Wonderful commentary, deep respect for the presentation and pilot qualifications. Thinking of everyone in the UK during these COVID times. All the best from Nova Scotia, Canada.
The best all around fighter plane of WWI. Used to attack the German trenches as well as against enemy aircraft. Carried 4 bombs toward the end of the war. My father flew 9 months with the 41st and after leave, finished the war with the 84th , with his last victory on Nov.10, 1918.
Albert Ball made a number of improvements that were adapted to all SE5s. Except for one. He had the Vickers removed and had a second Lewis gun mounted to fire obliquely downward through the floor of the cockpit. That didn't take.
Um ... The Aldis sight did not magnify at all. And no, you did not have to look straight through it. THAT is the advantage of the Aldis sight, it's a compensating sight. Due to the optics arrangement, no matter what angle or offset you're looking through it from, the targeting circles truly represent where the gun will shoot.
The SE5 had a canopy (enclosed cockpit) which pilots didn't like due to lack of visibility and installed the cut-down screen. Also I believe some pilots removed the headrest/hump as it obscured some rearward vision?
COVID has hurt our dream to visit the UK and take in the history. We would like to take in this military pageant and my husband being a radio & computer nut a visit to Bletchley Park. Actually we have a long list of places & events including RAF Cranwell. Cheers from Canada. This was William Avery Bishop's second fighter. 72 aircraft + 3 balloons
Interesting , that the stick is held back on a bump on landing. With a modern aircraft the stick is put in the middle and left there . Maybe it's because modern suspension is softer ?
Sitting that high up in the aircraft was not popular with the pilots that flew them. They all lowered the seat as low as possible and someof them even modified the seats so they could sit even lower. The headrest extension was also hated and removed because it interfered with checking their six.
A fighter aircraft that is stable is not a good fighter aircraft and this man does not seem to understand that. An aircraft that is too stable means the pilot will have to fight the controls to make the violent maneuvers necessary in a dogfight. An unstable aircraft will react faster to the pilot's input because there is no inherent stability opposing the pilot's input to the controls. That's why all of the worlds fighter aircrafts today are deliberately designed to be unstable in flight and so much so that it would be impossible for a human pilot to fly the aircraft without the many computers in them that makes hundreds of adjustments to the control surfaces every second just to keep the aircraft flying.
You are comparing an aircraft introduced in 1917 with 21st century technology. The guy giving this excellent presentation just so happens to be a world renowned fast military jet test pilot!!!
They would have plenty understanding on that issue. Compare the KIAs and DIFAs for the Camel. The Camel killed more pilots than the enemy did. Easy aircraft to fly would be better on the low hour pilots turning up at the front.
Given you had to stand to change the drum magazine, controlling the aircraft with your knees, a degree of stability was essential. This particular aircraft was flown in 1918 by Major CEM Pickthorn (my grandfather) when he achieved his 5th kill. I for one am very glad it was a stable and rugged airframe
200+ aces and many of the top RFC pilots would beg to differ, if they were alive today. Only the Camel produced more aces but it arrived in numbers at the front much sooner even though the SE5 came first.
