JFM

Not an action-filled shot but I always liked the foreboding ambiance.

Okay, popular image of an unarmed Albatros D.III that better shows the manufacture/Idflieg plates on the leading edges of the lower wings, as well as the Nicht auftreten placard on both sides. And, Lewie, respectfully, Albatros is spelled with one s. Please forgive me; I know it's pedantic of me to say but I'm just trying to be informative.

(The beautiful) Albatros C.III (Li) 5403/17. (Hey, Devs, hint, hint...) Jasta 5's Hans von Hippel's Albatros D.Va 5639/17. Interestingly, it had green/mauve wings with blue undersurfaces, save for the undersurface of the upper wing which had 5-color irregular polygon fabric, although the ailerons were blue. Note the smoothness of the ailerons and the Nicht auftreten placard on the lower wing (they were usually on both wings but the fuselage blocks view of the port placard), which doesn't appear in many photographs due to its location on Albatros planes. Also, if you look closely you'll see the manufacture and Idflieg plates on the leading edges of the lower wings, just ahead of the interplane struts. This shot is a little grainy so they appear as dark rectangles here. (I'll find a better shot of them and post.)

Oh, no question! Interest takes a second to arrive and those guys toil for months/years. BTW, any screenshots don't have to depict "new" features; ducks eat the small bread thrown to them, too. Besides, look at all the "OT" threads in this place. Hardly about OFF anymore.

And just as a firebreak, he's interested, not impatient. As am I.

Without getting deep into it I will state that I believe there is intelligent life elsewhere in the universe. However, I do not believe alien life is visiting Earth. Now, I’m bound by the constraints of my human mind and its knowledge being based on principles and conditions as we know them on Earth. However, regardless of what kind of intelligent life there is outside our solar system and regardless of how they think and live, I believe it safe to say that space travel across light year distances is a purposeful and organized endeavor and event. It doesn’t just happen randomly. Doubtless a long series of progressive learning and technological evolutions must occur within an alien species on some distant planet for them to attain the ability to construct space ships that can sustain the life of its occupants during journeys across billions of miles and back (in this regard they are far in advance of our abilities). Safe to say these things require organized societal planning and execution; i.e., a space ship doesn’t just build itself. They must be conceived, designed, constructed, tested, flown, revised, upgraded, improved, etc, the result of intelligent beings working in concert. Not a stretch to suggest that even in an alien world these projects must be financed by some form of labor compensation; i.e., somebody has to go before the Queen and request funds to go to the New World, if you will. Are funds appropriated from their form of Congress for their form of NASA? Not a stretch to ponder such a thing. And then after said funds are procured and the technology realized and executed and the space ship conceived and its crew trained and the billion mile journey is survived and the space ships—despite the (for all intents and purposes) infinite distance of space in every direction—head for Earth time and again; after all of that, the only thing these superior beings do once they get here is turn their lights on over Arizona or kill some cattle and sheep in Montana or flatten grass into circles in England? Look at the Herculean effort and cost just to get a Space Shuttle into a near-earth orbit for a week and back. Now, imagine if NASA went before Congress and said they wanted to build a space ship that could travel to and from, for instance, let’s just say, Pluto (I know it’s no longer classified as a planet but it is distant and solid). Ridiculously close compared to planets discovered outside our solar system which are too distant to determine if inhabited by intelligent life. Still, think of the incredible overhead and man-hours just to design a ship that could travel to Pluto and back and sustain its crew for the years of space travel that trip would take. Now, consider the Congressional reaction when they ask the purpose of such a visit to Pluto and NASA tells them, “Well, we just want to make cool-looking circles in the Plutonian dust, then maybe zoom around at really low altitude and then turn the exterior lights on and off a lot. Oh, and for good measure, lets throw in an anal probe or two on any life we find there.” Think NASA would get their mission? Nope. Yet alien civilizations conceive/pitch/receive funding/design/train/prepare/execute similarly worthless missions across tens/hundreds/thousands of light years? To make a crop circle? Again, I’m bound by my earthly knowledge and have no idea how an alien civilization thinks/conceives/executes, but I’m sorry I just don’t buy it. I’m not saying people don’t see things in the sky they describe as “UFOs”—even some of my dearest friends have—but respectfully I do not believe their origins are of extraterrestrial intelligence. I am not trying to convince anybody otherwise and have no explanation for any nocturnal Minnesota boomerangs; just offering my two cents.

Olham, I took your photo and marked the location of Chateau de Bethune and site of many JG1 photos:

I'm on there. Most of what I see there is more worthless than television. There can be gold in the stream but you have to pan an awfully long time. I liken it to talking between classes in high school (which is eeking up on thirty years ago for me). You get some skinny on what's going on with certain friends but almost all of it isn't vital. Does OFF have a page there? Never even thought to look since I spent such little time there.

UKW, I meant my comment to be more across-the-board, as I see sim vs sim bickering in oh-so-many threads in oh-so many fora. I meant not to single out you or anyone else and apologize if it came across that I did. Regarding vanilla RoF, I don't know how you can complain about certain planes when the entire sim was mostly a steaming pile! I know, the SE5a and Camel were just part of a long list. That release was the most I've ever been let down by a sim. They've come a long, long way since then, but even today they don't have the classic Johannistahl-built Albatros D.III (they tart up their Albatros D.III (OAWs) to look like Johannistahl-built machines ) and probably never will. In my view THE classic German scout flown by some of the most famous pilots in one of the most famous periods of the war, and RoF won't build it. I've stated a case for it several times and always the same answer from the devs: "Nobody wants to fly a 160 hp machine, so Yankee go home." Then, later, they released the Albatros D.II... Regarding the 40 planes in the air, I've never done the things you guys have suggested in OFF. I never fly Quick Scenarios, ever. I only fly campaign missions and usually I'm shot down or collided with long before 1918! I'm an early and late-mid war guy. I'm not complaining about not seeing 40 planes, mind you, I'm busy enough with 15 flying around me, but it'd be cool to see. A few times I've found a lone straggler on the deck, heading for his lines. I've had so much fun swooping down to hammer him into oblivion; I'd rather have that than huge furballs. The stealthy, unseen attack was a pivotal scout tactic that hasn't been fully realized in a sim yet due to the AI's ability to auto-see you when close, so any facsimile thereof I enjoy. In my world, bring on the new RoF campaign, P4, and CoD. I'll add them to the sim cathouse.

In my view, fighting over which sim is "best" is asinine. All sims have their positives and negatives. When I fly RoF I don't think "This sucks compared to OFF" or "This is so much better than OFF," and when I fly OFF I don't think "This sucks compared to ROF" or "This is so much better than OFF." When I fly one I don't even think about the other. I enjoy each for its own merits, and I constructively criticize them on their own merits. I'm looking forward to both the new RoF campaign and OFF P4. I'd also like to see 40 planes in the air at once in either sim, as I never have before. Perhaps I will in COD, which I'll also buy as soon as it's released.

The fields are there but they're just generic reproductions that look nothing like the originals. +1 that it'd be great to have some of the well known fields historically represented. This request has been made in the past and IIRC Winder indicated it could be done. Would be done is a different matter.

No, flying low behind the lines wasn't against MvR's knowledge or advice. Hell, he had done it numerous times and long before 21 April 1918. I dare say it was his MO; once he got his teeth in he rarely if ever let go. Much is made about 21 April that MvR violated his personal combat strategy. Not so. What is usually quoted is from his Air Combat Manual General Priciples, in which "One should never obstinately stay with an opponent who, through bad shooting or skilful turning, one has been unable to shoot down, when the battle lasts until far 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. But check the Air Combat Operations Manual; it's there. 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's 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. As far as his 9-month-old head wound, people read far, far too much into that. It seems they are incapable of accepting that people die in war and Richthofen was just a person. There was no great cause for what he did on 21 April; he had done it numerous times before. Numerous. I can't stress that enough that 21 April 1918 was NOT the first time he chased a plane at low altitude and/or behind the lines (and yes, he did this even before his headwound). The difference is that on 21 April somebody shot him. That's it. He didn't fly low because of his wound or fatigue and he routinely chased planes and continued shooting at them until they either landed or crashed. Regarding fatigue, he'd just come off months and months and months of non-combat rest. He was not "secluded in his four walls" and depressed; there are beau coup photos of him at this time. Newspaper interviews and anecdotes by squadron members reveal MvR as accessible, jocular, jovial. He wrote his Air Combat Operations manual at this time. As von Baur indicated, March 1918 saw his most productive month since Bloody April, and April 1918 he was doing very well despite poor weather cancelling many days of flying. It's really, really, really, really, really simple. MvR was in a war and like millions of other men, he was killed doing what he did every day.

The downfall of the German monarchy is an after-the-fact observation. At the time of MvR's death in April, Operation Michael hadn't smashed through to Paris but the Germans were far from total defeat; just a week before MvR's death the British were in such dire straights from the offensive that they issued the "Backs to the Wall" order; i.e., stand your ground and fight to the death. MvR's melancholy "Thoughts in a Dugout" is attributed to have been written at the end of his life but this undated document doesn't describe the state of the war (or, for that matter, Richthofen) at all in April 1918. Rather, it more accurately describes the state of each during the previous late summer. Hence, MvR had no "death premonition" or anything in spring 1918. He just flew too low too close to the lines and somebody shot him, that's all. Richthofen appointed a successor because he was a realist; every pilot knows the risk of dying. Still, he didn't dwell on it. As MvR wrote, one attacked without worry about that.

+1 to what von Baur wrote.

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.

I'm with UKWM. I prefer they don't move so I can hammer them down with a minimum of shots.

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.

These translations are all available at the National Archives in London. Copies of the originals. Mine look exactly like that.

Glad your pup weathered it. Not sappy at all, either. Lost my beloved pup Charlotte in October 2008. She was 17; I had her 16 years. I had her cremated and when my time comes she'll ride into eternity with me.

Hello, A very nice start. A constructive criticism is that the hangars do not look like those used by No.24 Squadron at Bertangles. Here are some shots of No.24 Squadron DH2s with their hangars in the background: Also, the weather charts, reports and forecasts I have for 23 November 1916 show the area was dominated by high pressure with clear skies in the morning. Clouds moved in later in the afternoon but in the morning they were confined to the channel coast. If interested, PM me an email addy and I'll send you larger hangar photos.

As a toddler I looked in the sky and saw a plane flying. I've loved all planes since; combat is incidental. As far as WW1, the first I heard of it was via Florida's own The Royal Guardsman, when I was four.

Great screens, thanks! BTW, take that, all you "be patient" types. The squeaky wheel gets the grease, eh Morris?

Again, don't confuse interest for impatience.

Don't confuse interest with impatience. I agree with Morris. The 23 December 2010 shots are so last year ago.

Didn't like his blues stuff much (calm down, I said I didn't like it, not that it wasn't good) but I loved his 80s rock/metal stuff. That he's gone is bad for his family but he lives forever in my cd players.