Warbirds Over the Beach Airshow 3 (Sopwith 1 1/2 Strutter)

In early October I spent the weekend in Virginia Beach at the “Warbirds Over the Beach” airshow. This third post on the air show includes some more of the pictures I took, and a few other more “professional” pictures.


This is a flying model of the Sopwith 1 1/2 Strutter. I have already posted this picture. The Sopwith 1 1/2 stutter did its first flight in December 1915 and was introduced to combat in April 1916. It was the first British aircraft to enter service with a forward firing synchronized machine gun that fired through the propeller. It was also the first airplane to have air brakes (the Wikipedia article on air brakes only started discussing their history in 1931). It had a 130 horsepower French built Clerget 9B 9-cylinder air-cooled rotary piston engine. I gather 1,280 were built in England and 4,500 were license-built in France by 11 different companies. 

This picture below taken by a friend of the same plane at the same time. Not sure why his picture looks brighter and better than mine. We were both using Apple I-phones. But then, I am really not that patient enough to be a good photographer. 

They also had one in the museum  

This is the observers compartment. Note the control stick. I gather this is a field improvisation, but was done during the Great War.

This is link is worth looking at, showing how one is constructed, fully documented in pictures: https://www.kipaero.com/aero-documentation/sopwith-construction/

This is their picture of the air brake:

Picture from KipAero

A useful discussion of Sopwith 1 1/2 Strutter airbrakes: http://www.theaerodrome.com/forum/archive/index.php/t-33348.html

And here is a picture of the plane during the Great War. Note the machinegun mount.

Vickers-build Sopwith 1-1/2 Strutter A8747 of the 43 Squadron RFC. Source: https://www.pinterest.co.uk/pin/416020084322288272/
Share this:
Christopher A. Lawrence
Christopher A. Lawrence

Christopher A. Lawrence is a professional historian and military analyst. He is the Executive Director and President of The Dupuy Institute, an organization dedicated to scholarly research and objective analysis of historical data related to armed conflict and the resolution of armed conflict. The Dupuy Institute provides independent, historically-based analyses of lessons learned from modern military experience.

Mr. Lawrence was the program manager for the Ardennes Campaign Simulation Data Base, the Kursk Data Base, the Modern Insurgency Spread Sheets and for a number of other smaller combat data bases. He has participated in casualty estimation studies (including estimates for Bosnia and Iraq) and studies of air campaign modeling, enemy prisoner of war capture rates, medium weight armor, urban warfare, situational awareness, counterinsurgency and other subjects for the U.S. Army, the Defense Department, the Joint Staff and the U.S. Air Force. He has also directed a number of studies related to the military impact of banning antipersonnel mines for the Joint Staff, Los Alamos National Laboratories and the Vietnam Veterans of American Foundation.

His published works include papers and monographs for the Congressional Office of Technology Assessment and the Vietnam Veterans of American Foundation, in addition to over 40 articles written for limited-distribution newsletters and over 60 analytical reports prepared for the Defense Department. He is the author of Kursk: The Battle of Prokhorovka (Aberdeen Books, Sheridan, CO., 2015), America’s Modern Wars: Understanding Iraq, Afghanistan and Vietnam (Casemate Publishers, Philadelphia & Oxford, 2015), War by Numbers: Understanding Conventional Combat (Potomac Books, Lincoln, NE., 2017) and The Battle of Prokhorovka (Stackpole Books, Guilford, CT., 2019)

Mr. Lawrence lives in northern Virginia, near Washington, D.C., with his wife and son.

Articles: 1455

3 Comments

  1. What is the purpose of the control stick in the observer’s compartment? Could the observer take over as pilot if required, e.g. if the pilot was killed?

    • Don’t know for certain, but I assume so. It could have also been used by the observer when doing observations. Apparently it was a field modification that was sometimes done. I don’t know if there was some type of override mechanism tied to one of the sticks, but I assume not.

      There is reason I took the picture though. Perhaps a Sopwith 1 1/2 Strutter expert is following this blog.

  2. “Not sure why his picture looks brighter and better than mine. We were both using Apple I-phones. But then, I am really not that patient enough to be a good photographer.”

    Chris, I suspect that he had a better angle (akin to that affectation of “deflection” in the rules for Richthofen’s War : – ) relative to the sun whereas your angle had much more of the plane’s visible surface shaded from the sun. He had a better angle for a camera shot while you had a better angle for a machinegun shot (and for a collision ) – :

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *