Blog

The Sopwith series of blogs concludes with an examination of the 7F.1 Snipe and the Dragon.

The Sopwith 7F.1 Snipe

As 1917 wore on and there appeared to be no prospect of the war ending in that year, or even the next, so the leading fighter aircraft companies began work on their designs to equip Britain’s air force in 1919. British Nieuport produced the B.N.1; Boulton & Paul the Bobolink and Austin Motors the Osprey triplane, while Sopwith chose to radically evolve the Camel into the 7F.1, later named the Snipe. The initial design was a single-bay biplane in which consideration was given to improving the pilot’s view and indeed, wrote Jack Bruce, it was this detail in “which the 7F.1 improved most upon the Camel, from which the pilot’s field of view was, by the standards of the time, atrocious.” [1] The engine chosen was the most powerful rotary then available, the 150hp Bentley B.R.1. The fuselage was circular in section, doubtless to provide a measure of streamlining and the entire aircraft was somewhat larger than the Camel.

A second design, serial B9963 and similar to the first, was built around W.O. Bentley’s new 200hp B.R.2 engine, while the third prototype, serial B9964, remains elusive. A fourth prototype, serial B9965, followed, which incorporated numerous small changes, including a modified upper wing and a revised fin and rudder, which, Bruce noted, “looked no more adequate than the original.” This aircraft crashed twice during testing and, after the second incident, it was rebuilt with two-bay wings, perhaps to address a requirement for a high altitude fighter. Although this role was not fulfilled, the two-bay wing remained.

The new Sopwith’s performance in comparative trials with its rivals at Martlesham Heath was not outstanding. Although the Snipe was an improvement on the Camel in terms of speed and climb, it was the Nieuport B.N.1 which appeared to possess the best overall performance. Wing Commander Alec Ogilvie of the Technical Department produced a report assessing the aircraft’s performance at Martlesham Heath. In it he wrote:

“This machine is a long way short of E.F. [Expeditionary Force] requirements as regards provision for equipment…Performance is a long way below requirements…even with 250lb short of proper load…As the machine was tested its flying qualities were bad, there being a strong tendency to get the nose down on turns. The rigging is being altered with a view to getting over this trouble. This machine as it stands is quite unsuitable for adoption as a type. Sopwith is making…alterations…but it will be essential for this machine to be tested before it can safely be said that the flying qualities will be improved sufficiently. No improvement in performance is to be looked for…In view of the advanced state of all four machines, [the Snipe, Bobolink, B.N.1 and Osprey] the definite probability that an adequate comparison will be available by March 15 1918, and the magnitude of the effects on the choice on the work of the Air Force for so long a period, it is most strongly urged that no decision should be taken before March 15 1918. It is submitted that a decision not based on positive tests would cause great irritation to the firms concerned, and would seriously weaken the position of the Technical Department in relation to designing firms generally.”

Yet, Bruce noted, “The Snipe was selected for no clearly identifiable reason.” However, factors which may have influenced the decision included the Snipe’s relative simplicity, Sopwith’s capacity for volume manufacturing and the logic of moving licensed manufacturers from Camel to Snipe production, instead of embarking upon a completely new aircraft from a different company. Both the RFC and RNAS were familiar with Sopwith designs by this time, with the Strutter, Pup, Camel and Dolphin all being in service.

This decision was at the expense of all the rival designs, save the Martinsyde F.4 Buzzard, which was not formally a part of the competition and was to be made in smaller numbers. In the event, even this modest ambition was never realised due to recurrent engine supply problems and the Martinsyde never served with the RAF as a fighter, (a few Rolls-Royce Falcon-powered F.3s were used as Home Defence aircraft in late 1918, while a handful of Buzzards were used as high-speed couriers during the 1919 Paris peace conference).

Sopwith Snipe, serial B9965, then went to France on 11th March, where it was tested by a number of service pilots. While comment was generally positive, the inadequate rudder and heavy ailerons were criticised and recommendations were made for the former to be enlarged. By this time, however, the momentum behind the Snipe was unstoppable and on 20th March large contracts were immediately placed for 1,700 aircraft. Planned production was eventually for 4,500 aircraft.

The next prototype, serial B9666, spent much time at Martlesham Heath, where the type’s considerable control problems were addressed at length. However, urgent production demands meant that early Snipes entered RAF service still fitted with plain ailerons and a balanced rudder which was only slightly larger than that fitted to the prototypes. Eventually, the development work on serial B9666 produced a mass-balanced rudder and ailerons, which were fitted to later production aircraft.

An attempt to produce a long-range escort fighter version for the bombers of the Independent Force, the Snipe 7F.1A, was completely unsuccessful due to structural limitations which would have rendered the aircraft useless for any sort of flying.

The only units to see action with the Snipe were 43 and 4 (AFC) squadrons during October and early November 1918 and, although the Australians enjoyed some success with the type, it is Major Barker’s action, fought on 27th October, while attached to 201 Squadron, for which the Snipe’s wartime service is chiefly remembered.

In spite of this and the Snipe’s selection as the standard fighter of the post-war RAF, it is well to remember the late Jack Bruce’s words on the aircraft:

‘The Snipe was perhaps fortunate that it went into operational service so late in the war that the German Jagdgeschwader were in operating difficulties and German industry was unable to bring forward new types in any numbers. In practical terms the Snipe was not much of an improvement over the Camel, in spite of its long period of development, yet in the post-war period it was to be preferred to the incomparably superior Martinsyde Buzzard as the Royal Air Force’s standard single-seat fighter.’ [2]

Although replacement of the Snipe by the Gloster Grebe and Armstrong Whitworth Siskin in the RAF’s fighter squadrons began in 1924, Snipes did remain on the strength of some training units until 1927 and, for this role, at least 40 airframes were converted into two-seaters to provide dual-instruction.

Major Oliver Stewart, writing of the Snipe in the 1920s, remembered: “It was more powerful and it had a better all-round performance, but it had none of the lightning manoeuvre of the Camel. To turn from a Camel to a Snipe was like turning from an eight horse-power sports car to an eight ton lorry…”

The Sopwith Dragon

During 1917, Granville Bradshaw of ABC Motors designed a new radial engine, a comparative rarity at that time, which was believed to develop 340hp for a weight of only 600lb and was later named the Dragonfly. Suitably impressed, it was not long before large government orders were forthcoming and designs for suitable aircraft sought.

Among the more notable of these was the Sopwith Dragon, derived from the sixth Snipe prototype and modified to accept the Dragonfly I engine. Apart from the change in the engine installation, the most obvious difference was the lengthening of the fuselage by 22 inches, to compensate for the added weight of the new engine. Total RAF orders for the Dragon eventually came to around 330 airframes.

However, as work on the Dragon, and other aircraft, progressed, it was realised that the Dragonfly was not completely reliable. The engine suffered from chronic overheating and was unfortunately designed to deliver peak power at the torsional resonance frequency of its own crankshaft, which caused a damaging vibration. It did not produce the expected power output, nor was it possible to run the engine for more than a few hours at a time before an overhaul was necessary; these faults clearly ruled it out for use in military aircraft. Nevertheless, massive orders for the Dragonfly had been placed and great efforts were made to remedy the engine’s woes, resulting in the redesigned Dragonfly 1A. Alas, these efforts were to no avail and the war was over long before work was finally abandoned. A second Sopwith Dragon was built in which the Dragonfly 1A was installed. A short testing programme was begun in 1919 but the continuing engine problems noted above and the end of the war meant that it was quickly abandoned. In spite of this, Sopwith completed 200 Dragon airframes and the aircraft was not finally declared obsolete until 1923. It is worth noting that a large number of new British aircraft were designed around the engine and almost all were cancelled following the armistice. [3]

Despite this less than stellar coda to the Sopwith story, it must be remembered that the company produced several excellent designs between 1915 and 1918 without which the RFC and RNAS would have been at a distinct disadvantage. Notably, the Pup provided the first true “thoroughbred” fighter for the RFC and RNAS, the Camel became an essential addition on several Fronts from mid-1917 until the end of the war and the Dolphin, thanks to its fine flying qualities and powerful engine, proved to be one of the best fighters of the period.

In common with other aircraft companies at the end of the war, Sopwith struggled to survive. Attempts to enter the civilian market were unsuccessful and neither was an aircraft designed to compete in the Daily Mail Transatlantic Air Race of 1919. The company was forced to declare bankruptcy in 1920 but was resurrected shortly afterwards when Thomas Sopwith and Harry Hawker purchased the assets to form H.G. Hawker Engineering. The company would go on to produce such classic designs as the Hart series, the Hurricane, Typhoon, Tempest and Hunter. After a series of mergers, the Hawker brand name, by now part of the Hawker-Siddeley Group, finally disappeared in 1963.

To complement the blog published earlier, this second part will illustrate and describe the Sopwith Camel and Dolphin.

The Sopwith Camel

Even as the Pup was entering service on the Western Front, the Sopwith design team was planning the next generation fighter. The Sopwith F.1, soon to be known by all as the Camel, first flew in the winter of 1916/1917. Although the Camel was a development of the Pup, there was in reality very little to connect the two. The most marked difference was the decision to group the heaviest elements of the aircraft, (the engine, fuel and oil tanks, armament and pilot), within the smallest space possible, increasing manoeuvrability. The torque from the rotary engine was also a factor in giving the Camel an agility that was probably unmatched by any other aircraft during the First World War.

It was originally intended to give dihedral to both wings but, to ease production, the decision was made to produce the upper wing without dihedral, while that of the lower wing was doubled to 5º to compensate. A problem with the prototype was the positioning of the cockpit underneath the upper wing, badly impeding the pilot’s view upwards and forwards and so, to remedy this, a cut out was made in the trailing edge. Another shortcoming was the decision to cover the breeches of the Vickers guns. As these were both fed from the right, clearing stoppages was a problem and most in-service Camels had a portion of this covering cut away. A variety of engines was fitted to the Camel, notably the 130hp Clerget, the 110hp Le Rhone and, in naval and later, RAF, versions, the 150hp Bentley B.R.1. The Clerget proved to be a source of endless trouble for the RFC and was eventually replaced by the Le Rhone or the 140hp Clerget 9Bf. Likewise, problems with the Sopwith Kauper synchronisation gear fitted to the Clerget were negated by the fitting of the superior Constantinesco gear to Le Rhone-powered aircraft.

The Admiralty was enthusiastic about the aircraft and the first production examples entered service with 4 Squadron, RNAS, in June 1917. The War Office was not far behind and the first RFC Camels were sent to 70 Squadron to replace its 1½ Strutters in June and July. The Camel was ordered in very large quantities and, as usual, Sopwith contracted production to other companies, including Ruston Proctor, Portholme, Boulton & Paul, Hooper and Clayton & Shuttleworth. Notable Camel aces were William Barker, Raymond Collishaw, D.R. McLaren and Henry Woollett. In terms of enemy aircraft destroyed, the Sopwith F.1 Camel is regarded as the pre-eminent fighter of the First World War, with 1,294 victories.

