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

Remembered Today:

SE5a or Sopwith Camel?


Jonathan Saunders

Recommended Posts

The reason that this is relevant here is that I also recall that the SE5a and Camel could and did zero there guns so the overwing Lewis hit the same spot as the cowling mounted Vickers.

So (1) SE5a (2) Nieuport 17 (3) Bristol FE2b (4) SPAD VII (sometimes I like to live dangerously) (5) Camel. This assumes I can't widen the discussion to involve the Snipe or DVII ;)

Yeah, but this 'same spot' is a bit of a weasel concept when the guns are feet apart. If you harmonise them for 50 yards and then open fire at 250, the Lewis will be shooting maybe 15 feet low if the Vickers is still more-or-less on. With the Lewis shooting at such an angle to the line of sight, working out the enemy's range is just another damn thing you wouldn't wanna have to bu99er about with in a dogfight. I'd just use the Vickers and hope the ammo lasted.

I like your batting order, though. Might put the F2B at no. 2, and a young crazy-brave would undoubtedly put the Camel higher, if not top... :D

Regards,

MikB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd put the Bristol F2B as type I'd prefer to trust my life to - providing I was late enough in the war to learn from initial flawed tactics. The F2B was a fast as most single-seaters and being slightly less manouverable was compensated for by having an observer to protect my rear.

At least thats the theory. Does anyone have loss-rate comparisons for the F2B, Camel and SE5a?

And of course I mean the RR Falcon-engined version, not the Sunbeam Arab version which used to shake its oil and fuel lines loose while deep over enemy territory, and sometimes the entire engine would come off its mountings so that the crew found themselves descending surrounded by pits of aeroplane

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

My grandfather flew a large number of different types while he was ferrying for a period. I remember he disliked the Camel for it's lack of forgiveness, liked the SE5 but his favorite was the Bristol Fighter which "was just like riding a bike"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the hands of the right pilot the Camel was an absolutely deadly fighter, but it took many hours to master it. Some pilots were just not suited to flying rotary-engined aircraft, never naturally comfortable with the gyroscopic effects, and it was common at the time to classify some as "rotary" pilots and others not, and to assign them accordingly. They would never make good Camel pilots, and would be much happier -- and safer -- in an aircraft like the S.E.5a. For those that mastered the Camel, it would respond in a flash to their inputs, so that they barely thought of what they wanted to do and it was done. Will Barker was one of the greatest exponents, but there were many others, obviously. I remember reading the account (and I can't recall who it was just now) of a Camel pilot pursued by three Albatros at ground level. He pulled a loop from zero feet, which the Albatros could not even contemplate, coming out on its tail and shot it down. Then he simply repeated the maneuvre with the second. I think the third one wisely headed for home.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like the Vickers gun on the fuselage, the overwing Lewis gun was fired by a cable connected to the control column. The tricky thing with the Lewis was pulling it down on its mounting rail to change the 97 round ammunition drum - while still flying and perhaps fighting.

Gareth

This was actually a strength of the SE 5 and SE 5a for the gun could be pulled down to fire upwards at 45 degrees, effectively giving one a fairly long straight (for all practical concerns) trajectory. This was the approach that Albert Ball favoured. This and the fact that the muzzle of the fixed Vickers was below and away from the pilots forward vision would have made the SE5a the logical choice as a night fighter ( a role in which a stable platform was also valuable) however its engine took too long to warm up for rapid reaction to air raid warnings so the Camel was used but with the Vickers replaced by Lewises on the top wing and the pilot and the fuel tank positions swapped. This allowed the 45 degree upward shot ( a strategy repeated in many WW2 German night fighter designs) and avoided the muzzle flash destroying the pilot's night vision.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One very prosaic factor was that there was a shortage in the supply of of suitable engines for the SE5a s whereas big rotaries were less in demand by designers and more available so Camels were easier to produce than SE5a s

One interesting point is that when the US chose a European fighter design to license produce they picked the SE5 a over the Camel (and presumably the Snipe) and the SPAD, even though they couldn't stuff a Liberty in it.

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...