Jump to content
The Great War (1914-1918) Forum

Remembered Today:

A rare dogfight over Anzac?


jay26thBn
 Share

Recommended Posts

I found this in Trove today.  Perhaps @b3rn or  @fetubican advise whether the dogfight actually occurred.   I have edited the letter to highlight the dogfight reference.

The writer belonged to the 23rd Australian Infantry Battalion: No.2, Harold Beardmore,  The Bn were located at Lone Pine during September 1915.

Border Morning Mail and Riverina Times (Albury, NSW), Saturday 13 November 1915, page 5

EXPERIENCES IN THE TRENCHES.

Private Beardmore, in his second letter, writes:—"The Trenches, Gallipoli, September 27, 1915,—Just a few hurried lines in answer to your most welcome letter. We are having a warm time at present...(Later).—I have since had my dinner [OP: he means his lunch], so will continue. When we were away after the water there were two aeroplanes up in the clouds—one of ours, and one of the enemy's. As we watched, they started firing at one another. They were just like two big hawks fighting. I think there is no doubt ours was the better. Every time our aeroplane flies straight at the Turk the latter would get for his life in the opposite direction. The Turkish artillery started firing at our plane, and then our warships wired in and battered them; so, between the lot, it was a grand exhibition. 

Edited by jay26thBn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The disc 'Ottoman Aviation 1909-1919' (2nd version 2012) by O. Nikolajsen has

“27th [September 1915]: 1 Albatros C.I crew Preussner-Kettembeil; recce over Gulf of Saros with engagement in the first air-battle with enemy aircraft, indecisive, no damage sustained.”

Edited by michaeldr
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Details & photograph from Victory at Gallipoli 1915 by Klaus Wolf (translated by Thomas P. Iredale), published by Pen & Sword, 2020 [ISBN 978 1 52676 816 2]

Second Lieutenant Ludwig Preussner, as a Turkish Lieutenant, commanded No.1 Flying Squadron at Gallipoli. Stationed at San Stefano in 1916 i/c flying training. Crashed 16 May 1916, after a panic-struck student blocked the joy-stick. Preussner died of his injuries 29 May 1916. Received the Turkish War Medal, Silver Liakat Medal & EK1. Buried at Tarabya.

Preussner is seen standing in this photograph (credited to Bundesarchiv Koblenz)

Preussner.jpg.d94e81aaf4af9e49d06fa914011b4e3e.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, michaeldr said:

The disc 'Ottoman Aviation 1909-1919' (2nd version 2012) by O. Nikolajsen has

“27th [September 1915]: 1 Albatros C.I crew Preussner-Kettembeil; recce over Gulf of Saros with engagement in the first air-battle with enemy aircraft, indecisive, no damage sustained.”

Thanks for the confirmation.  It would be good to discover who the allied airmen were.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This incident on 27th September 1915 was, as you suggest, what would later be called a 'dog-fight' – an engagement between two aircraft, firing at one-another. It was probably the first such engagement over Gallipoli because the Turks had only just received their first armed aircraft. The armed Albatros C.I, number AK.1, arrived on 10th September 1915.

 

Bombs and darts etc had been dropped previously, but aerial combat as such had up until then been between armed aircrews. E.G; “On the 22nd (June 1915) however, a British aircraft was lucky enough to hit the Rumpler's engine with shots from a carbine to forcing it to land between the lines.” [from Nikolajsen]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mate,

Other sourses give us

Kettenbeil (Kettembeil) Karl    ObLt (Capt)    Observer Airforce (shown Artillery officer HQ Southern Group Darndenells 6-15) to 1st Aircraft Company Tayyare Boluk 8-15 to Flieger-Abteilung 300 5-16 rtn 10-16 to Beobachterschule Obsver School Aircraft School (Tayyare Mektebi) at Air station at Yesilköy/San Stafano 10-16 to 1-17 to (Kofl) Kommandeur der Flieger 5th Army Smyrna (replaced Schueler) 7-17 - Izmir ve Çanakkale'de 5. Ordu'da Uçak Bölüklerinin sonraki komutani (Izmir and Çanakkale'da 5th Army Aircraft Company's next commander) shown Izmir Group 1-18 to Kommdr de Flieger 5th Army Smyrna (from wayer) 8-18     1915-17    (1890 in Stettin died 12-4-76) from (1st Thuringian) Feldartillerie-Regiment No 19 to Adjt Reserve Feldartillerie-Regiment No 22 8-14 to 6-15 to Turkey 6-15 claimed in Albatros C1 (AK1 446-1014/15) shot first enemy plane with Lt Preussner (P) on Dardnelles Front over the Gulf of Seros 27-9-15 shown in Albatros B1 (A11) with Lt Fünfhausen (P) crashed into sea off Tenedos after raid and saved 6-16 shown in Rumpler C 1 with Morzik (P) in raid on Romani area 4-8-16 shown LVG with Dobberstein (P) on raid to Tenedos 10-16 to (Kofl) Kommandeur de Flieger 5th Army 7-17 retired 1920 to Maj 1935 to LtCol 1936 to Col 1938 later WWII shown Col Luftwaffe Armee-Oberkommando 11 6-41 to 11-41 to Kdr. d.Lw. (Koflug) bei der 17. Armee 1941 and (Koflug) bei der H.Gr. Mitte. 1942 attached to Ia of Lw.Führungsstab to Deutschen Gesandtschaft in Lissabon (embassy in Lisbon) to Gen-Maj 1943 to Luftattaché an der Deutschen Botschaft in Ankarra 1943-44  (spelling in Ole Nikoljsen) shown in Klaus Wolf's Book
 

Preussner Louis (Preußner Ludwig)    civilian / Unteroffizier (Lt)    Pilot Airforce OC Dardanelles Flieger-Abteilung 2-15 OC 1st Aircraft Company Tayyare Boluk 6-15 to Director Training Flieger Abt. School San Stefano 7-15 (Aviator Dept. San Stefano) Aircraft School (Tayyare Mektebi) at Air station at Yesilköy 1915 Çanakkale'de Pilot Uçus bölük komutani (Flight Commander in Çanakkale)     1915-16    (1888 at Hölle Bayern DoA 29-5-16) im Deutschen Krankenhaus at Konstantinopel grave in German war cemetery at Tarabya Istanbul Ex Guard Jäger Bn (Shown German-Turkish Air Auxiliary Comand at Czerneheviz in Hungary) ferry aircraft to Turkey Feb to Aug 1915 claimed in Albatros C1 (AK1 446-1014/15) with Lt Ketlembeil (O) brought down first allied plane in 27-9-15 reported instructor with trainee pilot when in Rumpler B1 or (Gotha G2) crashed at San Stefano field - reported mortality in Flying accident with Turkish pupil Ali Riza at San Stefano durch Flugzeugabsturz bei San Stefano verwundet shown WIA 16-5-16 from injuries in plane crash and DoA 29-5-16 on grave in türkischen Diensten gefallene preußische Offiziere 10 awarded EK I and Ottoman Silver Liakat Medal with swords and War Medal (spelling in Ole Nikoljsen) shown in book by Klaus Wolf

So they claim to have shot down an enemy plane on that date, not the first crew to claim a plane on either side when none were brought down?

 

Cheers


S.B
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Jay, thanks for bringing this to our attention.

On 27 September, Commander Samson (No. 3 Wing RNAS) records chasing a ‘Taube’. He was flying a Nieuport scout, and the time was mid-morning. 

No. 2 Wing was operational by now, and I think Ark Royal's seaplanes might also have been up, so there may have been other contenders, but perhaps Samson was the pilot of the Allied plane.

The Ottoman air service was actively bombing Imbros at the time. They seemed to know of Hamilton's HQ and the airship shed, recently erected, presented a terrific target. Samson's steward, was killed by a bomb the next day. He now lies in Lancashire Landing Cemetery.

Combats in the air were infrequent but certainly not unknown before 27 September.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Many thanks Bernie.  

