Worst and Best Aircraft

[PFF]

Best Aircraft?

SE5

Fokker DVII

Worst Aircraft?

Be2

HAnsa-Brandenberg D1

[Hambo]

My Grandfather flew most aircraft types while ferrying towards the end of the war including the SE5 but his personal favorite by a mile was the Bristol Fighter.

He did say that in his estimation the Fokker DVII was the best we were up against.

All the best Hambo

[Guest Diccon]

In defence of the B.E. 2 it provided exactly what the customer specified. The fact that the development of aerial warfare could not be forseen was its misfortune. It was the only british design suitable for subcontract manufacture in the early stages of the war due to the foresight of Mervyn O'Gorman in having all factory designs properly drawn.

Diccon

In memory of my grandfather 30883 Cpl. Sydney Law D Coy 2 KOYLI KIA 14 April 1917 at Fayet. Commemorated at Thiepval

[Adrian Roberts]

Worst:

How about the Spad A2 "pulpit fighter" with the gunner in the nose and the engine immediately behind him, between him and the pilot. A bad idea technically and operationally, and one that assumed the gunner to be expendable in a nose-over. Many were given to the Russians who were assumed to be even more expendable.

And while I agree that its unfair to label the BE2 as among the worst, the BE12 interim fighter version was a product of sheer desperation, and was withdrawn from the Western Front after only a month.

As for the best, you have to consider the best at a given time. You could say the Fokker E1 and E111 were the best in late 1915/early16, largely but not entirely due to their interrupter gear. But maybe the Bristol Scout would have had their measure if a decent interrupter gear came along more quickly. There is a belief that the Bristol M1C monoplane would have been the best in 1917 if the Air Ministry had given it a chance.

And in terms of what was technically the best as the war ended, even if they were too late to have much influence, you would have to consider the Fokker D.VIII, the Sopwith Snipe, and the Nieuport-Delage 29

Adrian

[Dolphin]

Worst:

How about the Spad A2 "pulpit fighter" with the gunner in the nose and the engine immediately behind him, between him and the pilot. A bad idea technically and operationally, and one that assumed the gunner to be expendable in a nose-over. Many were given to the Russians who were assumed to be even more expendable.

Adrian

Another aeroplane on the SPAD A.2 and A.4 theme was the Royal Aircraft Factory's BE 9 'Pulpit', a modified BE 2c design with the observer and his Lewis Gun in front of the engine and pilot (see below). The only machine produced, 6700, was sent to France, where Lt W S Douglas of No 8 Sqn RFC - later Marshall of the RAF Lord Douglas - flew it on an operational sortie on 26 October 1915 and wrote "At the first sight of this weird contraption the Huns appeared to become terror-stricken, and they promptly fled".

Lt Duncan Grinnell-Milne commented in his splendid book Wind in the Wires that the RFC in the field was most grateful that no Germans were encountered and beaten during the above sortie as, if they had, the BE 9 would have been judged a success and ordered into mass production, with the result that there woudn't have been a living RFC observer in France.

Regards

Gareth

[Dolphin]

And in terms of what was technically the best as the war ended, even if they were too late to have much influence, you would have to consider the Fokker D.VIII, the Sopwith Snipe, and the Nieuport-Delage 29

Adrian

Another machine that would, or at least should, have had a great impact in 1919 was the Martinsyde F.4 Buzzard, which would have replaced the SE 5a in RAF service and was ordered by the French as well. A Buzzard is shown below.

The 1919 skies of France would also have seen many of the Sopwith 5.F1 Dolphin II - a 300hp development of the machine used by the RAF in 1918. As well as UK production, it was to be built under licence in France and would probably have replaced the SPAD XIII in French and US fighter units.

Regards

Gareth

[per ardua per mare per terram]

I'd vote for the Sopwith Camel as the best - at its time. Did Sopwith produce a bad aircraft?

What makes the BE2 the worst is actually the policy of continuing to use it long after they were obsolete.

[Adrian Roberts]

I mentioned the Sopwith Snipe above as being among the best, but perusing a thread on theaerodrome.com made me more cautious. It seems that contemporary opinions ranged from "rubbish" to "no better than the Camel", to "great". Certainly Sopwith took longer to get it right than with previous designs. It did have a superior rate of climb to the Camel, and the pilots of 4 sqn AFC loved it - but a cynical view of that could be that most of them had never flown an SE5a or a Dolphin!

