As the thread title asks, when did the N17 start to use twin machine guns? Did twin MGs become the norm for them?
Nieuport 17, twin machine guns?
As the thread title asks, when did the N17 start to use twin machine guns? Did twin MGs become the norm for them?
I might be wrong , but as far as I know looking in my references Nieuport 17 only had a wing mount Lewis or deck mount Vickers.
One book I have mentions once the syncronized Vickers became available that replaced the wing mounted Lewis, but some kept the Lewis too. I haven't been able to find any numbers/ratio of N17s with two machine guns.
I tend to believe it was one or the other and maybe a rare instance both.
Last edited by Teaticket; 04-13-2015 at 16:59.
After I wrote this reply I found this on the WoG site:
http://www.wingsofwar.org/forums/sho...8681-Nieuports
With a nod to Teaticket.
I have the same information, Vickers replacement of Lewis gun; trial conducted on twin machine-guns, etc.
Twin MG's imposed seeming unfavorable results which were undisclosed in the text of my source, simply stating twin MG's rendered "unacceptable performance penalties." Kenneth Munson, p. 138 Pocketbook Encyclopedia, Fighters 1914-19, Macmillan, NY, 1968.
Would you like a twin armed Nieuport 17? Yes please, indeedy.
Regards,
Mel
Last edited by Gribble; 04-13-2015 at 18:42.
Some French naval N-17s had twin lewis over the wing.
The Escadrille used 7 Nieuport XVII from october 1916 to march 1918. They were armed with two Lewis machine-guns overwing, rather than the more common synchronized single Vickers. They received the codes SP 2, SP 3, SP 4, SP 5, SP 6, SP 7 and SP 8. But the letters "SP" (identifying the planes of the CAM Dunkerque) were never painted, only the numbers, in black, on the two sides of the fuselage and on the fuselage upper decking, behind the pilot. The unit insignia was a diving black eagle, painted on the port and starboard sides.
Zoe, nice find.
Twin stingers on Nieuports.
In Italy, two machineguns were not rare: both the deck Vickers and the Lewis on the upper wing. Even if machineguns were scarce. But Imolesi had one on his Ni.2142, we featured him on a card. Jon Guttman's "Nieuport Fliers of The Lafayette" features many Nieuports with the same arrangement: N.1844 (we did a miniature for it), Ni.1950, Ni. 1811, Ni.1803. To quickly quote just the ones havin profiles and clear pictures where they are on the foreground.
Why not four?Originally Posted by Gribble
I am trying to figure out which movement deck could have this one ...
Dit it ever move???
Whilst four guns must have made it fly like a brick, I do like the idea of two machine guns.
For my Italian machines I will certainly adopt one. That will make it much more competitive for those special, not a cat in hells chance of getting back, missions.
Rob.
"Courage is the art of being the only one who knows you're scared to death."
Thank you Wing Commander. I hadn't thought about adding a machine gun to my Italian Nieuports. I'm most times outnumbered 3 to 1.
Should the two mg version fly a different maneuver deck? P or E instead of I?
Peter,
I agree, some sort of 'adjustment' would be worth considering. I cannot speak to which deck(s) however.
Still good a good question toward 'balance'.
In my scurrying about in the 'historical texts' the extra 'guns' created some type of 'negative' performance issue with the planes.
I would be a shameful librarian if I were to have any WWI aeroplane technical manuals, but, what a lovely thought to have them nonetheless.
I certainly think that the climb rate should be affected.
Rob.
"Courage is the art of being the only one who knows you're scared to death."
Maybe not if they had a bigger engine fitted as suggested in the photo of the four gunner - the extra 20hp may compensate for a second gun ?!
Now you're talking Dave.
Fire power with maneuverability...
Rob.
Last edited by Flying Officer Kyte; 04-15-2015 at 00:21.
"Courage is the art of being the only one who knows you're scared to death."
Weight itself is one problem; another is balance. I'm not sure how much a loaded Lewis weighed, but having it that far above the centerline may have screwed up the the balance a bit (like a ship with a heavy load on deck and nothing below deck).
The issue with all 1914-17 fighter types was that the engines were so underpowered that - with just one machine gun - they were operating close to their flight envelope limits. Adding a second gun on anything under 120 hp was problematic. You will note that the only successful twin-gun aircraft in this period were the Albatros series which had 160hp engines.
Various attempts at adding extra guns to Nieuports are noted but there will always be trade-offs.
1) expect to lose at least 1,000 feet on maximum altitude, possibly more.
2) expect to lose some climbing speed, possibly 10% under 10,000 feet and 25% above it.
3) expect to lose some speed and experience an increase in turning circle due to higher wing loading.
4) remember that Nieuports are more fragile than most and extra weight means extra strain and extra chance of tearing the wings off in overdive or sharp turns.
With the arrival of the 130hp engine it appears that some previous single-gun types like the Sopwith Triplane and the Nieuports did receive second guns but both aircraft were at the end of their operational development.
It could also come down to pilot choice. If a pilot wanted to go balloon-busting down low (under 6,000 feet) and did not mind the penalties which I just mentioned then he was welcome to try.
Why not four?
I am trying to figure out which movement deck could have this one ...It would be damn lucky to even stagger into the sky!
Definitely the slowest of the X decks!
Adding a second MG was not always a bad idea, even if it was frowned upon a lot.
Willy Coppens has been the first Belgian pilot to use the Hanriot, arrived at the airfield of De Moeren the 22th of August 1917 and refused by all his fellow pilots. He became the first Belgian ace on it, scoring 37 victories (35 on drachens, he is the best Balloon Buster of the war). He tried several alternative weapons to the standard single MG. He wanted to try the two MGs but he was heavily wounded before managing to do it, and after the ace André De Meulemeester convinced him that it was not worth. Some time later Coppens tried anyway the twin MGs, from the 23rd to the 25th of october 1917, but he immediately abandoned them for a 11mm Vickers MG with incendiary bullets that he got from a French colleague.
The ace that actually showed how a twin machinegun on a Hanriot would be a great idea is Silvio Scaroni, our second ace after Baracca. On his all yellow HD.1 for which we give a miniature (serial number 7517) he added a second MG between the 16th and the 17th of june, 1918. From the 21th of june to the 12th of july, in just 3 weeks, he scored 9 of his 26 official victories (counting unconfirmed ones, the total is 30) on that very plane. The last two on the same day, in which he was shot down and wounded. After this great deed, several more Italian aces added a second MG on their Hd.1. Among them Fucini, for which we provide an A-firing miniature too.
The engine was a 110 HP one, but no-one complained of reduced performances. True also that Hd.1 was a pretty great desig, done in strict contact between engeneers and Italian aces expressing their needs.
So once again it seems to be a case of Horses for courses and one man's meat is another mans poison.
At least in my games maximum altitude does not feature, as I have never climbed that high. I get vertigo at more than eight pegs high.
A combination of the 20 hp engine, slower rate of climb and wider turning circle with no overdives seems to be a good compromise. That is if I actually ever get to add the extra gun to one of my Nieuports.
Thanks for all the information chaps, and thanks for drawing my attention to the original possibility Peter.
Rob.
"Courage is the art of being the only one who knows you're scared to death."
Actually when we see a twin gunned Nieuport 17 we are almost sure that it is a 17bis with the improved Clerget 130 HP or the better Le Rhône 9Jby 130 HP.
Italy had very few 17bis and the most famous was the one flown by Ace Flavio Baracchini marked with his Black Shield.
About the performances of the twin gunned Ni.17bis, I would like to let the word to Wing Captain Lambe in his dispatach to Flight Commander G M Dyott of the Air Department: " ... for godness' sake give your best attention to fitting two syncronising guns. The machine has a very good performances with one Vickers gun and one Lewis gun on the top plane and two Vickers guns should in no way retard the performance and would be an immense advantage ...".
It would be of the most interest, for those who like to compare engines performances, to have a closer look at the development of the engine Le Rhône 9J: in 1917 it had 130 HP but it was 8-10 Kg. lighter than the one produced in 1916 thanks to its aluminium pistons and a greater rotational speed.
So, for a Ni.17bis armed with twin MGs either in the standard cowl and top wing config or, as wanted by the RNSA, with twin cowl Vickers, I would not use a different movement deck from the one provided with the original WoG supplies.
Another subject is, of course, finding a deck for that four MGs gunbus.
Eventually, my answer to Peter's question "when did the N17 start to use twin machine guns?" is from 1917 providing you fly a Ni.17bis.
Prior to that period we might see twin gunned Ni.17 and Ni.16 but only as a sporadic field modification as we can appreciate in this nice pic of Belgian Aces Jan Olieslagers.
Mau
Or October 1916 if using CAM Dunkerque N17s (not 17bis).
Thanks for all the great info. What few books I have and my web searches found ittle on this.
Well as you say Pete, we have more than a little to go on now.
Even an aircraft and an Ace to pilot it thanks to Mau.
Rob.
"Courage is the art of being the only one who knows you're scared to death."
Sportsmen will often customise equipment. High quality shotguns can be customised to a customer's requirements. Combat aircraft are often not much different. In WW2 RAF pilots experimented with harmonisation at a time when the 'official' harmonisation was still for the machine-guns to mesh at 600 yards. Ace pilots began reducing this to 200 yards or less. They found it suited their style of combat.
While WW2 equipment was less easy to personalise some still managed it. Douglas Bader insisted on an all-machine-gun aircraft at a time when his squadron was beginning to use a partial cannon armament. During the Battle of Britain an enterprising sergeant pilot discovered that webs inside the wings of a Hurricane could be removed which allowed two guns in each wing to carry 400 rounds per gun instead of 350 r.p.g. This gave them an additional one or two bursts of fire on four guns only. A nice edge when things get difficult.
Another Ace:
The Quarter Master Pierre Malvoisin, best of Naval Aviation fighter pilot with six victories claimed lands on one of the Nieuport 17 CAM Dunkirk. He was brought down and captured May 26, 1918 - Notice the two Lewis guns - Photo Air War Illustrated.
Source: http://albindenis.free.fr/Site_escad..._Dunkerque.htm
Most of his victories were in a Sopwith Triplane.
Nungesser's and Ambrogi's Ni.17s are often depicted with two machineguns.
Nungesser's camouflaged one (will have no overwing Lewis after mid July 1917), we did a mini for it in Wings of War:
Ambrogi's "4":
That would suggest that Nungesser found the weight penalty of two guns was too much and he reverted to one gun. Interesting…!
Might not be a weight problem -- could be simple inconvenience: Lewis guns were difficult to reload at the best of times; trying to coordinate flying an airplane with a drum swap....
I'm honestly astonished that the RFC/RAF kept the Lewis/Vickers combo of the Se.5a rather than 2 Vickers like the Camel.
Karl
It is impossible for a man to begin to learn what he thinks he knows. -- Epictetus
Well, the problem is that on the 10th of July, just after Nungesser's arrive at the Lafayette Escadrille, the engine burned up. The plane was hastly put again into service conditions with a new engine but without the large spinner it had before and without the upper Lewis. The reasons why those were not on the plane in the days following a reparation at the front after an accident could be different than a change of mind of the pilot on the quality of the solution - it could be an availability and supply problem, or maybe the new engine was not as powerful as the previous one... I really do not know, but I'd be careful in judging without more data.
Thank you!
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks