CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
Menu
Research dossier · General Reference

Airco DH.9

1917 bomber aircraft family

Cross-disciplinary reference desk with index cards, atlas, dictionary and catalogue
General referenceInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionJul 26, 2026
Entity authorityQ163488
Source-derived summary

The Airco DH.9 (from de Havilland 9) – also known after 1920 as the de Havilland DH.9 – is a British single-engined biplane bomber that was developed and deployed during the First World War.

The DH.9 was a development of Airco's earlier successful DH.4, with which it shared many components. These were mated to an all-new fuselage and used the Beardmore Halford Pullinger 230 hp (170 kW) engine, which promised increased performance. Anticipating its usefulness, the type was ordered in very large numbers for Britain's Royal Flying Corps (RFC).

Upon entering service, the DH.9's performance was found to be unsatisfactory. The BHP engine was unreliable and failed to provide the expected power, which gave the DH.9 less performance than the aircraft it had been meant to replace. The performance deficit was blamed for the heavy losses they suffered over the Western Front. The redesigned DH.9A was fitted with a more powerful and reliable American Liberty L-12 engine which rectified the shortcomings of the original DH.9 model.

Development

Origins

During June 1917, partially as a result of attacks by German bombers on London, the War Office issued its recommendation to almost double the size of the Royal Flying Corps (RFC) to a total of 200 squadrons. In early July 1917, the British Cabinet accepted the recommendation, with the intention that the majority of the new squadrons were to be equipped with bombers.

Editorial summary

The public source identifies “Airco DH.9” as 1917 bomber aircraft family. This brief keeps that definition visible, then builds a research path around Airco, bomber and aircraft.

Editorial reviewA dependable orientation record for establishing vocabulary, names and a first evidence trail. The current lead gives the account dated anchors—1920, 1917—that can be checked directly. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. Its value is orientation rather than verdict, with Airco, bomber and aircraft providing the first useful test.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

A short description can identify a subject without explaining its stakes. For “Airco DH.9”, the useful work is to connect “1917 bomber aircraft family” to the records capable of establishing context and consequence.

Evidence profile

The citation trail is more important than the brevity of the summary: it shows where individual claims can be examined in context. The source revision retrieved here is dated Jul 26, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q163488. The Library of Congress control number is sh2010007486. 1 of 1 selected statements include explicit references; 0 carry qualifiers and 0 use preferred rank. The first chronological checks are 1920 and 1917.

Critical limits

The absence of detail may reflect summary conventions rather than a lack of surviving documentation. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.

Best used for
  • Subject orientation
  • Search vocabulary
  • Locating named sources
Verify next

The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “Airco DH.9”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Airco DH.9 primary sources, Airco DH.9 archive and Airco research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Airco DH.9”?
  2. What terminology or title could unlock a more precise catalogue search?
  3. Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from Airco DH.9” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.