Airco DH5

Jane's states that D.H.5 was produced late in 1916, extensively used at the front in 1917 and was in the main an effort to produce a single seater fighter in which the pilot's view upwards and forwards was not entirely blanketed by the top wing.
I seem to remember reading somewhere that there was a huge blind spot if you were attacked from above and behind.
Aerodrome states that lack of performance at high altitude was due to the engine but this is similar to the one installed in the Nieuport 17. Difference in gross weights might perhaps make a difference (DH5 1492lbs and N. 1246lbs)
Jane's suggests the cause was the back-stagger.
Speed at 10000ft. 102 m.p.h.
Speed at 15000ft. 89 m.p.h.
What did pilots think of their mount?
Casualties high? Victories few?
Any fans among Forumites?
Any in Museums?
Anyone built a replica?
VBR
Peter S.

My understanding was that the DH.5 was heavy on the controls, the pilots did not like the blind spot behind and above them (similar to on the DH2, Fe2, and Vickers Gunbus pushers), the cockpit had various problems because of being so clsoe to the engine, it did not climb well, it did not enter a dive expecially well, and it did not turn and bank well. I think it was viewed as relatively stable, but as a fighter it was something of a dray horse. Pilots feared it, and later put the same unwarranted fear into the Sopwith Dolphin, for the problem of it turning over in a bad landing and breaking the poor unfortunate pilot's neck.

And, oh, yes, it only had one gun, like almost all of the allied planes. So it was generally disliked, though put up with.

RFC's CFS Testing Sqdn said: Stability: Quite Satisfactory. Lateral and longitudinal very good, directional fair. Controllability: Quite Satisfactory, Machine Easy To land and to fly. Handy and quick in the air. Length of turn to unstick 60 yards. To pull up with engine stopped 120 yards. Tactical Features: Vickers gun can be elevated 60 degrees. Facilities for Reconaissance good. The view directly behind is badly masked by top plane. Designed as fighter only.

Oddly its statistics were less than the Sopwith Pup. It also had problems with the Constantinesco gear and with vibration. Had apparently a horrible reputation though some open minded pilots liked it. It did have victories - it's first in May 1917 over an Albatros D III. It's main problem really seemed to be it was slow. They used to fly the low part of a stacked large formation but it became fairly good at ground attack. I could find no mention of any surviving though one was saved during the late war period as a museum piece and was thought to be scrapped after the war.

2Sqn AFC's first mounts when they went to the front in October 1917 were DH5s. They eventually got a total of 9 confirmed victories on the type before converting to SE5as.

They were most extensively used by the squadron during the Battle of Cambrai where they did very good work in ground attack to the point where squadron pilots were awarded six Military Crosses for the period. I do think, however, the squadron was pleased to get its SE5s.

The top scoring pilot on DH5s was the kiwi 'Maori' Coningham of 32 sqn with 9 victories.

[PeterL]

A while ago I modelled the DH5. I expended*a great deal of time and effort on the cockpit interior, reasoning that it would be highly visible due to the back stagger, but when the model was finished all that could be seen was the top of the sea! My guess is that if you can't see into the cockpit then seeing out of it was pretty difficult too

cheers

Peter L

Peter L
Congratulations on the model it looks superb.
Did you create it from photographs or are there scale drawings?
I assume there are no kits for it.
I have a confession. I once sent out a reply with L instead of S. It was a slip of the finger and not deliberate. Can't remember what it was but you came on to deny it was you. Moral cowardice on my part and I was new to the Forum.
Regards
Peter S.

>What did pilots think of their mount?

Richard Howard from 2 Sqn AFC;
"Here we are flying DH5's a single seat scout machine which can travel at 120 mph, flying level with the engine flat out. This is about as fast as the DH4, which I was flying in France. As you no doubt the DH4 is a two-seater machine, heavily built and thereore slow at manouvreing. Being a scout the DH5 manouvres very quickly and thus makes up for the disadvantage of having no observer to protect the tail of the machine. ... They are very strongly built and can be looped or spun easily, and can be dived at 180 mph without the wings dropping off. .... Being a scout, the DH5 also needs careful handling."

2 AFC found that German two-seaters were able to out run them. Also the DH 5 suffered performance problems above 10,000 feet. In my opinion, they were an excellent late 1916 to early 1917 Scout, unfortunately, Squadrons were being equipped with them in late 1917 ( 2 AFC went to France in them in Sept 1917 ). The DH5's were replaced by SE5a's in 2 Sqn AFC in December.

Howard wrote of the SE5a in comparison;
" ... in flying the rotary engine[DH5], you have a very light engine with a small amount of propeller torque and thus the machine can be manouvred very quickly. In the other case [SE5a] you a heavier more powerful engine, with a lot of propeller torque. The result is you have to put a lot of left rudder to counteract torque and also there is a tendency of the heavier engine to pull the nose down on turns. The machine cannot manouvre as quickly as the other, but in speed and strength it exceeds everything."


>Casualties high? Victories few?

Several of the DH5 Squadrons were involved in the fierce fighting around the Cambrai sector where they were used in the ground attack role. Casualties were fairly heavy in that period. Les Holden went through DH5's pretty quick in that period, his DH5 haing been shot up continually, on one occasion he had not only a DH5 full of holes, but three holes in his clothing, no damage to his skin.

In 2 AFC the victories were few in the DH5 as the German aircraft could pretty much disengage as they wanted to, there are several recorded combats were the DH5's were unable to keep pace with the German two-seaters.

>Any fans among Forumites?

Yes

>Anyone built a replica?

I think there is one in the somewhere in the South US? There arent any known originals left.

There is some info on the DH5 on the Australian Flying Corps Website;

http://members.nbci.com/pointcook/



cam

[PeterL]

Peter, I won't go into the aliases I've used on the forum, and will again no doubt The model is a scratch build, but I beleive I saw the DH5 listed as a release from Chris Gannon sometime soon. Not sur if it's 1/72 or the manly scale though

Peter L