An important secondary role for the Camel was in ground-attack, beginning with the Battle of Cambrai in November 1917. Camel squadrons engaged in this work suffered very heavy casualties during 1918 but, faute de mieux, the Camel “fought on until the end of the war…magically manoeuvrable when flown with understanding of its fiercely pronounced idiosyncrasies, savagely unforgiving of incompetent handling.”[1]

Camels were produced in a number of variants. The most widely-produced after the standard F.1 was the 2F.1, a navalised version intended for use from a variety of vessels. The fuselage was made in two sections, which could be separated for stowage aboard ship while the mainplane centre section, and thus the overall wingspan, was reduced. The 2F.1 Camel was embarked upon a number of dreadnoughts during 1918 as an anti-airship deterrent and for these duties one Vickers gun was retained and a single over-wing Lewis gun fitted. A 2F.1, flown from a towed lighter in the North Sea by Flight Sub-Lieutenant Stuart Culley, destroyed Zeppelin L53 on 11 August 1918 and seven 2F.1 Camels from HMS Furious attacked the airship base at Tondern on 19 July 1918 in the world’s first carrier-launched air strike.

A dedicated night fighter, or “Comic” version, was produced in small numbers and issued to some of the UK’s Home Defence units. Two over-wing Lewis guns replaced the Vickers guns and, to facilitate reloading, the cockpit was moved aft by about a foot, while the fuel tank was moved forward to compensate. These ungainly aircraft did not distinguish themselves during their service careers.

Many Camels were issued to training units, where, Jack Bruce wrote, “they acquired a sinister reputation…inexperienced pilots were unable to react quickly enough when the fine-adjustment fuel control had to be altered soon after take-off; the faltering engine’s loss of power, if not instantly corrected, could lead to a stall and spin at a level too low to permit recovery of control.”[2] As a partial remedy, a small quantity of two-seat instructional versions was produced and some of these are known to have been used by training units during 1918.

The heavy casualties incurred by squadrons engaged in ground-attack duties led to the design of the experimental TF.1 Camel, which did not go into production but influenced the development of the Sopwith TF.2 Salamander. Armour was added to the forward part of the aircraft and two Lewis guns were fitted at a downward angle. “TF” stood for “Trench Fighter”.

Sopwith Camels were supplied to the Belgian Air Force in 1918 and used by several of that country’s aces. Two squadrons of the United States Army Air Service, attached to the RAF, were equipped with the Camel in 1918.

Total production came to 5,490 Camels of all types.

The Sopwith 5F.1 Dolphin

The first prototype of what became known as the Sopwith Dolphin emerged from the Sopwith works in May 1917 and was quite unlike any previous Sopwith aircraft. The raisons d’etre of the design were the installation of the powerful 200hp Hispano-Suiza V8 engine and the decision to position the upper wing level with the top of the fuselage, a feature which gave the pilot a completely unobstructed view in the upper hemisphere. To maintain the relationship between lift and centre of gravity, the lower wing was placed forward of the upper, resulting in the Dolphin’s characteristic negative stagger.

That the view downwards was considered insufficient is proven by the various modifications made to the succession of prototypes which appeared during 1917. For this reason, the Dolphin briefly sported cut-outs in the lower wing roots before a lowered rear fuselage decking, with deep cut-outs to the cockpit sides, was eventually chosen. The tall frontal radiator was abandoned after the first prototype and an attempt to mount the radiators on the upper wing was similarly unsuccessful; it was quickly decided that small block-type radiators, mounted on either side of the forward fuselage, were sufficient. Meanwhile, the tail assembly was successively enlarged and a balanced rudder fitted. During its development, the aircraft gained a mounting on the cockpit for two Lewis guns, supplementing the two Vickers guns already installed, possibly stemming from an early interest shown in the type by the Admiralty as a potential Home Defence aircraft. Although this feature was retained on production aircraft, most units in the field removed one or both of the Lewis guns. The fourth prototype, virtually a production-standard aircraft, was tested by the pilots of 19 Squadron; the subsequent report enthusiastically stated: “the machine itself seems to handle perfectly at all heights… [and] is very stable…The view is perfect and the machine easy to fly…Twelve pilots of this squadron have flown it; they all handled it satisfactorily and were delighted with the machine…”

Production of 500 Dolphins was ordered while the aircraft was undergoing tests in the summer of 1917 and further batches were ordered from Darracq and Hooper. However, the Ministry of Munitions rightly noted in March 1918 that “this type is affected by the shortage of Hispano-Suiza engines in the same way as the SE5 [sic].”

During late 1917, the pressure on Hispano-Suiza engine production increased. The engine was required for the SPAD XIII, the S.E.5a and the new Dolphin. Adding to the list of problems was the seemingly endless trouble suffered by licensed manufacturers of the engine, much of which revolved around the reduction gearing and airscrew shaft, which on the engines produced by some manufacturers, particularly Brasier, was found to be too soft. S.E.5a and Dolphin production was badly stymied by this, with airframes lying around in the UK waiting for engines. Meanwhile, Wolseley was having difficulty in producing its own version of the geared Hispano, the Adder, for the S.E.5a and it would be some months before an adequate supply of these powerful engines was available. A solution lay in removing the reduction gear altogether from the Hispano and, although this reduced the performance of the aircraft in which it was fitted, the “RAF in France evidently considered this price worth paying in order to have reliability.”[3] This aircraft, which entered service late in the war, became known as the Dolphin Mk. III.

A French development of the Dolphin (the Dauphin), intended for the Aéronautique Militaire and the United States Army Air Service, was fitted with the 300hp direct-drive Hispano-Suiza 8Fb. This version was known as the Dolphin Mk. II and was distinguished by somewhat bulbous nose contours. However, only a few were produced by SACA (Société Anonyme des Constructions Aéronautiques) before the war ended. Although there was some British interest, the pressure on Hispano-Suiza production precluded any hope of the RAF ordering the type.

The Dolphin equipped 19, 23, 79 and 87 Squadrons on the Western Front in 1918 and won many admirers thanks to its stability, speed and manoeuvrability. Flt Lt (later Air Chief Marshal) Leslie Hollinghurst wrote that “…the Dolphin was easy to fly and was strong and manoeuvrable. The pilot had an excellent view and, in my view, it was one of the best war machines ever built.” [4]

The Dolphin did not gain acceptance as a Home Defence fighter, due largely to the time (approximately 20 minutes) needed to warm the Hispano Suiza engine, which precluded a quick “scramble.” A further disqualification was the largely erroneous belief that the Dolphin would turn over on to its back in a crash landing, which, if not killing or injuring the pilot, would prevent him from escaping and much time and effort was put into devising a pair of curved steel hoops above the cockpit. In fact, the type’s centre of gravity meant that it rarely assumed this position and instead merely buried its nose into the ground. However, although a number of Dolphins flew with training units in the UK, Hollinghurst noted that the type earned an undeserved reputation for stalling quickly, with the result that the Dolphin did not earn the complete confidence of trainee pilots.

The Dolphin did not enjoy a long post-war career: aircraft of 79 Squadron served at Bickendorf until July 1919 and it remained in production until August 1919. The RAF did not declare the Dolphin obsolete until September 1921.

A few Dolphins served with the Polish Air Force in the war with Russia in 1920-1921.

Total British production came to 1,774 Dolphins of both types.

The RAF Museum is fortunate to receive the medal groups of many former members of the RAF; one recent such addition has a nice Hendon connection.

This is the ‘Medal Bar of Six’ of Squadron Leader Donald Ernest Gray – RAF Museum Accession Number X008-4139. It consists of (reading from left to right):

1939-1945 Star
Atlantic Star with Air Crew Europe Clasp
Defence Medal
1939-1945 War Medal
General Service Medal with Malaya Clasp
Air Efficiency Award

The group at first glance might look quite ordinary with no gallantry medals. However, with information gleaned from his log book an interesting history is revealed and also his participation in a forgotten humanitarian operation. Donald Gray was working at Cambridge Instruments Ltd, maker of scientific and medical instruments, in 1939 he joined RAF following the outbreak of war; he failed his pilot medical due to poor eyesight and instead trained as a Wireless Operator/Air Gunner (WOP/AG).

His flying training was from February 1941( No 1 Signals School); Gunnery training commencing July 1941.

When his training was completed, he flew as part of the crew of the Bristol Blenheim IVF long-range fighter (converted from the standard bomber version by the addition of a four-gun under-fuselage pack) with the Shetland-Islands based 404 (Coastal Fighter) Squadron Coastal Command from December 1941 to Sept 1942 when Bristol Beaufighters replaced the Blenheims. The Blenheims’ duties included shipping protection flights and they could act as escort fighters for bombing raids.

He transferred to No. 224 Squadron Coastal Command flying Consolidated Liberators on long-range reconnaissance and anti-submarine duties from October 1942 to January 1944, on 27 December 1942 they sighted and attacked a U-boat with unknown results, he also records attacking shipping off the French and Spanish coasts and chasing away Junkers Ju 88s from convoys which his aircraft was escorting. He married in 1944.

He then went to no. 111 Operational Training Unit – OTU- Nassau (Bahamas) /Lossiemouth (Liberators again) from February 1944 – June 1946 training other WOP/AGs, and flew on Short Sunderland flying boats like the one now in London from February 1947 with the Far-East based No. 88 Sqn from July 1947 – On 1 September 1946, No. 1430 Flight at RAF Kai Tak, Hong Kong had been re-designated No. 88 Squadron for transport duties with six Short Sunderland flying boats.

Courier services between bases in the Far East were operated until No.88 Squadron was re-designated a general reconnaissance unit. On 17 May 1949, Donald Grey flew on one of three Sunderland aircraft sent to Shanghai to evacuate British civilians trapped in the city from the advancing communist forces. According to Flight 2 of 1995, 95 civilians were evacuated. The Melbourne Argus reported:

“Strange and pathetic scenes marked the evacuation. Tears flowed as several Sikhs whom the British brought to Shanghai years ago for police duties in the old International Settlement were parted from their Chinese wives and children who could not obtain exit permits.

One Briton arrived at the seaplane base with a dilapidated white-painted office desk exceeding the 20lb baggage limit which he vainly tried to get flown out. Another brought two mattresses bursting at the seams. Others carried bedding and wicker baskets filled with assorted articles, including a bundle of dirty laundry.

The British evacuees were told they were being carried on an “austerity” basis and that no fare would be charged. One man wore two suits, two hats, and an overcoat in the warm sun. Another wore three coats.”

Unlike so many others, Donald Gray had survived over 80 operational wartime missions.

