AURORA 1/48-SCALE AIRCO DE HAVILLAND DH.4 WW1 RFC RAF BIPLANE *DECALS-ONLY*

ORIGINAL AUTHENTIC VINTAGE DECALS ONLY IN THIS AUCTION – THERE IS NO KIT INCLUDED

IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS, PLEASE ASK ME BEFORE BIDDING / PURCHASING – I WANT EVERYONE TO BE 100% SATISFIED WITH NO SURPRISES OR MIS-UNDERSTANDINGS

IF YOU ARE BUYING MULTIPLE ITEMS FROM ME AT THE SAME TIME (OR EXPECT TO IN THE NEAR TERM) THEN LET ME KNOW AND I WILL COMBINE ALL INTO A SINGLE SHIPMENT AND ADJUST THE FINAL INVOICE TO REFLECT THE MOST ECONOMICAL SHIPPING METHOD AVAILABLE TO YOUR ADDRESS

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Additional Information from Internet Encyclopedia

The Airco DH.4 is a British two-seat biplane day bomber of the First World War. It was designed by Geoffrey de Havilland (hence "DH") for Airco, and was the first British two-seat light day-bomber capable of defending itself.

The DH.4 was developed as a two-seat combat aircraft, for both day bomber and aerial reconnaissance missions. It was to have been powered by the new 160 hp (120 kW) Beardmore Halford Pullinger (BHP) engine, but problems with that resulted in numerous other engines being used, perhaps the best of which was the 375 hp (280 kW) Rolls-Royce Eagle engine. The DH.4 first flew in August 1916 and it entered operational service in France on 6 March 1917 less than a year later. The majority were manufactured as general purpose two-seaters in the United States for the American expeditionary forces in France.

Following the Armistice of 11 November 1918, many DH.4s were sold to civil operators where it was found to be particularly useful as a mailplane. Early commercial passenger airplane service in Europe was initiated with modified variants of the DH-4. War-surplus DH-4s became key aircraft in newly emerging air forces throughout the world. The U.S. Army later had several companies re-manufacture its remaining DH.4s to DH.4B standard and they operated the type into the early 1930s.

Development

Origins

The DH.4 was designed by Geoffrey de Havilland as a light two-seat combat aircraft, intended to perform both day bomber and aerial reconnaissance missions. The intention was for it to be powered by the newly-developed 160 hp (120 kW) Beardmore Halford Pullinger (BHP) engine. The DH.4 was developed in parallel to the rival Bristol Fighter. During August 1916, the prototype DH.4 made its first flight, powered by a prototype 230 hp (170 kW) BHP engine.

Initial flight tests revealed it to have favourable handling and performance. The Central Flying School (CFS) conducted early evaluation flights using the prototype, leading to it producing a favourable report on the aircraft, observing good stability in flight, light flying controls and its relatively comfortable crew positions. During its flights with the CFS, it was able to attain previously unheard-of time-to-altitude figures, unmatched by any of its predecessors. While flying trials with the prototype had been producing promising results, it soon became clear that the BHP engine would require a major redesign prior to entering production.

Even by the time of flying trials with the first prototype, there had been no finalised plans for quantity production of the BHP engine. Coincidentally, another suitable and promising aeroengine, the water-cooled Rolls-Royce Eagle in-line engine, was approaching the end of its development process. According to Bruce, the Eagle shared the same basic configuration as the BHP engine, which greatly aiding in its adoption by de Havilland, as did the engine's endorsement by William Beardmore. During the summer of 1916, a second prototype, equipped with the Rolls-Royce engine, conducted its first flight.

In response to its favourable performance, the Royal Flying Corps (RFC) decided to place an initial order for the type during late 1916.[6] Separately to the RFC's interactions with the DH.4, it had received substantial interest from the Royal Navy as well. The Admiralty decided to order a further pair of prototypes, configured to suit the service's own requirements, for evaluation purposes; however, according to Bruce, it is unlikely that the second of these was ever constructed. Following trials with the first of these prototypes, orders were placed for the production of DH.4s to equip the Royal Naval Air Service.

