Historical precedent for reduced fuel load?

[Bletchley 8]

Not waterproof Olham - if you read the Aerodrome thread you will find knowledgeable people who disagree with it. But it fits the evidence, I think, and the experts cited above include these figures in their books. If you want to look at British_eh's SIA-RSS settings for bullet-load you will find the percentage for each aircraft that you need to set in-game (for most German 2-gun scouts it is 50% up to 1918, but the Fokker E.IV is an exception at 100%).

 

Bletchley

[Olham 164]

Thank you, Bletchley.

Oh yeah - the SIA-RSS stuff is something I still need to explore.

It may need a better promotion and a good name?

[Hasse Wind 46]

That's definitely interesting information. 500 rounds should be enough ammo for most situations, and it makes the aircraft lighter.

[Olham 164]

Good point!

[JFM 18]

I'll add that after going through MvR's combat reports and comparing them with RFC combat reports and a/c performance, etc., clearly he was going up with full tanks.

 

Also, many of MvR's combat reports indicate he fired in excess of 500 rounds. One well known example is when he fought Hawker 23 November 1916. His combat report indicated he fired 900 rounds flying an Albatros D.II.

[Olham 164]

So, it would indicate, that the Albatros D.II in 1916 already went up with 1000 rounds?

[Guest British_eh]

Hi there Olham,

 

What a great idea, a new name and promotion for the SIA- RSS ( Survival In the Air - Realistic Survival Standard) It was initially meant to be somewhat compared to DiD and thus an acronym and has remained unpromoted except by myself and Bletchley. I should like to hereby appoint Herr von Olham as the propagandist for our cause! Found in the Over Flanders Fields Subforum -OFF - Survival In the Air Series We are currently working on an all new approach and thus your timing is impecable. I shall send the Beta to you immediately Sehr geehrter Herr!.

 

Cheers,

 

British_eh

 

PS The Gun Loadout for all aircraft OFF, can be found at the above site. Google Translate has it as "my leader" :(

Edited February 24, 2011 by British_eh

[Olham 164]

Oh Gott! Never, please never call me "Mein Führer"!

If ever Germany would choose a Führer again, I would steal a little sailing boat and sail across the North Sea

to Widowmaker, to link up with him in the fight against that "brown sauce" or should I say "squirts in brown shirts"?

But I think I can be sure Germans have had enough of one of that kind.

 

As for the promotion: I feel honoured, but will be on another leave until next weekend.

And then, before I could think of any promotion, I will have to read through all that stuff first.

I am sure you guys have compiled some dense guides and historical information.

A possible way to promote the idea would be, to ask the whole forum for a better name.

(That would hopefully make many more people read it).

When I'm back, I will gladly tell you my thoughts about that, and maybe make suggestions.

I am already sure after your and Bletchley's recent comments and statements, that it would be

a waste, if your SIA-RSS wasn't noticed much more. I hope I will be able to help you there.

Edited February 23, 2011 by Olham

[Bletchley 8]

"Also, many of MvR's combat reports indicate he fired in excess of 500 rounds. One well known example is when he fought Hawker 23 November 1916. His combat report indicated he fired 900 rounds flying an Albatros D.II."

 

You may be right Jim, although I would like to see consistent evidence from several pilots' combat reports to be convinced that 1000 rounds was the norm in this period, and not just a personal variation on the part of MvR. It is possible that MvR is the exception here, as he certainly had the personal clout to customise many features of his own aircraft (not just the colour, but the trigger leavers of his guns as well), and he may have felt that the advantage of a further 500 rounds would sometimes (allways?) outweight the disadvantages in aircraft performance of adding 27lb to 28lb pounds of extra weight forward of the centre of gravity.

 

Harry Woodman (Woodman, Harry. Early aircraft armament: the aeroplane and the gun up to 1918. Arms & Armour, 1989. ISBN: 0853689903) states in reference to the LMG 08/15 "The gun now weighed only 13 kg... and this was the weapon, in twin-mounted form, that armed the Albatros D.I which appeared over the Front in September 1916...the ammunition belts normally carried 250 although more rounds could be accommodated. p.136-137". The ammunition box was apparently of a standard size, divided into two compartments, each capable of holding up to 600 rounds... so it would have been possible to fill it with either 2 x 250 round fabric Parabellum belts or 2 x 500 round fabric Parabellum belts (the 550 round Maxim belt does not appear to have been used on aircraft).

 

I have only seen extracts from selected combat reports of MvR here: http://www.oocities.com/taipan1961/Richthofen.htm

None of these cite a figure higher than 500 rounds being fired, although some hint or suggest that there might have been more. It cites 200 rounds fired on 30th September 1916; 300 rounds on 10th October 1916; 200 rounds on 25th October 1916 (and 500 rounds by another pilot, possibly with a single gun Halberstadt, ending with a gun jam); 150 rounds on 23rd January 1917; 150 rounds on 1st February 1917 (with single gun Halberstadt); "some several hundred shots" on 14th February 1917, and "one hundred shots" later in the day; "some 500 shots" on 4th March 1917, although there is a suggestion that he fired earlier as well; 400+ rounds later in the same day. If you have the full reports to hand, it would be useful if you could quote from those examples where MvR fired more than 500 rounds - in particular the encounter between MvR and Hawker, as the source linked to above contains no details of rounds fired in this combat.

 

Bletchley

[Olham 164]

Well, I hope you "historical-facts-guys" will find more detail about this and other questions.

It is funny, how some bits of history are getting lost, cause no one documented them good enough.

I had the same feeling about the use of face masks - I eventually found film footage in a Canadian archive,

showing a pilot (I think it was Goering) taking such a face amsk off.

These leather masks must have been used a lot in cold weather, but you hardly ever see them in photographs,

because the pilots would have taken them of for the picture to be taken.

 

But - historically correct or not - using 500 rounds only on the Albatros would certainly decrease the number

of shot down aircraft, and so it would add some more realism to OFF flying.

 

PS: I don't know about the French and the British, but from what I have read from Udet and Buckler, I gained

the impression, that the pilots, together with their Werkmeister and his mechanics, did the modifications on

their aircraft without asking much. So, Richthofen for example had let his mechanics attach those stiffening

steel rods at the lower ends of the V-struts of his Albatros D.III, long before this was made standard by

Albatros Flugzeugwerke.

Edited February 24, 2011 by Olham

[MJmorrow 0]

In the book Camel- King of Combat, there is a passeage, written by Ronald Sykes, and Sykes mentions that he used 28 Imperial gallons of fuel, in his Camel, at take off. 24 gallons in the main tank and four gallons in the reserve tank. I hope that this is helpful.

Edited February 24, 2011 by MJmorrow

[Guest British_eh]

Hi there,

 

I believe that the Camel was a bit thirsty and during the 1918 period, flying with what appears to be 1000 rounds of Amo, per historical research, the extra fuel was needed. The Reserve tank was certainly depended on as if there was a fuel line issue because of damage, this was their ticket home. In Yeates there are several examples of this, and having to hand pump the fuel through as it wasn't gravity feed.

 

Cheers,

 

British_eh

 

 

[cptroyce 0]

About nine or ten years ago, I did an analysis of all of MvR's combat reports.

If I remember correctly the average rounds fired for all his kills was well below 500 or more rounds. More in the 200 round range. I wish I could find the spread sheet, but I believe it "gone with the internet wind".

 

Royce

[JFM 18]

Hello,

 

This is long; I apologize.

 

So, Richthofen for example had let his mechanics attach those stiffening steel rods at the lower ends of the V-struts of his Albatros D.III, long before this was made standard by Albatros Flugzeugwerke.

 

I have many, many photos of Richthofen's airplanes. Not one of them has steel rods attached to the V struts, a la the D.Va.

 

"Also, many of MvR's combat reports indicate he fired in excess of 500 rounds. One well known example is when he fought Hawker 23 November 1916. His combat report indicated he fired 900 rounds flying an Albatros D.II."

You may be right Jim, although I would like to see consistent evidence from several pilots' combat reports to be convinced that 1000 rounds was the norm in this period, and not just a personal variation on the part of MvR.

 

Regarding MvR, frankly, it’s not that I may be right, I am right. Similar to what you said, I would like to see consistent evidence from several pilots’ combat reports to be convinced that 1000 rounds was not the norm in this period. I’m not challenging you, personally; let’s research it because as I see it, it’s a lot of speculation at this point.

 

He certainly had the personal clout to customise many features of his own aircraft (not just the colour, but the trigger leavers of his guns as well)

 

MvR didn’t have any personal clout in autumn 1916 when he shot down Hawker with 900 rounds; he was another pilot in Jasta 2. A rising star, indeed, but a star not yet. He wasn’t the Staffelführer, his plane wasn’t red (my research indicates it he was still within the “earth colors” phase of markings and photographs bear this out), and when 23 November dawned he had less victories than Kirmaier, who had been killed the day before. We all know what MvR eventually became but this must kept in perspective that it all happens after his Hawker fight. Thus, what personal clout would MvR have had in November 1916 above others, such as the higher scoring Jasta 2 Staffelführer Kirmaier (Boelcke’s replacement, no less), and why? And when would have the said “clout” kick in? After his first victory? Second? Third?

 

Honestly, I am not familiar with the “customized trigger leavers,” as I’ve never seen an indication of such in any of MvR’s reports, notes, letters, etc. Same goes for those of Jasta 11 and JGI. What was the customization and what is the source that reports this customization?

 

he may have felt that the advantage of a further 500 rounds would sometimes (allways?) outweight the disadvantages in aircraft performance of adding 27lb to 28lb pounds of extra weight forward of the centre of gravity.

 

“May have” = speculation. Nothing wrong with speculation; let’s just be clear about it. Regarding performance, the CG impact would depend on the moments of the ammunition bins, which I don’t know precisely. I’ll speculate and ask how significant would any disadvantages be? The Albatros DV (Mercedes D.IIIa, not the 160hp DIII, granted, but used here for illustrative purposes) fuel consumption was ca. 14 gallons per hour. Fuel weighs ca. 6 lbs per gallon. To burn off 28 lbs of fuel to compensate for this “extra” bullet weight would take a bit more than twenty minutes—i.e., during the full throttle climb to altitude. These performance figures are supplied by the factory and attained by a test pilot under optimum conditions; real engines in the field always put out less horsepower than spec and burned more fuel than spec. You are right, any weight—“extra” or otherwise—reduces overall performance. However, this doesn’t necessarily equal poor performance—i.e., markedly reduced maneuverability during dogfights. Many people (not you, per say, just in general) refer to performance and its affects on dogfighting and don’t consider or overlook that dogfighting is defensive. MvR was 100% offensive:

 

“A qualified fighter pilot is one who attacks the enemy when he sees him, who is ready and capable of engaging in combat at all times and does not give thought as to whether he may be lying on the ground with his shattered machine at the end of a battle.”

 

“The fighter pilots should have an allotted area to cruise around in as it suits them, but when they see an opponent they must attack and shoot him down. Anything else is absurd.”

 

“The continuous attack assures success.”

 

MvR sought to attack with stealth, not dogfight. The only thing maneuverability gets you is the ability to shake a pursuer, and even that’s no guarantee; you don’t use it to attack. How much maneuverability is needed to attack a two-seater such as a BE2, anyway? After all, two-seaters were the primary targets for MvR/J2/J11/JG1. (Writing about his tactics: “I am on the lookout for artillery-spotting aircraft…”) MvR would stalk a plane and attack—he wouldn’t stalk a plane and then do some aerobatics and then attack. Many times these attacks would be hit-and-run affairs (as documented by suviving RFC crewmembers)—roar in, fire, disengage, re-assume position of advantage, repeat. To use a somewhat crude metaphor, MvR was all about the missionary position and had no interest in the Kama Sutra.

 

Yet, let’s go back to Hawker. Here’s MvR with the weight disadvantage of his “extra” 500 rounds shooting down and killing a pilot of noteworthy stick-and-rudder ability, flying a nimble DH2. Clearly and unmistakeably, any supposed 28 lb weight “disadvantage” mattered not at all in one of the First World War's greatest du oder ich aerial battles against one of the RFC's best pilots; the sun set with Hawker dead. Now, I am aware of the various books’ claims of Hawker’s “engine problems”—all of them, unproven speculation, and some are barely disguised “the best man lost” outrage—as the cause of his defeat but if Hawker’s engine performed so poorly how was he able to execute low altitude aerobatics? “Well, his engine went bad during them.” Really, how is that known? The only witness to that is dead. Let’s just say his engine was running poorly, which wouldn’t be unusual for No. 24 Squadron DH2s. What about when the engine ran fine before that? Hawker still couldn’t catch or shake MvR flying with his extra-500-rounds-weight/CG disadvantaged Albatros D.II.

 

Passage from Lothar von Richthofen: [written about fighting an RFC machine in April 1917, flying an Albatros D.III] “…Now the hour for this poor fellow has come! I sat behind him. At the necessary distance, about fifty meters away, I sighted him cleanly and pressed my machine-gun buttons. What next! Not a shot came out. A jam in the guns. I cleared them and again pressed the machine-gun buttons: Not a shot! Curses! Success so near! I looked at my machine guns once more. Blast! I had already shot my last round. I have the empty ammunition belts in my hands. A thousand shots! I had so many when I did not need them.” Then: “The next day I flew to the sector where the airplane [he had fought as just described], a Spad, a very good English single-seater at the time, had been taken for safety; I looked at the machine and searched for hits. With my thousand shots I must have hit him at least once!”

 

Brotherly influence to allow “extra” bullets? By April 1917 MvR certainly had influence he lacked the previous autumn. Yet all accounts—personal and those of his pilots—indicate he led by example. What, nobody else in the Staffel warranted a full ammunition load? Von Schoenebeck recalled that for target practice, “…we beginners averaged about 50-60 percent of hits. The Staffel’s aces managed 80 or 85 percent, but when Richthofen came back he had nearly always planted more than 90 percent of his shots in the target.” Obviously, target practice is not combat and under those conditions MvR didn’t amass such a high percentage; neither did the others. Aerial gunnery was imprecise at best, even for the best. For those guys shooting under 50 percent, I cannot see and have not found the justification of limiting their total ammunition by 50% for a marginal weight decrease when these planes were intent on making slashing attacks against two-seaters. The Albatros fighters were designed for speed and twin-gun firepower in the first place, not maneuverability; I speculate it would be illogical to hamstring them by such a radical ammunition reduction.

 

Again, though, I’m not one to state a belief—which in this case is based on the combat reports and anecdotes of participating pilots—and then ignore all evidence against it. If it can be shown that 500 rounds usually was the norm for an Albatros D, I’ll run with it. To that end, in the Woodman book you noted, I don’t have that particular work. What is his credited source for those figures? (To be clear, that’s a querie, not a challenge.) Not such supporting evidence, though, indicating the belts could carry more than 250.

 

Regarding that posted link, I followed it to that under-construction MvR site, last updated in 2001. It looked a mess and was rife with error. I own MvR’s translated combat reports that I received from the National Archives in London; anybody can get them. I apologize for being less than clear earlier because figures for MvR’s rounds-fired aren’t only in the CRs—the CRs are but one source. Personal recollections and letters are others.

 

Regarding the Hawker fight, as you asked, the above-linked “source” doesn’t list the combat report. It does present some erroneous details that I will now refute:

 

1. No.24 ‘A’ Flight took off with four DH2s, but one (2nd Lt. J.H. Crutch) turned back—not two—during mid patrol and thus two DH2s (Andrews and Saundby) flew with Hawker. More accurately, Hawker and Saundby flew with Andrews, since Andrews led.

 

2. No. 24 did not attack Jasta 2, as indicated on that site (and even in MvR’s Der Rote Kampfflieger); this is 100% erroneous. Based on the combat reports of MvR, Andrews and Saundby, which all agree, Jasta 2 dived down and attacked No. 24 from above.

 

3. Andrews did not retire because of a “misfiring” engine—i.e., mechanical trouble—he retired because his plane and engine had been shot to pieces by a/some Jasta 2 pilot(s).

 

4. Hawker never attacked MvR, inasmuch as got his gun to bear. Several dodgy translations (such as The Red Air Fighter) indicate he did, but I own an original 1917 Berlin published Der Rote Kamppflieger and in this book there is no mention of Hawker firing on MvR. Thus, any and all translations of this book that indicates Hawker fired at MvR are wrong (inasmuch as we only have MvR's report of this phase of their battle, since Hawker was killed).

 

Here is the Hawker CR (verbatim and in entirety), when MvR was flying an Albatros D.II:

 

 

 

11th Victory.

 

Nov. 23. 1916, 3 p.m. south of Bapaume.

Vickers One-seater, plane lying near Bapaume.

Inmate: Major Hawker, dead

 

--------------

 

I attacked together with 2 planes a Vickers one-seater in 3000 meters alt. After a long curve fight of 3 – 5 minutes I had pressed down adversary to 500 meters. He now tried to escape flying to the front, I pursued and brought him down after 900 shot.

 

Witnesses: Lieut. Wortmann. Lieut. Collin etc.

 

Frhr. v. Richthofen.

 

Lieut.

 

Here’s #27, flying an Albatros D.III:

 

27th Victory.

 

March 17th, 1917.

Vikkers Two-seater.

11.30 a.m.

Oppy.

Occupants: Both killed, no identity discs, names found on

Maps were Smith and Heanly.

Plane A.3439

Motor Aero Engine 854.

Machine-gun: 19633 and 19901.

 

--------------

 

About 11.30 I attacked with nine of my machines an enemy squad of 16 units. During the fight I managed to force a Vikkers Two-seater aside which I then, after 800 shots, brought down. In my machine-gun fire the plane lost its open work fuselage.

 

The occupants were killed and were taken for burial by local Commanders at Oppy.

 

(Sig.) Frhr. v. Richthofen.

 

Was acknowledged.

 

Although there are a few to several instances of 500 to 500+ rounds fired to down MvR's victories, mostly he used less than 400. For his last ten he averaged ca. 100 per victory. I won’t get into all that in depth because this is part of a book I am writing.

[RAF_Louvert 101]

.

 

What a great discussion.

 

.

[Hasse Wind 46]

Now that's some excellent historical analysis, JFM. If only it could be found from all works about WW1 air combat!

[Bletchley 8]

Thank you Jim! That is just the evidence that I was looking for.

 

The statement by Lothar (April 1917), and the quotes from MvR's combat reports do clearly indicate that more than 500 rounds were carried, before January 1918. That is good enough for me - I eat my words. Many thanks for taking the time to research this further :)

 

I hope you don't mind, but I have posted your evidence from Lothar and from MvR as a continuation of my thread (How many rounds did they carry?) at the Aerodrome forum - the original thread was closed (old) so I started a new one, citing you as source and linked to this thread.

 

Woodman does not cite a reference for his statement that 250 rounds per gun was the normal load after the switch to twin guns.

 

The reference to MvR's trigger leavers was from a thread on the Aerodrome forum - I will check back and post a link.

 

Bletchley

Edited February 26, 2011 by Bletchley

[DukeIronHand 8]

Since we are quoting MvR combat reports I got my book out of them that has them all - translated to English of course.

 

I fell asleep but looked at his first 30 claims I think.

 

In about half he mentions ammo usage.

 

About a third of those have it listed at 500+ shots.

 

This is strictly "unscientific". When I get the go-juice I will go through them all and write it down unless someone here beats me to it.