PerArdua: I can't think of a bad Sopwith design that actually went into production; maybe Gareth knows of some bad experimentals? The Pup was a nice little aeroplane but not really up to the job of regaining air superiority from the Albatrosses in late '16.

Theaerodrome.com also rate highly the SSW D.IV (which I believe is the same as the Siemens-Schuckert D.IV) - a rotary engined type even more manouverable than the Camel, but fortunately for the Allies only around in small numbers at the end of the war. Apparently it was faster at high altitudes than a Fokker D.VIII and an official report [? from which side] of Oct '18 described it as the best single-seater at the front.

Adrian

[KONDOA]

Voisins have to be considered amoungst the worst. They only just resemble an aircraft.

Roop

[Adrian Roberts]

Roop

Voisins have to be considered amoungst the worst. They only just resemble an aircraft.

Yes, but like the BE2 series, the Voisin was a pre-war design which was state of the art when first produced, and also like the BE2 remained in service far too long. At the beginning of the War, it was about the only type capable of carrying a machine-gun, and with that, Sergent Franz and Sapeur Quenalt scored the first air-to-air victory, over a Rumpler Taube that was even more obsolete.

Adrian

[Adrian Roberts]

the first air-to-air victory, over a Rumpler Taube

actually, I think the victim was an Aviatik: the first British victim was a Taube brought down by a rifle shot from a BE2 observer

Adrian

[Dolphin]

PerArdua: I can't think of a bad Sopwith design that actually went into production; maybe Gareth knows of some bad experimentals?

Adrian

Sopwith designs were certainly generally very good. However, two that come to mind as being less than classic are the L.R.T.Tr triplane and the 3F.2 Hippo. In addition, like many other British aeroplanes meant for use in 1919, two promising Sopwith designs were let down by disastrous ABC Engines: the 2FR.2 Bulldog would have been hampered by the ABC Dragonfly, while the 8F.1 Snail was handicapped by the smaller ABC Wasp.

The SSW D.III and D.IV were indeed excellent machines, and the Allies were fortunate that more weren't produced before the Armistice.

You're correct about Sergent Frantz and Soldat Quénault's victory being over an Aviatik; it was Aviatik B 114/14 of Fl Abt 18, flown by Feldwebel Wilhelm Schlichting and Oberleutnant Franz von Zangen, both of whom were killed in action on 5 October 1914.

Regards

Gareth

[Adrian Roberts]

Gareth

to develop some points from the above:

1) As the Martinsyde Buzzard was so good, do you know why the RAF selected the (possibly mediocre?) Snipe as their standard fighter after the war? They also wanted the Nieuport Nighthawk, but this was another design let down (in its initial form) by the disastrous Dragonfly. Was this all down to politics and money?

2) Is it true that (Josef?) Frantz lived until very recently? I'm sure I remember reading his obituary in about 1989. If so, its ironic that he outlived so many air fighters that came after.

3) Don't know if the site will let us post images yet, but do you have any pics of the Hippo and other Sopwith designs you mention?

Adrian

[Dolphin]

1) As the Martinsyde Buzzard was so good, do you know why the RAF selected the (possibly mediocre?) Snipe as their standard fighter after the war?

Adrian

A good question. I don't know the answer, and can only quote J M Bruce, the incomparable authority, in his British Aeroplanes 1914-1918:

"It seems rather strange that the much slower Sopwith Snipe was preferred as the standard single-seater fighter of the post-War RAF, the more so because the Martinsyde F.4 anticipated, particularly in its handling qualities, fighters of later years. It was fully aerobatic and thoroughly manoeuvrable, but its turning radius was larger than that of its predecessors."

Could it have been political influence at work?

Gareth

[Dolphin]

3) Don't know if the site will let us post images yet, but do you have any pics of the Hippo and other Sopwith designs you mention?

Adrian

I'll post a photograph of the L.R.T.Tr and the three specimens from the Sopwith menagerie, the Bulldog, Hippo and Snail, as soon as the photograph-posting facility returns.

Your mention of Sgt Frantz living to a ripe old age rings a bell, but I can't find a reference at the moment.

Regards

Gareth

[Dolphin]

I'll post a photograph of the L.R.T.Tr and the three specimens from the Sopwith menagerie, the Bulldog, Hippo and Snail, as soon as the photograph-posting facility returns.

