Bristol M1c monoplane

Reguarding Bristol M1C featured in RFC aircraft. Most of these aircraft flew in the Middle East. As advanced trainers in Egypt with RFC training Sqns and operational in Mesopotamia with 72 Sqn and 150 Sqn (one flight) in Salonika. In Mespot they were still in service until early 1919

How come this plane that appeared in 1917 with an excellent speed of 130mph did not fight in the Western Front??. I read some where that it was because it had a high landing speed!!. What about those poor pilots of two seaters that had to land with those pieces of garbage that looked like a rhino??. Or the ones that were still fighting with DH2´s??, or BE 2´s??. Would they mind the "high landing speed"??. At least they would had had a change to come back and have a go at landing!!.

What do you think about it??. Alex Revell, are you there??, if so, Could you help us??.

I´m afraid we cann´t help those poor chaps that could have survived with this plane.

Thanks for your comments Eduardo. As I understand it the machines high landing speed was the reason it was considered unsuitable for France. Perhaps nice open deserts in Mespot were considered more suitable. 72 Sqns 'C' Flight was fully equiped with the M1C with various mods to combat the high temps experienced

[leo]

Ray:

For additional comments on the Bristol M1c monoplane, you might wish to check the Forum for April 20 and April 26. What a handsome airplane!

leo

[alex_revell]

Eduardo
Yes, I'm still out there/here. When Gerald Maxwell was a fighting instructor at Ayr in 1918 the Bristol was a favoutire mount of the instructors there. Gerald first flew one on 3rd April 1918 and pronounced it 'very nice'. The fllowing day he flew it in a mock combat against an SE5 and a Camel. His diary extract reads. ' The monoplane is the nicest machine I have ever flown'. On April 5th 1918 he fought another mock combat with a fellow instructor, Foggin. 'Self on SE and he (Foggin) on monoplane. I could not do a thing against him as the monoplane outzooms an SE everytime'. After they swopped machines, Gerald had no difficulty (on the monoplane) outflying Foggin in the SE. This was in 1918. Think what could have been done with the Bristol in early 1917, the era of the DH2,FE8 etc. Oliver Sewart in The Clouds Remember, recalled how in 1916 all the pilots were looking forward eagerly to having the Bristol. The reason that the landing speed was too high is nonsense. It was 50-52 mph;the DH2 was 45-50mph and the BE12 was 45mph. The Bristol's landing run was no more than 115 yards and the those of the DH4 and DH5 were 120 yards. Stewart stated that its performance and all round manoeuvrability was superior to both the SE or Snipe and, of course, it was much earlier than both. I think the reason for it not being adopted for service on the Western Front was because of prejudice against monoplanes, particularly by Trenchard, who, by all accounts wasn't very bright. I know he is considered as the Father of the RAF, but as one very distinguished pilot once put it me 'He almost strangled us at birth'. There's no doubt that his offensive policy cost the RFC a lot of unneccessary casualties. An offensive policy is not a strategy to be followed by a technically inferior side as the RFC was in late 16 early 17. The trouble was, as the same pilot put it.'Boom thought that fifteen miles over the lines was more offensive than five. It cost us a lot of good chaps'.
regards
Alex