I'm assuming that Samson would have know the difference between a Taube and an Albatros?  I must admit that I'm a novice when it comes to planes used during the Gallipoli campaign.

I've also discovered numerous letters written by men during Sep/Oct 1915 who were at Anzac, where they state they've been bombed by enemy planes either in the trenches or on the beach.   For example:

6th Australian Field Ambulance, 6th Australian Infantry Brigade, No. 3356, John Samuel Robert Heath (located near Lone Pine).

"Geelong Advertiser (Vic), Saturday 13 November 1915, page 8

PTE. J. S. R. HEATH,

6th Field Ambulance, A.A.M.C., 6th Brigade (No. 3356), writes from Gallipoli, 28.9.15.— On duty today had an exciting time: shells came round a good deal, and an aeroplane dropped a bomb 30 yards up the hill from our dressing station, and sent dirt over us. A shell came over us and went down the gully. The cry came for stretcher-bearers and Norm. and I dashed down to render first aid. It was the worst I've seen. A big shell had gone right into a dug-out and exploded. Three men lay dead and another was so badly wounded that we could do little for him."

So, Anzac also provided a good target of opportunity for the German / Turkish aircrews; innumerable men to aim at, as well as tons of supplies (munitions, food, etc) to destroy at North Beach, Anzac Cove and near Brighton Beach.  

Cheers.

Edited by jay26thBn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, jay26thBn said:

I'm assuming that Samson would have know the difference between a Taube and an Albatros?

Samson may have been using the word 'Taube' as a general term indicating an enemy aircraft. Such usage was certainly common place.

Nikolajsen shows seven different types of enemy aircraft used over Gallipoli (Jan 1915 - Feb 1916) but Taube is not one of them; see his Chapter 6, page 75

On the other hand, Sterling Michael Pavelec in his 'Airpower over Gallipoli 1915-1916' says that four of these obsolete aircraft were used over Gallipoli, but "all were destroyed over the course of the campaign, either by Allied bombing raids, or by the frequent violent storms." Pavelec's last mention of one in action is on 10th August 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, b3rn said:

there may have been other contenders, but perhaps Samson was the pilot of the Allied plane.

Hi Bern

Having taken Pavelec down from the bookshelf, I see that he covers the 27 September incident on his page 70

He too is not sure who was involved on the allied side and he puts forward two names;

either Samson in Nieuport Number 24 or Davies in Nieuport Number 26

Pavelec concludes; 'It was not the first time that enemies faced off in the air, but it was the first time that two aircraft. both armed with machine guns, exchanged fire over Gallipoli.'

regards

Michael

Edited by michaeldr
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, michaeldr said:

Samson may have been using the word 'Taube' as a general term indicating an enemy aircraft. Such usage was certainly common place.

 

 

Common enough for it to be used frequently by the Anzacs when writing home.  A few examples:

6th Australian Field Ambulance, 6th Australian Infantry Brigade, No. 3356, John Samuel Robert Heath.

Location: near Lone Pine / Brown's Dip.

Geelong Advertiser (Vic), Saturday 6 November 1915, page 8

PTE. J R. HEATH.

Latest news from Private J. S. R. Heath, son of Mr. and Mrs. R. W. Heath, East Geelong, Address: No. 3356, 6th Field Ambulance, C Section, A.A.M.C., A.I.F . c'o Intermediate Records, Egypt.

Gallipoli, 17/9/15.— ...A Taube aeroplane dropped some lyddite bombs at us yesterday, but hit the water 200 yards away. Lots of aeroplanes fly over us, very high up...

And:

13th Australian Light Horse Regiment, No. 453, William Thomas Slater, C Squadron.

Location: near Lone Pine / Brown's Dip.

Mortlake Dispatch (Vic), Saturday 6 November 1915, page 3

SOLDIERS' LETTERS

Private Willie Slater writes under date of 16th Sept. as follows:...We also have to guard against aeroplanes which fly over us. Yesterday a Taube dropped a great bomb over us, but no one was hurt...

