Landships II

Thanks for that . I see the church was smaller and less ornate in those days .  By the way  does anyone know the exact time D17 walked down the street?
 Thanks 
  

D17 crossed the wire on the southern outskirts of Flers at about 0820. Lt. Phillips, an RFC observer with No. 3 Sqn. noted that the tank was at N31c 3.5 (near the church) at 0910. This message was logged at 4th Army HQ at 1003.

Here are a couple of views of the church in the spring of 1917.

As it was an RFC Squadron on an observation mission I think it is unlikely to be a pusher - sorry! Much more likely to be something like a BE2 of some form.

Found the piece below on Wiki:

"Sent to France on the outbreak of the First World War, the squadron initially operated in the reconnaissance role using a variety of aircraft types. Cecil Lewis, author of Sagittarius Rising flew Morane Parasols with 3 Squadron during the Somme offensive in the summer of 1916. Later, in October 1917, with the introduction of Sopwith Camels, a fighter/scout role was taken on, with 59 enemy aircraft being claimed by the end of the war. The squadron disbanded in October 1919.^[2][3]

There were nine Flying aces among its ranks, including Douglas Bell, George Riley, Will Hubbard, Adrian Franklyn, Hazel LeRoy Wallace, Lloyd Hamilton, David Hughes, and Neil Smuts.<sup>[4]"

This is odd as it looks like Sqdrn 3 was a fighter unit?</sup>

-- Edited by Brennan on Friday 12th of February 2010 02:05:18 PM

-- Edited by Brennan on Friday 12th of February 2010 02:05:46 PM

I didnt read it untill recently and actually enjoyed it, guess it takes all sorts....

Three things I remember from the book...

Morane parasols were lethal on take off..... dodgy tail plane or lack thereof...
canvas billowing on the upper surface of the wing in flight...
the rush of shells flying past the observing AC during the barrage, I think he mentions it was rare to get shot down by your own artillery.....

The Morane Parasol L sounds right to me...... note it has no airelons and uses wing warp this is clear in some of the pics, also the very visable prop in motion....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?gl=US&v=zUKAfIkmHOo


Cheers

-- Edited by Ironsides on Saturday 13th of February 2010 11:48:23 AM

Hi mickk
The clues are there already an aircraft from No3 squadron was observing(Rhomboid) and saw the tank in question near the church at 0910hrs this aircraft would most likely have been a Morane(Brennan) as this is what no3 predominantly had at this time....

Cheers

 

-- Edited by Ironsides on Tuesday 16th of February 2010 07:08:05 PM

Thank you for posting images of your painting! They look great & very skilfull!

Is it OK if I turn your images into screen savers for my PC, please?

Regards,

Brennan

-- Edited by Brennan on Wednesday 17th of February 2010 09:52:48 PM

 Thanks for the nice comments  Yes you can use for a screen saver if you like but they are only details, the painting isn't finished yet , got lots more to do

 Anybody know the serial number of D17, and if it had its name written on it anywhere?  Cant see it on the 2 photos I have of it.

 Thanks

You're right. But I have noticed a tiny white line just under the track adjuster.
By the way I thought that the Solomon pattern was only applied to a few tanks in England and was a sort of Impressionist landscape with a pink sunset  I think the crews in France made up their own . I noticed some of the A company tanks had quite a "Jazzy" pattern .Where as some of the other companys were more Cubist.
Wonder if each company had a kind of style?

-- Edited by mickk on Monday 22nd of February 2010 10:39:01 PM

-- Edited by mickk on Monday 22nd of February 2010 10:39:39 PM

Thanks very much . Would love to read the essay. Its a facinating subject, those early camouflage schemes. Have tried to copy them quite a few times, my latest attempt is nearly finished

-- Edited by mickk on Tuesday 23rd of February 2010 10:43:21 AM

-- Edited by mickk on Tuesday 23rd of February 2010 01:09:56 PM

Hi Vorticist,

welcome to the forum!
Your question about the overlap of Vorticism and camouflage patterns, well there's still some controversy on that. As is on the influence of Cubism too.
That there was an influence is generally not denied. There are some quotes from Picasso (the man seemed to have an opinion on almost everything, being quiet extravert and flamboyant as he was..), and quotes from his lady friend Gertrude Stein referring to camouflage patterns.
But as far as known mr Norman Wilkinson, "the dazzle painter", never mentioned any influence of Vorticist painting, though he referred to artists and painting in a more common way. Soon after the outbreak of the war, Vorticism came to an end, most of the artist were enlisted and some were killed in action.
Edward Wadsworth joined the camoufleurs later, and by that time he merely had to realise the patterns already designed in London. So his influence was restricted. His daughter's opinion on the matter is, that her father had no influence on Wilkinsons patterns, only on the adaptation of already existing designs for the liners Mauretania and Aquitania.
He joined the camoufleurs on request of Wilkinson himself, by the way.
It also worked the other way round: painters got influenced or inspired by seeing disruptive patterns.
Probably Wilkinson, a sailor himself, saw the Vorticist patterns more pragmatic, concerned about the losses at sea. After the war he made a few paintings of dazzle ships at sea, but these were not Vorticist paintings, it fitted in his traditional work as a (maritime) painter.

regards, Kieffer

Vorticist, if you send me an e-mail, I will attach the article to a reply. You may wish to check your library for a copy of Patrick Wright's "Tank - the Progress of a Monstrous War Machine", since the author discusses some of the issues which you have raised from the perspective of a social historian.

As regards Solomon J. Solomon, I think it would be fair to say that he was a rather old-fashioned artist, even by the standards of Edwardian times. His works show a pronounced classical style, and he made a comfortable living from his establishment patrons. I suspect, however, that his formal art training in the play of light and shadow gave him some insight into effective camouflage. Solomon wrote a book on camouflage after the war, but it does not discuss his work on the tanks at any length.

C.R.W. Nevinson, a Great War artist whose work shows marked Futurist influences, produced a painting of a camouflaged tank ("A Tank", 1917). I have been unable to find a published reproduction of this work, which is held in the IWM collection.

Congratulations on another very fine painting, Mick.  

mickk, much much better than pretty. A really impressive piece of work. I am particularly impressed by the work you do with light in the sky! It feels like I could step through & be there!