 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion Groups General ModelsRailroadsRocketsRadio Controlled Air ModelsHelicoptersLand ModelsWater ModelsModelGeeks.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Model Forum / General / Models / December 2005Se 5a --forgotten fighter--relatively speaking?
Has the Se 5a been somewhat ignored as compared to the Spad and Sopwith Camel? I just don't see much modeler information on the Se 5a, yet it served in large numbers in WWI and I have not seen any criticisms of the aircraft. Yet, it does not seem to generate the excitement of the Spads, Camels, Fokker DVII's or triplanes, (both the Albatrosses and Pfalz's seem to get more attention) yet it was in the thick of the fight to the end, was it not? Was it a compromise aircraft? That is, an aircraft that tended to be adequate at everthing but had no outstanding or bad individual characteristics that might make it more famous/notorious and thereby more popular with historians? Or was it because it was so homely looking, without bright colors to spruce it up? Or have I just missed all the sites worshipping the Se 5a? > Has the Se 5a been somewhat ignored as compared to the Spad and Sopwith > Camel? [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > triplanes, (both the Albatrosses and Pfalz's seem to get more attention) > yet it was in the thick of the fight to the end, was it not? By all accounts it was a popular aeroplane with it's pilots and served with 24 squadrons throughout the RFC and RAF This is a good site. http://storage.mfa.free.fr/SE5Auk.html >>Has the Se 5a been somewhat ignored as compared to the Spad and Sopwith >>Camel? [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > 24 squadrons throughout the RFC and RAF > This is a good site. http://storage.mfa.free.fr/SE5Auk.html I saw the Se 5a on the French site. It is brown. I am assuming this is an interpretation of some PC 10 shades? > Has the Se 5a been somewhat ignored as compared to the Spad and > Sopwith Camel? [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > > Or have I just missed all the sites worshipping the Se 5a? Apparently it was a very highly regarded aircraft. It was an adequate fighter (or "scout" as they were termed at the time). It wasn't *highly* maneouvrable, unlike the Sopwith Camel, but on the upside it was a stable gun platform. It was also faster than the enemy so SE5 pilots could disengage at will. The SE5 also endeared itself to its pilots because it wasn't constantly trying to kill them, again unlike the Sopwith Camel. Sadly, it just didn't get the same good media coverage as the Camel, no doubt because Major James Bigglesworth never flew one! ;-)  SignatureEnzo I wear the cheese. It does not wear me. Enzo wrote > Sadly, it just didn't get the same good media coverage as the Camel, no > doubt because Major James Bigglesworth never flew one! ;-) Biggles did, in one short story, borrow a Lewis gun and Foster mount from a friend in a neighbouring SE5a squadron, attach it to his Camel, and use it to take on a German heavy bomber from below (Schrage-musik, anyone?). Anyone know if any Allied pilots lumbered with the over wing Lewis ever did use it to fire upwards ? I've always thought that the combination of the one fixed synchronised Vickers and the Lewis on the wing tended to weaken the attacking power of the SE5a - there must have been times when pilots got on the tail of a Hun and found they'd suddenly got half the fire-power. "I've always thought that the combination of the one fixed synchronised Vickers and the Lewis on the wing tended to weaken the attacking power of the SE5a - there must have been times when pilots got on the tail of a Hun and found they'd suddenly got half the fire-power." Depends on what kind of shot you are, and the SE 5a was the favored mount of sureshots. Someone found the wreck of one of McCudden's victims and determinded that it was hit by about ten rounds, two of which disabled the engine. The Lewis gun was unsynchronised, and fired at a faster rate than the Vickers; the Lewis and the Vickers could fire more shots per second than the two Vickers in the Camel. It was also a much steadier gun platform. The top American ace in the RAF, Bill Lambert, flew the SE 5a, as did many others, and it may have been flown by more 10+ US aces than the Spad. Nor did Snoopy......:) Bill Banaszak, MFE Sr. >Nor did Snoopy......:) > >Bill Banaszak, MFE Sr. don't forget he was a bum flier constantly going down in flames. did he ever shoot anyone down? don't think so. > >Nor did Snoopy......:) > > > >Bill Banaszak, MFE Sr. > > don't forget he was a bum flier constantly going down in > flames. did he ever shoot anyone down? don't think so. So? In this country now one doesn't have to be good at anything, other than getting in the papers. ;] Bill Banaszak, MFE Sr. >> >Nor did Snoopy......:) >> > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > >Bill Banaszak, MFE Sr. ya think? The Se5a is definitely not a forgotten fighter, but since you can't do much with paint jobs on WWI birds, it doesn't get much press in modelling circles. Even with how boring color schemes tend to be or that scout, you can now get excellent injection molded kits in 1/72 and 1/48th of it. The plane that I feel has gotten very short shrift is the Salmson two-seater .... that was used in large numbers by both American and French units, and it can be done in some very very cool camouflage schemes. Still if you want to build a Salmson, you're stuck with resin or vac in 1/72, and vac (if you can find it) in 1/48!! What's that about... Eduard should really jump in here. --- Tontoni The SE5 must have been a surperior fighter,altho the Camel and Spad did not survive long after WW1, the SE5 was used into the 1920s by the US Army Air Service. It was built in the US, there is one example in the Dayton Air Force Museum. Charles Lindbergh flew one during his time in the service in the early 1920s and was involved in a mid-air collision during maneuvers. His was the first class that wore parachutes, fortunately for aviation history. The SE5 is very popular with flying scale modelers, the long nose makes it easier to balance and the marked dihedral makes for a good flyer. > The SE5 must have been a surperior fighter,altho the Camel and Spad did not > survive long after WW1, the SE5 was used into the 1920s by the US Army Air > Service. It was built in the US, there is one example in the Dayton Air > Force Museum. Made a good sky-writer, too, with the right additions. A Colonel (or, perhaps, Captain) Savage bought a bunch after the war - I think he took some to the US. The SE5a at the RAF Museum in Hendon claims to be one of Savage's sky-writes converted back into a fighter; the SE5a at the Science Museum in London is still light grey, with strange hoses running along the fuselage. > Has the Se 5a been somewhat ignored as compared to the Spad and Sopwith > Camel? (snip) The SE-5 was an aircraft that the brass did not request, but was adopted anyway because it turned out to be so good. So it was an orphan step-child to that extent. It was not liked by the RAF's golden boy, Albert Ball, who said "The S.E.5 has turned out a dud... It's a great shame, for everybody expects such a lot from them... it is a rotten machine." Actually, Ball just objected to having to switch from the Nieuport 17 to the S.E.5. The third strike against it's fame and glory was the fact that Charles Shultz put Snoopy in a Sopwith Camel... >> Has the Se 5a been somewhat ignored as compared to the Spad and >> Sopwith Camel? [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > It was not liked by the RAF's golden boy, Albert Ball May I be a pedant here? I must point out that Albert Ball never served in the RAF. He was commissioned into the British Army, 7Bn The Sherwood Foresters. After learning how to fly at his own expense he was posted to the Royal Flying Corps in 1915. Ball was killed on 17 May 1917 in a one-to-one combat with Lothar von Richthofen. Both pilots crashed, probably due to disorientation in the failing evening light. Richthofen survived and was credited with a kill, almost certainly unjustly. The RAF was formed on 1 April 1918. <Enzo disengages pedant mode> > who said "The > S.E.5 has turned out a dud... It's a great shame, for everybody > expects such a lot from them... it is a rotten machine." Actually, > Ball just objected to having to switch from the Nieuport 17 to the > S.E.5. True. However, Ball may well have been referring to the *actual* SE5, which was an early version with a rather underpowered and unreliable Hispano-Suiza engine. The definitive SE5a with a Wolseley Viper engine had 33% more power. It is quite significant that of Ball's eventual total of 44 "kills", all but ten of them were scored in the SE5a. SignatureEnzo I wear the cheese. It does not wear me. > True. However, Ball may well have been referring to the *actual* SE5, which > was an early version with a rather underpowered and unreliable Hispano-Suiza > engine. The definitive SE5a with a Wolseley Viper engine had 33% more power. > It is quite significant that of Ball's eventual total of 44 "kills", all but > ten of them were scored in the SE5a. The prototype SE5 didn't even fly 'til November, 1916. Ball scored his first 31 "kills" before October, 1916. Presumably, none of them were scored in the then-nonexistant SE5. >> True. However, Ball may well have been referring to the *actual* >> SE5, which was an early version with a rather underpowered and [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Presumably, none of them were scored in the then-nonexistant SE5. Got that one totally wrong, didn't I? Maybe I should have said "ten of them were scored in the SE5a". Or maybe... just maybe... he had an invisible SE5, like Wonder Woman... ;-) SignatureEnzo I wear the cheese. It does not wear me. >> Has the Se 5a been somewhat ignored as compared to the Spad and >> Sopwith Camel? [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > The third strike against it's fame and glory was the fact that Charles > Shultz put Snoopy in a Sopwith Camel... What about a name. Why didn't the Se 5 have a catchy name? Was it the victim of just being designed a bit too early to get one? > What about a name. Why didn't the Se 5 have a catchy name? Was it the > victim of just being designed a bit too early to get one? WE should give it a name! We should come up with various names and vote on it. Sort of a "Name the S.E.5a Contest!" I humbly suggest Hun Slayer. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.