Formations

[Greybeard]

I wonder what were most used formations amongst allied and german during WWI (astern, abreast, echelon, wedge?).

Thanks,
GB

[Romani]

Going from memory:

The short answer is that the wedge or vee was the most used , echeloned in altitude.

Second, the echelon, or duck flight, echeloned also in altitude.

Line abreast was used by German Slachtstaffeln, ground attack airplanes, wich is the key difference from later wars where strafing was carried out in line astern.

I have doubts about line astern being ever used, save for training flights, and perhaps for bombing raids.

The subject has been dealt with in depth in these threads from the archives, in chronological order, oldest first

Coordinated Attacks & Defensive Formations

Rotte, kette and schwarm

British Flight Formations

Late War German Fighter Formations

Fokker Eiii Formations

A question about formations

WW1 Formations

[Greybeard]

Thank you very much, Romani.

I should have made a search first.

Cheers,
GB

[Romani]

Follow up post with added information:

The only instance I can find of formation in line ahead was bombing by Sopwith Strutters of Naval 3rd Wing in 1916.

Source: "Biplanes and Bombsights. British Bombing in WWI" - Williams.


The same book touches on bombing formations later in the war but the same info is found expanded in " Independent Force" by Keith Rennles, quoted as follows:

p.8

Although twelve aircraft made up a bombing formation, six aircraft were found to be the maximum which could be readily controlled by one leader, therefore the formation was split into two groups of six. Each formation adopted an arrow-head as shown below:




The first row (numbers 2 and 3) flew 50ft higher than the leader, the rear row (numbers 4, 5 and 6) flew 50ft lower than the leader. The leader and deputy leader were easily distinguishable as both carried streamers. Positions 2 and 3 were given at first to experienced pilots who, by keeping close to the leader, would hopefully hold the formation together. Of the rear row numbers 4 and 6 were the newer and less experienced pilots, with the number 5 position being taken by the more experienced deputy leader. As the fighting in the air grew more intense, most casualties were taken in the number 4 and 6 positions. To overcome this it was found better to place the more experienced pilots in the rear row, as they tended to drive the less experienced pilots (numbers 2 and 3) up to the leader, as they themselves would not straggle.
The second formation flying exactly as the first, flew either half-left or half-right astern of the leading formation, about 80 to 100ft above it. The choice of right or left depended on the position of the sun as enemy aircraft normally attacked from the rear and out of the sun. With this in mind the second formation flew on the side furthest from the sun to enable observers of the leading formation to fire at enemy aircraft attacking the second formation without being blinded by aiming towards the sun.
...

For long distance raids... fuel supply allowed only a direct... route. To avoid delay in gaining position, formations formed up on the ground and took off in formation.
... On several occasions three squadron formations totalling 36 aircraft or more took off... Several experiments with the larger formations were tried but they were never a success.


My own comment: Hope this answers a related question about taking off in formation. It seems probable that the same rationale of avoiding delays and saving fuel led to mass fighter squadron take offs, specially for the German Jastas in 1918 as fuel got scarce.