Mystery Aircraft

[nacluv]

I think that last photo is an S.E.5/A. The mainplane and elevator planforms match.

Edit: On closer inspection, you can even make out the cowling on the upper fuselage just behind the cockpit opening.

[MReyn24050]

sillohed,
As Simon says the close up photograph is more likely to be a DH4. However, the guys in the cockpits look to me to be airmen from the USA. Therefore the crashed aircraft could possibly be an American built DH4-B a rebuilt version of Liberty powered DH-4 for U.S. Air Service. The Pilot's cockpit was relocated to behind fuel tank, adjacent to observer's cockpit. Similar to this photograph of the US marine version O2-B1.



An interesting feature of the crashed aircraft are the strengthening tie-bars going between the outboard wing struts. I cannot find any photographs of the DH.4 or DH.9 aircraft with these rather heavy tie-bars.

[LowNSlow]

I'd agree with nacluv, it's an SE5a. The wingtips are wrong for a Camel and the Camel nose was much shorter.

[albatross]

You guys are probably correct! That's why I love this site.
Ask a question - get an answer.
No "I am smarter than you are." or "Your grammar or spelling is incorrect." as sometimes seen on other threads.

[Arclite01]

Definitely not an SE5/SE5a

I am thinking Sopwith Snipe

Arc

[MReyn24050]

nacluv. I am not convinced this aircraft is an SE5.


The roundels appear to be incorrect for an SE5{-


Whereas they fit the Sopwith Camel;-

[nacluv]

I disagree!

Look at the planform of the wings, and in particular the elevators.

Then look at the length of the nose in the original photo. If that was a Sopwith, no nose would be visible forward of the leading edge of the upper wing from that angle.

Also as I posted earlier, you can make out the cowling behind the cockpit aperture - I maintain it is an S.E.5A.

[MReyn24050]

naclav. OK I agree it matches the SE5 better than the Sopwith. The corner radius of the upper wing matches the SE5 and I will also the Engine projects forward more.

[sillohed]

Summary

So can I safely say that the crashed plane is an Airco DH9 and the cockpit closeup is a DH4 or DH4-B and the airplane in flight is an SE5? Now to show my ignorance further who are the manufacturers of these two planes. With this information I can give a proper title to each photograph. I can't thank you guys enough, I have been a pilot for 55 years and feel pretty stupid about these vintage planes. I have a few more that I will post but I am trying to keep them in some semblance of order so it makes sense. Regards,Ed

[sillohed]

American Marines?

I am guessing that this is the DH4-B since the cockpit is below (not behind the wing). The troops look U.S. Marines to me but the cockpit arrangement and the markings on the wing suggest U.S. Army and the plane doesn't match your photo of the 02-B1 posted by MReyn24050 .

[sillohed]

My Favorite

This is my all time favorite photo. These guys look so so casual. The markings appear to be US Army so I presume this is another DH4-B

[sillohed]

Perplexed

This picture really has me perplexed. The engine cowls look odd and the rest doesn't seem to match anything else in the collection. There are a couple of seaplanes that I will post later but this looks like a two engine boat on wheels (lots of wheels). And is that two vertical fins and rudders? Any ideas?

[ICT_SLB]

I think you'll find it's a Martin MB-1 - the first bomber built for the US Army Air Service and powered by twin 400 hp Liberty engines and, like a lot of larger airplanes at the time, with twin rudders.

[Noyade]

G'day sillohed.

I'm thinking your two biplanes above are Jennies....

[India Four Two]

I have been a pilot for 55 years and feel pretty stupid about these vintage planes.

No need to feel stupid. Stick around here and you'll learn a lot. I certainly have! For example, I didn't know about the US-built DH-4B that Mel mentioned above.

I agree with Noyade. Your latest SE pictures are of Jennys. The kingposts above the outer wing panels are a very distinctive feature. Here's my favourite Jenny picture, showing the kingposts being used for a different purpose:



Concerning manufacturers, see:

Airco DH.4 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Sopwith Aviation Company - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Royal Aircraft Factory S.E.5 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Martin MB-1 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Curtiss JN-4 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[India Four Two]

Back to the original crash photos. There is a very nice picture here of a DH-4B at the USAF museum:

http://www.nationalmuseum.af.mil/sha...-1234S-001.jpg

The cockpits are similar to the crashed aircraft, but the windshields are definitely smaller and there are no tie-bars (well spotted Mel).

Coincidentally, there is a Martin MB-2 (a modified MB-1) in the background.

There are also some very nice cockpit pictures of a DH-4 Mailplane restoration here:

DH-4

The windshields on the crashed aircraft definitely have an "American look" to them and in the distance in the first photo are some buildings of military appearance.

Any thoughts on the location, anyone?

[MReyn24050]

sillohed you wrote:-

So can I safely say that the crashed plane is an Airco DH9 and the cockpit closeup is a DH-4 or DH4-B and the airplane in flight is an SE5?

Forgive me I may have confused you. In my initial assessment of the crashed aircraft at Post #10 I stated

I believe that may well be an Airco DH9A "Ninak"

. After further analysis of the photographs posted at Posts # 14,15 and 17 I would say my first assessment was incorrect.


From Wikipedia:-

The Airco DH-4 was a British two-seat biplane day-bomber of the First World War. It was designed by Geoffrey de Havilland (hence "DH") for Airco, and was the first British two seat light day-bomber to have an effective defensive armament. It first flew in August 1916 and entered service with the Royal Flying Corps (RFC) in March 1917. The majority of DH-4s were actually built as general purpose two-seaters in the USA, for service with the American forces in France.
The DH-9 was designed by de Havilland for the Aircraft Manufacturing Company in 1916 as a successor to the DH-4. It used the wings and tail unit of the DH-4 but had a new fuselage. This enabled the pilot to sit closer to the gunner/observer and away from the engine and fuel tank.The DH-9A - (also referred to as the Nine-Ack) was designed for Airco by Westland Aircraft to take advantage of the 400 hp (298 kW) American Liberty L-12 engine. Apart from the new engine and slightly larger wings it was identical to the DH-9. Initially it was hoped to quickly replace the DH-9 with the new version - however a shortage of Liberty engines available to the RAF curtailed the new type's service in the First World War – and it is best known as a standard type in the postwar RAF – serving as a general purpose aircraft for several years. 2,300 DH-9As were built by ten different British companies.

I agree with the comments made by Simon at Post #20 in that the aircraft in the photograph at Post # 17 is an US Army DH-4 but not a DH-4B.

On the National Museum of the U.S. Air Force website, in respect of the De Havilland DH-4, the following is stated:-

The DH-4 was an ever-present element of the U.S. Army Air Service both during and following World War I. When the United States entered WWI in April 1917, the Aviation Section of the Signal Corps only had 132 aircraft, all obsolete. Modeled from a combat tested British De Havilland design, the DH-4 was the only U.S. built aircraft to see combat during WWI. With inadequate funding to buy new aircraft, the newly created U.S. Army Air Service continued to use the DH-4 in a number of roles during the lean years following the war. By the time it was finally retired from service in 1932, the DH-4 had been developed into over 60 variants.

During WWI, the Air Service used the DH-4 primarily for day bombing, observation and artillery spotting. The first American-built DH-4 arrived in France in May 1918, and the 135th Aero Squadron flew the first DH-4 combat mission in early August. By war's end, 1,213 DH-4s had been delivered to France.

Unfortunately, the early DH-4s had drawbacks, including the fuel system. The pressurized gas tank had a tendency to explode and a rubber fuel line under the exhaust manifold caused some fires. This led to the title "The Flaming Coffin," even though only eight of the 33 DH-4s lost in combat by the United States burned as they fell. Furthermore, the location of the gas tank between the pilot and observer limited communication and could crush the pilot in an accident.

To overcome this problem 1,538 DH-4s were modified in 1919-1923 to DH-4Bs by moving the pilot's seat back to a similar position as the DH-9A and the now unpressurized gas tank forward, correcting the most serious problem in the DH-4 design.

I therefore believe the crashed aircraft is an American DH-4B

[nacluv]

In the photo of the Jennies and Marines, I think the aircraft obscured by the Marines might well be a DH, not a Jenny. No kingposts, and a different engine cowl.

What do you reckon?

[sillohed]

Am I Driving You Crazy Yet?

So what do you think.....DH4 on floats?

[sillohed]

Thanks

India Four Two and Noyade, thanks for straightening me out on the Jennys. I thought they were DH4's but I can see the subtle differences (or not so subtle to a trained eye) now that you mention them. ed