JFM

Even the USA was not immune. Here's the 7-wing Johns Multiplane:

And let's not forget the Tommies! Supermarine Night Hawk Armstrong Whitworth FK10

That's an unfair assessment on Fokker. He wasn't the only one who went beyond a triplane. Other companies tried multi-wing airplanes. Euler, Friedrichshafen, Naglo all had quadraplanes. Euler Friedrichshafen Naglo

The info I have states the Alb Dr.I suffered from "pronounced tail heaviness" and had problems with radiator water connections. It also had "unfavorable performance figures." The Germans went through a phase when many companies were at least testing a triplane configuration, and more! Like that Fokker V8 above. Here is the Roland Dr.I: Albatros also made a pusher, the C.II:

Okay, steering this back to airplane photos. Not so much unusually rare planes that aren't known, but more beautiful Albatros machines. Right, Olham? Come on, confess! That Dr.I is a thing of beauty!

Empty weight including water, 2,561.5 lbs. Loaded weight, 3,746 lbs. I don't remember it in Dayton, either. I'll be there in September and look for it.

Here's a better photo: Another:

LUSAC-11. According to American Military Aircraft 1908-1919, that plane SC 42133 belongs to the USAFM today.

Cool. Wound up watching all of it. Thanks!

Hello. For those interested, after eight years of work I am announcing the publication of my new book, Inside the Victories of Manfred von Richthofen, Comprehensive Victory Summaries and Combat Statistics, published by Aeronaut books and available worldwide on Amazon. As seen on the flyer, the book is divided into two volumes. We preferred it to be a single volume but the exigencies of print-on-demand publishing (where a book isn’t physically made until it is ordered) require a 400-page limit, and this book came out to be 474 pages. Thus, rather than delete material—there is no filler to delete—it required two volumes. The book is so new I don’t even have my own copy yet—I’ve only seen pdfs—but I can say it contains more information than all five of my previous books combined. It’s doubtful you’ll commit everything in the book to memory—I started writing it in the first place because I wanted a personal reference source without having to thumb through ten billion other books/notes/files/reports, separating the fact from the error as I went—so you’ll turn back to it again and again as necessary for the rest of your life. Much of the material is new and refutes many tired-yet-still-kicking myths about MvR. I’m not talking the old yarn about Roy Brown shooting him down—surely all those flat-earthers who hung onto that notion realize the world is round by now! I mean various details of his victories; the realities of his fight with Hawker; who shot him down 6 July 1917, and the extent of his injury; comprehensive examination of his souvenirs; and a complete debunking of the hyper-exaggerated belief of “post-traumatic stress disorder” and how it “caused” Richthofen to be shot down and killed—that chapter alone is the size of an Osprey book. In fact, the Osprey books I’ve written are 22,000 words each. Combined, Inside the Victories of Manfred von Richthofen contains over 180,000 words, not including photo/illustration/profile captions. Some of the topics and information have been touched upon in my previous books, of course, but with nowhere near the nth degree detail as presented in Inside the Victories. And while there are several excellent books out on Richthofen, nowhere else is “everything you need to know about MvR” contained within a single, go-to reference source. I certainly don’t expect people to buy this. I’m just advising everyone that Inside the Victories now exists. Once I get my copies I’ll attach a few photos here so you can see what they look like. Thank you for your time.

The writer failed to substantiate her claim these men were "feared" as much as MvR. And made no cases for why they were "better and more skilled," whatever her undeclared criteria for what she constitutes as better and more skilled--it obviously isn't total credited victories. I'm not saying those guys were or weren't "better and more skilled," but today people can just blather anything in the "press" without supporting evidence, as long as it makes a catchy headline. I had hoped she'd make a case for her claims! Regardless, even MvR would have said Boelcke was the best, considering what/when/how he did what he did. In fact, he even stated that. But I will say that if you go through the RFC Communiques, during his "reign" Richthofen is discussed frequently and more often than others. Not just mentioned, but discussed. The RFC may have "feared" others more, I don't know, but they certainly weren't as interested in them, at least as far as the command structure was concerned.

Why be so passive? Just write JimAttrill and ask him directly to remove the links.

What a coupla great guys with those offers! Hopefully Jaa comes back in here and sees the links.

*cough* Roucourt *cough*

From the OBD website http://www.overflandersfields.com/previous.html: "Note OFF is no longer sold, and is not directly upgradable to the newer current 'WOFF'". I don't see HITR anywhere, either. Maybe you can get it privately from someone? If not here, try http://simhq.com/forum/ubbthreads.php

HI, Pawgy, Not much OFF/WOFF action here at CA as compared to SimHQ. Try this link for a start: http://simhq.com/forum/ubbthreads.php/forums/89/1/Over_Flanders_Fields This is straight to the OBD website: http://www.overflandersfields.com/previous.html

Yes. On the Dr.1, for instance, one box held the ammo and the other collected the discarded metal ammo belt links. When using the hemp ammo belts the belts were collected in the bin. You see that on the Fokker Es, Albs, etc.

@Hauskbee: Too big? You dislike seeing things clearly? I use Photoshop but I am not going to reduce stellar photos to micro-size because BIG is part of their joy! At least for me. I'll email you the photo and you can reduce them to the size you prefer.

Yes. The fuel and oil tanks are there. You'll see the fuel gauge up front like that on several Fokker machines. Here's an example:

Hauksbee, that's the fuel level gauge.

For me, I hope "non-WW1" means a flight sim based on a different war. Otherwise, this is where I get off. Thanks OBD, it's been fun.

Sweet RE8.

Stumbled on this comment last night regarding a flight test report for the FE.8: "Wind screen fitted is efficient and goggles can be dispensed with." From RAF FE8, Windsock Datafile 74, JM Bruce, Albatros Publications Ltd, 1999, p.4.

I know you are, Hauksbee! I wasn't talking about you.

I agree, but with the caveat that attention be paid to which engine utilized that. For instance, since the Mercedes engines had starting mags you wouldn't have guys spinning props for the Albs, Fokker DVII, Walfisch, etc. You see repros having guys swing props but not even for all of them, as I saw a Fokker DVII in CA and the pilot fired it up. But I agree it would be cool to have that. Will sims ever progress that far? Speaking of spinning props--and I know this would be WAY down the list even if these things were actually addressed--the props in WOFF spin too freely after the engines are shut down. They spin and spin and spin like props on a modern turboprop spinning in the breeze. But turboprop props aren't connected to a crankshaft and pistons. Props on recip engines had to overcome cylinder compression and that stops rotation quickly; sometimes the props "back up" partially at the very end. Behold the very end of this video for an example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2HYpvRBlti4