Royal Aircraft Factory BE.2c***FINISHED***

[PeterB]

Probably pushing my luck a bit, but I have realised that the ancient tin of Precision "Doped Natural Fabric" that I like is on its last legs and needs using before it dries out. One of the gaps in my WWI collection for many years is the BE.2c, and so when Airfix announced one in 2016 I pre-ordered it and here it is.

 

 

I realised from the box art that at one of the versions provided was a single seat anti Zeppelin fighter with a Lewis gun, but did not realise that the second version included was also a single seater, this time with Le Prieur rockets. Both of these are entirely valid as the BE.2 and later BE.12 were widely used by home defence squadrons against airships with considerable success initially, but I wanted one of the original recce and artillery spotting versions from mid 1915 to mid 1916 which Airfix eventually released in the second boxing together with a rather gaudily decorated trainer, so I will be making one or two changes to the build. I made a start on it once it arrived, and got the fuselage together, and then for some reason, possibly a hospital visit for an operation that went a bit wrong, put it back in the box and forgot about it until now, when I went into my stash for subjects for this GB.

 

Given the way Airfix have engineered the cabane struts and the fact that they provide alignment jigs for the interplane struts, if I don't make a mess of it, the top wing should go on fairly quickly, but as ever time will tell.🤞

 

Pete

 

 

Edited January 23 by PeterB

[81-er]

Good luck

 

James

[PeterB]

So far so good - the engineering and fit is good so I managed to get the lower wing and tail surfaces on pretty quickly together with the front cabane strut, and after a small clean up I put the first coat of "linen" paint on.

 

 

The design of the underside is interesting-

 

Note the exposed wing spars and the intentional gap at the wing root.

 

In around 1878 the British Army decided to start using manned observation balloons after several years of private experimenting by some officers, and set up a balloon section of the Royal Engineers at Woolwich Arsenal. In late 1904 it had outgrown the premises so a move was made to a new site at Farnborough to both make balloons and train their crews. Over the next few years experiments also began with S.F Cody's man carrying kites, and it was perhaps inevitable that the “Balloon School/Factory” would end up also building aircraft for the Army and later the Royal Flying Corps. In April 1911 it was renamed “His Majesty's Aircraft Factory” more commonly called the Royal Aircraft Factory after 1912, and under the Superintendent Mervyn O'Gorman, a small group of young designers including the likes of Geoffrey De Havilland and Henry Folland proceeded to develop a variety of experimental types. The “Factory” would also become involved in the design of aircraft engines.

 

The nomenclature used on Factory designs was a little unusual. Initially there were 3 groups-

 

S.E. (Santos Experimental) named after Santos-Dumont which had canards in front of the wings.

B.E. (Bleriot Experimental) named after Bleriot which were of the tractor layout.

F.E. (Farman Experimental) which were pushers.

 

Later a couple more were added-

 

T.E (Tatin Experimental) which were monoplanes with a pusher propeller behind the tail.

R.E. (Reconnaissance Experimental) tractor biplanes for reconnaissance purposes.

 

Following the fatal crash of the first and only “Santos Canard” S.E.1 in 1911, no more aircraft of this type were made and S.E. was changed to mean Scout Experimental as in Folland's S.E.5.

 

Pre-war budgets were tight and so once the small number of French types that were initially bought for testing had been finished with, O'Gorman resorted to “creative accounting” by listing new in-house builds as being “reconstructions”, and so De Havilland's first general purpose tractor biplane in 1911, known as the B.E.1 was supposedly a reconstructed Voisin! Over the next few months more versions were built to test various modifications, known as the B.E.2, 3, 4, 5, and 6, these being aircraft tail numbers, but when the finalised version was accepted for production after the Larkhill trials in 1912, it was given the type name B.E.2a. It was not initially intended that the Factory would actually build production aircraft so an order for the first 4 was placed with the British and Colonial Aeroplane Company, other manufacturers such as Vickers, Handley Page, Armstrong Whitworth and the Coventry Ordnance Works and numerous others being added later. The B.E.2a initially was a 2 bay biplane with unequal span wings though later production versions had equal span wings. It had no wing stagger and used wing warping, and was powered by a 70HP air cooled Renault in-line engine carried by side frames but otherwise open. It was a two seater with the observer in front and was unarmed. The rudder was unsupported which would prove slightly problematic later apparently. The performance was pretty good for the time, with a top speed of 70 mph low down and 65 mph at 6500 ft, and a ceiling of 10000 ft.

 

When war broke out, 2 of the first RFC squadrons to arrive in France had 23 B.E 2a's between them and many more followed, together with the slightly modified B.E.2b, both of which gave satisfactory service it seems. These were soon joined by the revised B.E.2c which had been under development and testing in 1914 and the first true production version arrived on January 25th 1915.

 

Pete

Edited January 24 by PeterB

[JOCKNEY]

Looks terrific Pete

Any idea why the underside of the lower wing also has the holes for the interning strutts ?

Beso of luck

Cheers Pat 

[PeterB]

8 minutes ago, JOCKNEY said:

Looks terrific Pete

Any idea why the underside of the lower wing also has the holes for the interning strutts ?

Beso of luck

Cheers Pat 

Thanks Pat,

 

Actually they are holes for the underwing landing skids!😄

 

Pete

Edited January 24 by PeterB

[Paul Thompson]

TBH, you can do without the kit supplied jigs so long as you ensure there's no trace of mould seam or flash on the cabane strut inserts and the wing bit they mate with. Just glue them into the top wing and spring the interplane stuts in afterwards, letting the cabane joints cure first with the model on a piece of graph paper so you can see any misalignment. Works for me, anyway..........  As far as I remember, anyway. I built it when first released, then got carried away with a couple of Formaplane kits of same, with their conversion pack to allow making other BE variants, and after 3 months put the Formaplane parts back in a box while I considered if I really wanted to spend my life this way.

 

Paul.

[PeterB]

5 hours ago, Paul Thompson said:

TBH, you can do without the kit supplied jigs so long as you ensure there's no trace of mould seam or flash on the cabane strut inserts and the wing bit they mate with. Just glue them into the top wing and spring the interplane stuts in afterwards, letting the cabane joints cure first with the model on a piece of graph paper so you can see any misalignment. Works for me, anyway..........  As far as I remember, anyway. I built it when first released, then got carried away with a couple of Formaplane kits of same, with their conversion pack to allow making other BE variants, and after 3 months put the Formaplane parts back in a box while I considered if I really wanted to spend my life this way.

 

Paul.

Hi Paul,

 

I actually considered buying the Formaplane kit back in around 1990 but once I finally decided to buy it I found it was not longer available  - probably as well as the other vac-forms I bought at the same time never got built and were donated to Pat. Your post confirms something I thought I remembered - that there was a kit that included options for versions other than the BE.2c - did it include the BE.12 or is that my wonky memory? I must have been serious about buying the Formaplane kit as I have now remembered I bought Aeroclub engine and exhaust sets for both the BE.2c and BE.12 which I still have if you ever decide to build yours!

 

Pete

 

 

Edited January 25 by PeterB

[Paul Thompson]

10 hours ago, PeterB said:

Hi Paul,

 

I actually considered buying the Formaplane kit back in around 1990 but once I finally decided to buy it I found it was not longer available  - probably as well as the other vac-forms I bought at the same time never got built and were donated to Pat. Your post confirms something I thought I remembered - that there was a kit that included options for versions other than the BE.2c - did it include the BE.12 or is that my wonky memory? I must have been serious about buying the Formaplane kit as I have now remembered I bought Aeroclub engine and exhaust sets for both the BE.2c and BE.12 which I still have if you ever decide to build yours!

 

Pete

 

 

Clearing up storm damage right now (Scotland, y'know) but I'll check what's in the Formaplane offerings later today. Might not take long, the banging noise from the roof has no visible outside cause so may (I hope) just be wind blowing stuff around in the eaves. I guess we'll find out come the next heavy rain..............

 

Paul.

 

[Paul Thompson]

Pete,

    Thanks for the offer, but I'm fairly replete with Aeroclub engines. And if you persevere I'm sure you can find the Formaplane kit and will then need them yourself. I've seen quite a few at Telford over the last few years, there were a couple last time I went to Perth, and on Ebay (UK, to keep postage reasonable) they come up monthly. I've never paid more than a fiver for one. The conversion pack is rarer but I've seen a few.

 

    One of the reasons I paused (I refuse to say I gave up) is that there's an engraved line or two on the fuselage noticeably in the wrong place or heading off at the wrong angle, which need filling. An artefact of using the plans then current. The parts themselves are well formed and although the smaller details by their nature are unuseable, they're good as templates (struts, and the like). The instructions in both packs are also quite comprehensive, and the conversion set leaves no doubt what needs changing for a given version. You'll still need a Windsock Datafile to get far though. Another reason I put it on hold is that I got hold of and cleaned up the CMR resin, then also a Veeday kit, and I think I have the Meikraft kit somewhere (Yay! Having scouted around since writing this missive, I found it).. The new plan is to build them all together, along with another Airfix kit, mixing and matching so I get all variants done. Do-able, but I need everything currently on the desk finished with.

 

    Back to the question you actually wanted answering, the set is called Conversion Set 1a, BE2-12 variants. With this set and a BE2c kit you can make one of the following - an early BE2D, BE2D, BE2E, BE2F, BE12 and BE12A. So, wings, fuselage plug ins, and a whole lot of templates, with rod and strut material. Decals you'll have to supply, which isn't hard since national markings and serials are mostly all they carried. If you get really lucky, the base kit you find may have an airscrew, wheels, engine, and or a Lewis bunged in.

 

    I hope that helps.I can scan the instruction sheets if you like.

 

Paul.

[PeterB]

Thanks Paul,

 

I have the Windsock book, but I doubt I will ever have the patience to build a vac form biplane these days, even if my ageing hands and eyes would be up to it. I see what you mean about the struts on the Airfix kit. Not sure which is worse - sprue attachments in the middle which need great care in getting them off and cleaning them up without breaking them, or ones like in the kit where they are attached at the ends and require a magnifying visor to clean up so they will fit!

 

Pete

[PeterB]

Fuselage complete and painted, as is the engine section which is just a push fit at the moment - the instructions say to add it after the top wing is on which will make filling and cleaning up the joint a possible pain, but the small pins at the upper rear of the exhausts are meant to touch the wing leading edge I think so probably would interfere with the wing being fitted.

 

 

The object on the side of the fuselage below the pilot's cockpit is a Thornton-Pickard camera which the pilot had to operate which would involve changing the big glass plates after each shot - far from ideal.

 

The fit of the engine parts was not bad but I thought the instructions were a bit vague in terms of parts A17 and B08.

 

 

The way the prop fits is a little strange as you will see later.

 

So, on with the story -

 

In 1913-14 the Royal Aircraft Factory carried out a series of tests aimed at creating an aircraft with inherent stability, this being considered an important attribute for reconnaissance missions, particularly when there was only a single crew member, with the pilot being able to leave the aircraft to “fly itself” whilst making observations or taking photos. These were mainly the work of one of the Factory staff, Edward Busk, and resulted in the BE.2c having staggered equal span wings and a large horizontal tailplane. Ailerons were fitted to both wings and a triangular fixed vertical tail surface was added though on later production machines this was replaced a somewhat larger with one with a curved top profile. During a test flight one pilot reported not touching the controls over a distance of 40 miles whilst he wrote a record of the flight on a notepad. This stability made the plane easy to fly and excellent for its designed purpose as long as there was no effective enemy opposition as events were to prove later.

 

The early production versions retained the wheel and skid type undercarriage of the BE.2a/b and the Renault engine, but later a revised skidless undercarriage was fitted and the new RAF 1a air cooled V8 engine was substituted – this being an improved version of the Renault with slightly larger cylinders given a couple of extra HP. The large vertical exhaust pipes incorporated silencers which were reported to be effective as the plane was said to be very quiet compared with many others of the period. Until the arrival of the Fokker Eindekker with a working synchronised forward firing gun in mid 1915, the various B.E's of the RFC went about their job with little to fear other than flak and the odd breakdown.

 

Pete

Edited January 25 by PeterB

[PeterB]

The top wing went on pretty easily thanks to the positive location of the cabane struts and my usual Meccano supporting jig.

 

 

The wings are very thin and flexible so I had to add a little weight to press the lower ends of the struts into their locations on the lower wing. Once dry I strengthened the joints with thin CA and added the nose section.

 

 

I will leave that to set overnight before starting on the rigging.

 

The story continues-

 

At the end of June 1915 the first of the Fokker E.I monoplanes appeared at the front. Not a particularly impressive plane, with a speed of only just over 80 mph and manoeuvrability limited a little by the use of wing warping, it did have a forward firing Spandau mg synchronised to fire through the prop arc. Issued in small numbers to the best pilots it soon began to take a toll on the allied recce planes, including the B.E.2c which was unarmed and could neither outrun the Fokker as it was 10 mph slower, nor manoeuvre out of the way due to the inherent stability. As the number of Eindekkers increased and the slightly faster E.III arrived, the second half of 1915 became increasingly dangerous for the crews of the B.E. who acquired the nickname “Fokker Fodder” during what became known as the “Fokker Scourge”.