Production

During late 1916, the first order for 50 DH.4s, powered by 250 hp (190 kW) Eagle III engines, was received from the RFC. According to Bruce, it was not a surprise to most observers that the Eagle had been selected to power the first batch of production DH.4s. The initial production aircraft were largely identical to the second prototype, the main difference being the adoption of armament, which included a single synchronised 0.303 in (7.7 mm) Vickers machine gun for the pilot, while the observer was provided with a 0.303 in (7.7 mm) Lewis gun mounted upon a Scarff ring.

Production of the DH.4 was performed by a variety of companies beyond Airco themselves; these included F.W. Berwick and Co, Glendower Aircraft Company, Palladium Autocars, Vulcan Motor and Engineering, and the Westland Aircraft Work.[10] By the end of production, a total of 1,449 aircraft (from orders for 1,700 aircraft) were constructed in Britain for the Royal Flying Corps (RFC) and the Royal Naval Air Service (RNAS). Overseas, SABCA of Belgium produced a further 15 DH.4s during 1926.

As production progressed, various changes and improvements to the design were introduced upon the DH.4. As time went on, production DH.4s were fitted with Eagle engines of increasing power, ending with the 375 hp (280 kW) Eagle VIII, which powered the majority of frontline DH.4s by the end of 1917. However, this transition was greatly hindered as by January 1917, it had become clear that there was a chronic shortage of Rolls-Royce aero engines, and of the Eagle in particular; it has been claimed by Bruce that this shortfall was partially the result of protracted decision-making on the part of the Air Board.

In response to the limited availability of the Eagle, extensive investigations into the use of alternative engines for the DH.4 were conducted. This resulted in aircraft being outfitted with a diverse range of engines; these included the BHP (230 hp (170 kW), the Royal Aircraft Factory RAF3A (200 hp (150 kW)), the Siddeley Puma (230 hp (170 kW)) and the 260 hp (190 kW) Fiat, all of which were used to power, which encountered varying degrees of success, to production aircraft. None of these engines proved to be capable of matching the performance of the Eagle engine, which remained the preferred options despite the persistent supply constraints.

The Airco DH.4 was a conventional tractor two bay biplane of all-wooden construction. It was entirely built of traditional materials. The forward fuselage section and the underside of the tail area was covered by a 3mm plywood skin; this construction led to the fuselage being both strong and lightweight, heavily contributing to cross-bracing only being used for the four bays directly behind the rear cockpit. The nose of the aircraft was considerably longer than necessary, the cowling having been originally designed to accommodate the Beardmore Halford Pullinger (BHP) engine, rather than the Rolls-Royce Eagle that was adopted for production instead.

The DH.4 was powered by a variety of engines, including the Eagle, the BHP, the American Liberty, Royal Aircraft Factory RAF3A, the Siddeley Puma and the Fiat. Regardless of the engine used, it drove a four-bladed propeller mounted upon the nose. Cooling for the engine was provided via an oval-shaped radiator, while a port-mounted exhaust manifold discarded waste emissions above the upper wing. An unusual modification featuring on a small proportion of production DH.4s was the inversion of the engine, a design change that had been implemented in order to better accommodate the relatively-tall Ricardo-Halford-Armstrong (RHA) supercharged engine, which would otherwise unduly obstruct the pilot's forward field of view.

The DH.4 was operated by a crew of two, who were accommodated in widely spaced cockpits, between which the fuel tank was positioned.[8] While the crew arrangement provided good fields of view for both the pilot and observer; however, it had the noticeable downside of causing communication problems between the two crew members, particularly during combat situation, where the speaking tube that linked the two cockpits was of only limited use. On the majority of American-built aircraft, the pilot's seating and fuel tank arrangement were switched around; aviation author Peter M Bowers credits this change with improving the pilot's safety in the event of a crash, as well as allowing for better communication with the observer.

The DH.4 was armed with a single forward-firing synchronised Vickers machine gun along with either one or two .303 in (7.7 mm) Lewis guns fitted on a Scarff ring fired by the observer. In terms of bomb load, it accommodate a maximum payload of 460 lb (210 kg), which could be mounted upon external racks. Throughout the type's production life, a number of alterations to the armaments, such as the ergonomics of the observer's Lewis gun and the installation of an additional Vickers gun, were implemented. A pair of DH.4s were outfitted with COW 37 mm guns for experimental purposes, but the war came to a close prior to firing trials being conducted. All armaments would typically be removed from those DH.4s that were used by civil operators, including ex-military aircraft that were sold on in great numbers following the end of the Great War.

One of the more elaborate modifications of the DH.4 was the adaption of the type as a seaplane.[10] It was furnished with large floats, which were allegedly based upon the design of those used upon the German Hansa-Brandenburg W.29 seaplane. According to Bruce, while no such aircraft entered into operational service as a result of competition from other aircraft to perform the role, a number of DH.4 seaplanes were produced for trial purposes at Felixstowe and were successfully flown.

Operational history

British military service

The DH.4 entered service with the RFC in January 1917, first being used by No. 55 Squadron.[8] More squadrons were equipped with the type to increase the bombing capacity of the RFC, with two squadrons re-equipping in May, and a total of six squadrons by the end of the year.[8][24] During late 1917, the uptake of the type by the RFC was accelerated due to a desire to launch retaliatory bombing raids upon Germany following such attacks having been conducted against the British mainland. While Russia had been an early customer for the DH.4, having ordered 50 of the type in September 1917, the Russian and British governments subsequently agreed to delay the former's deliveries, instead diverting those aircraft to RFC squadrons in France.

As well as the RFC, the RNAS also used the DH.4. During the spring of 1917, No. 2 Squadron became the first unit of the service to receive examples of the type. The RNAS flew their DH.4s over both France and over Italy, specifically the Aegean front in the latter case. The DH.4 was typically used to conduct coastal patrols by the RNAS. One such flight, crewed by the pilot Major Egbert Cadbury and Captain Robert Leckie (later Air Vice-Marshal) as gunner, shot down Zeppelin L70 on 5 August 1918. In another incident, a group of four RNAS DH.4s were jointly credited with the sinking of the German U-boat UB 12 on 19 August 1918.

The DH.4 proved a huge success and was often considered the best single-engined bomber of World War I.[Note 1] Even when fully loaded with bombs, with its reliability and impressive performance, the type proved highly popular with its crews. The Airco DH.4 was easy to fly, and especially when fitted with the Rolls-Royce Eagle engine, its speed and altitude performance gave it a good deal of invulnerability to German fighter interception,[28] so that the DH.4 often did not require a fighter escort on missions, a concept furthered by de Havilland in the later Mosquito of the Second World War.

A drawback of the design was the distance between pilot and observer, as they were separated by the large main fuel tank. This made communication between the crew members difficult, especially in combat with enemy fighters.[29] There was also some controversy (especially in American service) that this placement of the fuel tank was inherently unsafe.[30][31] In fact, most contemporary aircraft were prone to catching fire in the air.[Note 2] The fire hazard was reduced, however, when the pressurised fuel system was replaced by one using wind-driven fuel pumps late in 1917,[29] although this was not initially adopted by American-built aircraft.[33] The otherwise inferior DH.9 brought the pilot and observer closer together by placing the fuel tank in the usual place, between the pilot and the engine.

Despite its success, numbers in service with the RFC actually started to decline from spring 1918, mainly due to a shortage of engines, and production switched to the DH.9, which turned out to be disappointing, being inferior to the DH.4 in most respects. It was left to the further developed DH.9A, with the American Liberty engine, to satisfactorily replace the DH.4.

When the Independent Air Force was set up in June 1918 to carry out strategic bombing of targets in Germany, the DH.4s of 55 Squadron formed part of it, being used for daylight attacks. 55 Squadron developed tactics of flying in wedge formations, bombing on the leader's command and with the massed defensive fire of the formation deterring attacks by enemy fighters. Despite heavy losses, 55 Squadron continued in operation, the only one of the day bombing squadrons in the Independent Force which did not have to temporarily stand down owing to aircrew losses.