 

OP: I can understand that to a lay person, such as the Anzac soldier, all enemy planes were 'Taubes", but to an aviator who should know better?  I just can't believe he would use the term Taube in such an offhand manner.  But that's just my opinion.  

Edited by jay26thBn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
10 hours ago, michaeldr said:

Pavelec concludes; 'It was not the first time that enemies faced off in the air, but it was the first time that two aircraft. both armed with machine guns, exchanged fire over Gallipoli.'

 

It's good to see that what I advised my wife last night was correct; her GF was witness to, possibly, the very first dog-fight at Anzac.  

Edited by jay26thBn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mate,

 

Yes "using the word 'Taube' as a general term indicating an enemy aircraft" the Light Horse records are full of this word for a plane at Gallipoli and in Egypt and Palestine.

A bit like Fokker, brings up that old joke about the Battle of Britain vetern fighting off all those Fokkers.

Yes Its nice to put names to all combatants, not always possible in this game.

 

Michael

I could find no mention of any Taubes sent to Turkey, while Rumplers were sent but destroyed when bombed around San Stefano they were replaced by the Albatross, 

Tayyare Boluk (Aircraft Company) Dardanelles Flieger-Abteilung to 1st Air Company (Recce) - grouped as 2x Bleriot XI 2 (Ertugrul and ? ) 2-15 to (3x (Rumpler B1) + seaplane Nieuport Hydravion at San Stefano 3-15 to Çanakkale 3-15 (shown formed (Rumpler B1) (R1) 3x Albatros B1 (A2,3 & 4) 5-15 to Galata (4x (Rumpler B1) (R3 4 6 & 8) 7-15 to Tekirdag (4x Albatros C1 (AK1 -) & 2x Albatros B1 (A11,12) 10-15 shown 1x Fokker E1 (36/15) 11-15 s

Cheers


S.B

Edited by stevebecker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, jay26thBn said:

I'm assuming that Samson would have know the difference between a Taube and an Albatros?  I must admit that I'm a novice when it comes to planes used during the Gallipoli campaign.

I've also discovered numerous letters written by men during Sep/Oct 1915 who were at Anzac, where they state they've been bombed by enemy planes either in the trenches or on the beach...

Taube — this type was not operated by the Ottoman air service at Gallipoli, but the word was in common parlance among British and dominion personnel, as Michael says. Think of it as shorthand for an enemy aircraft, assumed to be piloted by Germans. Samson does use the term in his log book entry for 27 September. Perhaps it's a term he personally favoured, it occurs 7 times in his personal flying log. Other terms used in the squadron log include 'enemy aeroplane' and 'hostile aircraft'.

When you start looking, it's remarkable how often aeroplanes are mentioned in the war diaries and personal accounts. Remarkable because it's something which features little in popular accounts of the campaign.

9 hours ago, michaeldr said:

Sterling Michael Pavelec in his 'Airpower over Gallipoli 1915-1916' says that four of these obsolete aircraft were used over Gallipoli, but "all were destroyed over the course of the campaign, either by Allied bombing raids, or by the frequent violent storms." Pavelec's last mention of one in action is on 10th August 

I think Pavelec is wrong!

9 hours ago, michaeldr said:

Having taken Pavelec down from the bookshelf, I see that he covers the 27 September incident on his page 70

He too is not sure who was involved on the allied side and he puts forward two names;

either Samson in Nieuport Number 24 or Davies in Nieuport Number 26

Pavelec concludes; 'It was not the first time that enemies faced off in the air, but it was the first time that two aircraft. both armed with machine guns, exchanged fire over Gallipoli.'

On 27 September, Davies was up with Samson, also flying a Nieuport scout. However in the log he is recorded as 'Taube patrol'. Davies returned at 10.40 am.  Samson is recorded as 'Taube chase' and he returns at 10.55. That's why I thought it more likely to have been Samson.

As to assuming this combat as the first by armed aircraft at Gallipoli, I'd insert 'probably' or 'possibly'!

Here is a passage from Davies' autobiography, Sailor in the Air. The incident must take place in the period 16–27 September (based on log book entries for Davies and the first two Nieuports). The location matches well with Jay's newspaper account (although Samson's chase probably took him over the same area). I couldn't find another account by Davies of air combat over the peninsula.

