Sopwith Dolphin

[Graeme]

Al

That sort of ties in with Bishop taking over as CO in March 1918 as suggested in the SE5 File.

At that time squadron commanders were regarded as valuable beasts, so while he might have might have "jumped" (poor choice of words, I apologise) at a front-line posting straight off, I imagine he would have been told "no flying over the lines until you're up to speed on tactics etc.", with the follow up "or we'll post you to HE."

Most likely, he was given command of a squadron still forming up so he could get to know the latest machines, tactics and the pilots under his command.

Interestingly, the squadron was not moved to France until the end of May 1918, two months after the German offensive had kicked off (21 March). Had there been a desperate need for every pilot/machine available, I've no doubt Bishop would have been sent to the front earlier, either as the CO of an existing unit or with his new squadron.

I think that one of the problems faced by the Dolphin was that it didn't look good and the prospect of being decapitated in the event of a hard landing couldn't have filled prospective pilots with joy. Perhaps it was just too radical?

Only a few more posts for the mystical 100.

Graeme

Hi

The Dolphin and SE5. Well, the problem with anacdotal comparisons is that pilots dont have any way to accurately measure what the airplane is doing when they fly and talk to or chase other pilots. So many variables. With the SE5, there are several different engines.
With these limits in Mind, the The SE5 normally has an inferior initial rate of turn versus the Dolphin, and slightly inferior SEP which means tha the tightest turn on the dolphin is tighter and it can sustain more G in a turn without loss of speed or alittude. Well, without the extra weight of the Lewis's. I do more on that later.
The Woolsey powered SE5 redresses some of these shortcomings with the power, but not the initial turn radius. But the Woolsey is a little faster.
Dolphin problems.... one basic problem is that the cooling system was not up to the engine, the plumbing sucked. As it heated up, it would lose power.
But the Real problem was probably psychological, much like the problem with the SNIPE. Pilots Expected a Camel plus more power and they didnt get it. The Snipe and Dolphin lacked that nervous handling that resulted in wonderful responsiveness to the experienced pilot that they had become used to with the Camel. In the long run, however, the Snipe and Dolphin were better for the inexperienced pilot.

The Lewis guns... Usually the sycnronizers used by the Allied side had problems with the Lewis guns. And that is one part of the initial Dolphin question: No the Lewises wernt syncronized.
Why were they there? What I like to call the "Ball Syndrome". Albert Ball liked to sneak up on EAs, pace them, get really really close, crank back his overwing Lewis and pump rounds into the aircraft. From then on, besides the Alfred Ball Design, a number of designers tried to make this work for ordinary pilots. And mostly it did not. By 1917, things had changed and finding lone docile Two Seater was unlikely.
This vertical shooting as an idea continued in designers minds for a long time. In WW2 German Night Fighters often had such a set up using 20mm cannon called(forgive my spelling) Schrage Musak.
Hopes this helps.

Rocky

[Billy_Bishop]

From what I've read, when it came to the Dolphin, either you loved it, or you hated it. I think Bishop was in the latter category.

With regard to which was really more maneauverable, I think that might be more subjective than we think. What it comes down to is tactics. For example, the tactics the USMC piloted F2A Buffalos used at Midway didn't help them very much against the Japanese. However, the Finns took the export version of the Buffalo and did very well with it against the Russians.

Tactics!!

VBR,

Al Lowe
aka Billy Bishop

Al may have contributed to a misconception when he said that the SE-5a had the Wolseley where the Dolphin had the Hisso engine. In fact, both machines were originally designed for the Hisso, and a goodly number of Hisso-powered SEs were built. The reason the Viper was introduced to the SE airframe was the same reduction gear problem that dogged the Dolphin.

As for "Albert Ball Syndrome," this seems to me to have been based on more than tactics. As much as Ball liked attacking with a Lewis from underneath and behind, he seems to have just plain disliked the Vickers. He tried to remove the latter from his SE-5; and the Austin-Ball AFB-1, which he seems to have inspired even if he didn't actively participate in its design, was armed with two Lewis guns, one of which fired forward through a hollow airscrew shaft.

[leo]

J M Bruce wrote that RAF flyers were reminded of the DH 5 by the arrangement of the wings. That plane was not well received by the RAF. He also indicated that lyers were worried about the possibility of head injuries in a crash. He obviously felt these criticisms were without merit and felt that the Dolphin was a great plane for night fighting. It was underutilized in that role.

leo

Yo Billy.

The old Buffalo thing! The finns got a very much lighter version with a better motor and they got to fly against Russians in even more obsolete aircraft. The Allied Buffalo flyers in the navy got to face Zeros and Japanese pilots in a plane that was a lot heavier.

Rocky

[Graeme]

Barrett - now you're talking my language, numbers!

So far, the Dolphin scorers I've identified are:
(Part 1)

F W Gillet, 79 Sqn, 17 Dest, 0 OOC, 3 Balloons = 20
R B Bannerman, 79 Sqn, 15 Dest, 1 OOC, 1 Balloon = 17
A W Vigers, 87 Sqn, 6 Dest, 8 OOC, 0 Balloons = 14
A D Carter, 19 Sqn, 9 Dest, 5 OOC, 0 Balloons = 14
A A N D Pentland, 87 Sqn, 7 Dest, 6 OOC, 0 Balloons = 13
F I Lord, 79 Sqn, 8 Dest, 4 OOC, 1 Balloon = 13
G B Irving, 19 Sqn, 4 Dest, 8 OOC, 0 Balloons = 12
J W Pearson, 23 Sqn, 6 Dest, 6 OOC, 0 Balloons = 12
H J Larkin, 87 Sqn, 5 Dest, 6 OOC, 0 Balloons = 11
L N Hollinghurst, 87 Sqn, 7 Dest, 4 OOC, 0 Balloons = 11
A B Fairclough, 23 Sqn, 7 Dest, 3 OOC, 0 Balloons = 10
C V Gardner, 19 Sqn, 4 Dest, 6 OOC, 0 Balloons = 10
F McQuistan, 19 Sqn, 3 Dest, 7 OOC, 0 Balloons = 10
J D I Hardman, 19 Sqn, 5 Dest, 4 OOC, 0 Balloons = 9
R A De L'Haye, 19 Sqn, 4 Dest, 5 OOC, 0 Balloons = 9
H A R Biziou, 87 Sqn, 7 Dest, 1 OOC, 0 Balloons = 8
J Leacroft, 19 Sqn, 3 Dest, 5 OOC, 0 Balloons = 8
H A White, 23 Sqn, 3 Dest, 4 OOC, 0 Balloons = 7
L H Ray, 19 Sqn, 2 Dest, 4 OOC, 1 Balloon = 7
N W Hustings, 19 Sqn, 2 Dest, 5 OOC, 0 Balloons = 7
J D de Pencier, 19 Sqn, 1 Dest, 5 OOC, 0 Balloons = 6
E Taylor, 79 Sqn, 1 Dest, 1 OOC, 4 Balloons = 6
J H McNeaney, 79 Sqn, 6 Dest, 0 OOC, 0 Balloons = 6
A W Blake, 19 Sqn, 2 Dest, 3 OOC, 0 Balloons = 5
C E Worthington, 87 Sqn, 4 Dest, 1 OOC, 0 Balloons = 5
H N Compton, 23 Sqn, 4 Dest, 1 OOC, 0 Balloons = 5
J A Aldridge, 19 Sqn, 1 Dest, 4 OOC, 0 Balloons = 5
R M MacDonald, 87 Sqn, 2 Dest, 3 OOC, 0 Balloons = 5
C J W Darwin, 87 Sqn, 4 Dest, 1 OOC, 0 Balloons = 5
F S Wilkins, 79 Sqn, 2 Dest, 2 OOC, 0 Balloons = 4
P Huskinson, 19 RFC, 2 Dest, 2 OOC, 0 Balloons = 4
C K Oliver, 87 Sqn, 1 Dest, 3 OOC, 0 Balloons = 4
C Montgomery-Moore, 19 Sqn, 4 Dest, 0 OOC, 0 Balloons = 4
F Woolley, 79 Sqn, 4 Dest, 0 OOC, 0 Balloons = 4
J W Crane, 19 Sqn, 1 Dest, 3 OOC, 0 Balloons = 4
J C Callaghan, 87 Sqn, 2 Dest, 2 OOC, 0 Balloons = 4
D C Mangan, 87 Sqn, 2 Dest, 1 OOC, 0 Balloons = 3
E J Taylor, 23 Sqn, 2 Dest, 1 OOC, 0 Balloons = 3
F J Stevenson, 79 Sqn, 3 Dest, 0 OOC, 0 Balloons = 3
H A F Goodison, 23 Sqn, 2 Dest, 1 OOC, 0 Balloons = 3
L Murray Stewart, 87 Sqn, 2 Dest, 1 OOC, 0 Balloons = 3
P J E Pierce, 19 Sqn, 1 Dest, 2 OOC, 0 Balloons = 3
R A Hewat, 87 Sqn, 2 Dest, 1 OOC, 0 Balloons = 3

Part 2 to follow

Graeme

[Graeme]

Dolphin scorers part 2:

E Olivier, 19 RFC, 2 Dest, 0 OOC, 0 Balloons = 2
C Faber, 79 Sqn, 2 Dest, 0 OOC, 0 Balloons = 2
L S Ladd, 79 Sqn, 1 Dest, 1 OOC, 0 Balloons = 2
M R N Jennings, 19 RFC, 2 Dest, 0 OOC, 0 Balloons = 2
W M Fry, 79 Sqn, 2 Dest, 0 OOC, 0 Balloons = 2
A P Pehrson, 23 Sqn, 1 Dest, 1 OOC, 0 Balloons = 2
E B Crickmore, 87 Sqn, 2 Dest, 0 OOC, 0 Balloons = 2
E J Blyth, 19 RFC, 0 Dest, 2 OOC, 0 Balloons = 2
F W Ferguson, 87 Sqn, 0 Dest, 2 OOC, 0 Balloons = 2
H E Faulkner, 23 Sqn, 1 Dest, 1 OOC, 0 Balloons = 2
H M S Parsons, 79 Sqn, 1 Dest, 1 OOC, 0 Balloons = 2
M S Gregory, 19 Sqn, 2 Dest, 0 OOC, 0 Balloons = 2
R W Duff, 19 Sqn, 0 Dest, 2 OOC, 0 Balloons = 2
T H Mercer, 19 Sqn, 0 Dest, 2 OOC, 0 Balloons = 2
W F Hendershot, 19 Sqn, 1 Dest, 1 OOC, 0 Balloons = 2
A J Brown, 23 Sqn, 1 Dest, 0 OOC, 0 Balloons = 1
H P Rushforth, 79 Sqn, 0 Dest, 1 OOC, 0 Balloons = 1
J D Canning, 79 Sqn, 1 Dest, 0 OOC, 0 Balloons = 1
L M Mansbridge, 23 Sqn, 0 Dest, 1 OOC, 0 Balloons = 1
O C Bryson, 19 RFC, 1 Dest, 0 OOC, 0 Balloons = 1
A B Sinclair, 23 Sqn, 1 Dest, 0 OOC, 0 Balloons = 1
Adam, 23 Sqn, 1 Dest, 0 OOC, 0 Balloons = 1
B Ankers, 87 Sqn, 1 Dest, 0 OOC, 0 Balloons = 1
Bentley, 23 Sqn, 1 Dest, 0 OOC, 0 Balloons = 1
Brooke, 79 Sqn, 1 Dest, 0 OOC, 0 Balloons = 1
C A Crysler, 23 Sqn, 1 Dest, 0 OOC, 0 Balloons = 1
C Bridge, 23 Sqn, 0 Dest, 1 OOC, 0 Balloons = 1
C C A Sherwood, 23 Sqn, 1 Dest, 0 OOC, 0 Balloons = 1
C L Lindeberg, 79 Sqn, 1 Dest, 0 OOC, 0 Balloons = 1
C S Hall, 19 Sqn, 1 Dest, 0 OOC, 0 Balloons = 1
C S Harvey, 87 Sqn, 0 Dest, 1 OOC, 0 Balloons = 1
D P Laird, 19 Sqn, 0 Dest, 1 OOC, 0 Balloons = 1
D Weatherly, 87 Sqn, 0 Dest, 1 OOC, 0 Balloons = 1
E A Coapman, 79 Sqn, 1 Dest, 0 OOC, 0 Balloons = 1
F W Goodman, 87 Sqn, 0 Dest, 1 OOC, 0 Balloons = 1
G W Northridge, 19 Sqn, 1 Dest, 0 OOC, 0 Balloons = 1
H J MacDonald, 79 Sqn, 1 Dest, 0 OOC, 0 Balloons = 1
H V Puckridge, 19 RFC, 1 Dest, 0 OOC, 0 Balloons = 1
J Adam, 23 Sqn, 1 Dest, 0 OOC, 0 Balloons = 1
J S Hewson, 19 Sqn, 0 Dest, 1 OOC, 0 Balloons = 1
Macpherson, 23 Sqn, 1 Dest, 0 OOC, 0 Balloons = 1
N E Miller, 19 Sqn, 0 Dest, 1 OOC, 0 Balloons = 1
R C Davies, 19 Sqn, 1 Dest, 0 OOC, 0 Balloons = 1
R L M Robb, 23 Sqn, 1 Dest, 0 OOC, 0 Balloons = 1
S B Croyden, 79 Sqn, 0 Dest, 1 OOC, 0 Balloons = 1
S Symondson, 23 Sqn, 0 Dest, 1 OOC, 0 Balloons = 1
T T Shipman, 87 Sqn, 0 Dest, 1 OOC, 0 Balloons = 1
V G Snyder, 79 Sqn, 1 Dest, 0 OOC, 0 Balloons = 1
W F Leach, 19 Sqn, 0 Dest, 1 OOC, 0 Balloons = 1
N W Noel, 79 Sqn, 1 Dest, 0 OOC, 0 Balloons = 1

Dest = Destroyed, OOC = Out of control.


There might be a couple of other pilots to be added to this list - I'm still looking into some claims.

Graeme

[Dan_San_Abbott]

Neophyte:
* *I find this discussion interesting, I would like to add my opinion. From J.m. Bruce's book "British Aeroplanes" *I dug out the following data:
* * * * The characteristics were:
* * * * * * * * * * *S.E.5a * * *5F1 Dolphin
Empty wt. * * * 1400 lbs * * * *1406 lbs.
loaded wt. * * * 1953 lbs * * * *1911 lbs.
Max a/s@15k * *121mph * * * * 119mph
climb to 15k. * * *18'50" * * * * *19'30"
ceiling * * * * * * 22000 ft * * * 21000 ft.
aspect ratio * * * *5.32 * * * * * * 7.22.
* The *S.E.5a has a slight edge in performance. The aspect ratio (span/chord) indicates the S.E.5a would turn and roll quicker than the Dolphin,*however at high altitude the Dolphin with it's higher aspect ratio would be more responsive to maneuovering and less likely to fall in a spin. The cockpit of the S.E.5a is somewhat confining is not as hostile as the Dolphin with the vickers gun butt immediately in your face. The armament favors the Dolphin with twin synchronized Vickers. The Lewis gun is useless and dangerous to the pilot's safety. Although the overhead view is better in the Dolphin, the pilot is almost sure to be killed in a nose over.
From a fighting stand point the S.E.5a is proven to be superior to the Dolphin. In my opinion those Hissos would have been put to better use in more S.E.5a. *The 300 hp Hisso powered Mark II Dolphin were scheduled for French production and service. While the performance was better than the Mk. I, they never saw service.
* * * * * * *Bluer skies ahead,
* * * * * * * * * * Dan-San

[Barrett]

Ref. Graham and Dan-San's posts--don't you just LOVE the forum?
Al, the Brewster F2A never got a chance to prove itself in US service. The only combat--Midway--would've been a loss if VMF-221 had flown Hellcats. IGNORING THE TECHNICAL MATTERS, the squadron was committed piecemeal against superior numbers of enemy aircraft flown by more experienced aviators, with an altitude disadvantage to boot. Every pilot I've known who flew the Buffalo LIKED it as a flying machine. its biggest genuine (vice perceived) problem was very poor carrier suitability--a factor that was irrelevant to the Finns. Not knowing what a "dog" they had, they proceeded to kick Soviet empennages for 3 years.