He was on Avro Ansons/Lincolns (such as the example displayed at RAFM Cosford – the only example in the UK) in 1953-4 at RAF Shawbury in Shropshire and made his last flight May 1957 in a de Havilland Chipmunk at RAF North Weald, Essex. He also served at Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe (SHAPE), Belgium in 1976 and in the United States (Lowry AFB) in 1976-78; his final posting was to RAF Hendon where he was President of the Mess Committee (PMC) in the late 1970s, retiring back to Cambridge aged 58.

His Medal Bar was donated along with supporting archive material by Mrs Christine Gray July 2016 to whom the Museum gives its sincere thanks.

If you have any small objects that you would like to donate to the Museum please visit our Donate Artefacts Form.

Until recently visitors to the War in the Air hangar at Cosford sometimes must have wondered why there was on display a Mercedes-Benz G-Wagen four wheel drive utility vehicle, painted in an unmilitary-looking glossy black with a red stripe. This vehicle had actually been used by 18 Squadron RAF as a hire car for squadron staff during their service in West Germany in the 1980s and 1990s. Now moved into storage, how 18 Squadron came to have it was partly the reason for its preservation.

18 Squadron were the first RAF squadron to operate the Boeing C-47 Chinook, converting onto it in July 1981 when based at Odiham in Hampshire. With the beginning of the conflict in the Falkland Islands in April 1982, four of the Squadron’s Chinooks and associated personnel were embarked on the cargo ship the Atlantic Conveyor and transported to the South Atlantic area of operations.

On 25 May 1982 while with the Naval Task Force in San Carlos Water off East Falkland the Atlantic Conveyor was hit by two Exocet missiles fired from Argentine Air Force Super Etendard aircraft. A huge fire was started which resulted in the deaths of 12 personnel on board and the loss of all of the cargo, including three of 18 Squadron’s four Chinooks. Atlantic Conveyor sank three days later.

One Chinook, ZA718, coded BN or Bravo November, was on task when Atlantic Conveyor was hit, and was able to land on HMS Hermes and avoid the conflagration on the Atlantic Conveyor. 18 Squadron personnel were able to set up a command post at Port San Carlos to direct operations for Bravo November.

Whilst there, the Squadron commanders were given the use of a captured Argentine G-Wagen, surrendered as spoils of war to the Brigade of Gurkhas. This vehicle had been damaged by cannon fire from a British Harrier aircraft, and had sustained a hole in its bonnet and inner wing from a cannon shell. Despite this it proved serviceable and the OC of 18 Squadron Wing Commander Stables arranged for it to be brought back to the UK when operations in the Falklands ceased.

First registered in December 1981, the G-Wagen was part of a large consignment ordered from Mercedes-Benz and delivered to the Argentine military. Its original colour scheme was a tan and olive camouflage, which is illustrated in this photograph of it in the mid-1980s. Just visible is the 18 Squadron Pegasus emblem which was added to the passenger door.

18 Squadron took the G-Wagen with them when posted to RAF Gutersloh in West Germany in 1983 and it was registered as a British Forces Germany vehicle. It came into its own as a Squadron hack and hire vehicle, with personnel taking it as far afield as Denmark, Lichtenstein and Yugoslavia. Its hire sheet even records a detail in 1990 of “Op Granby” and an increase in mileage of 1500km, but whether it was taken to 18 Squadron’s theatre of operations in the Gulf is not yet known.
Alongside 18 Squadron at Gutersloh was the Puma helicopter equipped 230 Squadron, whose squadron crest features a tiger, in recognition of the Squadron’s service in Malaya. A friendly rivalry existed between the two squadrons and after two large porcelain tigers went missing from the 230 Squadron crew room, the G-Wagen was kidnapped for a week and returned to 18 Squadron with an orange and black stripe colour scheme. Funds were found for it to be painted in colours more befitting 18 Squadron, and hence the black and red 18 Squadron colour scheme it remains in today.

The original Argentine colours can still be seen on the rear number plate holder, alongside the 18 Squadron Pegasus.

In 1993, after ten years of service, the G-Wagen was starting to wear out and a request to a main dealer for a gearbox part required the sharing of its chassis number. It was at this point it was discovered that the Argentine military had never completed payment for the vehicle back in 1981 and Mercedes demanded the return of their stolen property. 18 Squadron personnel politely pointed out that as a “spoil of war” the G-Wagen was not being given up, and the part was obtained from an alternative source!

After 18 Squadron were posted back to the UK in June 1997 the G-Wagen could not be UK registered due to its lack of importation documents, and the decision was taken to retire it from service. Air Marshal Sir John Curtiss, Commander of the Air element during the Falklands Conflict, helped in the vehicle’s recovery back to the UK from the Falklands on the basis that it would eventually be transferred to the RAF Museum. On 14th June 2001 it duly arrived at Cosford in an 18 Squadron Chinook and was rolled out for its official handover to the Museum from OC 18 Squadron Wing Commander David Prowse.

Routine conservation work by Museum staff in 2003 led to a variety of items being removed from underneath the rear seat. These included some empty Embassy cigarette packets and a disposable lighter, two Argentine Ever Ready batteries, a German beer bottle top and a diamante earring! Also found were the burnt remains of this Argentine “Jockey Club” cigarette wrapper.

The damage to the bonnet caused by the Harrier’s 30mm cannon shell was repaired by 18 Squadron when the G-Wagen first arrived in Gutersloh in 1983. The exit hole in the inner wing still remains, however, and will be kept as evidence of the battle damage sustained during the vehicle’s service life.

In September 1916, William Leefe Robinson was awarded a Victoria Cross for destroying the German Army airship SL11 over Cuffley on the night of 3 September 1916. This blog will examine the impact the events of that night had on the German air offensive against the UK and on the life of William Leefe Robinson.

William Leefe Robinson was born in India on 14 July 1895, the son of Horace Robinson, a coffee planter, and his wife, Elizabeth Leefe. Although the family temporarily moved to England from India in 1901, as a result of competition from Brazilian plantations, they moved back again two years later. In 1909, William and his brother Harold were sent back once again to England to be educated at St. Bees School in Cumberland (Cumbria). Although William did not distinguish himself academically, he shone in school sports and was well-liked by the staff and pupils.

Just a few days after the outbreak of war in 1914, Robinson entered the Royal Military College, Sandhurst. Upon being commissioned, he was posted to the Fifth Militia Battalion of the Worcester Regiment but, quickly bored by a life of assisting in training men for the Front, he applied for a number of transfers. Ray Rimmel writes that “there seems little reason to suppose that Robinson had any great ambition for flying, the subject was never raised in correspondence, more likely the tedium of his position was such that he fired off as many applications as possible and took the first one offered him.” Thus it was that on 29 March 1915, he was posted to 4 Squadron RFC as an observer.

During a reconnaissance on 8 May, Robinson was wounded in the arm by two pieces of shrapnel from a German anti-aircraft shell. After being treated in hospital, Robinson was given a month’s leave and, on 29 June, he was posted to Farnborough to begin flying training. On 18 July he went solo for the first time and on 28 July qualified for his Royal Aero Club Certificate. At the end of September, he joined 19 Squadron, based at Castle Bromwich, where his duties included the delivery of aircraft and the taking aloft of trainee pilots and observers.

Originally intended for reconnaissance duties, the airships of the German Army and Navy were first used to bomb the UK in January 1915. During the later months of 1915, the attacks on the UK by both German airships were increasing in frequency and boldness and, as a result of public and media pressure, the government began substantially to increase the UK’s aerial defences, particularly those around London. Although the material damage inflicted by the airships was light, particularly when compared to later aeroplane raids, their nuisance value was considerably greater. Substantial numbers of aircraft, searchlights and anti-aircraft batteries were stationed around the country, as well as large numbers of personnel to operate and support them, all of which distracted from the main effort on the Western Front. Although it is the German Navy that is best remembered for the offensive against the UK, the German Army, mainly equipped with Schütte-Lanz airships, made a small contribution to the offensive.

A rival to the better-known Zeppelin, Schütte-Lanz constructed airships primarily from wood and plywood. Although other features pioneered by Schütte-Lanz were in time copied by Zeppelin, wooden construction was not a real success. Aluminium and duralumin proved to be lighter and stronger, while a wooden structure, imperfectly sealed by the airship’s envelope, was prone to moisture damage. This not only occurred when flying in wet weather but also in damp hangar conditions, which was a particular problem at naval bases. As a consequence, the German Naval Airship Division preferred Zeppelin’s products and the majority of Schütte-Lanz airships were used by the German Army.

As part of the increase in London’s defences, Robinson joined 10 Reserve Aeroplane Squadron at Joyce Green on Christmas Eve, 1915. However, due to his Commanding Officer making “…such a fuss about having me back at Birmingham…” he returned there at the end of January. Just a few days later, he was again posted south, to Suttons Farm, where a Flight of the newly-formed 19 Reserve Aeroplane Squadron was based. On 15 April 1916, as part of a large-scale reorganisation of the country’s defences, 19 Squadron was re-titled 39 Home Defence Squadron. The airfields used by the squadron were very primitive and the difficult task of landing by night was assisted only by an L-shaped flare path, made by placing petrol cans at intervals, their lids removed and the insides filled with petrol, paraffin and cotton waste. The flying itself was arduous – the patrols were long, with the pilots heavily muffled against the cold and their faces covered in whale oil to protect them from frostbite, while landing in the dark was difficult and dangerous.

Improvements were being made, however, in regard to the quality of the defences. Early attempts to attack German airships with weapons such as Hales bombs and Ranken darts were almost completely unsuccessful. The striking exception was the destruction of Zeppelin LZ37 on the night of 7 June 1915, as it returned to its base over Belgium, when it was bombed from above by Flight Sub-Lieutenant Rex Warneford. Despite this success, explosive bullets were being developed and the War Office and Admiralty had ordered large quantities of them from different inventors. Sparklet, Buckingham, Brock and Pomeroy were all used by the Home Defence squadrons from 1916, often in a mixture designed to inflict as much damage to their hydrogen-filled targets as possible. French Le Prieur rockets were also issued to RFC Home Defence units but, although they had found success against tethered kite balloons, they were of no use against airships and most RFC pilots had them removed.

On the night of 25 April, Robinson was among the members of 39 Squadron who spotted LZ97, a German Army Zeppelin commanded by Hauptmann Erich Linnarz, while over London. Two pilots attacked the airship: future AOC-in-C of Bomber Command, Captain Arthur Harris made an ineffective challenge with his B.E.2c’s machine gun and, as his aircraft was unable to climb above the Zeppelin, his attempt to use Ranken Darts was equally hopeless. The other assailant was Robinson, who in fact attacked LZ97 before Harris. In his combat report, Robinson wrote: “I fired at the Zeppelin three times (each time almost immediately below it); the machine gun jammed five times, and I only got off about twenty rounds. When the Zeppelin made off in a ENE direction, I followed for some minutes, but lost sight of it.”

