Handley Page 0/400 number C9689

[Lyffe]

Handley Page 0/400, serial number C9689, was apparently lost on operations during September 1918. I regret I don't know which squadron the aircraft was with at the time, but can anyone provide the target and date for the loss (any info would be appreciated).

TIA
Brian

[Graeme]

Brian

Not sure about C9689, but D9689, flown by Lt R L Cobham + Lt E E Taylor + Lt E G Gallagher, No 115 Sqn, was lost on 16 September 1918 in a raid upon Thionville. The crew were interned.

Graeme

[Lyffe]

Many thanks Graeme, seems like an awful coincidence that two aircraft of the same type and almost identical number should be lost in the same month.

I have a photo of C9689 when it was on the strength of No1 School of Navigation and Bomb Dropping at Stonehenge, and Googling the number I came across an item on the HP 0/100 and 0/400 series in the Flight archive. It includes some notes on individual machines; the list is just a small selection and by no means comprehensive, but includes:

"C9689, claimed by Germans as brought down in September 1918".

I have to admit I do wonder how C9689 managed to get from a training unit at Stonehenge to the front.

The item was written in 1953 so it's possible there could be a typo.

If you are interested the item records that D9689 was one of a batch of 50 built by Clayton & Shuttleworth of Lincoln (with Eagle engines). Also noted is that 115 Squadron lost just the one aircraft between June and November 1918 (but you probably know that!)

Brian

[Steve Suddaby]

I have slightly different information from Graeme, Brian, though what I have doesn't provide a complete picture. In Chaz Bowyer's "Handley Page Bombers of the First World War", he lists C9689 as having been in 115 Squadron (Independent Force) and at No. 8 TDS, Netheravon. D9689 is also in the list for 115 Sqn. Curiously, he does not list it (or D9689) in his appendix of HPs lost to "direct enemy action", though that table does not include HPs that crashed within British lines due to flak or engine trouble. (I can't tell if it would include HPs down in German lines due to engine trouble -- the title doesn't make it sound like it.)

I have fairly complete records of the Independent Force raids. 115 Squadron lost aircraft twice during September 1918. The first was on 16/17 September, as Graeme mentioned, when one of eight HPs went missing on a night raid to the Metz-Sablon rail triangle. (Two of the eight had to abort with mechanical problems; the records say 6 reached the target or some target and dropped bombs; the missing HP was one of those 6.)

I'm not sure how to explain Graeme's detailed record saying the planes went to Thionville instead of Metz-Sablon. The latter was much closer and would have been a more appropriate target for 115 Sqn's maiden mission. It is possible they intended to hit Thionville but settled for M-S -- that was very common. The German records collected by the American Bombing Survey after the war indicate that Metz rail targets were attacked twice that night. There was no raid or even alert at Thionville that night.

The other missing aircraft was on the night of 20/21 September, when 10 HPs attacked the aerodrome at Morhange and a flaming onion battery "in the vicinity of" Fontenay. The records say all 10 planes bombed targets; one of them did not return.

I hope this is helpful even though it is not definitive. Based on Graeme's response, it does sound like 16 September is more likely even though the information doesn't line up as nicely as we'd like.

--Steve

[Lyffe]

Many thanks Steve,

Perhaps you could give your source Graeme (original records or book).

Steve:

Your reference to 8 TDS had me worried for a moment, but 'Wings over Wiltshire', an excellent book by Rod Priddle, has the unit forming at Netheravon on 1 April 1918, which leaves a distinct possibility that C9689 was previously with No 1 S of N&BD at Stonehenge - the two airfields are about 10 km apart. I cannot vouch for the provenance of the photo but I acquired my copy from Rod who, in turn, obtained it from a Mrs Locke. However, he is pretty thorough and I doubt he would have used it unless he was certain.

The Flight article, written by J M Bruce, lists five 0/400s as being lost to enemy action in September:

B8803 (Pilot Lt Taylor)
C9658 (the pilot, Lt Dodd, was killed, and the Commonwealth War Graves Commission gives his unit as 215 Sqn)
C9662
C9682 (Pilot Lt Lapp)
C9689
(As I said previously this was not intended as a definitive list)

Interestingly Bruce does not list 8 TDS as operating 0/400s.

Priddle lists eight 0/400s as being with 8 TDS, but not C9689, although he implies the list is not complete.

Brian

[Steve Suddaby]

I've found another source that sheds light on this, Brian. I also have in my library Windsock Datafile 116, "Handley Page O/400, Vol. One" by Colin Owers. He has a table, pp.32-36, "Handley Page O/100 and O/400 Losses to November 1918". Among the entries:

16/17 Sept 1918, D9689 of 115 Sqn, "Raid on Metz-Sablon rail triangle. Forced to land Luxembourg. Lt. R L Cobham; Lt. E G Gallagher; 2/Lt. E E Taylor; Sgt. Heighton. Crew interned."

