WWI Digest 382 Topics covered in this issue include: 1) Re: This List - Air or Armor? by GRBroman@aol.com 2) Re: Re[5]: This List - Air or Armor? by Lawrence Dunn 3) Tuesday, 2 January 1917, Plessis by "Marian Hollinger, Bradley Omanson" 4) Re: Nie.28 question by mbittner@juno.com 5) Re[4]: This List - Air or Armor? by SHUSTAD@email.usps.gov 6) Re: Driven Nuts by Joseph Gentile 7) Sopwith Hobbies by Bob Norgren 8) Re: Nie.28 question by Mark Shannon 9) Re: Sunday, 31 December 1916, Plessis (2nd entry of the day) by Rob 10) Re: Fokker Dr.I machine guns (was: This List) by Mark Shannon 11) Re: Sopwith Hobbies by aew (Allan Wright) 12) Re: Sunday, 31 December 1916, Plessis (2nd entry of the day) by "Marian Hollinger, Bradley Omanson" 13) Nieuport/Macchi 11 Bebe by Mark Shannon 14) Re: Who won? by Rob 15) Re: Sopwith Hobbies by Joseph Gentile 16) Re: Sunday, 31 December 1916, Plessis (2nd entry of the day) by Howard Rifkin 17) Book: The Jasta Pilots by Brian Nicklas 18) Re: Sunday, 31 December 1916, Plessis (2nd entry of the day) by "Marian Hollinger, Bradley Omanson" 19) Re: Sunday, 31 December 1916, Plessis (2nd entry of the day by Rob 20) Re: Nieuport/Macchi 11 Bebe by mbittner@juno.com 21) Some Albatros photos for sale. by Shane Weier 22) Re: Fokker Dr.I machine guns (was: This List) by Mick Fauchon 23) Re: Book: The Jasta Pilots by JimMaas@aol.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 07:16:09 -0500 From: GRBroman@aol.com To: wwi Subject: Re: This List - Air or Armor? Message-ID: <970102071609_1923085556@emout03.mail.aol.com> In a message dated 96-12-31 19:23:58 EST, you write: > >GRBroman@aol.com wrote: >> I can get back to you after i talk to Bob as he mixes his own >> colors using testors enamels. > >That would be swell. Thanks and happy gnu year. > > Lawrence, send me your snail mail address and I will pass it on to Bob. He said he will mail you some info. He isn't on the net yet. Glen ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 02 Jan 1997 08:13:29 -0800 From: Lawrence Dunn To: wwi Subject: Re: Re[5]: This List - Air or Armor? Message-ID: <32CBDEA9.4E7D@mail.idt.net> Shelley Goodwin wrote: > > Larry, > > I could've sworn I saw 'Steve' at the bottom of your message <:-| > ...thought you were the Mad Norseman, Steve Hustad. Please forgive my > chronic confusion. > Thanks for the response-all I need is another set of those danged > little rubbery soldiers! The Conquistadores & Aztecs are pretty cool > though...What species of acrylics do you favor? > > Riordan > > ______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________ > Subject: Re: Re[3]: This List - Air or Armor? > Author: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu at Internet > Date: 1/1/97 9:59 AM > > Shelley Goodwin wrote: > > > > > > Steve, > > > > Does Revell-Germany put out the set of "rubber"/urethane or ???? late-war > > Germany infantry, and if so, are any of the NCOs armed w/ Bergman smgs? > > Also, how do you get enamels to stick to that stuff? > > > > Riordan > > Hi: > > Revell AG does indeed do their Jerrys late war, and some of them do have > the Bergmann. Unfortunately, it seems to be hard to find artillery or > flamethrowers for their scale -- scratch-building would be a necessity. > > I painted mine with acrylics, so can't speak for enamels. But I just > primed them with Floquil White Spray, and painted! Worked fine, but I > know enamels are a different story. Good luck. > > Larry Coming in from (or, rather, back to) model-building from painting wargames miniatures, I just continued to use Polly-S, my figurine paint of choice. I'm very happy with their effect, but they dry very fast so don't really allow "wet-on-wet" painting effects. I know people who wargame with the Revell AG Thirty Years War and the Saxons/Normans figurines -- people come up to the table and are baffled by who manufactures them! Wonder how they'd feel if they knew the figs were plastic "toys" which are bigger, nicer and cheaper than 15mm lead figurines! The Civil War and Napoleonic lines are so popular that other manufacturers have stepped in to fill in the (gaping) holes in these lines for completelness of