The Imperial War Museum in London has on display what purports to be a Camel N6812 "flown by Flight Sub-Lieutenant Stuart D Culley, from a barge towed by the destroyer HMS Redoubt on 11th August 1918 when he shot down German Zeppelin L.53, the last to fall during the war". This particular machine has 2 Lewis guns over the top wing. I'm told the Naval 2F1 model had a single Lewis gun there, and period photos I've seen back this up. I'm also told there was a night fighter version with 2 Lewis guns above the wing but a rear-mounted cockpit. The IWM machine has a forward cockpit. Anybody know what's going on with this machine ? I've been told that the guns as seen mounted here couldn't have operated correctly due to the ammo drums interfering with each other. ?? Is that because of cartridge ejection direction ? A special model or a restoration error ? Link to a set of photos of this machine at Wikipedia : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Sopwith_..._War_Musuem.jpg
thanks. Rod.

Must have been tempting to have a spare in case of a jam - but take your point that there may not have been 2 in reality. They do look pretty together though and given pilots predilection for "customising" their machines, I'd not be surprised that it is an accurate take on the weaponry flown with - even if it was an unofficial configuration. No doubt the squadron armourer would have made the guns work - perhaps by staggering them a bit.

I don't see how the ammunition drums would interfere with each other - obviously they don't get in the way of each other otherwise both wouldn't be fitted at the same time as shown. As for spent case ejection, they eject to the right but I don't see how that would be a problem as twin Lewis' were fitted on Scarff rings for Observers frequently on other aircraft.

Also, JM Bruce's 'Warplanes of the First World War' shows a period photograph of Culley's 2F1 fitted with the twin Lewis gun fit and mentions it in the text

I would not put any limits on the inginuity of a competant naval armourers crew supported by good mechanics. In 1914 the RNAS were getting aircraft to perform beyond design specs, so by 1918 why would it be any different. Btw not every aircraft was photographed and not every photo survives.

Previous threads on Culley's camel:
http://1914-1918.invisionzone.com/forums/i...4&hl=Culley
http://1914-1918.invisionzone.com/forums/i...3&hl=Culley

Camel with twin Lewis’
http://1914-1918.invisionzone.com/forums/i...5&hl=Culley

Culleys Lewises were not intended to be reloaded in flight and it appears that he carried no spare drums - less weight = faster climb. No point in a heavier armament if you can't get at the target.

The twin lewis night fighters had the arrangement as a] the flash from the vickers tended to blind the pilot and b] they could be trained to fire upwards at 45 degrees - a classic angle adopted by some German night fighters in WW2. Not all twin Lewis gun night fighters had the cockpit and fuel tank swaped (the 'comic cuts' variety) some did have the conventional cockpit arrangement but reloading the guns would be next to impossible on these.

I note that Culley's Camel appears to have the guns mounted to fire forward, not upwards. In this case, he would have had to virtually stall the machine to fire at a Zeppelin above him; not easy or safe near the altitude ceiling. Or was there a Foster mounting to angle the guns upward? (I doubt it as the Camel pilot was virtually under the wing. I have seen this Camel at the IWM but can't remember that detail). Or, did he manage to get to the same altitude as LZ53 and attack while level?

Thank you gentlemen for your helpful replies. I'll summarise what I've understood from here and the other threads pointed to:

I read elswhere that Lewis guns were necessary to fire the explosive bullets needed to bring down airships, as the Vickers couldn't fire them (reason why not not stated). correct ? My understanding is that this would have been technically illegal under the 1868 St Petersburg Declaration and 1899 Hague Convention, but since the German airships were essentially being used as terrorist weapons against civilians this didn't worry the British.

The Lewis gun being above the wing had the advantage of not blinding the pilot at night, although Culley appears to have operated during the day. Correct ?

There was no room between the muzzle and the propeller to fit flash suppressors on Vickers guns above the engine cowling, correct ?

Culley did indeed fly missions with 2 Lewis guns above the wing, apparently not a common configuration.

There is perhaps some doubt as to whether the IWM depicts the guns correctly mounted as they appear fixed in a forward-firing position and hence Culley would have been unable to attack from below, which would be a disadvatage at high altitude.
Dolphin posted the following photo from WWI of a 44 Squadron night fighter at http://1914-1918.invisionzone.com/forums/i...5&hl=Culley shows 2 above-wing Lewis guns on elevating mounting (correct terminology ?). MikeW states it's Culley's machine... the number has been censored. But the wing struts look different and the cockpit is further back than the IWM machine - it's not the IWM machine. But with Culley's cockpit further forward than the night-fighter, it looks like he wouldn't have been able to operate the guns manually anyway. ??


Conclusion : Culley used non-standard twin fixed Lewis guns, in which case the IWM restoration is accurate...
have I got it right ?

thanks, Rod

Korrect in essence, haven't got time to look for pedantic nit picking errors

Just to add a few bits

A mixed load was thought the best against airships and balloons which is easiest to do with a Lewis drum. I have also seen suggestions that there could be premature ignition in rounds fired in Vickers mgs. One overrideing factor was weight, to get up to the Naval Zepps an interceptor had to be able to climb fast and high - two Lewises are lighter than a Vickers and a Lewis. A similar situation occured in WW2 when special high altitude pressurised versions of the Ju 86 bomber were appearing over Alexandria and specially tuned and lightened Spits were needed to get up and intercept them - in this case some of the armament and ammo was also sacrificed to achieve altitude.

Producing an effective flash suppressor for the Vickers seems to have been difficult as there were certainly complaints from some infantry of the ineffectiveness of early version.

The Lewis on the F2 Camel came down through the gap in the wing above the pilot's head for reloading and was on a different mounting to the night fighter Camels (or the SE5 for that matter). I'll try and post details tonight. There wouldn't be room to get two Lewises through the gap.

Twin fixed Lewis on Culley's Camel is accurate - the book I mentioned which has a photo of N6812 in service shows it with fixed Lewis' and mentions so in the text

Yes, but the Camel in the IWM is not fitted with the pretty crucial upward firing slide arrangement. I suppose this mod may well have been removed when the Zep threat ended and to to replicate the aircraft it would have been easy to install the 2 Lewis' but maybe impossible to find the slide.

Did WW1 night fighters use the upward firing technique say against Gothas in anticipation of the WW2 jazz music technique?

I seem to remember from my Biggles books that this explosive/incendiary ammunition was called Buckingham and could indeed only be used against balloons

IIRC was not Buckingham explosive and Pomeroy incendiary?

It wasn't in the original photo I mentioned either, hence me describing it as fixed - couldn't have been that crucial as Culley managed to shoot down the Zepp without it

As I said a few posts ago the mount on the F2 Camel was not the same as on the Night fighter Camel or the SE5 as the pilot did not sit behind the wing but under it. The gun mount did not slide but merely folded back and down so the breech went through the square cut out above the pilot (not unlike the mounting on some earlier Newport's). There is a contemporary photo of Culley's Camel in War Planes of the First World War Vol 2 by J M Bruce p 159 which shows the twin gun mount exactly as per the IWM Camel (as I've said earlier there would not be room for them to fold through cut out and in any case Cully was keeping the aircraft light and carried no spare drums.). And yes as I've also said in another posting the night fighters did fire at 45 degrees exactly as in the later Shrage Musik German mountings. Indeed Leefe Robinson brought down the first airship over Britain by firing a Lewis at 45 degrees from a BE2. Much closer still to the later German arrangement was the mounting of 30 mm cannon (COW guns) to fire at 45 degrees from DH4 bombers.

Thanks Centurion.

At the risk of going slightly off topic, what quarry was the cannon equipped DH4 after?

The twin Lewis guns were selected as armament for the Sopwith 2F.1 "Comic" night fighter as they are much lighter than a Vickers, and if I recall correctly, have a higher rate of fire (the reason they are the machine gun of choice as an air-mounted weapon if they are mounted on the upper wings or anywhere else that does not require them to be interrupted to fire through the propellors, apparently Lewis guns are unsuitable for that purpose).

The reason they were mounted on the upper wing was, as mentioned, to prevent blinding the pilot with the gun muzzle flash. No spare drums were carried as it was essential to make the aircraft as light as possible to reach the altitudes of their intended targets. The ammunition was indeed Buckingham and Pomeroy to give the greatest chance of bringing down a zeppelin.

The guns were not mounted on a Foster mount to save weight, and as there was no requirement to change drums mid-flight, so they were fired using a Bowden cable.

Click to view attachment

(photo from squadron/signal publications "Sopwith Fighters in Action").

ianw,

The COW gun (Coventry Ordnance Works) was primarily used against shipping and surfaced submarines (and I suppose those at snorkel or periscope depth)

Culley's F2 was not a nightfighter but a special mod. AFAIK all nightfighters were converted F1 Camels. As I've already explained the Foster mount was unsuitable for a Camel other than the comic cuts versions as it brought the gun down behind the wing and the pilot sat under it. Naval Camels with an single overwing gun used an entirely different mount. The main reason the Lewis was used as an anti Zep fighter was, as someone has already pointed out, because it could fire a mixed load including incendary and explosive rounds.

The COW was originally intended as an anti airship weapon amongst other uses. Any use at all in WW1 was limited in the extreme. I'll post more detail this PM. Post war a number of aircraft were built with it mounted to fire upwards at 45 degrees but none entered service.

As promised.

The COW automatic gun first appeared as 37mm intended for the FE2 as a ground attack weapon. However after a French experiment with a 37mm Hotchkiss in a Vosin resulted in its wings coming off in flight this idea was dropped. The FE 6 was designed for the COW gun but abandoned. A new 1¹/₂ pounder was developed to be put in the FE4 which in turn was abandoned. One was then fitted to a Tellier Flying boat as an anti sub weapon at tests carried out but again the scheme was abandoned. It was then thought that it could be an anti Zep gun and tests carried out with a Dh4, on one of these the gun fired up at 45 degrees and exited through the bottom of the aircraft also at 45 degrees Despite this a DH 4 was fitted with the gun and flew a number of operational anti Zeppelin missions and on one occasion took off to intercept Gotha bombers. In all cases it failed to make contact. However a further two COW armed Dh4s were sent to France as bomber interceptors.
It was proposed that the defensive armament of the HP 1500 bomber should be two COWs but this was soon dropped. A Vimy was also fitted with a COW but to what end remains unclear.
Post war a Vickers Valentia and a Short Cromarty flying boat were both fitted with the COW for development in the anti sub role but the money ran out.
In the 20s after Vickers took over all COWgun development two aircraft were built to carry it in an anti bomber role - these being the Bristol Bagshot and the Westland Westbury however both aircraft proved to be poor performers and once again the scheme was dropped.
In 1931 a final attempt was made to use the gun as a bomber destroyer and the Vickers Type 161 and the Westland F20/29 were both single seaters fitted with a 45 degree upward firing COW. After some vacillation the Air Staff abandoned the project. Two Blackburn Perth Flying boats were later fitted with the COW but by now the air staff were disenchanted with the concept of heavy cannon armed aircraft and that was it.

Interesting article on COW gun and Davis recoilless gun here.

http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk/cannon_pioneers.htm

The only COW gun photos I've seen were angled downwards. It would be interesting to see one angled upwards.

If you look in the article to which you've linked you'll see a link to a photo of one in a DH4 (in fact the one tested at Orfordness and used on a number of patrols)
did you not read it before posting

I've got the book on which it was based. British Aircraft Armament Vol2 (R Wallace Clarke) provides a better account.

Photos of COWs pointing downward at 45 degrees are usually of one or other of the two COW armed Blackburn Perth flying Boats in the early 1930s. These were not fixed at 45 degrees this was merely the maximum depression.

Getting back to the original subject. The Lewis on Naval Camels was on an Admiralty mounting and not a Foster. The gun was fixed on the mounting and the whole mounting swung down through the wing aperture on a spring loaded arm (rather like a beefed up Anglepoise lamp stand). It was certainly much more complex than represented in the old Airfix model! It would not be possible to mount two Lewises on this fitting.

Aircraft with the Foster over wing mount (2nd model) included:

Sopwith Camel Night Fighter (comic cuts)
Sopwith One and a Half Strutter Night Fighter (comic cuts)
SE5 and 5a
Avro 504K Night Fighter

There were a number of other over wing mounts

I know I'm a pedant, but just to clarify matters, Culley's Camel was a 2F.1, not an "F2". The later Sopwith fighter aircraft that reached production status were the F.1 Camel, 2F.1 Ship's Camel, 5F.1 Dolphin, and 7F.1 Snipe, plus the 8F.1 Snail.

Gareth

Merely short hand - I was typing on a very small notebook balanced on the knee and avoiding too many key strokes