JFM

That appears to be offset to starboard, so he could still aim the guns okay. Beyond that, IMO wouldn't be much of a problem.

Hey, ran across this shot in the archives. It's a Roland and not a Pfalz, but what the hell :

Looks great, especially the cockpit shots!

Hello, Perhaps the most famous "kindling" the RFC assigned a G number to was Voss's wreck, designated G 72. Just as an FYI, that top photo is not 4022/17. It is actually 8282/17, a Jasta 35b Pfalz DIIIa shot down 25 April 1918 and assigned Brigade No. G/3Bde/4. In the photo below of the same plane, you can see its serial began with "82."

My $00.02 is I don't put too much stock in "crazy weather." Okay, no stock. I live in Florida; can't even tell we got all that rain last week. Maybe in a few very low lying areas, perhaps, but the undeniably overwhelming majority of the state is fine. Fine. Elsewhere, it's summer; it's always 100+ somewhere in US in the summer. There are always fires every year; some bigger, some smaller, many of them the result of arson. There are always storms. There are always tornadoes. There are always blizzards. There are always floods. There are always droughts. Always have been, too. Only now, and this will be no revelation, there is 24/7 cable and internet "news" and blogs and forums and storm chasers and social media to "report" and one-up each other regarding every single drop of rain and clap of thunder on a worldwide basis. I'm typing these words in my office in Florida and I know people are going to read them on the other side of the US, in Europe, in Africa, in Scandanavia, within minutes. This is taken for granted today but even just twenty years ago, that was the stuff of Star Wars. Plus, nearly everybody today walks around with a phone capable of taking photographs and videos that can be transmitted to nearly anywhere on earth, or be made accessible to anyone on earth. Instead of us seeing a mention of one or two things a day on the evening news or in a daily newspaper, now we see "news" reports on a minute-by-minute basis, literally. "News" is also reported in present tense to lend urgency to the story; it's still "fresh" that way. Thus, everything seems to be happening at once. Coupled with the arguably short memories of many--at least Americans, who for instance fall for the same lines and platitudes during an election, and the election before that, and the election before that, yadda--this provides a sense of unprecedented "crazy" weather that must "mean something." These various media outlets really think we're idiots, too. When it rains, they tell me to use an umbrella. When it's hot, they tell me to drink plenty of water and be careful when exercising outdoors. When there's lightning, they tell me to seek indoor shelter. When it's cold, they tell me to "bundle up." Really? No s**t... Oh, and hey, Weather Channel? A few things: 1) Earthquakes are NOT weather. Neither are Tsunamis. Ever. 2) There is a new invention that lets you video hurricanes without having to send a camera crew out into the storm--it's called a window. 3) Sending "reporters" outside into a hurricane to tell us "it sure is windy out here" makes as much sense and is as informative as a "reporter" running into a burning building and telling us "it sure is hot and smoky in here." Again, no s**t... Okay, rant over.

Nice, HD! I love Pennsylvania.

I check both places because it only takes a couple clicks to do it. Plus, I own several flight sims so I check much more than just OFF news.

I'd do that in a second if I had the time/spare cash--except for that Haggis part, of course. (No offense to those who enjoy such things.)

Hauksbee, I fly with the Gatorstaffel! Plenty of room for a transfer to the Eternal Summer.

Very interesting to see the different locations in the world. Thank you for sharing! Few views from this corner: Front. Back, with the two killers. Took this photo this morning. For the non-Floridians, the white-framed structure is the "pool cage" and keeps out bugs, leaves, yadda. When I first moved here I had never seen anything like it. These cages are all over the place, and now I'm used to them. Another brutal winter day. Sunset. Another sunset. No Photoshopping. Sometimes the sky is on fire. I live in Naples, but this is Sarasota. Cumulonimbus. This looks to the north, toward Cape Coral. Gulf of Mexico at Longboat Key. The Gulf is very placid on this side of the penninsula. Hurricane Charley, 2004. Been through five hurricanes here, two Cat 4s (Charley was one of them). Hurricane Charley. Getting worse. Took this from the lanai of our old condo. This was my first hurricane and had I still been drinking I would have been into the Crown Royal at this point. Hurricanes are the occasional tax we pay for such glorious weather otherwise.

I already have every blade of grass at Roucourt mapped! Even have a pre-war aerial photo. Just need one during the war. Ahh, that's the key. Although, with the photograph that shows the church and the coal mine smokestack, the aerial shot is no longer needed to ascertain positive location. I just want to see it because I want to see it. I sent you some photos the other day (not Boelcke, some Albs, I think). Did they make it? We're having email troubles, I know. Please let me know if they did before I try to send more.

I've never heard of those pilots but, hot damn, this photo is fantastic, Olham! Nope, requires two more! I was wrong where I thought the airfield was. I was off about 600 yards in another field. I took this 1916 aerial and lined it up with photos of Boelcke and it was just spot on. Now when I go back to Lagnicourt I can visit the proper location! Now, your next mission: 1917 aerial of Roucourt.

Yes, Hauksbee, that's what I meant. And good points, although wasn't the territory to be restored to Mexico, not Germany?

Good stuff, Hasse. Here's the elephant in the room: Millions of lives would have been spared had there not been a war for the US to join in the first place. The US declared war in 1917 but we had no appreciable impact until the following year, other than causing certain strategic reactions (e.g., The Amerika-programm). Had the war ended and a peace treaty signed in 1917, why is it assumed said peace treaty wouldn't have been just as harsh for Germany as the Treaty of Versailles in 1919? In 1917 would Germany not have to accept the War Guilt Clauses, not give up territories, not pay reparations? What, in 1917 Entente would have said, "Okay, good try, but better luck next time! Now, off you go!"? I seriously doubt it. Communism and Fascism weren't the result of US involvement in WW1. They were already in place, whether the US fought in WW1 or not. Also, US involvement did not cause Hitler's hatred for Jews and desire for Lebensraum, two of the strongest engines of his foreign policies.

(Preface: the following questions are actual questions, not rhetorical ones, lest they be mistaken for challenges.) What is the difference if the same people post there what they were going to post here, or vice-versa? For instance, if somebody posts a screenshot of a new skin that everyone comments on, what is the difference if it's done in one forum or another, if the same people are posting in each? Isn't it about the people, not where the people are? Personally, I don't care where the official forum is; it's not as if I have to drive across town or anything. It's just two clicks away and I don't even have to put down my coffee cup. Nor do I feel that those who do care about the official forum location should not. I just don't understand, is all. It's all so mountain-out-of-a-mole-hill to me. So, I'm looking to understand a little more.

If you ever see a guy who says there are no dumb questions but then rips new guys for asking questions--thar she blows!

Yes, Flyby, Brown made one diving pass and left, never to return. He did not pursue MvR. In my view the evidence concludes Brown did not fire the killing shot, and it's speculative that Brown even hit MvR's plane anywhere. Also, it's doubtful that MvR saw/noticed Brown's attack. Initially in my book about Richthofen I made the bold decision not to mention Brown at all because, as I say, if I mentioned every guy who took a shot at Richthofen and did not kill him, the book would have been 2,000 pages long! In the end, I (very) briefly mentioned Brown, only because he did make an attack, after all, but more so because the myth of his attack has become part of the history; it's become more noteworthy than the attack itself.

Hello. Just a few nitpicky things. First, my take on who killed MvR: Who the hell knows? Everybody fixates on the machine gunners and there are good theories for Buie and Popkin, but why not a soldier with a rifle? Lot of talk against both a machine gunner or rifleman because of how hard it would be to overcome bullet spread or leading the plane but somebody overcame it. I just won't say it was Popkin and discount all those other soldiers winging off shots. And, in my view, respectfully, it was not Brown. The bullet the killed MvR came from his right to left; Brown attacked from MvR’s left to right. Just that easily Brown is ruled out because MvR would have had to roll nearly inverted for Brown to hit him and there is neither a single eyewitness account of, nor tactical purpose for, this having happened. Again, my two cents. (I know Pol and I will continue to agree to disagree. ) As far as violating his rules that day, MvR actually did not. What is usually quoted as proof of such a violation comes from MvR’s Air Combat Manual General Principles, in which "One should never obstinately stay with an opponent who, through bad shooting or skillful turning, one has been unable to shoot down, when the battle lasts until far [my emphasis] on the other side and one is alone and faced by a greater number of opponents." Normally, when this is quoted, the word "far" is omitted; even Peter Kilduff left it out when quoting the manual in the main text of Beyond the Legend of the Red Baron. But check the Air Combat Operations Manual in the back of that book; the word “far” is there. It’s also in the German language document I have, typed and signed by Richthofen (a copy, of course—I am not so lucky to have the original!). Thus, was MvR "far" behind the lines 21 April 1918? Nope. Where he crashed was about 2.5-3 miles behind the lines. In an airplane, that distance is nothing. Was he facing a greater number of opponents? Nope. He was chasing May--no threat there--and the only other plane around was Brown's, who made one diving attack and then left. I dare say it is speculation that MvR even saw Brown's attack. Clearly, as I always say, it was MvR's altitude that got him in the most trouble, not distance. Put him three miles behind the lines at 10,000 feet and no small arms would touch him. Put him over the lines at 50 feet and still the small arms danger was there--didn't even have to be behind the lines at that altitude, just near them. Look at Mannock. Regarding his speed, MvR wasn’t travelling at 100 mph when shot. He had turned back East into the wind to return to his lines. The weather reports I have for that day place the easterly windspeeds at 20-35 mph. Assuming an airspeed of 100 mph, then MvR would have first flown by at 120-135 mph groundspeed (GS=airspeed + tailwind, or airspeed - headwind, for those unsure) when chasing May, then when he turned for home his groundspeed would have plummeted to 65-80 mph. Also, regarding MvR being shot in the head (6 July 1917) at long range, my extensive research into the events of this wounding reveal he was shot at extremely close range. 300 meters is just when the FE2d first opened fire. MvR was in a head-on run with this FE2d and they covered the 300 meter distance in seconds; only upon convergence did MvR lose control. I.e., when he was wounded (and simultaneously blinded, and paralyzed, and when his arms and legs fell from the controls). And, the kicker: he wasn’t shot by Woodbridge or Cunnell in the FE2d! (As an aside, even though he didn’t shoot MvR, Woodbridge gets all the credit for it. Why not Cunnell? He was in that FE2d and firing at MvR, too. Everybody overlooks that—although it really doesn’t matter, since Cunnell didn’t shoot him, either.) Who shot him? I can't determine that. I can determine who it wasn't, however, and it wasn’t the FE2d he was going nose-to-nose with. It wasn't "Kurt Wolff behind him," either, as some believe. (I devoted an entire chapter to 6 July in my MvR book, for those interested, and the topic will be revisited in the FE2 vs Albatros Scouts "Duel" book I'm writing for Osprey.) Anyway, forgive me. I get carried away. I don't expect everyone to agree with me but I appreciate the opportunity to ramble.

This was answered over in the Aerodrome. "Severe resonance vibrations...particularly when pulling out of a shallow dive, to such a degree that the wing spars, fuselage frames and plywood skin were damaged." In the book Albatros Experimentals, Forgotten Fighters 1, page 6, it also states that after the "fuselage frame was replaced, the weight was redistributed, the center-section struts were relocated and a different airscrew was installed," the vibration was eliminated but during trials of November 1917 the machine "failed to demonstrate noteworthy performance." A second Alb D.VII was made but it experienced "severe nose-heaviness." Eventually it was cleared for "flight by military pilots," but by summer 1918 acceptance flights had not taken place. This is speculated to be the result of the Alb D.VII's Benz Bz.IIIBo ("o" because it wasn't geared) engines being used by the Aviatik D.III, although I believe only two of those were built. However, from what I've read the V-8 Bz.BIIIBo was an "oddity" and not mass produced, and as such its availability was limited.

For what it's worth I don't think you could hear creaking wood above a roaring engine--as a student I could barely hear my flight instructor screaming right next to me. Of course "I don't think" = speculation; never flown a wood-framed airplane. I have hundreds of hours in Cessnas and can confirm they do make noise when stalling. Not just the stall horn, but the wings will--how do I describe it--"hauntingly groan" as they near stall. Seems the sound comes through the fresh air vents at the upper left and right sides of the cockpit--i.e., right next to the inboard leading edge wing roots. This mostly during power off stalls, when the engine is throttled back; i.e., when things are relatively quiet. During power on stalls or accelerated stalls I don't recall the haunting groan over the engine. The plane just departs--and hang on if you aren't coordinated!

First, I know absolutely el zilcho grande about FMs and how to either create them or tweak them. Just wanted to place my ignorance right out front. However, I will comment that I have found neither documents nor pilot anecdotes that support the significant throttle lag present with the OFF Albs heretofore. On those machines the throttle cable led to a dual-barrel twin-jet carburetor; increase the throttle, the cable linkage opened the butterfly valves, and away she went! In the split-second timing of combat, such a lag as with the OFF machines could be deadly. I wouldn't want to fly a Cessna 152 around the pattern with such throttle lag because sometimes you have to "give it the gun" when something unforeseen happens (like when some damn fool taxis into position as you are on short final and about to flare) and a five-to-seven second delay could have catastrophic consequences. Especially with OFF Nieuports buzzing around, bent on collision! As far as overall performance across the Alb D series, from the records I've gathered it seemed fairly universal. Sure, I'm aware British pilots found it sluggish compared to what they were used to, such as the Pup, but that doesn't mean the D.V was more sluggish than the D.I. When Cecil Lewis wrote that an Albatros he flew (from the descripton likely an Albatros DIII, perhaps 2015/16) "was sluggish, strong, reliable and determined," he didn't say "sluggish as compared to the Albatros D.I." Instead, he said "it had none of the feeling of lightness and grace that our aircraft had." That comment holds true for the entire Albatros D-series. German pilots complained the later Albs were dogs but this wasn't so much a comparison to earlier Albs than a comparison to the improved RFC machines that they were facing. With the successive machines in the series they had expected performance increases that, unfortunately for them, hadn't come. The Albs' horsepower increased from 160 to 170 to 180 to 200, but unfortunately the weight increased as well, off-setting performance gains benefitted by the increased horsepower. Still, later production D.Vs and early production D.Vas weighed in at 915 kg fully loaded; only 17 kg (37 lbs) heavier than the 898 kg D.II and with 20 more horsepower (some sources list the D.II weight at 888 kg, giving a 27 kg [60 lbs] difference] to make up for it. Yet in OFF they're as nimble as a 747 compared to the D.II. With fuel being 6 lbs/gallon, then taking a D.V up with half tanks in OFF ought to feel like flying the D.II, but it does not. For my money, I can live with the dog performance aspect--which is kind of obvious since I'll have to live with whatever is released in OFF2, won't I? My humble request is please reduce/remove the throttle lag. Oh, and please also remove the one-bullet-to-the-aileron-reduces-roll-rate-by-over-fifty-percent-even-though-the-ailerons-are-still-fully-deflected phenomenon that hampers all the planes. Please note these are constructive observations and not meant to be deconstructive criticisms. (Note: Edited for typos.)

Sickening. He just put that out for sale and there is it, pirated for the world to steal. http://www.collectors-edition.de/QAU/InDetail/FokD8/FokD8_english.htm Oh, wait, it looks to be a truncated promo version or something. Nevermind. Still, I'll leave the link on here.

Amen. Bunch of horses**t. Iran imports four drops of oil to us and the gas prices are forecast to go through the roof. Personally, I'd gladly pay higher fuel prices as a result of telling Iran to take their oil and go f*** themselves. And while I can't speak for all Americans, this American does realize how lucky he is. Every day. And gas prices are one of the lowest things on my "Lucky List."

Yeah, that's the church you see in the background of several Boelcke/Jasta 2 photos.

I agree, I've been twice in mid-September and overall the weather was nice. Spots of rain on some days but mostly partly cloudy, some overcast. On my last day in France the weather went downhill slowly as the day went on and around dusk it started raining when I was in Lagnicourt. Other than that, no problems. Vimy Ridge, weather slowly closing: Later at Lagnicourt. Can't see it but the rain had just started and it was pouring: