British Mobile AAA, 1916 - video

[egbert]

The destruction of a Fokker, that was no Fokker

http://www.iwm.org.uk/collections/item/object/1060022938

[Ewan Carmichael]

What is it then?

[David Filsell]

Interested to know why anti aircraft fire has become "triple". Its no shorter than AA Fire, Flack or even Archie. Yet another unnecessary Americanism I guess which has crept in.

[egbert]

What is it then?

I see a "Taube" , what do you think?

Interested to know why anti aircraft fire has become "triple". Its no shorter than AA Fire, Flack or even Archie. Yet another unnecessary Americanism I guess which has crept in.

FLAK (Flugabwehr-Kanone) is even shorter then Flack

[egbert]

AAA is not an unnecessary Americanism, it is indeed the worldwide military norm/term.

[old sparky]

There was a lorry mounted gun similar to these quietly rusting away behind the Thornycroft works in Basingstoke in the late 50s. I hope it was rescued. Anyone have any knowledge of this?

Peter B

[David Filsell]

Trple A or AAA may be world wide but "that doesn't make it a good person". I accept Flack was wrong - I should have written Flak. 'Triple A' just seems yet another unnecessary Americanised complication to the language.

Incidentally the term flaks was used by journos during the Viet Nam War (which as we all know just needed more troops to be sent for it to be 'won' by the US) for US Military spokesmen (Spokespersons although I don't know if anyone of the female persuasion undertook the role) who briefed them and got upset when the press men "saw it different".

[Rockdoc]

This clip's been discussed before. I'm almost certain that it's shot around Armentieres in 1916 and there is a matching series of stills at the IWM, one of which appeared in Stand To! as a Then and Now comparative set. I believe that the guns forming the majority of the images are some of the first 13-pdr 9-cwt versions to reach France but the pair shown in the market square are the 6-cwt version on different high-angle mounts. The latter part, where the gun fires and the men immediately start waving their caps is an absolute nonsense since it took something of the order of 30 seconds for a shell to reach operational altitudes and the shots of the plane are clearly cobbled together.

We called it anti-aircraft artillery at the time, as did the French (artillerie anti-aerienne).

The Thorneycroft gun-lorry is now at IWM Duxford.

Keith

[Jasta72s]

I assume the clip was dicussed before here: http://1914-1918.invisionzone.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=195389

However, it is worth a second look!

Indeed, the "falling" Fokker is looking like a "Taube"! Egbert is right.

Neither wing shape nor tail seem to match a Fokker monoplane. IMHO it is not falling at all - it is only flying overhead.

Then a very smart cut is following (5:43) and we see smoke and finally a burning airplane and now, suddenly, it is displaying the tail of a Fokker OR Pfalz monoplane.

However, the burning airplane at 5:57 looks like a biplane to me.

Also the claim of a downed Fokker in January 1916 is a bit dubious. A Fokker E type was not lost on the British side of the lines in January 16 but there were still some A types around too.

[Rockdoc]

It certainly isn't January 1916 as the 9-cwt gun wasn't in service then. They initially had trouble producing them in the numbers required and they only dribbled into France from around March/April until they'd got things straightened out by the middle of the year. One serious hold-up was caused by the inadequacy of the Mk III mount, which was the 6-cwt Mk II mount modified to take the heavier piece. It wasn't up to the job and a beefed-up Mk IV had to be developed before the guns could be released.

Keith

[Ewan Carmichael]

I see a "Taube" , what do you think?

I have no idea. Thats why I asked