Jump to content
Free downloads from TNA ×
The Great War (1914-1918) Forum

Remembered Today:

Antiques Roadshow 20th January


BullerTurner

Recommended Posts

Let me start by saying I am no expert on the RFC/RAF, just interested!  So I enjoyed the segment on the Sopwith Camel album, right up to the point where the valuer waxed lyrical on the Camel being "the Spitfire of the Great War".

 

now as I said, not an expert but I am pretty sure that is inaccurate and the real ace-vehicle and best aircraft was of course the Royal Aircraft Factory SE5.  Do any of you who are more expert and deeper interested have a view?  Don't worry, I'm not too distressed!  If I got distressed by the misapprehensions, errors and received myths fielded on the Antiques Roadshow about Great War artefacts, I'd never sleep Sundays!

Edited by BullerTurner
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Although by no means an expert. From what I have read about the SE5, it definitely became, following some modifications, the better machine of the two.  It was more reliable, if not as manoeuvrable as the Sopwith Camel, it could also reach much higher altitudes of circa 20,000 feet, whereas the Sopwith could barely reach 10.000 feet.  The SE5 was also much faster at around 120 mph as opposed to the Camel at circa 100 mph.

 

The comment that the Sopwith Camel was 'the Spitfire of the Great War' is probably true to a point, certainly up and until the SE5 came upon the scene during 1917.

 

Purely my own opinion,

 

Robert

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, but didn't Biggles fly a Camel?

Also, the Spitfire was outnumbered by the Hurricane, a more robust aircraft, just like the SE5, so perhaps the comparison wasn't that far off (although we can guess what he was trying to say).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, the comparison may not be that far off.  Ask Joe (or Joanna) average to name a WW2 aircraft and most (at least in the UK) would probably say "Spitfire".  Ask them to do the same for WW1 and "Sopwith Camel" is a far more likely answer than any other Allied aircraft type.

 

Personally, I blame Snoopy for this global ignorance about other WW1 aircraft types! :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wouldn't read too much into the Spitfire comment. Buffnut is right. Most popularly known was probably what was meant.

For the record I know little about the relative performance of WWI aircraft!

Dave

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Attr: also Douglas Bader, I believe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Old Owl said:

The comment that the Sopwith Camel was 'the Spitfire of the Great War' is probably true to a point, certainly up and until the SE5 came upon the scene during 1917.

 

 

The SE5 entered service on the Western Front in April 1917, the Sopwith Camel in July, and the SE5a in October.

 

Cheers

 

Gareth

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Camel actually reached the front in June 1917; Flt Sub-Lieut Langley Frank Willard Smith DSC, a Canadian pilot in No 4 Squadron RNAS, was killed in Camel N6362 on 13 June 1917 when it broke up during the interception of 16 Gothas and fell into the sea five miles north-west of Bruges.  His body was recovered and interred in Houtave Churchyard.

 

In Appendix XXVII of The War In The Air by H A Jones, the Camel's service ceiling is quoted as high as 24,000 feet (with a 110-hp Le Rhone engine) and as low as 19,000 feet (with a 130-hp Clerget engine).  The highest speed of a Camel given as 118.5 mph at an altitude of 10,000 feet with a 110-hp Le Rhone engine.

 

The same Appendix quotes the service ceiling for the SE5 as 17,000 feet and that of the SE5a as 20,000 feet and indicated that both machines achieved a maximum speed (119 mph and 132 mph, respectively) at 6,500 feet.

 

In terms of agility, I'd say Camel = Spitfire and in terms of gun-platform stability, SE5a = Hurricane.

 

Graeme

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

However, I'd not like to reload the SE5 top machine gun whilst airborne. The Camel was far better in that respect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I watched a Antiques Road Trip programme yesterday. One of the items was a WW1 medal, I'm not a medal specialist, but it looked like the 1914 Star. It sold for £45. But name on the rim was Sapper Arch Whitehouse. If this was the Arch Whitehouse some medal collector got a bargain!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Both expert and sleb seemed to think that he would have survived the war, unaware that the overseas service qualified whether survived or died.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, we all know what Michael Gove thinks about experts! 😉

 

I get the Spitfire/Hurricane comparison.  Especially when one considers the number of top aces who opted to fly the stable gun-platform SE5a?  Camels for splitarsing but an SE5a for business!  Also the SE5a had none of the "vices" of the Camel's rotary engine.

 

Oh and yes, @Interested, Biggles did fly a Camel (Biggles of the Camel Squadron et al) amongst other types.  His logbook must have been fascinating reading!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

Arch White House {RAF] would prebably have qualified for 1914-1915 star  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arch_Whitehouse

However I think the medal offered for sale came from a different Arch Whitehouse as he was a "Sapper" {Royal engineers]

Arch Whitehouse of the RAF was  by his own admission a Machine Gunner who was literelly taken from the trenches to become an observer....

 

Edited by T, Fazzini
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...