Olham

Haha, that sounds like you also played those picture quartet games in America, Hauksbee? Yes, Udet had a fiancée named Eleonore - he nicknamed her "Lo". (He was always a bit short, wasn't he?) "LO" was written on all his Jasta 37 Albatros D.V, the Fokker D.VII and also on the Siemens-Schuckert D.III or D.IV (not sure which one he flew). But you guys wanted Fokker pics.

Well, as a kid, she didn't perform bad at all - she could always compete with the others. Then she grew older, but didn't get stronger. Her beauty still increased, though!

Hauksbee, I guess LIMA made a joke. Triplane used so many wings, that a monoplane had to follow. Get it? Oh, the firepower of my girl is not what I'm worried about. But she isn't the best dancer in the competition, with her German temper...

Yes, I almost only make Albatros skins, and I fly WW1 sims only because of that aircraft. It's all for the looks of it! The Dr.I, or the Fokker D.VII are ugly compared to her. I KNOW they were better fighters - but I'm only in it for the looks. Kinda "vanity-war"... Beat them with beauty!

Is that an American comic figure, the "Yellow Kid"? Yellow looks good on the Dr.I !

Yes, I watched it from the other forum - Jammer spent a lot of time making it, and the video shows - great job, Jammer!

Haha - wasn't that a film with Dustin Hofman? Which plane is he flying?

Geeze - seems you were really in the "black sheep department" there! Could you make any civil use of what you had learned there, Jim?

You could write it like a story, Jim - a colleague of mine, who's name I have forgotten, happend to witness this one day...

Thanks for the insight, Jim - a great story indeed!

Thanks, I'll watch it when back from the job. Funny - you are still up, and I am up again. (Without coffee, this life would be impracticable...)

Interesting find, Hauksbee - I had never seen that mount!

The "magic of WW1 planes" might be - that they can fly at all - that you can survive the flight in one piece (Sorry, couldn't resist! )

What a simple - but overwhelming - idea! Bringing up emotions without rattling sabres or mourning recitations of sad poems...

THE Battle? Weren't there more than one?

I know nothing about technology, Jim, so I can only guess: maybe any straight number would mean, that always two cylinders would have to be in the same situation? Which is impossible with an off-center camshaft, I guess?

I never had any idea how these engines worked. Now I found this animated video. That helped me a bit further. You can adjust the speed, so you can see it real slow. Enjoy! http://www.animatedengines.com/gnome.html

Maybe JFM can clear that up. I think Fokker had a good access to those Oberursel rotaries, or even had a certain amount of them already. Same maybe for structural parts they had built and already tested for the Dr.1 ? An inline engine would have needed a totally new design, I guess.

The design design of Reinhold Platz was based on the Dr.1. So the D.VI is much like the Dr.1, but with only two wings (which look more like the D.VII wings). At low altitude it was even faster than the Fokker D.VII, by the way!

Craaa - zeeeee!!! It looks as if they all had not yet understood the importance of energy/engine power/forward speed. How could they seriously go to three wings on an Albatros D.V, which was already regarded as obsolete, when they didn't give it a stronger engine??? The Fokker D.VI is said to have been a great fighter craft - nimble and good climb, and a good forward speed, even a bit higher up. That could have been introduced instead of the Dr.1, had they not been in their triplane craze. But when they finally built it, the rotaries were getting sorted out, and the Fokker D.VII was the design of the hour - so only 47 or so were built. https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fokker_D.VI

Arghhh!!! You knew I hate it! I LOVE the original Albatros D.V and D.Va for their beauty - but this triplane is a crime against good taste! Uargh!!!

Yes, Akronym. As a designer, I always found that you can better copy a simple to build chair which is also great for sitting, than to design a completely new chair nobody had come up with yet - which is uncomfortable. As for cars or aircraft, you should always think about the whole of the design. What is it's purpose? What does it need to fullfill that? What does the driver or pilot need to be able to handle it best? What do the mechanics need to be able to access everything easily, and to exchange parts? Of course, after all these seemingly logical points, come the producers who give the money, and they ask "What does it cost to produce that?" Those guys can easily change a good design idea into a mediocre one, or even crapp.

??? What is KISS?

Here is an interesting article from WIKI about an American pilot of German-Irish origins, who broke the altitude record without oxygen supply with that airplane. He almost got killed doing that, because he went unconscious due to the lack of oxygen. He became conscious again at an alt of only 600 meters (ca. 1800 feet), and although he was almost blind from the lacking effect, he managed to land the craft intact. https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rudolph_William_Schroeder Strange that there is no Anglo-American page for this.

It does look like an extremely sturdy build. Wonder what it might have weighed...