

Recovery.

Three accounts record the engine/aircraft being recovered at night.

e.

Crew.

Most accounts record 2 crew, although one account (Day) says 4 crew. Potential candidates are:

i.

Sqn Cdr Davies

. Flying a Nieuport with fin code N26. Ref Sturtivant & Page.

Note the single pilot does not fit with the record of 2 crew.

ii.

Flt Lt Newton-Clare and Capt Walser.

Flying a Farman M4 and 'landed Suvla'.

Note the 2 crew fits with the records of 2 crew escaping

iii.

Other

as yet unidentified.

My questions are:

A. What are the relative sizes of a Nieuport, a Nieuport XH and an Henri-Farman?

B. Is a Nieuport a single seater? i.e. Could Sqn Cdr Davies have had an observer with him?

C. Does anyone have a list of all the Allied aircraft types in theatre at the time? There is an IWM article by Peter Hart mentioning Maurice Farmans, Henri Farmans, Morane Parasols, BE 2Cs, Bristol Scouts and Nieuports. Also this article mentions the Short 184 Seaplane flown from HMS Ben -my-Chree

http://en.wikipedia....MS_Ben-my-Chree

in Aug 1915

http://en.wikipedia..../Short_Type_184

. Schneider seaplanes are also mentioned in a linked article. I note that HMS Ark Royal had Sopwith Tabloids but I believe the service version was a single seater. All the caveats of using Wiki as a reliable reference apply.

D. Were there any aircraft in theatre that had 4 crew? i.e. can we eliminate Day's account?

2. 18^th August 1915. Ottoman Army report ahostile seaplane was damaged in the afternoon by cannon fire while flying overthe right flank of the Ottoman positions near Sedd uel Bahr. The seaplane fell into the sea and was towed away by a torpedo boat.

3. 19^th August 1915. Suvla Bay. Flt Cdr Samson and Jopp forced to land at Suvla Bay in HF 24 around 10:00. The aircraft was not a seaplane as it rolled downhill after landing. Other than Samson's own account and log book, so far noother diaries record this event.

Any mistakes are mine. MG