Olham

. .10 28 DAYS LATER That's what it feels like doesn't it?

Funny how we got used to the comfort and luxury of this place, isn't it? This was my home for the last two years, and it was a good place, and it will remain my place No. 1. Great you guys are back!

These must be the longest two weeks of my entire life! (And they say time flies faster with age! ...)

I bet, HPW - but I am confident you'll get there.

Well, they said it was "better" than the D.III - whatever they mean exactly. Wiki has the D.III with 175 km/h at 1.000 Meter; and the Pfalz D.IIIa with 181 km/h at sea-level. Quite confusing, the various levels...

That guy, sirgisbod, is a very good "film maker" - well done!

German Wikipedia has the following for the Pfalz types: The machine guns (of the Pfalz D.III) were integrated into the fuselage, which made them harder for the pilot to reach, especially at gun jams. The D.IIIa had rounded wing tips and control surfaces. The machine guns were installed so, that they were easier to reach for ground personnel and pilots. The (Mercedes D.III) engine was also improved for a better performance (then called Mercedes D.IIIa). SERVICE The Pfalz appeared at the front in August 1917, first with Jasta 10, then with Jasta 4 and the Bavarian Jastas 16, 23, 32, 34 and 35. She was superiour to the Albatros D.III, but couldn't reach the speed of the faster Albatros D.V, or the climb of the more agile Fokker Dr.1. At lower level flight she threatened to side-slip in turns. Especially the (...) S.E.5a, the Sopwith Camel or the SPAD XIII were superiour to her. Still, she was quite liked by her pilots, cause she was rated as reliable and especially as more robust than the Albatros, which tended to break it's wings in dives. The Pfalz was quite bulletproof, which made her the ideal craft for balloon attacks; although she could be set ablaze easier than other craft, due to her construction. Successful fighter pilots like Julius Buckler and Heinrich Gontermann achieved many balloon kills with her. Primarily Bavarian units were equipped with the craft, which was built in (Bavarian) Speyer those days.

The region which the French call "Alsace" and the Germans "Elsass", is an area both nations have been fighting for several times. In a documentary I heard, that still today some people there don't like to decide wether they are French or German - but they are proud to be "Alsaciens" or "Elsässer". The landscape painter Jean Jaques Waltz lived before the Great War in the "Elsass", cause it was German then. But already his name contains some of both - Jean Jaques are French first names; Watz is rather a German family name. His artist name "Hansi" again is a German form of "Hans", as said to little boys. Nevertheless, "Hansi's" heart felt French, and he was made a process for treason or so, but managed to escape, and to become a French Sous-Lieutenant in the Great War. Here is his story, and some fine photographs and drawings of "Hansi": http://www.greatward...si/Hansi_01.htm I find he is a good example for why we should think more European in Europe, and less national. Don't get me wrong - I love differing identities. I wouldn't like the French being like the Germans, or the British like the Italians. I love the different ways of life, and the variety of cooking & brewing etc. But if someone says to me, he is neither French nor German but Alsatian - that's perfectly okay for me.

Very interesting and informative additions like always - thank you, Capitaine.

Maybe they should have made another mini-state like Luxemburg of Alsace-Lorraine? Neither French nor German - a French-German meeting place for holidays? .

Hmmm... - mine was actually not SO bad - we went to see the cast iron works in my hometown. (I was one of the last who saw it - only 2 years later it was torn down.)

I have just read a passage by Carl Degelow, German fighter ace with Jasta 7 and Jasta 40. When he came to Jasta 40, he had to change from rotary (Fokker Dr.1) to the inline fighters again. He had the choice - Albatros D.Va or Pfalz D.IIIa. He took the Pfalz, because she was the more reliable or safer plane in his opinion. He had flown the craft in Jasta 7. The Albatros, he said, had got that special metal bracing around the wing spar, where it held the V-strut; but the advice was still, not to dive steeply with the Albatros for longer. So here's a clear vote for the Pfalz.

Children often have far less scruples - they play Monopoly like the big bankers, get the hotels on the expensive streets, while you end with the violett cheap ones.

Not in Campaign, no. But with OFF II I'll fly a British Campaign; or even several.

Not the only one - AEG J.II Schlachtflieger had downward "schräge Musik": This is a very neatly renewed Sopwith Dolphin!

I wish we would have made such interesting school trips - good luck for your son's journey, Widow, and indeed - we want some photos!

Sorry for making the mouths of some of you water - this book seems to be released only in September. I've just found it announced for pre-order at AMAZON. Not knowing much about the man who's grave I had only recently visited, I will definitely buy it. Berthold was one of the few aces, who served from the first days of the Great War until August 1918, when he was wounded again. He had several injuries through accidents and war wounds before - which may be the reason why Kilduff called the book "Iron Man". Berthold had 44 confirmed victories. He served with KEK Vaux; FFA 23; Jasta 4, 14, 18; and took over the command for JG II. Born 24 March 1891, he survived the Great War, only to get killed by German rioters in March 1920.

Ah, great to hear - I just ordered the book about Carl Degelow! Widow, I don't know. Berthold's last "accident" was to crash into a house with his Fokker D.VII. The only German I know of having jumped with the chute and lived, is Ernst Udet. Ace Fritz Rumey from the great Jasta 5 died at the end of the war, when his parachute failed to open. Here is The Aerodrome about Berthold: http://www.theaerodrome.com/aces/germany/berthold.php .

The Sopwith Camel had a max. speed of 185 km/h - the Fokker Dr.1 only 160 km/h. Good point! I bet MvR was much cooler than the novice May, and May seems to have done quite well in that situation - after all he survived it. Good point - each pilot had to decide individually, if they dared or not dared to fly special manoeuvres. I bet, most of them did the hazardous daring ones only, when they were under direct threat of getting killed - not on their own attacks. Arthur Gould Lee once dived vertical from a "yellow nosed" Albatros (Jasta 10 ?). And still the Albatros pilot followed, which is insane with the lower sesquiplane wings' known tendency to flutter and then break in steep dives. But Lee also heard aching sounds from his Pup, and he also feared it would break up in mid air. He only had no other choice, with two Spandaus hammering away close behind him. He was lucky and could exchange one of his nine lives - the German was a damn bad shot. A miracle the Albatros didn't break up! .

Shiloh, you may need to place the TrackIR camera further back. Since I attached mine on a stand 3 inches behind the monitor surface, I don't have those weird flips anymore. The Brisfit is a very reassuring craft to fight in. Strong, fast, sturdy and agile. Attacking them always bears strong risk of getting wounded or even killed.

Over at "The Aerodrome" I just found this document (?) with data about German WW1 aircraft. No idea, if it is a true document though. It contains data about speed and climb at various levels. Maybe interesting to study closer. http://naca.central.cranfield.ac.uk/reports/1923/naca-tn-147.pdf

Just found this post from 2006 at "The Aerodrome", posted by "Bletchley" (our Bletchley?): Looking at my copy of Peter L Gray's "The Pfalz D.III" (Profile Publications no.43), 1965: British figures from a captured D.III (160 hp Mercedes) Max. speed at 10,000 ft. 102.5 mph, at 15,000 ft. 91.5 mph. Climb to 5000 ft in 6 min., to 15,000 ft in 41 min. 20 sec. German figures (not sourced) Max. speed 165 km. hr. (103.12 mph). Climb to 1,000 m. (3,280 ft.) in 3.25 min., to 2,000 m (6,560 ft) in 7.25 min., to 3,000 m (9,840 ft.) in 11.75 min. D.IIIa (175/180 hp Mercedes): at a loaded weight of 911 kg. (2,004 lb) made test climb to 5,000 m (16,400 ft.) in 33 min. on 4th Feb. 1918. Author comments that: "In service the Pfalz seems to have been a considerably maligned machine; many stories, probably most of them apocryphal, circulating as to its unsuitability: "too slow", "does not climb", "too heavy", "won't recover from a spin", "fuselage weak", "not properly constructed", "tail weak and liable to break off", etc. In actual fact it was quite a good, rugged aeroplane. Initially there was a tendency to failure of the upper wing wing-tips in combat...but stronger spars were ordered to rectify this. The Pfalz could dive a good deal faster than any other German fighter and with excellent stability, in consequence it provided a good gun platform. Its style of construction endowed it with an ability to absorb a fair degree of punishment. There certainly was a tendency for the machine to get in a flat spin from which it was exceedingly difficult to recover. In a report dated 25th October 1917, Jasta 24 expressed the following opinion...'It is slower than the Albatros D III; it is fast in a dive and is then faster than the Albatros D V. The climbing performance... varies greatly, sometimes almost as good as the average Albatros D V but never better' Also: "The tailplane and one-piece unbalanced elevator were an angular, trapezoidal shape...The section was of inverse camber which gave stability in a prolonged dive and considerably assisted recovery" Hope this is of some help! Bletchley

Well, it WAS an improvement over the D.III - only not as much of an improvement as everybody had desired. Still though, Manfred von Richthofen (Dr.1) chased May (Camel) over a distance of 3 or 4 miles. Which brings up the question, how much an experienced pilot could get out of his craft, if he knew it through and through. Since the Dr.1 climbs very good, MvR could have used short climbs, to turn the gained height into speed in shallow dives. We'd need a physician to clear, if that makes sense. Anyone? .

Pike, maybe you want to read and see through this document: Performance Analysis and Tactics of Fighter Aircraft from WWI http://home.comcast.net/~clipper-108/AIAAPaper2005-119.pdf I guess you need to be good with physics and diagrams, but this documentation contains a lot about loadings, weights and rates - enjoy! And if you find something and can translate it into common English, I'll be grateful.

Dej, I must admit, that I know little about the Sopwith Triplane or Little's fight until today - I will have to read the book Pips recommended. As a graphic designer with some PR knowledge I can only say: MvR had the better overall public relations. You can't beat the alarming effects of red, orange and yellow - the red Triplane became THE aircraft people remember to have seen, when it's about World War One aviation. But no doubt, Sopwith built one first. As far as I know, both the British as well as the German Triplane were hard to maintain in the field, and had often to be shipped back to a maintenance/Armee-Flugpark. The Sopwith Triplane always looks to me like a high class/best material fighter. The wooden struts alone cause that impression. Widow, you could ask our Pfalz specialist for advice - Hasse Wind. I also need to fly her again in campaign, and I remember, she didn't turn as well as the Albatros with her nose above horizon. Keep her horizon-level in tight turns, or below. Avoid long turn fighting. But you can safely get out of bad situations in steep dives - she is sturdy - and in safe distance you turn the energy into height again. .