Early Oddball WW1 Fighters - Airco DH.2 and DH.5

Replica Airco (Aircraft Manufacturing Company) DH.2 pusher and Airco DH.5 aircraft take to the skies over Omaka Aerodrome, in New Zealand.
The Airco DH.5 was one of the first WW1 British fighters to be developed which featured an interrupter mechanism to allow the gun to fire through the spinning prop. Designer Geoffrey de Havilland was well aware of the visibility benefits afforded by his early DH.2 design, and so the backward stagger of the DH.5's top wing was his attempt to provide the pilot of this 'tractor' aircraft with the same degree of visibility as that of the older 'pusher' design.
** Historical Machines TV - Free 7-Day Trial ** : See much more video material like this, and more, on our premier video-on-demand streaming service at www.historicalm....
It'll cost you less that the price of a cup of coffee for a monthly subscription, and stere's heaps to see that you won't find on this channel.
For more info on the DH.2 see: en.wikipedia.or...
--
www.aviationfil...
Copyright © 2016 Historical Aviation Film Unit
This video material may not be reproduced in any form (except as an embedded video on any other website), without the written permission of the Historical Aviation Film Unit.

[@person___9]

the dh.2 was, and will always be, a work of art. it was such a beautiful, effective biplane that saw much use in ww1. it wont be forgotten.

[@Oouther1]

I don't know much about aviation, but it would seem that pivoting around the heavy engine would be more effective and slinging it around on the front. I really like the design!

[@MatthewZelek-iv8tb]

Thrust from front being shoved under wings is great for lift and stability.

[@rescue270]

The DH-2 was very effective, but also very dangerous. They were prone to catching fire in flight, and their stall-spin characteristics were bizarre. Spin recovery was very difficult, and required a technique unlike any other airplane that involved somehow rolling the spinning airplane on its back and recovering inverted. It was derogatorily known as "The Spinning Incinterator" for these characteristics. It was Maj. Lanoe Hawker who figured out how to get one out of a spin. Until then, spin recovery in a DH-2 was thought to be impossible, and DH-2s were not to be stalled or spun. Maj. Hawker died in combat flying a DH-2. While in a tight dogfight with Pilot-Leutnant Manfred von Richtofen, one of Richtofen's bullets glanced off of the DH-2s aft-mounted engine and struck Maj. Hawker in the head, killing him instantly.

[@adavis5926]

Love these old planes. The DH-2 is still one of my favorites to fly in air combat simulations.

[@Red19UK]

It always impresses me to think of dedication and manhours of work put in by the people who keep these amazing aircraft airworthy and flying. Im very glad they do it.

[@royalanania3306]

Odd ball or not they where a magnificent invention,those pilots were very brave to fly those fellows.

[@castlebravo1467]

Looks like he was lifting off at 35 miles an hour. The only planes I've ever wanted to own were WW1 aircraft. It's their speed and simplicity that I find interesting.

[@chd1694]

Castle Bravo : these were always my favorite aircraft.

[@astudentpilotlife]

Aka bush plane and the stol plane

[@CFITOMAHAWK]

Nice to fly lower and slower and enjoy nature below..

[@PhotogNT]

The DH2 was the first scale model I built as a child, I've had a soft spot for them ever since.

[@Etherdave]

Hardly oddball in 1915; pusher designs were quite common, especially in civilian aviation. This example is a modern-era replica, using a modern engine; period DH.2s used a wind-cooled rotary whose entire crankcase rotated along with the propeller. Thanks for posting!

[@jonathansteadman7935]

Thanks, you've answered my question elsewhere. I thought the DH2 had a rotary engine.

[@gallopingalumphus5390]

In late 1916 British ace, Lanoe Hawker, flew a DH.2 against everybody's favorite infamous ace, the Red Baron, Manfred von Richtofen, flying an Albatross D2. The DH.2 more maneuverable, the Albatross faster and better armed. After a lengthy battle, Hawker, running low on fuel, made a break for it, but the Baron's final burst caught Hawker with a head shot and down he went.

[@sugarnads]

Biggles is my favourite ace

[@sirboomsalot4902]

Dang, Hawker must have had some serious piloting skills to survive that long against Richthofen in an Albatros in one of these

[@MarsFKA]

Superior speed will usually win any engagement. At the 2015 Classic Fighters Omaka air show, while we were watching eight Fokker Triplanes displaying, the commentator said they were slower than most of the Allied fighters that they came up against, which meant that they could get into a fight, but not leave. After that, they had to rely on their superior maneuverability, which, with a skilled pilot, was often enough, but not always. On 23 September 1917, Werner Voss, one of Germany's leading fighter aces, with 48 victories, while flying a Fokker Triplane, was killed in action against a squadron of very experienced British aces, flying the faster SE5A. In a long fight, he put holes in all of his opponents, but couldn't hold them off forever. He was only twenty years old.

[@themuffinman4044]

I recall the baron commenting on how beautifully his enemies machine turned. (From his book)

[@cabba6915]

Sir Geoffrey de Havilland was a genius. From his pencil came only beautiful planes that would make the history of world aviation.