Some four months later, after 39 raids almost without loss, the German Naval and Army Airship Commands ambitiously launched their first combined operation against London. It was to be the largest airship raid of the war and, in the words of Cole and Cheeseman, “an utter failure.”
From midday until around 3.30 in the afternoon of 2 September 1916, twelve Naval and four Army airships rose slowly from their bases and began to climb over the North Sea. In Room 40 of the Admiralty, intercepted wireless messages from the German airships began to pour in and it was apparent by 5 o’clock that afternoon that a large raid was imminent. The weather, however, was not favourable: rain covered much of the UK during the morning and a light mist crept down from the Wash to cover London during the afternoon and evening. Worse, a strong wind from the south east actually compelled some of the German airships to return to base, as ice, forming on the hulls, threatened to bring them down through sheer weight. Zeppelin LZ53 turned back over Norfolk, while the commander of LZ97 aborted while still over the North Sea. The strong winds caused the rest of the raiders to scatter their bombs over the south-east of England during the night without causing significant damage. Only one airship, the Army’s Schütte-Lanz SL11, commanded by Hauptmann Wilhelm Schramm, “penetrated to within seven miles of Charing Cross.”

At around 11.10pm, the aircraft of 39 Squadron were “scrambled” from their airfields, with Robinson detailed to patrol between Hornchurch and Joyce Green. LZ98 had bombed the area around Dartford and Tilbury, when, shortly afterwards, it was sighted by Robinson. The Zeppelin, considerably lightened after dropping its bombs, easily evaded the B.E.2c. Robinson wrote: “I very slowly gained on it for about ten minutes – I judged it to be about 800 feet below me, and I sacrificed my speed in order to keep the height. It went behind some clouds, avoided the searchlights and I lost sight of it…” By this time, Robinson had actually exceeded his allotted patrol time but, perhaps in frustration, he flew out of his assigned patrol area and towards London, hoping that the capital’s searchlights would illuminate another target.

Meanwhile, Schramm’s SL11 had circled London from the east, in preparation for an attack on the capital from the north. The airship dropped numerous high explosive bombs across north London before it was detected and held over Alexandra Palace by the searchlights in Finsbury and Victoria Park. Thousands of Londoners watched as the Finsbury guns began to fire at the airship which, while turning evasively, was seen by three 39 Squadron pilots: 2/Lt Mackay, 2/Lt Hunt and Robinson. As Schramm turned over Tottenham, Robinson found himself catching SL11; after disappearing into a cloud, it reappeared, nearer than ever and, with the capital’s anti-aircraft gunners still enthusiastically engaging the airship, he signalled with a red Very light, at which the fire from the ground ceased. Moments later, he attacked the SL11 head-on:

I flew about 800 feet below it from bow to stern and distributed one drum along it (alternate New Brock and Pomeroy). It seemed to have no effect; I therefore moved to one side and gave it another drum distributed along its side – without apparent effect. I then got behind it (by this time I was very close – 500 feet or less below) and concentrated one drum on one part (underneath rear). I was then at a height of 11,500 feet when attacking the Zeppelin.
I hardly finished the drum before I saw the part fired at glow. In a few seconds the whole rear part was blazing.
When the third drum was fired there were no searchlights on the Zeppelin and no anti-aircraft was firing.
I quickly got out of the way of the falling, blazing Zeppelin and being very excited fired off a few red Very’s lights and dropped a parachute flare.

The burning airship crashed into a field outside Cuffley at approximately 2.20am on the morning of 3 September. All sixteen on board were killed.

The structure of the SL11 was constructed from wood and plywood, rather than the metal employed by Zeppelin and much of this was burnt during the airship’s descent. One eyewitness who arrived at the scene shortly after the SL11 came down remarked that “…there wasn’t much of a wreck there for an airship – only about twenty-five square yards of it…” Yet thousands of sightseers, enthused by the destruction of one of the much-hated “baby-killers”, were soon flooding towards Cuffley to view the remains. The authorities referred to the wreck as L21, possibly in order to prevent public confusion between Schütte-Lanz and Zeppelin airships.

Robinson’s recognition was not long in coming and a recommendation from Sir David Henderson for the awarding of the Victoria Cross was made shortly afterwards. By 5 September, newspapers were headlining the award of the VC to the “Hero of Cuffley”, the promulgation of which, some 48 hours after the action, made it “one of the quickest bestowals in the medal’s history.” The investiture took place at Windsor on 9 September. Robinson would also be rewarded with several thousand pounds from companies and individuals as the first airman to destroy a German airship over the UK.

The destruction of SL11 was swiftly followed by two more successes for the defences when Frederick Sowrey destroyed L32 on 24 September and Wulstan Tempest downed L31 on 2 October. The loss of three valuable airships within a month effectively broke the back of the airship offensive against the UK. Despite new and improved versions, known as the “height climbers” being deployed later in the war, they had little effect and the Leader of Airships, Peter Strasser, would meet his end in just such a craft, L70, during the last airship raid on Britain, when it was shot down on 5 August 1918.

Following the loss of SL11, the Army Airship Service made no further effort to attack the UK. The disastrous three months endured by Strasser at the end of 1916, persuaded the German Army Air Service, in Cole and Cheeseman’s words, that “successful airship attacks on London were no longer possible.” When the German Luftstreitkrafte (Combat Air Force) was formed shortly afterwards, its new commander, Wilhelm von Höppner, immediately stated: “Since an airship raid on London has become impossible, the Air Service is required to carry out a raid with aeroplanes as soon as possible.” The results of this realisation were the far more lethal Gotha raids which began on London in June 1917 and continued, although nocturnally, into 1918.

Meanwhile, Robinson desired a posting to a more active role, preferably on the Western Front and, on 9 February 1917, his wish came true when he received orders to join 48 Squadron, which was in the process of equipping with the new Bristol F.2a. This aircraft, which in modified form became the much-respected F.2b, (better known as the Bristol Fighter), was to suffer a disastrous combat debut. One of the new aircraft’s teething problems was the icing up of the guns at altitude. The squadron blamed this on the oil freezing, to which Robinson’s solution was to remove the oil altogether, a decision which was to remain controversial for obvious reasons. The squadron arrived in France on 18 March and, the following month, which became known to the RFC as “Bloody April” made its first sortie. This was a patrol of six F.2as led by Robinson in the vicinity of Douai, well-known to be the home of Jasta 11, equipped with the formidable Albatros D.III, under the command of Manfred von Richthofen. The patrol was duly intercepted by five pilots of Jasta 11, including von Richthofen, just as it was beginning to turn back for the British lines. Four of the six Bristols were swiftly shot down, including Robinson’s aircraft. Although early newspaper reports claimed that Robinson had been killed, he had in fact been captured. Many argue the disaster was due to the squadron’s inexperience with the new aircraft, while others have pointed out that many of the guns on the squadron’s aircraft were rendered useless by the lack of lubrication.

During the rest of 1917, Robinson attempted to escape four times, once, with two companions, even managing to evade capture until within four miles of the Swiss border. Eventually, Robinson found himself at Clausthal PoW camp, which was commanded by Heinrich Niemeyer, brother of Karl, commander of Holzminden. Both camps and both brothers (who were in fact twins) were infamous for their treatment of prisoners. In July 1918, Robinson was transferred to Holzminden, where he “suffered ceaseless and deliberate persecution”.” A failed escape attempt made Robinson’s standing with Karl Niemeyer even worse, who allegedly “swore to avenge the death of Wilhelm Schramm, whom he falsely claimed to have known well, going out of his way to make life difficult for Robinson.” Robinson was singled out for treatment which, it seems, was designed to gradually break his morale, including a requirement to answer roll calls three times a day and confinement to the most insalubrious cells in the camp. In memoirs published in 1919, the Norwegian pilot Trygve Gran, a fellow prisoner in Holzminden, recalled that on one occasion, “Robinson was taken to a cell and, for disobeying an ‘order’, was whipped to the point of collapse.”

Following the Armistice, Robinson was repatriated to the UK, landing on 14 December. Friends who saw him in England were shocked by his appearance, for the eighteen months of confinement had left Robinson seriously weakened. Shortly after Christmas, he contracted influenza, a pandemic of which was sweeping across Europe.

Captain William Leefe Robinson succumbed quickly, passing away on 31 December 1918. He was 23 years old.

This blog will examine four of Sopwith’s major First World War designs. With the publication of a second blog, the reader will be able to trace the continuous and gradual development of these famous aircraft, from the 1½ Strutter of 1915 to the Dragon of 1918. Photographs of each aircraft will illustrate the Sopwith “line of descent”.

Thomas Sopwith, already an accomplished pilot, began to produce his own aircraft at Brooklands in 1912. The Sopwith Aviation Company was established in a converted ice-rink in Kingston-on-Thames from early 1913 and, in the eighteen months or so before war was declared, the firm supplied a number of aircraft to the RNAS and RFC, as well as winning the 1914 Schneider Trophy at Monaco. At war’s outbreak, therefore, the company was well known, particularly to the Admiralty, and had won a reputation for building fast and well-designed aircraft.

The company, for much of the First World War, revolved around four men: founder Thomas Sopwith, designer Herbert Smith, works manager Fred Sigrist and test pilot Harry Hawker.

Sopwith 1½ Strutter
As related above, Sopwith had a special relationship with the Admiralty from the beginning and it is no surprise that the latter expressed an interest in the company’s new aircraft when it emerged in 1915. Although Sopwith described the aircraft as the LCT, (possibly the Land Clerget Tractor), the unusual centre-section strut design meant it quickly became known as the 1½ Strutter. Features of the prototype included a variable-incidence tailplane and air-brakes mounted at the lower wing roots, although the latter were not incorporated into production aircraft. Jack Bruce noted that the prototype was not equipped with a forward-firing machine gun, as “the superior performance to be expected from a tractor configuration outweighed the sacrifice of the unobstructed field of fire forward provided by a pusher”, which, he added, “was bold thinking with only 110hp available.”[1] Instead, the observer was able to swivel a Lewis gun, using the French Etévé mounting, in any direction, including over the upper wing.

Nevertheless, a batch of 50 aircraft, followed by another for 100, was ordered by the Admiralty. The compact design and relatively high speed of the aircraft led to its designation as a fighter, although many airframes from the second batch were completed as single-seat bombers. In early 1916, it was decided that a forward-firing gun was desirable and all Strutters, with the exception of the very first aircraft, were so equipped. The problematic Lewis gun arrangement was also dropped in favour of a Scarff-ring-mounted weapon.

The 3rd and 5th Wings of the Royal Naval Air Service (RNAS) began using both versions of the Strutter as a bomber in spring 1916. While the single-seat version was to be used exclusively as a bomber, the two-seater was, somewhat optimistically, employed on patrol duties as well. However, the Admiralty’s planned bombing campaign did not materialise as originally hoped. The crisis on the Western Front, caused by the Battle of Verdun, and the subsequent moving forward of the British Somme offensive, forced the RFC to request the transfer of considerable numbers of aircraft from naval contracts, among which were over 70 Strutters. Naval Strutters continued the Western Front bombing campaign into 1917, while limited numbers were employed as anti-submarine aircraft in the Mediterranean and as bombers in Macedonia. Others were embarked on HMS Furious and HMS Vindex, fitted with wheeled undercarriages or with skids. A number were used to test hydrovanes and flotation gear at the Isle of Grain.

The Royal Flying Corps (RFC) was not far behind the Navy in ordering the new type and, with the Sopwith works running at full capacity, an initial order for fifty aircraft was given to Ruston, Proctor in March 1916. Further batches were built by a multitude of different companies and almost 700 were eventually delivered to the RFC.

Unfortunately, RFC units on the Western Front found the new aircraft to be inferior to the opposition. An improvement in performance was sought by the installation of the 130hp Clerget engine but “this was too late…it was mid-April 1917 before production 1½ Strutters could be so equipped in reasonable numbers, and…the Sopwith was by then hopelessly outclassed.”[2] By October 1917, the Strutter had been withdrawn from the Western Front. Fifty-nine aircraft were converted to “Comic” specification for night-fighting operations and others continued as trainers in the UK.

While a total of approximately 1,300 Strutters was produced in the UK, over 4,500 were built in France, which made great use of the type as a bomber and reconnaissance aircraft. In addition, Belgium, Russia and the United States purchased the Strutter, making it one of the most widely-used aircraft of the First World War.

A Sopwith 1½ Strutter replica can be seen at the RAF Museum, Cosford.

Sopwith SL T B P

This aircraft, allegedly built straight from drawings chalked onto the floor of the Sopwith works by Harry Hawker, can claim to be the forerunner of the Pup. The tailplane and undercarriage followed Sopwith orthodoxy and similar versions were to be found on the Pup, as were the single-bay wings and wing-tips with significant backwards rake.

Harry Hawker used the aircraft as a personal runabout to fly between the various factories building Sopwith aircraft. It is known to have survived until at least 1926, by which time it was converted to a two-seater.

SL T B P may have stood for Sopwith Land Tractor BiPlane.

Sopwith Pup

The late Jack Bruce wrote that “it has been said that the little Sopwith Scout which was to be known as the Pup was designed as a counter-weapon to the Fokker monoplane.”[3] Whatever the truth of this, the Fokker began to make its presence felt in the late autumn of 1915 and the prototype of the Sopwith Pup first flew in February 1916. Possibly it was the exigencies of time, stemming from the Fokker menace, which caused Sopwith to use many of the design attributes of the SL T B P in the new aircraft.

The aircraft was, in comparison to its contemporaries, easy to fly and blessed with a high degree of manoeuvrability, made possible by the concentration of mass in the forward part of the fuselage. A low wing-loading, thanks to a generous chord, bestowed the Pup with an especially fine performance at higher altitudes, enabling it to retain full manoeuvrability to around 15,000 feet and Major James McCudden wrote that “when it came to manoeuvring, the Sopwith Scout would turn twice to an Albatros’ once.”

As Admiralty contractors, it is unsurprising that the first six aircraft were delivered to the RNAS and eventually some 175 Pups were built to naval contracts. Production aircraft first saw action with the RNAS in September 1916.

The RFC was not slow in following the Admiralty’s lead and large contracts were placed with both the Standard and Whitehead companies. The first RFC unit to be fully equipped with the Pup was 54 Squadron, which arrived in France on 24 December 1916. Shortly after production commenced, stronger cabane struts were introduced and although doubt was cast upon the structural strength of the little Sopwith by the Central Flying School, it was found to be satisfactory by the standards of the day. Nevertheless, units discovered that the mainplane panels of the Pup, irrespective of manufacturer or service, had to be replaced after about 40 hours of flying.

In late 1916, in response to a call from the RFC for reinforcements following the Battle of the Somme, the Admiralty dispatched 8 Squadron, RNAS to work with the army. Other RNAS Pup units active on the Western Front included 3, 4 and 9 Squadrons.

The Pup had only two major drawbacks. One was the 80hp Le Rhone or 100hp Le Rhone engine, which limited top speed and climb. The other was the single Vickers gun. In comparison, the Albatros D-series was fitted with a 160hp Mercedes engine and two machine guns. Consequently, as 1917 progressed, the Pup found itself increasingly hard-pressed by the Albatros D.III and D.V. The first Camels were delivered to the RNAS and RFC in June 1917 and thereafter the Pup was gradually withdrawn from service on the Western Front. The last Pup was relinquished by 54 Squadron in December 1917, by which time the type was thoroughly outclassed.

Attempts were made to increase the Pup’s performance. The 100hp Gnome Monosoupape was tried but did not confer any advantage. The 110hp Le Rhone was also tested and, although a slight improvement was gained, it was found that the extra weight of the engine made a three-point landing impossible. Trials confirmed that the static loading of this version was somewhat lower than the standard Pup and in November 1917, work on the aircraft was abandoned. However, as Bruce noted, “it is interesting that this work was still in progress at a time when the Camel and S.E.5a were in operational use [!]”[4]

Some Pups were embarked upon battleships and cruisers during the latter stages of the war as an anti-airship deterrent, while others played a pioneering role in taking off and landing from early aircraft carriers.

A large number of Pups were used by flying schools for training pupils in aerial fighting and several are known to have been retained by instructors for their own use at the Central Flying School and the School of Special Flying, in which role the little fighters acquired a variety of eye-catching colour schemes.

A Sopwith Pup, rebuilt from original parts, can be seen at RAF Museum, Cosford.

Sopwith Triplane

This aircraft is chiefly remembered for the great impression it made in the spring of 1917. Excellent manoeuvrability and rate of climb made it more than a match for the Albatros D.III; the German reaction was to call for rival designs, the result of which was the famous Fokker Dr.I.

The Triplane was an almost exact contemporary of the Pup; the fuselage was similar in construction and the armament remained identical. The short chord of the wings endowed the aircraft with excellent manoeuvrability and the pilot with good all-round vision, while the short wingspan gave the Triplane a high rate of roll. From February 1917, the Triplane was fitted with a tailplane of eight feet span, replacing the earlier ten feet span version derived from that of the Pup. At the same time, the engine was upgraded from the 110hp Clerget to the 130hp version which, in spite of the Triplane’s greater drag, gave it a speed advantage over the Pup.

The Triplane only saw action on the Western Front with the RNAS. Although the Triplane was ordered by the War Office, only one example is known to have served with the RFC. There is some confusion in the records over which batch of Triplanes was in fact ordered for the RFC. A request for the transfer of naval aircraft to the army in the autumn of 1916 was eventually fulfilled, the terms of which were that the RFC would hand over its contract for Sopwith Triplanes to the RNAS, while the latter gave up its SPAD VIIs to the former, although “it is doubtful whether any handover to the RNAS of a triplane built for the RFC ever took place, even on paper.”[5] However, in spite of this, the SPADs destined for the RNAS were handed over to the RFC! The firm of Oakley did eventually complete three aircraft, interestingly armed with two Vickers guns each, as were a batch of six Triplanes completed by Clayton & Shuttleworth.

The Triplane equipped a number of naval units, the most distinguished of which was 10 Squadron, RNAS. Led by Raymond Collishaw, the famous all-Canadian B Flight, or “Black Flight” of “Naval 10”, achieved remarkable success during May and June 1917. The aircraft of the Flight featured black engine cowlings and undercarriage wheels and were named Black Maria, Black Sheep, Black George, Black Prince and Black Death. Some of these names were given to more than one airframe, while Black Sheep was renamed Black Maria and Collishaw is known to have flown several Triplanes named Black Maria. The latter wrote:

The Triplane I found to be a delightful machine – in my estimation much preferable to the Pup.

I continued to fly this machine – N533 – for the remainder of the time I was with “Naval 10”, and wished very much that we had all been given twin-gun types long before. [6]

The official historian, H.A. Jones, wrote that “the sight of a Sopwith Triplane formation, in particular, induced the enemy pilots to dive out of range.” Although not easily verified, this statement illustrates the high regard in which the Triplane was held by both sides during the spring and summer of 1917.

Unfortunately, the superiority of the Triplane proved to be short-lived, for the new generation of German fighters, notably the Albatros D.V, proved to have the edge in combat. Triplanes began to be phased from front-line service in July and August 1917, although 1 Squadron, RNAS, did not relinquish its last example until December.

Triplane production came to 147 aircraft and some remained on charge in training units in the UK until the end of the war. Ten examples are known to have gone to the French Government and one, still in existence, was operated in Russia.

An Oakley-built Triplane can be seen at the RAF Museum, Hendon.

An attempt to improve performance was made by producing an almost entirely new, and larger, aircraft. Two prototypes were completed, one (serial N509) powered by a 150hp direct-drive Hispano-Suiza engine, the second (serial N510) by a geared 200hp version. The latter aircraft crashed fatally on 20 October 1916. The first prototype was based at Manston for some time, where it flew a number of Home Defence sorties. No development of either version was undertaken.

After several unsuccessful attempts to develop an effective long range flying boat for the maritime patrol role, in 1916 the Royal Naval Air Service (RNAS) bought 50 twin-engined H.8 flying boats from the Curtiss Aeroplanes and Motors Corporation in the United States. Unfortunately, the H.8 was seriously underpowered until its two 160 HP Curtiss VXX engines were replaced with 250 HP Rolls-Royce Eagles.

The H.12 – as the re-engined H.8 was designated – proved much more satisfactory and entered RNAS service in 1917. However, the RNAS’s Seaplane Experimental Flight at Felixstowe, under the direction of Commander John Porte, was still dissatisfied with the H.12s performance on take-off and landing. Cdr Porte realised that the hull was main cause of the trouble so he and his team tried replacing it with a completely new one, which was stronger, more hydrodynamically efficient and also easier to build.

This is a page from “Report on experimental flying boat hulls, 1915-1916” issued by Seaplane Experimental Flight at Felixstowe, which is held by the Museum’s Archives collection. It summarises the important features of the F.2A hull design which replaced the original Curtiss version on the H.12 resulting in a significant improvement in performance. (RAFM reference B433)

With its revised hull and Rolls-Royce Eagle engines, the improved version of the H.12 was ready to go into production in the UK, where it was known as the Felixstowe F.2A. A practically identical aircraft, designated the H.16, was built in the United States and many H.16s saw service in the RAF alongside the Felixstowe flying boats. Cmr Porte and his team went on to improve the F.2A design still further resulting in the F.3 and F.5, both of which were in full production in the UK when the First World War ended. In RNAS and RAF service all of the Curtiss and the Felixstowe flying boats from the H.12 to the F.5 were known as Large Americas.