Same night, same squadron, D5436, "Force landed returning from raid on Metz-Sablon. Capt. G L Blaine; 2/Lt. H S Maxwell; Sgt. E Hayes." [Since nothing is said about the crew being POW, WIA, etc., I infer that they crashed on the British side of the lines and were unhurt.]

21 Sept 1918, D5424 of 115 Sqn, "Raid on Moville airfield. Crashed on landing."

A couple comments about the D9689 entry... If they came down in Luxembourg during a Metz-Sablon raid, they were quite lost! (It's worth noting that this route would have taken them near Thionville, which could be why Graeme's source says that was their target.) It was not at all unusual for the Independent Force night bombers to be lost -- my research shows that the IF night bombers hit a different target than they thought they did or didn't even come near their believed target a THIRD of the time! (If you're not bored to tears by statistical research, it's described in my article in Over the Front, Vol.18, No. 3, Fall 2003. If you are bored by statistical research, I won't be insulted...) And I'd mention again that this was 115 Sqn's maiden raid, so their chance of being lost must have been higher than normal.

Again, none of this definitively solves the C9689 vs. D9689 question but I hope the additional information is useful.

--Steve

[Lyffe]

Many thanks Steve, a pity we're unable to pin-point what happened to C9689 but that's life.

I'm not in the least bored with statistical research - it often concerns me that books describing WW1 events imply a high degree of navigational accuracy ("Darkness shall cover me" being a case in point.) I suspect you are probably aware that even during the early years of WW2 the RAF Air Staff claimed its crews had no difficulty in opin-pointing targets, that is until the Butt Report of 1941, which showed that with a full moon only 2 in 5 aircraft claiming to attack a target were with 5 miles of it, whilst with a new moon the ratio fell to 1 in 15. If that was the case in 1941 I fail to see how it could have been better during WW1.

If I may digress.

You comment about navigational difficulties interests me greatly. I'm currently writing a biography of Captain C K M Douglas, an observer then pilot during WW1, who joined the British Meteorological Office after the war and subsequently became the outstanding forecaster of his generation - he was one of the team who produced the D-day forecasts.

Between May 1918 and May 1919 he was the CO of the Meteorological Flight at Berck (an airfield on the English Channel Coast south of Calais). The unit was tasked with gathering met data up to 14000 ft over Berck to assist the forecasters attached to the British Army. The Flight had three aircraft and two pilots, and was expected to make two ascents daily. (Hang on - I'm getting there.)

In October 1918 the RAF proposed an expansion of the Flight to increase the number of met sorties - and to conduct research into the navigational problems being reported by the Independent Force. Douglas was sent to Martlesham Heath at the beginning of November for briefing on the matter and discussions as to how to resolve the problems. It was a wasted journey; he didn't return until the end of November, by which time the Independent Force was being disbanded and there was no longer any immediate problem.

Now, I'm sorry if I've bored you!

Brian

[Steve Suddaby]

No, actually, Brian, that's quite interesting. I've read that the preparations for bombing Berlin from Bircham Newton in Norfolk with Handley Page V/1500s involved groundbreaking meteorological research. Was the work you described part of that research?

I had heard of the Butt Report -- I still find its conclusions astounding almost 70 years later!

Thanks for your fascinating response! --Steve

[Lyffe]

It might have been Steve, but nothing I've seen mentions deep penetration of Germany - but I'll go and have another look.

There was a Meteorological Flight at Bircham Newton in 1919, and I have some of its work, but it was really doing much the same as the Berck Met Flight, making daily ascents to record temperatures, cloud and other details. Without wishing to state the obvious that was of no value in forecasting winds.

For the British this era, 1918-20, was really the first time upper air data in the form of temperatures became available in real time, and the Met Office had no idea as to how to use it. The other problem was the lack of upper wind data - these were measured by pilot balloons and if there was too much cloud (as there usually was) any winds were restricted to less than 3000 ft, and even then only over friendly territory.

If you have a reference to 'groundbreaking met research' I'd very much appreciate knowing what it is.

In fact the British Met Office was way behind other countries in this respect; the German Met Office began drawing upper air charts (from which winds could be calculated) in 1931, but the first British ones did not appear until AFTER 1940 - in other words forecasts for the early operations in WW2 were little better than guesswork - and I say that as a retired meteorologist.

My man Douglas wrote some brilliant papers between 1920 and 1924 that showed how upper air data could be used, but it was never taken on board.

Brian

[Lyffe]

Gentlemen,

The Times carried a report of the raid on the night of 16-17 September 1918. To quote from the paper:

"The railways at Metz-Sablon and Treves were very heavily attacked and three fires started at Metz-Sablon. Bombs were dropped all around Treves station. The night was a first calm, but later high winds got up. At present 7 of our machines have not been located."

Frankfurt was also bombed that night and it is not clear is the 7 missing aircraft refers solely to the Metz-Sablon/Treves raids, or includes that made on Frankfurt.

Brian