 

Although pilots sometimes carried the odd pistol, rifle or carbine , no consideration had been given apparently to officially arming the B.E., perhaps in part due to the position of the observer in front surrounded by struts and rigging, but maybe also due to the limited lifting capacity of the plane. Apparently it could carry up to about 150lb of bombs – a bit more if the observer was left at home, but then radios began to be fitted. These were large items by modern standards and fitting them inside the fuselage was not easy – I have seen photos of planes with the radio fitted on a shelf on the outside of the fuselage alongside the observer's cockpit. Perhaps more relevantly they were heavy enough to cause performance problems and left little margin for the weight of a gun, mounting and ammo. Various efforts were made in the field with a variety of pillar type mountings for a Lewis gun in front or at the rear of the front cockpit but the field of fire was very restricted. A slightly better alternative was a sort of “trapeze” mounting at the rear of the cockpit allowing the gunner to fire over the pilot's head upwards to the rear and side, but again it was not very effective. Some machines also had Lewis guns mounted on an inner wing strut angled to fire forwards just outside the prop arc, with the breech alongside the pilot so he could change drums. In spite of all this losses continued to mount. With hindsight the obvious solution would have been to put the observer in the rear seat where he could have had a proper gun mounting, but sources say this was not possible as it would cause problems with the centre of gravity, but the Belgians seem to have managed it well enough with some they acquired!

 

However, the balance swung back in favour of the allies in the first half of 1916 when aircraft such as the Nieuport 11, Airco DH.2 and FE.2b arrived at the front and to a large extent nullified the Fokker threat – indeed I have seen reports that during that period losses of B.E's fell to the point where they were the lowest of any major type the RFC operated for a while. Then the balance began to change again in the second half of the year, firstly with the introduction by the Germans of the Halberstadt D.II and then the arrival of the Albatros D.I. In the meantime the Factory kept on modifying the design to introduce the B.E.2d with duals controls and more fuel and then the B.E.2e which had new single bay wings. Much was expected of this latter design but although a little faster and a bit more manoeuvrable it was a disappointment, in spite of which around 1300 were built from new, and many B.E.2c and d were given the “e” type wing as the B.E.2f and g. The final attempt at a solution was the B.E.12 series which was a single seater with a forward firing Vickers mg and was powered by the 140HP R.A.F.4a 12 cylinder engine, giving it a speed of around 100 mph. Entering service in mid 1916, about 300 B.E.12 and another 100 or so modified B.E.12a were built. Including around 800 B.E.2c, about 3500 aircraft of the B.E type were built.

 

Pete

Edited January 26 by PeterB

[PeterB]

With the exception of the flying wire running from the top of the front inboard strut to the cowling under the engine on both sides, the wings are rigged.

 

 

I will leave that to dry and tomorrow make a start on the decs as it will be easier to handle before I add the undercarriage - in theory.

 

So, the final part of the B.E. story-

 

Historically the B.E.2c has a bad reputation which is perhaps not entirely deserved as it was actually a pretty good plane for its time. What is certainly questionable is the continued “mass” production of the B.E type long after it was past its “sell by date” though this may be at least in part due to the delayed arrival of the intended replacements in the form of the R.E.8 and the A-W F.K.8. Certainly it caused a bit of a furore at the time, with one MP saying in the House of Commons in June 1916 that sending out RAF crews in planes of the B.E. type was tantamount to murder and articles by the likes of C.G. Grey, editor of the “Aeroplane” magazine who disliked both the Factory and O'Gorman, did not help. An official judicial enquiry exonerated the Royal Aircraft Factory of any failure, but O'Gorman was replaced as Superintendent in a “sideways promotion” and the Factory's reputation suffered. After withdrawal from front line service the B.E.'s mostly became trainers, but some found a new lease of life as single seat Home Defence fighters where their stability made them useful as night fighters with several Zeppelin kills to their credit. When the Gotha raids started they still made up the majority of the force but their lack of speed meant that they were replaced before too long.

 

For all its perceived failings it was certainly a significant type and I will be happy to have one in my collection.

 

Pete

[The Spadgent]

Fantastic work Pete and the history behind this lovely aircraft has been a pleasure to read. I’m falling in love with my one all over again .  Looking forward to your decals. 
 

Johnny

[PeterB]

Nearly done.

 

 

The undercarriage was one of the best engineered I have done. I have tried to copy the markings of one of the options Airfix provide in their later boxing, - 1744 with 12 Squadron at Marieux in France in September 1915. To be strictly correct the serial should have white outlines to the numbers on the red and blue stripes of the fin flash but that was beyond my decal printing skills. Airfix also show the plane with what I call "hybrid" national markings. Initially the RFC went to war with Union Flags on their planes, but by the end of 1914 roundels were supposed to replace them on the wings, and by June 1915 they were also added to the fuselage, but Airfix show small flags on the tail and under the wings as well as the flash/roundels. I could have printed some on white decal paper but getting rid of the white outlines would have been a pain so I did not bother.

 

Anyway, I just have to add the underwing roundels and prop, and then the windscreens but I will leave the latter until I have sprayed the model with varnish.

 

Pete

 

[81-er]

She's looking very nice, Pete

 

James

[Smudge]

I have just acquired an Airfix BE.2c, and was looking around to see what other modellers had done with their's. I thoroughly enjoyed reading this, with the additional history on the type. 

The camera is a nice addition. Did you make that yourself?

Also, if I may. Your thoughts on the Pegasus kits BE.2e? I'd like to model this version. Would it be best to just use the Pegasus wings on the Airfix kit?

Cheers.

[Roberto]

Really nice!

[PeterB]

2 hours ago, Smudge said:

I have just acquired an Airfix BE.2c, and was looking around to see what other modellers had done with their's. I thoroughly enjoyed reading this, with the additional history on the type. 

The camera is a nice addition. Did you make that yourself?

Also, if I may. Your thoughts on the Pegasus kits BE.2e? I'd like to model this version. Would it be best to just use the Pegasus wings on the Airfix kit?

Cheers.

Hi Smudge,

 

The camera came with the kit. As to the Pegasus B.E.2e, I had not realised that they had issued such a kit and certainly have never built it, but I did build their Vickers F.B.5 "Gunbus" and Halberstadt D.II. I am not sure about some of their earlier releases, but the pair I did date back to 1992 as apparently does the B.E. and they were rather nice, although being limited run the are a bit tricky, particularly the DIY struts. As you can see from the plan below you will need to change both the wings and the horizontal tail surfaces, and use the late model larger fixed vertical tail that should be included in the Airfix kit.

 

 

As far as I can tell the rest of the fuselage was identical to the B.E.2c, so you could use the Airfix one, though the Pegasus one may be OK and could make adding the wings easier. It should be possible so good luck.

 

Pete

Edited February 5 by PeterB

[Paul Thompson]

The Be2e was one of their later kits, and typically so. Fiddly, but very good if you can do low pressure limited run. Somehow combining thick, soft plastic with sharp, crisp detail. It takes much more effort to get it done than the Airfix kit, but it's worth it if you want one. Cleanup is the hardest thing, but thinning the cockpit sides and replacing the floor and bulkheads also needed. The Eduard PE set for the Airfix kit would be handy for fitting out the interior. This is what you get:

 

 

 

 

 

 

I hopt that helps.

 

Paul.

[Smudge]

7 hours ago, PeterB said:

The camera came with the kit.

 

Ah, thank you. I missed that one 

 

Sorry to put you on the spot regarding the Pegasus kit. Thank you for the detailed reply and drawing, very kind and much appreciated.

 

Cheers.

[Smudge]

6 hours ago, Paul Thompson said:

 The Eduard PE set for the Airfix kit would be handy for fitting out the interior. This is what you get:

 

Paul, thank you for the picture of the parts etc. It does look quite nice (considering). However, I think I will probably go with a conversion of the Airfix kit, using the relevant Pegasus bits.

 

The point about the Eduard set is interesting. I'll check it out. I have a nice old decal sheet from Blue Rider for the BE.2e, hence my interest (among other reasons).

 

Cheers.

[JOCKNEY]

Looks the business Pete, congratulations mate 

 

Cheers Pat 

[AdrianMF]

Nice! It is a super little kit (weird propeller mounting aside).

 

Regards,

Adrian

[PeterB]

19 hours ago, AdrianMF said:

Nice! It is a super little kit (weird propeller mounting aside).

 

Regards,

Adrian

Thanks Adrian,

 

Yes the way Airfix suggest you add the prop complete with the "casing" is a bit strange, and I decided to do it in a more "normal" fashion, gluing the casing on to the front of the engine block first then adding the prop. Otherwise, except for what I considered a little vagueness about the positioning of the engine parts, it is well engineered and a joy to build.

 

Pete