This general arrangement drawing of a Felixstowe F.3 was published in the January 29 1919 issue of “Aeronautics” in an article entitled “Large America Class Flying Boats (F.2A and F.3)” (RAFM reference PR01805). The War had been over for less than three months when this article was published and it was the first time detailed construction details and performance data for these aircraft appeared in print.

Such were the demands upon British aircraft manufacturers in 1917 that contracts for Felixstowe flying boats were awarded not only to experienced seaplane builders like Short Brothers and S.E. Saunders, but also to companies like Dick, Kerr and Company and the Phoenix Dynamo Company, which were building marine aircraft for the first time.

This advertisement for Short Brothers of Rochester appeared shortly after the First World War in “The British Aircraft Standard Catalogue, 1920-21” (RAFM reference 010061). It shows several Felixstowe F.5 hulls in the huge erecting shops at the Rochester works. Short Brothers were awarded contracts for two batches of 50 Felixstowe flying boats and completed a total of 35 F.3s and 25 F.5s before the remainder were cancelled at the end of the War. Hulls were built in a boatyard at Strood and final aircraft assembly carried out in the main works at Rochester.

Thanks to the simplified hull design incorporated in the Felixstowe flying boats, all of the manufacturers who were awarded contracts were soon delivering airworthy aircraft on schedule.

However, Phoenix in Bradford and Dick, Kerr in Preston had no convenient access to open water where their newly-built aircraft could be test-flown. Broken down into their major components their aircraft were transported by road from the factories to assembly and flight-testing outstations at Brough on the river Humber, South Shields on the Tyne and Lytham on the Ribble. In 1918 the company outstations at Brough and South Shields became Marine Aeroplane Depots under RAF control.

Here Felixstowe F.3 N4401, built by the Phoenix Dynamo Company in Bradford, is about to take to the water in 1918. The presence of a civilian handling party suggests that the photograph was taken while the aircraft was undergoing flight testing, probably at Brough. (RAFM reference X003-2602/6804)

Felixstowe flying boats were one of the most expensive aircraft types used by the RAF during the First World War. An F.2A airframe alone cost £6,738 and the two Roll-Royce Eagle VIII engines added another £3,245. Together this is equivalent to £430,000 at today’s prices. Although large numbers of flying boats were urgently needed, output was limited by the rate at which their Rolls-Royce Eagle engines could be produced.

Felixstowe F.3 hulls under construction at the Phoenix Dynamo Company’s Thornbury Works in Bradford, 1918 are seen here. 24 F.3s and 15 F.5s were built by Phoenix during 1918 but an order for 30 more was cancelled when the War ended. During the Royal visit to Yorkshire in May 1918, King George V inspected the F.3 production line at the works. One of the aircraft’s systems demonstrated to him was the wireless and he listened to a message sent from an airborne aircraft picked up by a wireless receiver at the factory. (RAFM reference X003-2602/6753).
The numbers of all types of Large America flying boats delivered to the RNAS/RAF as follows: 84 H.12s; 24 H.12 Converts; 173 F.2As; 2 F.2Cs; 176 F.3s; 100 (approx.) F.5s; and 75 H.16s. When the First World War ended several orders were cancelled before completion and the numbers delivered from some production batches of F.5s is uncertain. By the end of the First World War the RAF had 53 F.2As, 96 F.3s and 69 H.16s on strength.

Here we see the interior of the Dick, Kerr factory at Preston, where F.3 N4259 is shown fully assembled, complete with bombs beneath the wings. Many of the hulls for Dick, Kerr’s aircraft were built by the Boulton Paul Company in Norwich and most of the assembly and testing was carried out at South Shields, a three-day journey from Preston by steam lorry. Out of the 150 aircraft ordered from Dick, Kerr a total of 61 F.3s and 2 F.5s were delivered. The remainder were cancelled when the War ended. (RAF Museum reference X003-2602/6795)

Here a Boulton and Paul built F.3 fuselage is seen on its side, covered in a tarpaulin probably being transported from Norwich to the Phoenix Dynamo works in Preston some time in 1918.

In this photograph N4510, the first F.2A delivered by May, Harden & May, sits on its cradle outside the company’s Hythe works in early 1918. May, Harden & May built 71 F.2A hulls for aircraft ordered from the Aircraft Manufacturing Co. (AIRCO) based at Hendon. (RAF Museum reference X003-2602/6613)

S.E. Saunders Ltd in the Isle of Wight built 100 F.2As and had a been given a further contract for 50 F.5s when the war ended. This photograph showing F.2As nearing completion was taken in the company’s works at East Cowes in 1918.

Other manufacturers involved in the production of Large America flying boats included Aldous & Co, Dixon Brothers & Hutchinson, Summers & Payne, Camper & Nicholson, Norman Thompson/Williams & Co, the US Naval Aircraft Factory, Canadian Aeroplanes Ltd and the Dockyard Construction Unit on Malta.

The Museum’s First World War in the Air programme of events and blogs are supported by BAE Systems and the Heritage Lottery Fund.

This story explains the background to a situation where, by the end of April 1945, the people of Western Holland were on the edge of a human catastrophe, almost completely without food, and how Allied Air Forces in England responded with Operations “Manna” and “Chowhound”, the dropping of food from the air by bomber aeroplanes.

I suppose the story begins in May 1940, when Holland was invaded by Germany. For 5 years, Dutch citizens lived in an occupied country, directed, sometimes imprisoned or worse, by their captors and hoping for liberation. Resistance organisations were formed, information passed to the Allies and strong communications maintained with the exiled Government in England and with the Dutch Royal Family in Canada.

Growing Allied strength in the air was a powerful influence on the population. They listened to the roar of RAF bombers flying over Holland to attack German targets and many Dutch people say that this was the sound that convinced them they would one day be liberated. Unfortunately, the Germans were also aware of these routes and the population saw many combats in the night sky with bombers and crews falling to nightfighters, many of them stationed on Dutch airfields.
Great courage was shown by many Dutch people, not only helping and hiding crews who survived the loss of their aircraft, but also in tending the graves of fallen crewmen. This was equally true for the crews of the United States 8th Air Force, sending hundreds of daylight bombers at high altitude on their way to Germany.

For much of the War, Holland could just about feed itself, although the Germans removed large numbers of livestock, especially cattle, and requisitioned many other foodstuffs. There may not have been the pre-War variety, but food distribution systems worked and rationing, plus some black market for those who could afford it, ensured an adequate diet. This began to change soon after the Allied invasion of Normandy in June 1944. German priorities moved from being an Occupying to a Defending Army, with effects on the distribution system; the railways, waterways and Agriculture.

Over 500,000 acres were flooded or otherwise taken out of use by the Germans during 1944, many barges had been seized and there was no fuel for transport by lorry. These measures made distribution of food very difficult, particularly to the Western Provinces, which are less agricultural and contain the biggest cities.

Although the Allied Armies advanced relatively quickly through France and Belgium to capture the port of Antwerp, there were areas on the left flank that were left in German hands whilst the British 21st Army Group pushed towards Germany. Thus some of Holland was liberated, but much remained occupied. The British did try Operation Market Garden in September 1944. This was an attempt using paratroops to seize bridges across a number of major river obstacles. You will all have heard of ‘The Bridge Too Far”, at Arnhem, where the attempt stalled.

In anticipation of success at Arnhem, the Dutch Government in Exile called on the railway workers to strike, which they did. After the Germans defeated the airborne troops, they took revenge against the civilian population still in their hands. Men were rounded up for slave labour, electricity and gas supplies were severely restricted, partly through lack of fuel, and the transportation of food was forbidden for seven weeks, just as winter was approaching. Railway rolling stock was seized and taken to Germany. The workers maintained their strike, many going into hiding.

These measures and the unusually severe weather conditions of winter 44/45 brought the ‘Hongerwinter’. Canals and rivers froze, denying transport of food. This was especially difficult in the so-called ‘B-2’ area of the Western Provinces, containing some 3.5 Million people and the major population centres of Amsterdam, Rotterdam, The Hague and Utrecht.

Despite a system of food distribution and rationing which was well administered by Dutch civil servants, Food supplies were completely inadequate, particularly in these major cities. Some people cycled to the country to exchange valuables for food, some found black market food but most, particularly the old and children, were slowly starving to death. Lois de Jong, one of the most prominent Dutch writers on this time, estimates that about 20,000 civilians died of cold, malnutrition and associated disease before sufficient food became available. He also calculated that about 800,000 souls suffered some lasting effects from the hunger.
The Dutch government in exile was informed of these circumstances and in January 1945 Queen Wilhelmina wrote a letter to King George and President Roosevelt.

“It is the duty of the Dutch government to strongly plead for military action with the aim to drive the Germans out of The Netherlands. She feels that this request is reasonable and necessary and she will be grateful for the assurance that nothing will be left undone to reach this goal.
If, which the Dutch government hopes will not happen, immediate military aid will not be possible, than immediate aid in the shape of massive evacuation or in the shape of food supplies, clothing, fuel and medicine is necessary.”

A Dutch “Committee of Confidence” negotiated with the German Reichskomissar for Holland, Seyss-Inquart, for limited shipments of Flour, Fats and other food by Switzerland and Sweden under Red Cross arrangements. These began in late January and February 1945, but did not come anywhere near to solving the problem.

Although they started to stockpile rations in Europe, against the day when Holland could be liberated, Eisenhower and Supreme Headquarters Allied Expeditionary Force (SHAEF) high command were concerned. German forces in Holland, had been ordered to fight to the end by Hitler, and might cause complete devastation by flooding the rest of the Western Provinces, if they were attacked.

The Dutch Committee of Confidence then reported in early April that Seyss-Inquart might be open to negotiate a truce, which could allow the supply of much more food to avert an imminent humanitarian catastrophe. This led the Allies to an imaginative plan. Perhaps safe passage for airdrops of food from England, only 130 or so miles away, could be arranged?

Allied transport aircraft fleets were badly stretched by the demands of the War and delivering food quickly to Holland by ship was beset by difficulty through mines and the damage the Germans had done to ports, docks and cranes. However, there was a huge lifting capacity within the RAF’s Bomber Command and the United States Eighth Army Air Force, based in the United Kingdom. By this time in the War, there was a real sense that the Bombers were running out of worthwhile targets.

Air Commodore Andrew Geddes, whose job was Operations and Plans at 2nd Tactical Air Force, was summoned to Eisenhower’s Headquarters on 17th April to be told that he must plan for feeding 3,500,000 Dutch souls from the air, commencing in 10 days’ time. There were no parachutes available for dropping supplies, therefore Geddes should plan for low-level free drops and assume that the German troops on the ground would grant safe conduct for the flights.

