Olham

Worst drama I witnessed there was the two world wars being continued between that guy from England who later got banned, and a German, who got also banned, but had sneaked back in under a different name. After that, I didn't take part in discussions anymore. And I learnt, who very great our OFF Forum really is!

Exactly what I thought, Lou! I will definitely not ask this question over at The Aerodrome!

Oh, I see. Well, I'm still so green, when it comes to literature about WW1 air combat. Thank you, Lou! Widow, you should at least allow one for each nation. I bet it would still be impossible for Lou though. For the Germans, the book by ErnstUdet and that by Julius Buckler were the most sympathic reads for me so far. "No Parachute!" is simply a very great read for the British side.

You didn't mention McCudden's "Flying Fury", Lou, which seems to be quite famous. Did you not like it for any reason? (It's on my list, so I'd like to read your opinion).

Ah, you started one of those notorious debates there, Pips. Some of the guys there defend every bit of knowledge they believe to have with their teeth and claws. I hate such attitudes with "historians" - everyone who wasn't there himself, should remain a bit more open for "corrections" on their oppinions. (Especially when it is about WW1 colours, which we now must guess from B/W photographs).

Yes, this book (and surely others too) contain a lot of detail about facts we could not know otherwise. He wrote also, a little after my quoted passage, that the Germas had introduced three good fighter during his home front time, and there I read, that the Pfalz was regarded as "a good fighter". As for effect after hits: I wished the devs could make it possible, that only very small "hit boxes" would cause severe damage on ailerons or rudder. One British ace (Mannock?) had once described, that he landed an S.E.5, where the rudder was almost split and only held on to the craft by a single metal strip or something (I wished I had the quote right now). He only noticed it from looking back - the craft seemed to fly quite well with the damage. From all my readings, I recollect that wings could folf or tear off completely after a severe impact of rounds in critical structures. I can only remember one passage (by Udet), where he had a problem with a stuck rudder. He then had to perform clever manoeuvers to get the craft home, and that worked.

I'm always amazed, when a modeller can get the wires so neat! The jackets with the lambswool collars look great - but rather WW2ish, no? Anyway - a fine work!

...which would make the letters appear like having been changed more than I thought.

In "No Parachute!" I read yesterday, that No. 46 Sqdn, RFC, encountered the Fokker Triplane on September 6th, 1917. This was one of the two prototypes, delivered to Manfred von Richthofen and Werner Voss. What I found most interesting, was the colour description of Lee. As he had written the letter on the same day, I don't think his memory distorted what he had witnessed. And he describes an all-red Triplane. Another patrol, B flight, had set out half an hour after us, and had fortunately come into our area just in time to see the Huns come down on us. They rushed up and joined in, and the Albatri, thinking no doubt that it was all a trap, began to pull clear. It was then that I had a brief contact with the triplane, which stood out not only because it was a tripe but because of it's performance. It was an asthonishing sight to watch it soaring up over the other Huns in a steep effortless climb. It's very like a Sopwith Triplane, rotary-engined, but the middle and top wings are longer than the bottom, and when it approaches, the wing-tips seem on the slope. I can't think why the Huns didn't resume their attack, they were nine to our ten, but they could have bested us, especially having the triplane. Instead, the two formations spent several minutes confronting each other, about 300 yards apart, in loose groups, with everybody circling, climbing and generally sparting for advantage but not taking it. There were individual dashes forward, with bursts of fire, then quick withdrawals, for nobody on either side seemed inclined to do an Albert Ball solo charge into the middle of the enemy. Then the triplane, becoming bored, started a little war on his own. He climbed up well above his pack and dived alone at whichever Pup happened to be handy, fired a burst, then zoomed up and away back to the others. I happened to be one of the handy Pups at a moment when I was in a steep turn after firing fifty rounds at a Hun dappled like a snake. I heard the rattle of guns, saw tracer flash by my right shoulder, jerked the machine into a split-ass turn towards him, but he zoomed as I fired, half-rolled and slid back to his own team. Afterwards I found, he'd put twelve rounds in a neat group through my right upper wing, a foot from the center section strut. I sincerely hope my brief burst holed him too. He was all red, even to the underside, so he could have been Richthofen himself. If so, I could be lucky writing this letter. Now, even if the pilot was not Richthofen (who had to set out on a delayed convalescent leave, after his head wound still caused some worries), the Fokker Triplane was his; as the one from Werner Voss had the original Fokker-green on light blue streak painting. I had never read anywhere before, that von Richthofen's first prototype had been overall red.

Not so easy to understand, but after looking at the chart for some time, it seems to say, that the British made their "breakthrough" successes with high numbers of casualties. The higher victory number of German aces may result from three factors: 1. the Germans were trained much better at the beginning of the war, even in early 1917 the British pilot training was damn short 2. German pilots could not go home after half a year, as the British fighter pilots could* - they had to serve through the whole war 3. German fighter pilots did not have to cross the lines much, and so they were safer from becoming PoW (* if I understand Arthur Gould Lee correct)

Whatever I tried that with - it never worked. You guys are doing a great job!

The most users would probably fly 1917 and 1918, so it is absolutely understandable. As far as I know "our devels" , they will want to complete any gaps and shortages sooner rather than later. Give them time. P4 is such a sweet dream to enjoy...!

Nofsdad, if you give me your hometown and country, I will add your name to our OFF Forum Pilots maps. Oh, and as you're the new lad: I'll have a virtual Warsteiner.

Flanders and northern France are so flat, that a bicycle trip would be fine, I'd say.

Well, the early Morane Saulnier with the rear gun will come with P4.

This post is for UncleAl, who can't answer right now due to some restrictions. He pointed out to check system requirements for OFF here: http://www.overfland....com/sysreq.htm He would also usually point towards the "General Help Topics" with truckloads of advice and good knowledge.

Also smooth and fine: Win 7 (32bit). But I will upgrade one soon day.

Do you mean by bicycle? That's something I want to do some day.

"Down at the local palais me and the boys were having the knees up. I turns round to Harry What's that noise, rattling the teacups? Better get your head down! Sounds like another V1!" (Godley & Creme, "Consequences")

Thank you guys!

Aaaaaah - that explains it: I have always only clicked "Britain" and "Fighter" on my search - dooohhh!!! Sorry, Lou - I'm quite aware that I had rather been the jester but the king.

Alright, thank you!

"Hals- und Beinbruch", TaillyHo - come back alive and in one piece!

Alright! Cheers!

Found this nice little Time Zone Converter, cause I wanted to know the time of TaillyHo right now, while we corresponded with each other. For me it is right now 12:17 h, when it is for TaillyHo in Hobart 20:17. http://www.timezoneconverter.com/cgi-bin/tzc.tzc