SE5, SE5A, Camel, Bristol

[FLYING_TRUCKER]

I seem to have loaned or perhaps given away several very good books I had purchased on aircraft of the First World War.

Question:

Did the SE5 or SE5A ever have twin mounted machine guns like the Camel?
If not then why not, I know they had an upper weapon but why not twin mounted weapons like on most German aircraft or the Camel.
Did the Bristol F2B ever have machine guns mounted like the Camel, I know the observer had a weapon but what about forward firing weapons.
I remember reading that the SE5A and the Bristol F2B served in many corners of the Commonwealth well after the First World War ended.  Do you think or know if their armament might have changed?
They are two of my favorite aircraft, I would  give my wife and children AND I would talk Mr. Fozzer into cooking for you for a week to fly in a real one.
All comments welcome...thanks.

Cheers...Happy Landings...Doug

[Felix/FFDS]

Typcial standard armament was 1 vickers and 1 Lewis, with the Vickers offset to port.

Post war service was with New Zeland, Australia, USA, the RAF, but the main immediate post-war fighter was the Snipe.  Many SE5as made a second life as sky-writers.


The Brisfit had a "totally enclosed" vickers .202 firing through a blast tube in the center top of the the radiator, as well as the "observer's" guns.

Post war, the Brisfit was used well into the late '20's and some into the early '30s, as Army Cooperation aircraft, later replaced by such types as the Hawker Hind, etc.  A few examples were even flown by the Spanish Republicans.

[FLYING_TRUCKER]

Thanks Felix

Would that be a .303 rather than a .202?

I was wondering why they did not arm the SE5A or Bristol with two forward firing machine guns, like the Camel.

Was it perhaps that the Vickers Machine Gun was better than what the German Military used?

It would seem to me with two weapons it would be easier to shoot down the other aircraft and probably better at destroying sea or ground targets.

It would seem to me the Royal Flying Corps or Royal Air Force had some very good aircraft, but poorly armed.

Cheers...Happy Landings...Doug

[Hagar]

Would that be a .303 rather than a .202?

I was wondering why they did not arm the SE5A or Bristol with two forward firing machine guns, like the Camel.

Hi Doug. The SE.5a did have 2 forward-firing machine guns, the Vickers on a fixed fuselage mounting & the Lewis on an adjustable mounting above the centre-section. (I forget the name of the mount, maybe Felix can remind me.) http://www.gwdt.freeserve.co.uk/royal_aircraft_factory_se_5a.htm
Both were .303 calibre & could fire various types of ammunition - including "Brock" and "Pomeroy" explosive bullets & "Buckingham" incendiary rounds. These were very often mixed depending on the target. This might seem a light armament but it was obviously thought adequate. I believe some pilots modified their aircraft by fitting extra guns.

The Lewis was intended to be fired in the conventional forward position but could be pulled down on the mounting to change the ammunition drum. It was used to great effect firing upwards by Captain Albert Ball & others. (The Home Defence nightfighters also used this method against the "Zeppelin" raiders.) I have a photo of this mounting somewhere. I'll have to search for it.

PS. Not the photo I was thinking of but this profile shows the Lewis in the vertical position. The aircraft is a BE.2c nightfighter of No. 39 (Home Defence) Squadron circa 1916.

[FLYING_TRUCKER]

Thanks Doug

I was just wondering because the British Fighters always seemed lightly armed compared to the German Aircraft. (excluding the Camel)
I wonder if the Vickers and the Lewis on the SE5A could be fired in unison?
Thanks for posting that BE2c another one I would love to fly in.

Cheers...Happy Landings...Doug

[Felix/FFDS]

Thanks Doug

I was just wondering because the British Fighters always seemed lightly armed compared to the German Aircraft. (excluding the Camel)
I wonder if the Vickers and the Lewis on the SE5A could be fired in unison?
Thanks for posting that BE2c another one I would love to fly in.

Cheers...Happy Landings...Doug

Given the "armour" of the period, one machine gun was "good" enough.  Yes, the Vickers and Lewis could be fired together.  The most popular Lewis mounting (for top wing mounting) was the Foster mounting, which allowed to release the gun to travel back on the track so the pilot could clear jams/reload the drum, etc.

Variations of the tilted guns, as shown on the BE2c above, were also used on the Sopwith 1-1/2 Strutter single seat night fighters (twin Lewis) and the (Hagar, help me on this) "Comic Camel" night fighter (which I believe did NOT have the "hump".



As a side note, the not-to-successful (compared to other models) Nieuport 28 was a twin gun design, except the it had the one centrally located in front of the pilot, but the other was on a shelf to port, there not being enough space between the cabane.

[Hagar]

Variations of the tilted guns, as shown on the BE2c above, were also used on the Sopwith 1-1/2 Strutter single seat night fighters (twin Lewis) and the (Hagar, help me on this) "Comic Camel" night fighter (which I believe did NOT have the "hump".

First I've heard of it. I learn something new on this forum every day.

I found this after a quick search. http://www.rodenplant.com/HTML/407.htm
The original Comic seems to have been a modified  Sopwith 1 1/2 Strutter & the name was later used for the nightfighter version of the Camel  - the Sopwith Comic. Strange name for an aeroplane.
[quote]Captain F.W. Honnett, Flight Commander of "A" Flight No. 78 Sqn (HD) RFC, suggested a modification of one of the 1

[Hagar]

Again not the one I was thinking of. I took this shot at the Shuttleworth Pageant earlier this month. It's a genuine SE.5a (not a replica) & shows the Lewis gun on the Foster mount quite well. (You can also see the gunsight in front of the windscreen.) The gun was fired by a cable attached to the joystick.


One of my famous "carrot chops" but I knew it would come in handy some time.

PS. I'm now a member of the SVAS which means I can visit the museum free of charge any time I wish. I can take some static close-ups of the collection aircraft on my next visit if anyone wants them. I'm not sure when this will be as it's a 2 1/2 hour drive.

PPS. Found it.
This is the Foster mount on the SE.5a with the Lewis locked in the normal position. It has a different type of gunsight to the one in my photo. The trigger cable shows up clearly.

According to the file name this a similar mount on a Nieuport. I believe the chap in the photo is Lt. William Leefe-Robinson who shot down the first German airship to be destroyed over Great Britain. (Not in the Nieuport but a BE.2c nightfighter very similar to the one I posted earlier.)

[Woodlouse2002]

I found out this weekend that an ancestor of mine was responsible for the destruction of a Zeppelin.

[Hagar]

I found out this weekend that an ancestor of mine was responsible for the destruction of a Zeppelin.

Hope he wasn't the pilot - or the flight engineer.

PS. Do they call an airship pilot a pilot?

[Woodlouse2002]

Oh no. He was doing it for King and Country and in a flying machine of his own.


And I think an airship pilot is a Captain is he not?

[Hagar]

I think it was done on the same basis as a ship. The Captain gave the orders but the airship was steered by a helmsman.

[FLYING_TRUCKER]

I remember seeing something and I can't remember where...but...there seemed to be two large wheels in the pilot house (gondola) of the airship...one facing forward with an operator and one facing to port with an operator.
The one facing forward (they were like ships wheels) was for the rudder operator and the one facing to port was for the elevator operator.
There was also a throttle man (engineer station), radio station and navigators station.
I do not recall seeing a seat for the Captain and I think the area in the gondola was to small for one.
I will try to find that picture.
The older submarines I think operated with two separate wheels.
I do believe the modern airship and submarine have a control yoke and operate much like a modern aircraft.
Thanks for all the inputs everyone...the information is well received and sometimes amazing

Cheers...Happy Landings...Doug

[Felix/FFDS]

I do believe the modern airship and submarine have a control yoke and operate much like a modern aircraft.
Thanks for all the inputs everyone...the information is well received and sometimes amazing

Cheers...Happy Landings...Doug

I believe that the Goodyear "blimps" still use separate elevator wheels, which are recovered from blimp to blimp as they are retired and a new one is placed in service.  Current elevator wheels date back to the patrol blimps of the '40s.

[Hagar]

I remember seeing something and I can't remember where...but...there seemed to be two large wheels in the pilot house (gondola) of the airship...one facing forward with an operator and one facing to port with an operator.
The one facing forward (they were like ships wheels) was for the rudder operator and the one facing to port was for the elevator operator.
There was also a throttle man (engineer station), radio station and navigators station.
I do not recall seeing a seat for the Captain and I think the area in the gondola was to small for one.
I will try to find that picture.
The older submarines I think operated with two separate wheels.

Come to think of it the conventional airships we're discussing were controlled very much like the older submarines. The comparison is very appropriate.

I believe that the Goodyear "blimps" still use separate elevator wheels, which are recovered from blimp to blimp as they are retired and a new one is placed in service.  Current elevator wheels date back to the patrol blimps of the '40s.

Interesting Felix. My only experience with blimps is a short trip in the Airship Industries "Shamu" during a visit to Florida some years ago. As I remember it had conventional "aircraft type" controls (yoke & rudder pedals) & could be flown by one crew member although a co-pilot was on board ours. The Airship Industries blimps are controlled (ascent & descent) by tilting the engines. I don't know how they would be steered, maybe by engine revs. I don't think they have a conventional rudder or other moving control surfaces like the Goodyear blimps.