Adrian

Here's the Sopwith L.R.T.Tr, which brings to mind the old aviation adage that "If it looks right, it'll probably fly right". In this case, the reverse seems to apply.

Regards

Gareth

[Dolphin]

I'll post a photograph of the L.R.T.Tr and the three specimens from the Sopwith menagerie, the Bulldog, Hippo and Snail, as soon as the photograph-posting facility returns.

Adrian

Here's the 2FR.2 Bulldog.

Gareth

[Dolphin]

I'll post a photograph of the L.R.T.Tr and the three specimens from the Sopwith menagerie, the Bulldog, Hippo and Snail, as soon as the photograph-posting facility returns.

Adrian

This is the 3F.2 Hippo.

Gareth

[Dolphin]

I'll post a photograph of the L.R.T.Tr and the three specimens from the Sopwith menagerie, the Bulldog, Hippo and Snail, as soon as the photograph-posting facility returns.

Adrian

Last and, in size terms, least as well, here's the 8F.1 Snail.

Gareth

[Adrian Roberts]

Gareth

Thanks for the pictures. The Bulldog looks quite handsome. But as for the L.T.Tr...Aaaaargh! I note they didn't even bother naming it. What was the teardrop shaped nacelle in the upper centre-section? A fuel tank, or a gunner's position? Either way the moment of inertia would have made the machine very unstable.

ref the Martinsyde Buzzard: it could be that the reason it was not selected by the RAF was that the Martinsyde factory was much smaller than Sopwith and may not have had the necessary capacity, and firms would have been less amenable to contracting out in peacetime. Then again, in peacetime they would have needed less aircraft, and even Sopwith went into receivership after the war. I suspect it was politics; Tom Sopwith was a wily character, I've heard. And in much more recent times there have been suggestions the RAF haven't got the types they wanted for political reasons. (Did the RAAF really want the F111?)

Adrian

[Dolphin]

Adrian

The nacelle was the upper gunner's position, another gunner occupied a cockpit behind the pilot. The three-person Long Range Tractor Triplane was intended to be an escort machine for bombers, something like the French Caudron R series, but by the time that it was produced it was realised that escort work, and aerial fighting in general, was probably best done by smaller and more agile aircraft. There was thought given to deploying the L.R.T.Tr in an anti-airship role, but the thoughts apparently came to nothing - no doubt much to the relief of potential crew members!

I suppose most air services, like their land and water counterparts, have found themselves using equipment that they didn't want. Maybe it's too easy to judge with hindsight, but I can't imagine anyone being gleeful about the prospect of flying a Fairey Battle or a Blackburn Botha in action, let alone some of the French horrors of the late 1930s.

Regards

Gareth

[Dolphin]

Best Aircraft?

SE5

Fokker DVII

There were differences between Fokker D.VIIs, some were much better than others. The initial production machine, with the 160hp Mercedes D.III engine, was a pretty good performer, but the fame of the D.VII is more based on the later machine with the 185hp BMW D.IIIa, known as the D.VII F, which was superb.

The D.VII F was the aeroplane that the leading German aces wanted to fly unless, perhaps, they could get their hands on a Siemens-Schuckert D.III or D.IV.

Gareth

[Pte1643]

I'd vote for the Sopwith Camel as the best

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Didn't they use to say the Camel was a real Bu**er to fly, because of the amount of power available in such a small airframe?

I've heard that you got 3 choices:...

"Victoria Cross, Red Cross or Wooden Cross!"

Mark.

[Adrian Roberts]

Mark

The power to weight ratio of a Camel was no different to many other WW1 fighters, and in fact about the same as, say, a Cessna 182.

The problem was the torque generated by the fact that in a rotary engine the cylinders turned as well as the propeller, and the Camel was the most powerful rotary type at the time of its entry into service. Therefore it turned much quicker to the left than the right, quite viciously so, which was useful in combat but a deathtrap to the inexperienced trainee. I think it was American ace Elliot White Springs who was the only one of six of his mates who survived advanced training on Camels

Adrian

[Pte1643]

Adrian.

Thanks for that.

That's right, Torque rather than Power. I thought I had heard something along those lines, in a documentary once.

Mentioning that it was a very tricky airplane to get used to, esp' for the novice.

Also that the type claimed almost as many lives in "Non-Combat" incidents than from combat itself.

Hence the saying.

Mark.