RAF Bomber Command would provide No 1 and No 3 Group operating Lancasters, together with appropriate Pathfinder Mosquito and Lancaster support; altogether 33 Squadrons. The Americans would provide the B17 Flying Fortresses of 3rd Air Division of 10 Bombardment Groups. Whilst Geddes and his small staff were planning, Engineers in the Air Forces were working out how to pack the food and then drop it, with some changes to the bomb bay of the B17 aeroplanes. Material for the modifications, cargo nets, sacks and of course the food was being transported to the airfields in England.

At the same time, details of the plan were communicated to Holland, in order that arrangements for collecting, safeguarding, transporting and distributing the food could be made. The planners even specified the provision of medical services at the Drop Zones, in case hungry people invaded them and were hit by the tins and bags from the air.

Crews from the nominated Squadrons were practicing flying and drops at low level, in daylight, mostly with sandbags. Not everything went perfectly. At one demonstration; cascading tins of meat, sugar and other food were very close to hitting the senior officer spectators! Early on in the practice drops it was discovered that two sacks, one inside the other, were needed to avoid cargo being ruined or dispersed on landing.

Geddes also turned his plan into a sort of “Heads of Agreement” to be signed by Allied, Dutch and German Representatives. Neither Geddes, nor his seniors were interested in protracted negotiations or horse-trading. His document simply set out arrangements for the Air Supply of food to the population of the occupied Netherlands through flights to 10 specified drop zones.
Meanwhile, the Germans had flooded more land and the meagre remaining food was fast running out completely.

The first meeting with German Representatives was planned for the 28th April, in a School House at Achterveld. However, on the 27th, Resistance representatives, in touch with the Dutch Civilian Food Distribution organisation, reported to His Royal Highness Prince Bernhard that supplies and distribution had broken down and that they stood at the edge of catastrophe.
Seyss-Inquart had indicated that he would agree to 4 drop zones. Despite this, the German Representatives at Achterveld on the 28th said they were only there to hear what the Allies proposed and report back. The Allies then stated that food drops would begin next day at 5 locations, this would be announced on Radio Oranj, for the Dutch population and Radio Luxembourg, which at that time was a SHAEF station broadcasting to German Forces as Nachtsender 1212. The Germans were not to interfere with the drops and were to return to Achterveld as soon as possible with authorised Representatives.

On the next day, 29th April, 239 RAF Lancasters dropped 535 tons of food at 5 locations, followed by 1021 tons on the 30th. This was the day that Hitler committed suicide in Berlin and the day that Seyss-Inquart agreed to the arrangements at a second meeting at Achterveld

RAF aircrew were suspicious of German intentions when flying the first sorties of Operation Manna, which was the name for the RAF element of this plan. The crews knew how vulnerable they would be, flying low and slow at the height where light flak and even rifle fire would be very effective against them. However, apart from a few rifle calibre holes in a very few aeroplanes, the Germans carried out their part in the plan throughout. And aircrew confidence rapidly grew.

In sorties from the 1st May until 8th May, the RAF dropped a further 5586 tons of food. I say ‘RAF’. But the crews comprised airmen from around the world. 300 Squadron, your own Polish bombers, flew many sorties, as did Australians, Canadians and New Zealanders. There was even a Dutchman, Heukensfeld-Jansen, flying a Lancaster of 90 Squadron, to drop food at Rotterdam.

The American operation, ”Chowhound”, ran from 1st to 7th May and delivered 3770 tons of food By B17 onto 10 Drop Zones in 2189 sorties. In total, almost 11, 000 tons of food was dropped in 5,391 successful sorties, for the loss of 3 B17s and 1 Lancaster in accidents, which caused the death of 12 American crewmen.

Des Hawkins DFC, an RAF Navigator on Operation Manna has told how he normally stayed behind his curtain in the aeroplane but, on his Manna trips, he came out to see amazing sights on the ground; from German soldiers looking up at them to Dutch civilians in their thousands, around and on the Drop Zones, on roof tops, in the streets, waving flags and sheets or just their hands. Similar stories have been told by many of the aircrew.

Some tell stories of ‘finding’ and keeping a box or a sack, but that had its dangers as well. Some sacks might just have pepper in them, and there were dangers in eating too much high calorie food, too quickly, after so long on a very poor diet.

Despite the general hunger, discipline and organisation on the ground mostly worked very well. German soldiers and Dutch Policemen kept order and escorted the food as it was collected and carried off. Barges, wagons and manpower were all used for distribution, which started up very quickly, as did the kitchens to provide meals.

This was all bolstered from 3rd May by another Operation, “Faust”, which was Canadian Army transport, with the agreement of the Germans, crossing through the lines and delivered food, coal and medicines into the Western Provinces. 200 or more lorries were quickly given to the Dutch to help with the onward distribution.

After the German capitulation in Holland on 6th May 1945, Chowhound ended on the next day and Operation Manna on the 8th. As Dutch Government was re-established, reinstating Mayors and a civil administration, the supply of food by land continued, but the airdrops were over.
They only lasted just a few days but the Manna and Chowhound drops have had a massive impact on many levels. They made a real difference to the survival and future health of millions of people. Secondly, the people of Holland have not forgotten and have regularly honoured both the Veterans and the event itself. Prince Bernhard decorated Geddes after the War and they remained friends since meeting during the planning and at Achterveld.
There is a formal memorial to Manna and Chowhound in Holland and many households still cherish an old food sack, or a ration tin from those days. Many contacts have been established and maintained between the aircrew and the Dutch citizens involved. There are Memorials across the world from stamps in Holland, a tile mosaic in Canada to paintings and commemorative coins.
Also, these Operations showed the world a new use for Air Power, in the service of humanity, if you like. Ironically, one of the first and major recipients was the German nation, or at least those in Berlin. Commonwealth and American Air Forces found themselves running a massive airlift, Operation Plainfare and Operation Vittles, when the Soviets closed the access corridors to Berlin. This lasted almost a year and delivered over 2 Million tons of supplies.
Since then we have seen many other examples of this humanitarian use of Air Power; the delivery of aid from Ethiopia to Grenada and many places in between. This combination of Strategic Reach and the ability to plan, organise and implement effectively and quickly is a hallmark of the best Air Forces and will be needed around the World, again and again, in the future.

If you want to find out more about Manna and Chowhound, there is research material within the Archive and Library at the RAF Museum, Hendon, which can be inspected by appointment at the Reading Room. York and Dakota aeroplanes, of the type used on the Berlin Airlift are on display at Cosford Museum. There is also much material available on the internet. Finally a Dutch author, Hans Onderwater, has worked for many years to document both the operations themselves and the situation on the ground at the time. One of his books ‘Operation Manna/Chowhound: The Allied Food Dropping April/May 1945’ is also in English. Although it was published in 1985, it is still possible to find a copy even if, as I did, you have to secure it from a Dutch second hand book seller.

One very wet day in June 2008 I was asked if I would be interested in looking at the Wartime pilots’ log books and photographs of a visitor who had just arrived with his family.

The gentleman concerned was 88 year old Oswald Morris, and he had driven up from the South Coast to take a look at our Avro York, a type which he used to fly during the Second World War.

Ossie and his family went off to look round the Museum leaving me to browse his log books. Their contents were fascinating and revealed that Ossie flew Lancaster bombers with 44 Squadron, completing a gruelling tour of operations which included the low level daylight attack on the Schneider munitions works at Le Creusot in Eastern France.

Ossie was awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross on completion of his tour, the citation reading: “This officer has completed many successful sorties against targets in enemy-occupied territory during which he has displayed coolness and efficiency and a great determination to press home his attacks”.

After this he flew transport aircraft including the Albemarle, Dakota and finally the York. With the Metropolitan Communications Squadron Ossie captained VIP Yorks and transported Foreign Secretary Anthony Eden to the Yalta Conference in Russia in February 1945. For safely conveying his VIP passengers Ossie was awarded the Air Force Cross in 1946.

When Ossie returned from his tour of the Museum I asked him what he went on to do after leaving the RAF and he said he worked in the film industry as a cinematographer. “Any films I might have heard of?” I asked. Very modestly Ossie said “Oh a few perhaps” and then he and his family departed on their long wet drive back south.

An internet search revealed that Ossie had actually won an Academy Award in 1972 for his cinematography on the film “Fiddler on the Roof”, and BAFTAs for “The Hill” and “The Spy Who Came in From the Cold”. In a career spanning 40 years Ossie worked on Bond films, musicals and war films and with actors such as Richard Burton, Donald Pleasence, Michael Caine, Christopher Lee, Roger Moore and Gregory Peck.

Donald Pleasence himself served as an RAF wireless operator during World War Two. He became a prisoner of war in August 1944 following the crash of his Lancaster in France during a bombing operation, an experience he drew on to portray RAF forger Colin Blythe in the film “The Great Escape”. Richard Burton and Christopher Lee also saw wartime service in the RAF.

Ossie later gave us an interview about his RAF service, giving us detailed accounts of pilot training, bombing operations and his VIP transport flights. In this extract, he describes the Russian hospitality he received during his trip to Yalta.

• Listen to Ossie’s Yalta extract

It was very humbling to see Ossie’s Oscar alongside his DFC and AFC – a man who excelled in two careers and yet remained modest about them both.

The Jack Bruce Collection includes over 600 images of Nieuport aircraft. While conducting research on this famous company, an idea for a blog emerged, detailing the many differences, both major and minor, which distinguish the famous Nieuport fighters of 1914 – 1918.

The Nieuport design team was led by Gustave Delage from January 1914 and, under his direction, produced the long line of Nieuports described in this blog. The chief characteristic of his designs, until the Type 28, was the sesquiplane, or one and a half wing, layout, which afforded a fine downward view at the expense of the aircraft’s structural strength.

The lower wing was built around a single spar while the interplane struts terminated in a single point, dispensing with the strength resulting from a box-structure, one of the conventional biplane’s principal assets. The two-seat Nieuport 10 of 1914 was originally intended to have a variable incidence lower wing, acting around a sleeve located on a part of the lower spar that was circular in section. The variable incidence concept was abandoned after the Type 10 but the circular section joint remained, compromising the structure’s torsional rigidity. Violent manoeuvres or age could lead to the lower wing weakening, particularly at the root or at the spar to interplane strut junction, resulting in a catastrophic in-flight structural failure.

As is well-known, the Albatros “vee-strutters”, using a Nieuport-inspired sesquiplane layout, suffered from a similar structural weakness.

The Nieuport 11 “bébé”

Delage designed this diminutive aircraft in 1915 and it was quickly ordered into production for the French Air Force. It entered service in time to see combat during the Battle of Verdun and, with the Royal Flying Corps’ Airco D.H.2 and Royal Aircraft Factory F.E.2b, was instrumental in ending the air supremacy previously enjoyed by the Fokker E-series.

The aircraft can be readily distinguished from later Nieuports by the absence of a headrest. The flying wires converge from the wings to the fuselage.

The Nieuport 16

As 1916 progressed, pilots began to discover that the bébé was inferior in speed and climb in comparison to enemy aircraft. The obvious solution was more power and a 110hp Le Rhone engine was fitted in place of the 80hp version in the Type 11. However, although performance was marginally increased, the Type 16 was disliked by many pilots due to the effect of the heavier engine on the aircraft’s balance.

The Type 16 can often be distinguished from its predecessor by the presence of a headrest.

The Nieuport 17

Perhaps the most significant Nieuport type, the Type 17 was introduced into French service in late 1916. To resolve the defects of the Type 16, Delage lengthened the fuselage, increased the wing area, and changed the shape of the upper wing ailerons. The Type 17 was very successful, serving with the air forces of France, Britain, Belgium, Italy and Russia. However, the Albatros D.III and D.V were superior in most respects and the Type 17 was gradually withdrawn from combat service during 1917.
The Nieuport 17 featured a larger engine cowling and, as noted above, increased wing area.

The Nieuport 17bis

This development of the Type 17 was a temporary measure, featuring refinements which provided a marginal increase in performance.

The Type 17bis featured a circular-section fuselage, a Clerget engine and a narrow chord engine cowling.

The Nieuport 21

This aircraft was something of a hybrid, featuring the fuselage of the bébé and the wings of the Type 17. The aircraft was produced in small numbers and, as such, was comparatively rare. Most were issued to training units although a few did enter combat service, notably with the famous Escadrille N124 (later the Escadrille Lafayette).

The Type 21 was superficially similar to the Type 11 but can easily be distinguished from the latter by the use of parallel flying wires.

The Nieuport 23

This aircraft was another development of the Type 17 and was virtually identical in appearance.
In French service, the Type 23 featured an offset Vickers gun, distinguishing it from the Type 17. In British service, both the Type 17 and Type 23 were equipped with an over-wing Lewis gun. A change to the structure of the Type 23’s upper wing necessitated a revision to the fitting of the Lewis gun mounting plate. This small difference, in the absence of a visible serial number, is the only visual clue.

The Nieuport 23bis

This very rare sub-type was only used by British units. The aircraft featured a circular-section fuselage and was similar in appearance to the Nieuport 17bis.
The key features which distinguished the Type 23bis from the Type 17bis were the front centre section, or cabane, struts, which were angled forwards, due to a revised wing structure. The carburettor intake pipes were located above the thrust line on both sides.

The Nieuport 24

The Nieuports 17 and 23 began to be superseded by the SPAD VII in 1917. Both lacked the performance of the SPAD and were more difficult to fly. In an attempt to prolong the competitiveness of the sesquiplane design, Nieuport produced the Type 24.

The aircraft featured a 130hp Le Rhone engine, a circular-section fuselage, a new aerofoil section to improve lift and, in a departure from previous Nieuport practice, an elegantly-shaped, plywood-covered tail unit.

The aircraft entered service after the Type 24bis and was withdrawn by early 1918.

The Nieuport 24bis

Before the Type 24 entered production, Nieuport tested one of the latter with the tail unit of a Type 17. Although preceding the Type 24, this version was labelled the Type 24bis. It was manufactured in small numbers and entered service in early 1917.

The aircraft was externally similar to the Nieuport 17bis. Notable differences included the 130hp Le Rhone engine and the revised aerofoil section of the Type 24.

The Nieuport 25

It is possible that the Nieuport 25 used by Charles Nungesser was the only one of its kind to be built. As with the Type 24, it was an attempt to extend the life of the sesquiplane design.

The Type 25 was externally similar to the Type 24: the main feature of distinction being the fairing of the undercarriage legs.

The Nieuport 27

The Type 27 represented the final attempt to improve upon a basic design which had stood Nieuport in good stead since 1915. The Type 27 followed the Type 24 on the production line at Issy-les-Moulineaux and was supplied to the remaining Nieuport Escadrilles in 1918 in lieu of the SPAD XIII.

Like the Type 25, the Nieuport 27 was externally very similar to the Type 24. Small revisions to the Type 24’s design were a divided axle undercarriage and an internally-mounted tailskid. The ailerons of the Type 27 featured curved trailing edges, a departure from the straight-edged versions of earlier models.

The Nieuport 28

In response to the dominance of the SPADs VII and XIII, Gustave Delage abandoned the sesquiplane layout and designed a new fighter, the Type 28. A more powerful, 160hp Gnome-Monosoupape engine and an increased wing area were intended to solve the traditional respective Nieuport shortcomings of a low top speed and a poor rate of climb. The weakness of the sesquiplane would be addressed by providing a double-spar lower wing and parallel interplane struts.

In the event, these solutions were only partially successful. The aircraft did not meet with approval when tested, mainly due to the continued weakness of the wings and it was not selected for French Air Force service. However, due to continuing problems with SPAD XIII production, a reprieve for the design came with a demand to equip the new American Pursuit squadrons, then in the process of formation.

The aircraft eventually entered service with the USAAS in 1918 but, although graceful in appearance, it was not popular; structural problems during high-g manoeuvres continued and performance was markedly inferior to that of the superb Fokker D.VII.

The Nieuports became an important part of the Allied Air Forces and in particular to the French Air Force and the RFC and RNAS, due to their sparkling performance in 1915 and 1916. The availability of the Types 11 and 17 for the RFC and RNAS was especially well-received, as the UK was struggling to supply competitive fighter designs in sufficient numbers.

However, the pace of change was such that it was not long before it began to be outclassed by rival designs, both Allied and German and, while a series of incremental revisions was made, by mid-1918 the basic design, as shown by the Type 28, had become obsolete.

The Nieuport 29 made use of a monocoque fuselage, conventional interplane struts and a 300hp Hispano-Suiza V8 engine, which endowed it with a superlative performance. It entered service too late to see action in the First World War but became the standard fighter of the French Air Force during the 1920s.

Gustave Delage left the company in 1933 and joined the instruments and watch makers Jaeger. He died in 1946.

With over 50,000 items from the permanent collection stored at the Museum’s Reserve Collection, it’s little wonder that it can take a while for the staff to revisit some of the objects first recorded when they moved to the Stafford store 15 years ago. Back then the priority was to enter and locate the objects onto the Museum’s Computer Management System using the, sometimes scant, information recorded in old hand written registers.

For the past few years, Martin Ward of the Curatorial Division has been filling in some of the details missed during the initial inventory task. On 25 November he took a P-51D canopy off of the racks and started to clean away some of the grime that had been present when it came into the collection back in 1971.

Slowly a line of seven German crosses and the name Lt. H. E. Wiggins started to appear on the canopy rail revealing a history which had remained hidden for all these years.

Howard E ‘Pete’ Wiggins was a United States Army Air Force pilot serving with the 361st Fighter Squadron of the 356th Fighter Group from May 1944 to January 1945.

Based at RAF Martlesham Heath he under took 75 combat mission during which he gained four confirmed aerial victories and one enemy aircraft destroyed on the ground. He was also credited with two half shares confirming his “Ace” status according to the criteria used by the USAAF.

This canopy came from Wiggins third aircraft a P-51D-15-NA Mustang, 44-15094 named Angel Eyes III. His two previous two aircraft, P-47s, had been destroyed while being flown by other pilots, both of whom survived. The ‘tingle down the spine’ moment came when Martin was reviewing the dates of Wiggins victories. His first claim using Angel Eyes III had been on 25 November 1944. 71 years to the day that the history of this Mustang canopy had been rediscovered.

I have conducted further research online and I have managed to locate gun camera footage from Lt Wiggins P-47 Thunderbolt in August 1944, a combat report written by Lt Wiggins on the day following his first combat victory in Angel Eyes III, claiming a Focke Wulf Fw 190. From the same online source is a combat report by his wingman on that day 2Lt Rex Burden. Burden would become Angel Eyes III’s pilot when Wiggins left the squadron renaming the aircraft “The Strat O Liner”.

A post on the Martlesham Heath Aviation society guest book from 2003 by his daughter tells us that sadly Howard Wiggins died at the young age of 38, two months before his daughter was born. I am currently endeavouring to contact his son who had supplied the Little Friends website with many images of his father and his aircraft.

With the arrival of Halloween it falls upon me to make the obligatory tenuous link between the festivities and the RAF. Following on from the introductory questions on RAF unit badges I thought we’d take a look at those badges with suitably spooky imagery, and why those symbols were chosen.

Spiders and their webs feature quite frequently amongst unit badges. Spiders themselves are predators and thanks to their, sometimes venomous, bites have a reputation for being deadly. 58 Squadron RAF Regiment use a Black Widow for this reason whilst 127 Squadron, who were reformed at Habbaniya, Iraq, use a Tarantula which are common to the region.
Spider webs can be found on the badges of 30 Group HQ and 4 Balloon Centre where they represent the role of trapping the enemy with balloon barrages. Alternatively 3508 and 3509 Fighter Controller units use spider webs to represent the networks to which they belong.
4 Air Observers School also used a spider for a reason unique to themselves. They were based at West Freugh in Scotland, supposedly near the cave in which Robert the Bruce hid when he was inspired by the persistence of a spider trying to complete its web.

Bats are another common feature of RAF badges most frequently being used to denote nocturnal activity such as with 9 and 153 Squadrons who operated bombers and fighters respectively. 724 Signals Unit was a Ground Controlled Interception unit that controlled both day and night fighters and so featured both a sun and a bat on its badge.
Some units used the bat to symbolise the concept of tracking targets with sound waves, such as 162 Squadron which investigated enemy radar and 966 Signals Unit.
The badges of 25 Group HQ and 203 Advanced Flying School are officially described as displaying a vampire; unfortunately this is not a fanged gentleman in opera dress, although it would be apt for Halloween. In both cases this is actually a bat but specifically referring to the use of the De Havilland Vampire by both units.

The raven, so beloved of Edgar Allan Poe hasn’t always been linked with spookiness, in fact quite the opposite. Biblically the raven was symbol of providence and it is in this role that it features on the badges of Maintenance Command and its associated units.
Another use of the raven is on the badge of 254 Squadron who operated over northern waters, they used the raven as a symbol of the Vikings who also plied the same waters.

The hour glass is often found in the skeletal hands of the Grim Reaper himself and features on the badge of 218 Squadron. In this case the sand has almost run out, representing the fact the squadron was originally formed in April 1918, near the end of the First World War.

No witch would be complete without her broomstick, a seemingly mundane item that forms the badge of 40 Squadron. One of the squadrons First World War alumni was “Mick” Mannock who was always telling his men to “sweep the Hun from the sky”.

We shall conclude with what may be the most macabre of all badges. 100 Squadron proudly display a skull in front of two crossed bones on their badge, officially this is put down as “a device previously used”. It is likely that the earlier use of the badge was an allusion to the “Jolly Roger” flags displayed on the ships of pirates.

Unfortunately we’ve run out space for Owls which are probably the commonly found Halloween related badge device, how about another instalment on RAF badges featuring birds?