Editing Sopwith Camel (section)

===Flight characteristics===
[[File:1917 Sopwith F.1 Camel.jpg|thumb|1917 Sopwith F.1 Camel at [[Steven F. Udvar-Hazy Center]]]]
[[File:E02659CobbyCamel1918.jpg|thumb|Pilot's view from the cockpit of a Camel, June 1918]]

Unlike the preceding Pup and [[Sopwith Triplane|Triplane]], the Camel was considered to be difficult to fly.<ref>Bruce 1965, pp. 5-6.</ref> With light and sensitive controls the type owed both its extreme manoeuvrability and its difficult handling to the close placement of the engine, pilot, guns and fuel tank (some 90% of the aircraft's weight) within the front {{convert|7|ft|m|spell=in}} of the aircraft, and to the strong [[gyroscope|gyroscopic]] effect of the rotating mass of the cylinders common to [[rotary engine]]s.<ref group=Note>As compared with [[radial engine]]s in which a conventional rotating crankshaft is driven by a fixed engine block.</ref>

Due to the torque of the rotary engine the Camel turned more slowly to the left, which resulted in a nose-up attitude, but the torque also resulted in being able to turn to the right quicker than other fighters,<ref name='Clark1973'>Clark 1973, p. 134.</ref> although that resulted in a tendency towards a nose-down attitude from the turn. Because of the faster turning capability to the right, some pilots preferred to change heading 90° to the left by turning 270° to the right.<ref name=Hoyland>{{cite book |last= Hoyland |first= Graham |title= Merlin: The Power behind the Spitfire, Mosquito and Lancaster |location= London |publisher= William Collins |date= 2021 |pages= 93 |isbn= 978-0-00-835930-0}}</ref>

Upon entering service, the Camel gained an unfortunate reputation with pilots,<ref name=":0">Jackson 2005, pp. 15–16.</ref> with inexperienced ones crashing on take-off when the full fuel load pushed the aircraft's [[centre of gravity]] beyond the rearmost safe limit.

When in level flight, the Camel was markedly tail-heavy. Unlike the Sopwith Triplane, the Camel lacked a variable incidence tailplane, so that the pilot had to apply constant forward pressure on the control stick to maintain a level attitude at low altitude. The aircraft could be rigged so that at higher altitudes it could be flown "hands off". A stall immediately resulted in a dangerous [[Spin (flight)|spin]].
RFC pilots used to joke that it offered the choice between "a [[Headstone|wooden cross]], the [[Emblems of the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement|Red Cross]], or a [[Victoria Cross]]".<ref>Leinburger [https://books.google.com/books?id=DKv-TahJStsC&q=%22wooden+cross%22 2008, p. 30.]</ref><ref name= Hoyland/>

A two-seat trainer version was later built to ease the transition process:<ref name="bruce 9" /> in his ''Recollections of an Airman'', Lieutenant Colonel [[L. A. Strange]], who served with the central flying school, wrote: "In spite of the care we took, Camels continually spun down out of control when {{sic|flew}} by pupils on their first solos. At length, with the assistance of Lieut Morgan, who managed our workshops, I took the main tank out of several Camels and replaced [them] with a smaller one, which enabled us to fit in dual control."  Such conversions, and dual instruction, went some way to alleviating the previously unacceptable casualties incurred during the critical type-specific solo training stage.<ref name=":0" />

Despite these issues, its agility in combat made the Camel one of the best-remembered [[Allies of World War I|Allied]] aircraft of the [[World War I|First World War]]. Aviation author Robert Jackson notes that: "in the hands of a novice it displayed vicious characteristics that could make it a killer; but under the firm touch of a skilled pilot, who knew how to turn its vices to his own advantage, it was one of the most superb fighting machines ever built".<ref name= "Jackson 2007 2"/>