The Camera

[Belis4rius]

A two seater doing a recce has been forced down, the pilot expiring on landing. This aircraft has some valuable pictures onboard and was seen to go down, therefore the camera must be retrieved, which will mean the observer dismantling the camera and a friendly aircraft landing and picking it up, it may also, if a two seater, attempt to bring back the observer.

Choose a number of friendly planes to carry out the rescue/recovery, then dice to see how many arrive on turn one, the others dice again for the turn in which they enter, you can also dice to see from which direction they arrive if you want. The enemy also choose a number of aircraft and do the same.

Roll a die to find out how many turns it will take the observer to dismantle the camera, perhaps he does not have the right tools or a bullet hit the mount or the landing jammed some working part. Each turn the observer can choose to work on the camera or shoot at the enemy, he cannot do both. If he is wounded then he cannot do anything and someone else will have to land and finish the job.

The planes on the ground can be shot at as normal.

The game: A Breguet was on the ground, the first aircraft on the scene were two Spad XIII's and one Nieuport 17, the Boche arrived in the shape of a DVII and Dr.I. The Nieuport landed close to the two seater while the Spad's went for the Germans. The camera mount had been damaged and was proving a struggle to free. The Germans managed several runs on the grounded planes, forcing the observer to take some shots at them and heavily damaging the Nieuport. A lucky shot blew the DVII out of the air just as a Pfalz and another triplane arrived. Another Nieuport turned up for the French. The grounded Nieuport pilot gave up waiting for the camera and only just managed to get his shot up crate back into the air and head for home (1 damage point remaining!). By now the Germans had lost two more aircraft and the French one of their Spad's, however the second Neiuport was now on the ground and getting ready to recieve the camera while the remaining triplane attempted to limp home in flames. The observer of course wasn't too happy to have been left behind but no doubt would recieve a medal in due course for saving the camera.

[Lugburz]

I love creative ways of adding to the overall atmosphere of the game. Did you require the participating planes to change altitude and land or simply arrive in the vicinity? Did you require the planes to land within a certain ruler's distance of the objective? Again, what a fantastic idea for a scenario!

Lugz

[The Cowman]

Great Scenario! I can even see sacrificing a Breguet mini just to creat a nicle little crater/wreck marker to use for this mission! :clap:

[Belis4rius]

Thanks for the compliments.

I don't use altitude, therefore to land a plane plays two straights and ends with a stall, obviously the plane cannot shoot while landing, to take off again it plays a stall, a straight and a stall. I am not sure if these are from the WoW rule book or from a campaign set, but they work fine if you are not using altitude. I didn't make a ruling on how close the plane has to be, but let's face it, it should be pretty close considering the loading of the camera. I certainly got the Nieuports within short firing distance of the Breguet. The Germans took the view that shooting up the rescue/recovery plane was the best way to keep the camera in place until their infantry turned up, as I always thought that the Breguet had come down behind enemy lines.

So there is another element which could be added, enemy ground troops, although the observer should still get the chance to dismantle the camera before they have a chance of turning up. But with time running out will he continue to wrestle with the machine or return fire?

Give it a shot and drop me a line on how the game went.

[Hunter]

I like this scenario. Will have to figure in altitude in our scenario as wr play altitude rules. Thanks for the idea!

[Flying Officer Kyte]

What a little cracker.:thumbsup: It will figure in one of my games in the near future.:clap:
Rob.

[Albert Ross]

Great Scenario! I can even see sacrificing a Breguet mini just to creat a nicle little crater/wreck marker to use for this mission! :clap:

Excellent scenario :thumbsup:

You could always knock together something from a card model for this. :smack:

But I thought all the cameras at this time were hand held.....?:confused:

[Flying Officer Kyte]

Excellent scenario :thumbsup:
But I thought all the cameras at this time were hand held.....?:confused:

As the war progressed Stuart, cameras were mounted at the side of the fuselage on planes specifically earmarked for photo recon.
Rob.

[itchy]

Excellent will try this out next week ,I have a half built skytrex kit that will do as the downed aircraft.

[Bartman]

Definitely need to use a two-seater to make the rescue attempt. No way you leave a man behind. The film is important sure, but you wouldn't leave the crew behind. Gettin' your buddies back is the main thing. Even the deceased pilot.

[Albert Ross]

Absolutely. Besides the ethical issue of leaving a man behind, a lot of information can be gathered from a PoW or even the body of a fallen enemy

As it happens, I just found this photo of a camera mounted on a BE2c supposedly in 1916

[Belis4rius]

Thanks for all the feedback. As for leaving a man behind I cannot see this as a problem in WWI, perhaps a two seater was not available in the time frame allowed, also perhaps he might have held on to the lower wing, or maybe he just sacrificed his freedom in order to get the vital film back. The leaving a man behind ethos I suspect is more a modern thing due to warfare having changed so much since the big set piece battles of WWI and WWII and is held as sacrosant by many special forces units rather than the military at large. The bringing back of corpses certainly would not usually have been contemplated during WWI.

[Albert Ross]

Good point; back then we fought mostly honorable opponents who would care for our wounded as we cared for theirs and treat PoW's humanely. It's not very well known, but Germans captured by Japanese forces in WWI were treated exceptionally well, so much so that some elected to stay on in Japan after the war.

However there may be a difference between someone captured in combat and one behind enemy lines who will have useful information (at very least the location of his own airfield) on him. You also want to know just how much they were able to photograph/sketch/observe before you shot them down....

I've just noticed that the camera on that BE2c is mounted next to the pilot, not the observer who sat in front. This means an "observer wounded" special damage result against a BE2c in our game would not stop the mission going ahead, although given the record of these aircraft, it wouldn't be in the air much longer anyway, once engaged by a scout.

[gully_raker]

:thumbsup: Yes a great idea for a fun game & most realistic from an Historical perspective.

[Okie]

Sounds like a very good senario!!:) :salute::clap::cool: Okie

[Raege]

Very cool scenario will be giving this a go with the boys tonight :-) Thanks for sharing

[David Manley]

The observer of course wasn't too happy to have been left behind but no doubt would recieve a medal in due course for saving the camera.

IIRC Biggles occasionally picked up downed comrades and flew them home clutching to the wing of his Camel :)

[Albert Ross]

IIRC Biggles occasionally picked up downed comrades and flew them home clutching to the wing of his Camel :)

The maneuver cards for that must be interesting:)

[AlgyLacey]

IIRC Biggles occasionally picked up downed comrades and flew them home clutching to the wing of his Camel :)

He even came home that way himself on one occaision.

At least once he brought a spy out in extremis - plus the exploits of the rescue flight with their Biff. (In fact that's one of the main reasons I got mine)

[CappyTom]

Thanks for all the feedback. As for leaving a man behind I cannot see this as a problem in WWI, perhaps a two seater was not available in the time frame allowed, also perhaps he might have held on to the lower wing, or maybe he just sacrificed his freedom in order to get the vital film back. The leaving a man behind ethos I suspect is more a modern thing due to warfare having changed so much since the big set piece battles of WWI and WWII and is held as sacrosant by many special forces units rather than the military at large. The bringing back of corpses certainly would not usually have been contemplated during WWI.

I agree with you George. I talked to a gentleman years ago when I worked at a hospital. He had a limp and I thought that's why he was in the hospital for. He said no, he got that in the war. He still had his English accent and had the greatest disposition. His story started mid war and his unit was about to go over the wall. Or over the top I think he said. The allies started a barrage of cannon fire and when the whistle blow they went. The barrage was suppose to continue, in front of the infantry then stop. He was a little eager and a shell a little slow and landed behind him. He said,"When I woke up I was in a German hospital" and then they sent him to a P.O.W. camp. He said at the camp you were treated quite well and the officers were treated even better. You still wanted to escape but there was mutual respect for the prisoners on both sides back then, he said.
I was working at the Copper Queen Hospital when I met him.

Tom

[CappyTom]

Also George:p...great scenario:thumbsup:.
Thanks for sharing.
:salute:
Tom

[flyingryno]

Thanks for the scenario I'll put in our campaign that we're try to start.

[Pakratt]

I have been looking for ways to incorporate landing and takeoffs other than rearming..... Very creative and love the idea

[Bruce]

Very nice photo of a camera mounted on a BE2c Stuart. In this case the pilot operated the camera, not the observer.
I guess that the observer (in the front seat ahead of the pilot in the photo) was primarily along to watch for enemy aircraft and operate the aircraft's 1 or 2 Lewis guns (1 facing out the left side with a very narrow arc, the other facing rearwards between strutts and about 18" over the pilot's head). The photo shows a BE2c without a rear-facing Lewis gun. I wonder if the weight of the camera and accessories made the 2nd Lewis gun a non-starter?
We have a BE2c at the Air Museum here in Ottawa; the distance between the observer's seat and the pilot's seat is probably too great for any significant verbal communications so hand signals must have been the norm. You can see the rear edge of the front cockpit at the right edge of the photo.
There are several excellent photos in some threads on the site that show the BE2c's very awkward MG arrangements.

[Flying Officer Kyte]

Here are some more shots of cameras mounted on aircraft.
Rob.

29376

29375

29374

[Bruce]

Beautiful Rob. I'm adding those to my collection.
Questions - 1) the last photo shows the observer speaking into a microphone; is he speaking to his pilot (likely I think) or to somebody on the ground (a bit early wasn't it for voice radio communications), any ideas?
2) In the same photo, is that entire box-like device that's hanging over the side (from top to bottom) the camera or is the bottom bit a wooden "housing" to shield the lens from glare? Thoughts?

[Flying Officer Kyte]

If you look at the pic with the mike, the pilot has one too. It was internal com only. Air to ground was still in Morse at this time. As for the workings of the magic box only our "Photographic Buffs" will be able to tell you that one.
Rob.

[Flying Officer Kyte]

Here are a few more interesting pictures of cameras in action.
Rob.

29388

29389


29390

[Flying Officer Kyte]

And even more.

29413

29414

29415

29408

29407

29412

29411

29406

29410

29409

Rob.

[usmc1855]

You may want to add an element of desperation to the rescuing side, by having a threat of the enemy start an artillery barrage to destroy the downed plane (I've read several accounts of this happening). What I would suggest is again using a die roll to determine when the 1st spotting round might impact near the plane (scaring the hell out of the observer, and any friendly plane already on the ground!), then roll a second die (Halved) to determine how many rounds after the spotting round before the full barrage would begin.

[Flying Officer Kyte]

Lets add an enemy balloon to the mix Brian. If the rescue force can down it first, then the barrage can't range in.
Rob.

[usmc1855]

Great idea, Expanding on that theme, how about on the third turn or so, have an enemy two seater come into play which could call in artillery. This would give the friendly air cover something else to try and destroy, while the enemy fighters would have another task in trying to defend it.

[Flying Officer Kyte]

Yep, I can go for that too, and try to disrupt the spotting by driving it off would be enough. we could also incorperate some sort of signal system that the spotter, of whichever type, would need to use to get the Gunnery Officer to range in his guns. This could mean work for a large number of players, followed by a counter attack to bomb the guns.
Rob.

[usmc1855]

Yes. Great scenario for a sequence of games.

From what I've read, both sides developed an abbreviated Morse code type signal over wireless radios carried in spotter planes. The spotter would actually have an antenna he would reel out, and back in after use.

This is copied from: http://www.militaryhistoryonline.com/wwi/articles/airreconinwwi.aspx


A Communication Breakthrough

As an observation platform, aircraft had proven their ability to fly over enemy positions and report on enemy troop movements. However, one lingering concern was the timeliness of information obtained by the reconnaissance unit. In the early days of aerial reconnaissance, the preferred method of communication was to land near the front and report intelligence in person. This was hardly a risk free or practical method of communication given the lack of established airfields near the front.[32] Soon, reconnaissance units of both sides began dropping messages in weighted canisters and bundles. The air drops improved the timeliness of intelligence, but unless ground units were alerted to expect the air drop, the valuable intelligence would often lay unnoticed in the mud and debris of the front lines.[33] Some units devised signal systems using klaxon horns or colored lights, but these were difficult to detect from the ground and often led to misinterpretation.[34] The real breakthrough in air to ground communication occurred in late 1914 when the British began experimenting with wireless telegraph equipment.[35]

Wireless technology of the era had some obvious drawbacks. First, the equipment was too heavy and bulky for planes to carry both a transmitter and receiver, so planes flew with a transmitter only.[36] Second, in order to omit a clear signal the aircraft would have to descend to an altitude below 5000 ft and unreel a wire antennae that dangled 150 feet behind the plane.[37] And Morse code was hardly the fastest method of communication when relaying complex observations. A skilled observer could only send messages at a rate of up to 12 words per minute.[38] Still, the benefits offered by this crude method of communication revolutionized air reconnaissance, and nowhere did aerial reconnaissance change the nature of warfare more than in the coordination and targeting of artillery.

The Lethal Eye in the Sky

To really appreciate the impact and value of airborne artillery spotting, one needs to understand the incredible advances in artillery technology in the decades preceding the Great War. Just 40 years prior, the French and German armies were still using horse-drawn cannon to pound each other during the Franco-Prussian war.39 Targeting was generally accomplished through a time honored system of flash spotting and sound ranging.[40] As the name implies, a designated spotter would use a stop watch to calculate range based on the interval between the flash of the muzzle and the report of the guns. Once the range was determined, the cannons were aimed entirely by sight, and their stiff recoil knocked the cannon out of position with every shot. By the later part of the 19th Century, breech-loading howitzers had been developed that could absorb the recoil, allowing the gunners to engage enemy positions with far greater consistency and rate of fire.[41] The new howitzers also had much greater range than the visual capacity of the gun crews. New methods had to be developed in order to improve accuracy and take advantage of this lethal technology.


http://www.militaryhistoryonline.com/wwi/images/recon6.jpg
Modern artillery, like this British howitzer, was the most lethal weapon technology of the war.

Even before the introduction of wireless, aerial spotting vastly improved the targeting process for long-range artillery. The first method used to calculate the range of a target via aircraft was simple trigonometry. A reconnaissance aircraft would fly over enemy positions at a predetermined altitude and drop a signal flare or smoke bomb when directly over the target. Grounds spotters, who used binoculars to keep watch on the aircraft, would calculate range to the target using the known altitude of the aircraft and it's look angle above the horizon.[42] The method was equally effective at night when flight crews used colored lights to signal ground spotters.[43] Rather than cause any substantive damage, the intent of a night barrage was simply to terrorize, but in this capacity it was extremely effective. Pity the unfortunate infantryman who happened to light a cigarette while under the watchful eye of an aerial observer.

Although the triangulation method improved general ranging of artillery, there were a number of factors that limited its accuracy. First, early fixed wing aircraft determined altitude by means of a barometer which could only approximate true height above the ground.[44] Also, the aircraft had to remain under continual observation by the ground spotters. Atmospheric glare or haze that did not prevent the reconnaissance crew from observing the target was often enough to obstruct the view of the aircraft by the ground spotters.[45] Direct communication via wireless telegraph was the element that ultimately revolutionized targeting accuracy.

Initially, each wireless-equipped reconnaissance aircraft worked in conjunction with a single artillery battery.[46] At the beginning of each mission, the aircraft had to locate their assigned battery by way of large canvass letters that were laid out upon the ground near each battery to form the letters of a code. Once the position of the battery was established and a target was identified, the observer would transmit a firing order to the battery using a “clock code,” an abbreviated Morse code template based on the face of a clock that indicated range and vector to the target.[47] When the observer saw the first round fall in relation to the target, a second round could be directed with deadly accuracy.[48] To the forces on the ground, being spotted and deemed a worthy target by an artillery cooperation aircraft was analogous to certain death.

Wireless receivers were located directly at the battery site. To allow more than one observation unit to operate in the same area, a “clapper break” was devised to set a distinct tone for each respective aircraft's signal.[49] Signals were also heard and monitored at a central wireless station in each area. Should the wireless signal be degraded between any aircraft and their battery, the central wireless station could relay the target intelligence to the battery via a telephone line.[50] Each side aggressively attempted to detect and jam enemy wireless communications, or inundate enemy receiving stations with bogus transmissions.[51] The Germans even devised a “compass station” to detect and locate the source of wireless transmissions in order to direct scout patrols to the offending reconnaissance aircraft. The experiment had limited success due to the time lag between the location of the source and the arrival of the scouts, but the effort shows the critical impact of aerial reconnaissance upon ground operations during the Great War.[52] Once wireless technology was integrated into the aerial reconnaissance and artillery targeting process, the resulting weapons system brought death and destruction to the battlefields of Europe on a scale the world had not imagined possible.

[Flying Officer Kyte]

That is exactly the sort of thing that I had in mind Brian.
Rob.