Quote

 

A few mornings after this, while I was turning the hands to before breakfast, a German plane flew over and dropped bombs, amongst the ships in the harbour. We tried always to send an air­craft up after raiders, mainly for the sake of earning a good reputation, though there was little chance of reaching the height of the enemy planes until they were back over their own lines. The second Nieuport had not yet been fitted with a gun but I had a pistol. Calling to the handling party, I took off while the German was still in sight. As he seemed to be making towards Cape Helles, I steered more to the north in the hope of intercepting him when he turned for home. Much to my surprise this succeeded. Just as I reached the Peninsula and was at about 8,000 feet, I saw him at the same height and heading towards Maidos.

He did not see me. I managed to approach just behind and below him and started shooting with the pistol. After about four rounds the pistol jammed, but one of the bullets must have gone near enough to attract attention for he turned and let fly with an automatic weapon of sorts from the back seat. Then he was joined by a pal who also started to shoot. I put the Nieuport into a vertical dive and escaped. As a result of this encounter we expedited the second Lewis gun mounting.

 

 

Edited by b3rn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, b3rn said:

When you start looking, it's remarkable how often aeroplanes are mentioned in the war diaries and personal accounts. Remarkable because it's something which features little in popular accounts of the campaign.

 

Agree.  Before I discovered Beardmore's letter, I had paid little heed to aeroplane references at Anzac.  None of them had mentioned air combat between two adversaries.  Beardmore's was different, and was a 'gem' of a find.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, michaeldr said:

Pavelec concludes; 'It was not the first time that enemies faced off in the air, but it was the first time that two aircraft. both armed with machine guns, exchanged fire over Gallipoli.'

 

One wonders where Pavelec sourced the info from to arrive at this conclusion?  How did he know that both planes were armed with machine guns? 

I have Beardmore's account of the air battle, but who was Pavelec's informant?  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, jay26thBn said:

One wonders where Pavelec sourced the info from to arrive at this conclusion?  How did he know that both planes were armed with machine guns? 

I have Beardmore's account of the air battle, but who was Pavelec's informant?  

Had a quick look. Pavelec cites Nikolajsen (see Michael's reference above) and the 3 Wing RNAS flying log.

You can make an assumption that with armed Albatros types newly in theatre, and a report of a combat from Preussner, that might've been with Nieuports ('Taube chase' and 'Taube patrol') probably mounting a Lewis gun, that it was the first combat between two armed machines. But a number of French machines were armed before this date... 

I had a look in Samson's memoir. Here is what he says of his Nieuport: 

Quote

I had two fights with Germans in it ; but didn't down them, as I could only shoot upwards at an angle of 45 degrees with my gun, and although I hit one fellow a good many times he went down to ground level and I couldn't get at him.

By the way, you should join the Australian Society of WW1 Aero Historians. Membership from only 30 Australian dollars!

Edited by b3rn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, b3rn said:

You can make an assumption that with armed Albatros types newly in theatre, and a report of a combat from Preussner, that might've been with Nieuports ('Taube chase' and 'Taube patrol') probably mounting a Lewis gun, that it was the first combat between two armed machines. But a number of French machines were armed before this date... 

 

I will make that assumption.  The wife and son were happy to discover that her GF may have witnessed the duel from North Beach / Reserve Gully.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, b3rn said:

Had a quick look. Pavelec cites Nikolajsen (see Michael's reference above) and the 3 Wing RNAS flying log.

 

Bernie, thanks for confirming.  I knew Pavelec would have referred to reliable sources; I just needed someone to flesh them out.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mate,

We should also be careful using Pavelec, as Ottoman/Turkish sourses, as well as some Turkish writers find much fault with his book.

I saw a review by a Turkish historian who questioned a number of his concussions?

S.B

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, stevebecker said:

We should also be careful using Pavelec, as Ottoman/Turkish sourses, as well as some Turkish writers find much fault with his book.

I saw a review by a Turkish historian who questioned a number of his concussions?

There is dearth of books on the air-war at the Dardanelles and 'Airpower over Over Gallipoli 1915-1916' by Sterling Michael Pavelec helps to fill that space.

But does it over fill it?

These are Pavelec's references to the 'Taube' and I invite everyone to comment on them

 

p.32 - “However they had trouble getting aircraft from central Europe to the (Ottoman) Empire, and in March 1915, they had eleven aircraft available for the Gallipoli front – five Albatros B.1s and a single Etrick Taube, in addition to the five seaplanes at Çanakkale.”

Pavelec's note for this is “Nikolajsen, Ottoman Aviation, 51-55”. I have had a look at these pages and have failed to pick up a Nikolajsen reference to Taube.

Did anyone else spot what I might have missed?

 

p.77 - “Davies took HF.24 to the skies on 10 August, with Jopp as an observer in the front seat, on a reconnaissance flight. They spotted a German Etrich Taube over ANZAC, and flew to intercept.”

Pavelec's note at this point is not a reference, but an explanatory: “The Taube was obsolete by the start of the war. However it was used as a trainer in Germany and sent to peripheral theatres like Gallipoli. It was out classed by all of the Allied aircraft, but was all that was available.” When Pavelec reaches the conclusion of the incident, his note at that point is: “Davies, Sailor, 129.”

 

p.81 - This refers to the combined French MF.98(T) and 3 Wing raid on the Turkish airfield at Galata.

“The land-based planes at Gallata included the Taubes that were moved from Çanakkale for their protection, as well as the additional of Rumpler B.1s, LVG B.1s, and Albatros C.1s, which began to arrive in August.”

Pavelec's note for this refers to Nikolajsen & Yilmazer, Ottoman Aviation, 55.

The inclusion of Mr Yilmazer's name may indicate that this is an earlier version of 'Ottoman Aviation'. I have the “updated 2nd version 2012” which carries only the name of O. Nikolajsen. On checking this 2nd version's p.55, I have again failed to spot a reference to Taube

 

p.150/151 - Appendix II has a description of Igo Etrich's plane and the various companies who manufactured it

 

p.159 - Appendix II - “German Aircraft in the Dardanelles/Gallipoli Campaign

Rumpler/Etrich Taube. The Taube, detailed above, was the same type that the Germans employed first in the Gallipoli Campaign, Serno's first available aircraft included four Taubes, all of which were destroyed over the course of the campaign, either by Allied bombing raids, or by the frequent, violent storms.”

 

Comments please

Edited by michaeldr
Link to comment
Share on other sites

OP: I found the following newspaper article in Trove today.  It was written on 27 September 1915, but does not directly refer to the air battle that day.

10th Australian Infantry Battalion, 3rd Australian Infantry Brigade, No. 619, John Mitchell Sinclair.

Location: south-west of Lone Pine, adjacent to the front-lines manned by the 23rd Bn, 24th Bn and 13th ALHR.

Advertiser (Adelaide, SA), Saturday 13 November 1915, page 18

LIFE IN THE TRENCHES

Mr. J. H. Sinclair, S.M., Port Adelaide has received two letters from his son Jack who is again in the trenches at Gallipoli. In the first, dated September 20, Corporal Sinclair mentions that the Seventh Reinforcements had arrived about a week prior to his writing...

In the later letter dated September 27 the soldier son said he was lying in the support trenches, and had just been watching one of their aeroplanes dodging Turkish shells. The aeroplanes were very pretty to watch. They flew about so easily and gracefully, and in a few seconds could be right away from view. Theirs were much more daring than the Turkish. They ventured low down over the Turkish trenches, observing and dropping bombs notwithstanding the fire of Turkish machine guns and artillery. The Turkish machines flew very high, perhaps dropped a bomb, and were off as hard as they could go like a guilty schoolboy. If they happened to be up when one of the Allies' fellows went up they cut for dear life unless there were two of them. The Turks were not as brave in the air as on land. He had never seen any aeroplanes brought down by rifle or artillery fire, although the Turks waste enough shells on them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mate,

How they mixed them is unknown, as the wing structure of a Taube is different to any other German plane type?

But I can only guess they were using the generic term, and got mixed up?

A Rumpler does not look like a Taube, and they are known or confirmed as the first aircraft to form the first grouping at The Dardenelles, with some other left over types prewar most unusable.

But I agree with you mate.


S.B

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see them mentioned relatively often in accounts from Gallipoli; always as 'Taubes':

'We often have a visit from a Taube, but when our plane comes he scoots for his life with our chap after him.'

'This morning a blasted old Taube tried to drop four bombs on our camp, but missed by a mile. You can hear them zipping through the air, then there is a bang and a roar and up goes a sheet of water. We all gave him a cheer.'

(The two above are extracts from a letter from Trooper H G ('Ted') Warburton : — Gallipoli, 20/9/15, Daily Mercury (Mackay, Qld) 9 November 1915, p6

June 29th.
A very hot dusty day, and there is this morning, everywhere peace, except for the blighters' occasional pin-pricks; e.g. we have had no shrapnel near us this morning, but at breakfast time a 'Taube' dropped a bomb in the very next lines, three hundred yards off, just between Frank Erskine's and John McNeil's bivouac, and killed the machine gun Sergeant of the 4th Royal Scots Fusiliers, and wounded three men. I went down to see the place. It made a hole about two feet deep in the hard ground. The sergeant was lying alongside under a waterproof sheet. (Egerton, G.  (Major General),  Diary of Major General G. Egerton, C.B. Commanding 52nd Lowland Division, T.F. At Cape Helles, p24-5. [The sergeant mentioned as killed was 6115 J Crawford, 1st/4th Bn, Royal Scots Fusiliers]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Bryn said:

I see them mentioned relatively often in accounts from Gallipoli; always as 'Taubes':

'We often have a visit from a Taube, but when our plane comes he scoots for his life with our chap after him.'

'This morning a blasted old Taube tried to drop four bombs on our camp, but missed by a mile. You can hear them zipping through the air, then there is a bang and a roar and up goes a sheet of water. We all gave him a cheer.'

(The two above are extracts from a letter from Trooper H G ('Ted') Warburton : — Gallipoli, 20/9/15, Daily Mercury (Mackay, Qld) 9 November 1915, p6

 

I also found Warburton's letter in Trove. 6th Australian Light Horse Regiment, No. 599, Henry George Warbuton.

According to the 6th ALHR's war diary for September 1915, the regiment was located in No. 1 Section, South, which puts them between the beach and Tasmania Post. So they were further south than the 23rd Bn, 24th Bn, 13th ALHR and 10th Bn.  

It would appear, based on what I've found so far in Trove, that most 'Taube's' / enemy aeroplanes were flying from the south in a northerly direction during Sep / Oct 1915.  But again, that's my gut feel.   

Further, it was not uncommon for the Anzac to see several planes each day, as Harry Bunyan testifies:

12th Australian Light Horse Regiment, No. 82, Harry Bunyan, A Squadron.

Location: Otago Gully.

Wellington Times (NSW), Thursday 18 November 1915, page 4

LETTERS FROM THE FRONT

The following letter has been received by Mrs. Bunyan, Bodangora, from her son, Trooper H. Bunyan, being dated from Gallipoli on the 29th September:...We have been here a month and three days, landing on Sunday, 29th August...You say that there is to be an aeroplane display in Wellington. We sometimes get as many as six and seven a day over here; real displays, too, for as soon as one gets over towards the enemy's positions they blaze away at them with shrapnel fired from an 18-pounder field gun. It is a common sight to see an aeroplane with ten or twelve white puffs of smoke floating around it. They are very hard to hit, though; the range is so difficult. A Turkish machine flew over here today, and fired into our trenches with a machine gun. They don't do much bomb dropping here, principally looking out for fresh movements or locating big guns.

PS Now that Bernie has established machine guns were mounted on the planes of both sides from September 1915, my interest now lies in this period.

Edited by jay26thBn
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
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...