[@CFITOMAHAWK]

Rise of Flight Game- I love this Pusher Fighter. Visibility is king in Air Combat..

[@redbaron07]

Wonderful to see that the NZ crowd put as much effort and devotion into bringing back some of the "lemons" of WW1 aviation (DH 5) as they spend on the more recognizable rising stars. Pushers for front-firing guns, back-staggered biplanes for visibility - both great examples of form following (sometimes misguided) function. Designers can learn many lessons from these aircraft. Imagine if Burt Rutan was around back then!

[@doogle-gf3fi]

A wonderful video of brilliant aircraft!! Seeing them in person would be the only improvement for me. Well done and a huge Thank You to all involved with these aircraft and those that recorded, edited, narrated and shared this with us all!!

[@HistAvFilmUnit]

Thanks for that feedback -- it's always good to get something positive! :-)

[@DenverLapse]

Gorgeous!

[@HistAvFilmUnit]

Thank you! Cheers!

[@williamsmith9763]

Imagine flying an original DH.2. They didn’t even have a throttle. The only engine controls were the ignition switch and the mixture control. The pilot would regulate his speed by ‘blipping’ the engine. That is, turning it on and off.

[@sarinyagordon5174]

I’m only Eight but I like biplanes such as the Airco DH.2 and DH.3, Sopwith Camel, and Fokker DR1

[@sugarnads]

Read biggles 👍🏿👍🏿

[@13aceofspades13]

beautiful!

[@astudentpilotlife]

I would love to fly those aircraft!

[@astudentpilotlife]

@@MrZhefish As I was able to volunteer for a local airshow. I learn that many if not all, ww1 plane did not have the throttle that we have today. In facts, some have engine switches that only turn the plane engine on or off. And the real reason why it is call dog fight because of the sound of the engine on and off sounded like a dog barking from a distance.

[@nor0845]

Cracking, uninterrupted field of view. Better engine and more firepower would have been an even better plane. I should just add this is one of my favourite WW1 fighters. A brilliant design.

[@paulcrombie9623]

Synchronisation I think the word you were looking for, they could fire through the propeller but this did slow down the aircraft for a few valuable seconds, all important in a dogfight. Just a few seconds could cost the pilot his life.

[@HistAvFilmUnit]

The interruptor gear allowed for the synchronisation of the bullets with the turning prop.

[@tomt373]

Although the pusher design solved the machine gun synchronization problem, it compounded the risk taken with the early rotary engines at that time, which due to rushed war time quota lack of quality controls, were prone to literally breaking a piston rod, thus throwing the complete jug off of the engine with the piston, which could easily smash into the bracing for the rudder and elevator controls behind it, sending the plane down in an uncontrolled crash.

[@chd1694]

This was a very manuverable and deadly aircraft for its time. I don’t know for certain but the machine gun didn’t jam as badly as the other planes of the periods. It didn’t need to fire through the propeller and it had more ammunition.

[@aviationandsimulationbyber9244]

Crackerjack footage! The ground perspectives make it easy to imagine how it must have been in the 1910 to be a plane spotter

[@synthwavecat96]

The old 2001 PC game Red Ace Squadron is what first introduced me to the DH.2. Not odd at all to me.

[@markrichards2595]

My favorite !

[@Allan_aka_RocKITEman]

FWIW: Negative stagger looks _good_ a Staggerwing Beechcraft, but _not so much_ on the DH-5. {I was not previously aware the DH-5 had negative stagger.} I find that a bit surprising, because I usually ♥ biplanes, including those from the WWI era.

[@waynemetevia7983]

I've always liked those old biplanes. They look so cool. Would love to go for a ride in one some day.

[@HistAvFilmUnit]

They are!

[@powertrust1971]

I think this is the current nz airforce prize fighter.

[@geraldomarcicano]

Wonderful

[@sean68mtown]

“I did not care if I was shot down or not, I was so utterly frozen…” - McCudden

[@jonathansteadman7935]

Always thought this had a rotary engine, like the Sopwith Camel.

[@HistAvFilmUnit]

The original DH-2's did, but in this case this is a replica built in the late 20th Century and the builder only had a radial engine available.

[@453421abcdefg12345]

You neglected to mention that the rear engine position also provided a certain protection from bullets coming from behind!

[@atvanael]

And squashes you flat when you crash-land!

[@Otokichi786]

I recall that Major Lanoe Hawker was taken out by Manfred von Richtofen in spite of the "rotary engine armor."

[@fromgermany271]

The „pusher“ design also keeps the pilot clean. The original Gnome rotary engine was famous to spit large amounts of caster oil onto everything behind the engine. The one shown here uses a radial engine instead. Not original in look and sound and feel for the pilot.

[@tauncfester3022]

The 150 HP Kinner radial in both of these planes has got to give them more speed and climb than the Monosupape Gnome rotary 100 HP, but would completely ruin the gyroscopic forces that made both challenging to fly.

[@dcstevens8290]

this is the first time I've seen one of these pushers at start-up - sure looks like risky business in there!

[@HistAvFilmUnit]

Yes, you have to be on your toes!

[@jaooliva3494]

Este avião foi o primeiro construido especialmente para combate,motor atras pra alojar a metranca na frente

[@CFITOMAHAWK]

That DH2 with a better engine could have been a winner.. Love those pusher airplanes. Visibility is king while flying. Blind Spots Sucks.

[@JohnyG29]

It was a winner in 1916.

[@terriblegoatman826]

untrue, the airco had a very reliable gnome engine, but no throttle controls, only on and off

[@MarsFKA]

A big problem with the DH5 was the staggered top wing, which gave the pilot a great view up, down and sideways, but created a huge blind spot behind. As early as World War 1 it was recognised that most of the fighter pilots who were shot down were hit by someone they never saw, most of the attacks coming from behind. Having the cockpit placed in front of the wing of the DH5 was a very poor design.

[@oudeiseimi2724]

This would make a wonderful RC model, if you preserve the engine sound with a radial or big 4-stroke nitro engine.

[@scottfw7169]

I like the way these old things sound.

[@markbaker3172]

Imagine a 450 pund engine hitting you if you botched a landing or got shot down

[@williamchristopher1560]

Whats the box on the upper right hand DH 5 for?

[@vernmorris8898]

Wikipedia says its an auxiliary gravity feed fuel tank though that statement is marked citation needed. It makes some kind of sense though as its hard to see what else it could be and an offset fuel tank would not leak onto the cockpit if it were punctured.

[@ralikdiver]

The DH 2 has one also. I'm guessing it could be used as a header tank. Being set high and a gravity feed. It would provide positive pressure to the main tank. Assisting or negating the need for a fuel pump. Just spitballing here, can't find info one way or another.

[@redbaron07]

I vaguely remember an old mechanic's joke that if you placed a bird in the middle of the rigging of a parked pusher (Gunbus, DH2, Fe2b, etc.) and it escaped, you were missing some wires! It might have been from a Biggles book, can anyone confirm? (Of course, the prop swinger has to get out of there, fast!)

[@Cookingyo]

Would love to see the plans they used for the DH.2...

[@HistAvFilmUnit]

I believe it's a Walt Redfern replica. Not sure if those plans are still available or not....

[@paweldun]

wow, i thought it was a RC plane in the beginning of the video

[@ohyeahgamer3736]

Me too

[@billysolhurok5542]

On the DH.2- does the prop have a different pitch, or does the engine rotate in the opposite direction, compared to the DH.5?

[@philipwagner9169]

I'm pretty sure the engine was standard. Just mount it back to front and bolt the prop on the other way round!

[@wyattsdad8561]

Are the engines the real type of engines from the day? They don’t sound like other planes I’ve heard from that era.

[@waynepurcell6058]

These have modern radial engines instead of the old school rotaries.

[@westernspud504]

i can see why the Air cooled engine was not as realible as it could be ! the engine is in the back so its not getting cool air as it should .

[@williamscott2461]

Love these old planes- I wish we could still build these planes without the hundreds of thousands dollars they make you pay to do it now

[@gigipeedee]

You could just do it yourself

[@GamingWithLit]

It looks like a ww1 jet

[@Denver_Risley]

I always wondered how the hell you start this thing safely. I guess you don't. It's just dangerous. Very cool plane, though.

[@kevinsands7639]

Rotary engine? It looks like a radial engine to me?

[@HistAvFilmUnit]

These two replica aircraft do in fact utilise radials, but the original types used rotary engines.

[@sugarnads]

Dh2 wasnt an oddball it was a pretty successful scout.

[@HistAvFilmUnit]

It's an oddball to those people who haven't seen flimsy pushers before! ;-)

[@babaganoush6106]

@@HistAvFilmUnit and a lot of 'flimsy pushers' were used before, during and after The Great war.

[@gordonwiessner6327]

Due to budget cuts these are some of the newest choices for the North Korean air force.

[@albertopajuelomontes2066]

i suposse the engine is not original because the original one was a rotatory engine and the whole engine rotates

[@HistAvFilmUnit]

Correct, this is a Kinner radial engine -- no rotary engines were available when this replica aircraft was originally built.

[@kennethnewton7931]

Is this a replica. Or original

[@HistAvFilmUnit]

It's a (Walt Redfern) replica, with a Kinner radial engine instead of the more accurate rotary engine.

[@kennethnewton7931]

Is there any fore sale at this time

[@AVTARSINGHHARMAN]

hlo

[@theofarman]

Très mauvaise réplique du fabuleux Caudron G3

[@yurycz8933]

+

[@fredrictengstrom5646]

No wonder Uk is doing so well. Such ingenoity. Scotland,N Ireland r fed up. Thatcher and churchill saved u. Or?

[@rohanmane6595]

Fake

[@HistAvFilmUnit]

Nothing fake about them. They're as real as you are.