the armies! BTW, I've replied to several of your posts to the whole board even though you've addressed another person in your greeting. I can imagine how this might be annoying, and will stop if you'd like. Regards, Larry ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 02 Jan 1997 09:58:19 -0800 From: "Marian Hollinger, Bradley Omanson" To: wwi Subject: Tuesday, 2 January 1917, Plessis Message-ID: <32CBF73B.22E8@host.dmsc.net> Cloudy windy day and rain by night. Worked a good bit during day over notes on the place here for Major Parker. Did some pretty fair work for him too, if I do say so myself. Out for target practice with Lewis Machinegun on target range in early p.m. Received a nice New Year's present from Helen Harper--a pretty case for carrying bills. Did some more notes in evening and then turned in early. Feel very tired. ************************* from the War Diary of E.C.C. Genet ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 02 Jan 1997 05:40:15 EST From: mbittner@juno.com To: wwi Subject: Re: Nie.28 question Message-ID: <19970102.044203.14750.0.mbittner@juno.com> On Wed, 1 Jan 1997 23:56:17 -0500 bshatzer@orednet.org (Bill Shatzer) writes: > Well, this is not an aircraft on which I claim any degree of > expertise but I thought this one was metal panels to back to > just behind the cockpit opening and then fabric over stringers > the rest of the way back. So, I'm kinda uncertain where the > "natural wood" would come in. What am I missing? Well, I thought the same thing, until I took a close look at Windsock Vol 7 No 4. There are pictures from a restoration project that brought a Nie.28 *to flight*. According to the photo's - and text - it appears that there is "wood laminate" (for lack of a better term) about six inches to a foot behind the rear, cockpit opening. Unless I'm seeing things after my New Year's partying. ;-) Matt mbittner@juno.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 09:53:33 -0500 From: SHUSTAD@email.usps.gov To: "(u)WWI(a)PEASE1.SR.UNH.EDU" Subject: Re[4]: This List - Air or Armor? Message-ID: <0033000002088419000002*@MHS> Riordan, Yes, Revell does make 1/76 late war German Infantry - but they're not very good. Soft plastic, and stiff posing, etc. (No Bergman MG's). I scratch/heavily convert WW II Germans in 1/35 (Airfix multi-pose, DML & Tamiya parts) into WW I Germans for vignettes & dioramas, resin casting all of my own equipment from scratchbuilt masters, and redoing all uniforms & poses with DURO epoxy putty, etc. - so I don't have to screw around with enamel adhesion to soft plastic problems. Steve H. ______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________ Subject: Re[3]: This List - Air or Armor? Author: _WWI@PEASE1.SR.UNH.EDU (SMTP.WWI) at SSWGATE Date: 1/1/97 3:33 AM Steve, Does Revell-Germany put out the set of "rubber"/urethane or ???? late-war Germany infantry, and if so, are any of the NCOs armed w/ Bergman smgs? Also, how do you get enamels to stick to that stuff? Riordan ______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________ Subject: Re[2]: This List - Air or Armor? Author: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu at Internet Date: 12/31/96 9:19 AM About the 210mm artillery pieces; They *probably* used the same 3 paints/colors that many German infantrymen used to camouflage their steel helmets during the last 1 1/2 to 2 years of the war: These Humbrol enamel shades are close: Dark yellow ochre (Humbrol #63) (though a bit more yellow) Dark reddish brown (Humbrol #160) Dark green (Humbrol #30) From the photos I've seen of these the colors were usually applied in more of a random/'curvey' pattern on artillery pieces - rather than a lozenge or splinter type application. The base coat/color is almost certainly field gray (retained as a fourth camo color on some helmets by paintng around parts of the existing color with the new). (I collect these old German steel helmets, so I've seen quite a few). Steve H. (The Mad Norseman!) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- In a message dated 96-12-30 09:35:04 EST, you write: >Gott in Himmel!! Do you think the 210mm was a bigger piece? I wonder if >I should do my 1/35 210mm with the gaudy splinter scheme. Any details on >the colors used on those Rock Island guns? Also, do you know if the WWI >210mm used the wheel-shoes, or were they only "worn" in that OTHER war? Bob did a 21cm piece, it isn't in splinter but a scheme somewhat reminiscent of lozenge. . I believe the base color was feldgrau with a reddish brown, green, etc. I can get back to you after i talk to Bob as he mixes his own colors using testors enamels. His 2120 hs the steel roms with steel grousers that he scratched from plastic strip. Glen ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 09:54:47 -0600 (CST) From: Joseph Gentile To: wwi Subject: Re: Driven Nuts Message-ID: <199701021554.JAA27682@Walden.MO.NET> Major snippage.... >Modelers, unlike their artistic brethren in the fine arts, have a bad habit >of wanting everything cut and dried and keyed to model paints, so all they >have to do is take a laundry list of paint colors to the hobby shop and all >will be fine. Like a lot of things in life, it ain't so... > Bob, et al... I like to draw a comparison between modelling paints and a chromatic scale. If you look at a keyboard you will notice that there are only twelve tones that are used in the majority of "Western Music". Twelve different tones, that's it. Now, listen to your favorite CD. Whether it is Mahler or Sheryl Crow, Smashing Pumkins or John Coltrane is sure seems like there is a whole lot more music than just twelve little tones. The same is true for paints, dopes whatever...Regardless of which reference you are using there can only be a limited number of shades that a particular color can be. With today's choices at a well stocked hobby store one doesn't have to be a slave to a mixing cup and a pipette unless that is part of their joy within this hobby. I have found that I can usually get pretty close by using a FS to start with. For example, I wanted to finish my Czechmaster w.20 in the blue grey scheme. After inquiring here without any luck I called a known hobby dealer for some input. I turned to the back of my w.29 Datafile and gave him the Methuen reference as there was no FS number. He took that and matched it up on his paint rack and voila! Israeli Gray which I believe has a specific FS assigned to it. FWIW, the w.20 looks pretty good to me. If it is to grey, I'll blame it on the weather, too blue, the painters were suffering from a hang over. I guess what I have been trying to say is that "close enough" is good enough for a lot of us and is certainly a good starting point for our melody. If we choose to improvise and utilize tritone substitutions in music or a FS color that is readily available for this hobby then it is by choice and in some to most instances...close enough. Respectfully off of my soap box, Joe ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 02 Jan 1997 11:16:28 +0000 From: Bob Norgren To: wwi Subject: Sopwith Hobbies Message-ID: <32CB990C.ADB@ne.infi.net> Anyone have the email address for Juan at Sopwith Hobbies? Bob Sierra Scale Models smodels@ekx.infi.net ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 02 Jan 1997 10:21:40 -0600 From: Mark Shannon To: wwi Subject: Re: Nie.28 question Message-ID: <32CBE094.2D83@ix.netcom.com> Bill Shatzer wrote: > > Matt diligently typed: > > >So, reading the Scale Models articel Ray wrote on how to correct > >the Revell Nie.28, he mentions to paint the inside of the cockpit > >"medium grey". I'm thinking that the "forward" part of the > >cockpit should only be this color, while the aft part should be > >left "natural wood". > > > >Any other thinking on this? TIA! > > Well, this is not an aircraft on which I claim any degree of > expertise but I thought this one was metal panels to back to just > behind the cockpit opening and then fabric over stringers the > rest of the way back. So, I'm kinda uncertain where the "natural > wood" would come in. What am I missing? > > Cheers, > > -- > - Bill Shatzer bshatzer@orednet.org - -- According to the article Matt cites, the area you describe is sheathed in "wooden composite board" for which I read chipboard or masonite type material. There were metal panels in the area just behind the cowl, but I'm not sure how extensive they were, as the Scale Models article is the only one I have in any detail. This has been Mark and/or Mary Shannon at Shingend@ix.netcom.com Remember that every cliche started out as a stroke of genius. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 09:26:30 +0000 From: Rob To: wwi Subject: Re: Sunday, 31 December 1916, Plessis (2nd entry of the day) Message-ID: <9701020926.aa10745@scosysv.speechsys.com> > Nothing from beloved Gertrude as usual.... Wrote a > long letter to her and addressed it, as I have done for some time lately, > in care of her aunt Mrs Curry Barlow, in Ossining. A ha! Could it be that Mrs. Barlow is the villain of the piece? Perhaps she disapproves of this mercenary flyboy and his (no doubt) newly acquired French habits. Perhaps she hopes a heart-broken Gertie will settle down with that nice dentist from Auntie's bridge club. Rob, robj@speechsys.com. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 02 Jan 1997 10:27:58 -0600 From: Mark Shannon To: wwi Subject: Re: Fokker Dr.I machine guns (was: This List) Message-ID: <32CBE20E.423E@ix.netcom.com> Bill Shatzer wrote: > > In our last episode, Mick diligently typed: > > > > BTW, a propos DrIs......anyone like to offer an opinion about how > >and where the empty shell-cases discharge? > > Hmmm, a genuine ponderable! Imrie sez: "Empty cartridge cases were > ejected overboard from the bottoms of the guns, while the empty belts > were collected in a special box situated immediately in front of > the box for the loaded belts, via curved aluminium tubes which had > spring-loaded access flaps near the feed blocks" > > Rimmel, on the other hand, in the Datafile identifies the "curved > aluminium tubes" as "cartridge ejectors" and sez: "Some photos indicate > lower portions of the cartridge ejectors (port side) were tubular, rather > than rectangular as shown." > > Nowarra, not unexpectedly, sez nothing at all. > > Now, if the "curved aluminium tubes" are "cartridge ejectors", it appears > the one for the port MG would discharge somewhere just below and forward > of the trailing edge of the middle wing. Which leaves, however, the > question of where the one for the starboard MG would go. And, my own > understanding of the operation of the Spandau would lead me to believe, > however, that Imrie is correct and that spent cartridges _could not_ be > ejected into the "curved aluminium tubes" which show up in a lot of the > photos and that these could only serve to collect the empty belts. Thus > Imrie is correct that these "tubes" were for the belts and not for the > spent cases. > > Which leaves the question of just where the spent cartridge cases actually > went and how - "ejected overboard from the bottom of the guns" is hardly > a satisfactory answer. They gotta _get_ overboard somehow, but how and > where? Clearly there do not appear to be any "ejection ports" in the > bottom of the fuselage so that seems to be out. Nor, do there seem to > be any photos which show appropriate holes in the fuselage sides - > although the area underneath the middle wing is almost always in deep > shadow so there _might_ be something hiding there. Yet, I can't > find it. > > Which leaves the entire question as a "ponderable" for the nonce. > Alex Imrie knows the answer, I suspect, but, alas, he failed to > publish it so far as I can determine. > > Any chance the spent cases were not "ejected overboard" at all but > rather were collected in some sort of box or bag immediately under > the MGs? After a quick check of my books, I can't find any holes > for spent cartridges to eject overboard on the Albatros D.V or the > Fokker D.VII either. Given the material shortages Germany faced, it > would have made some sense for the Germans to attempt to recover > spent cartridges rather than ejecting them overboard if that could > have been done without compromising the effectiveness of the aircraft. > Just a thought. > > Excellent question - a wishy washy answer. But, it is the best I can do. > > Oh, and welcome back, Mick. We missed ya'! > > Cheers, > > -- > - Bill Shatzer bshatzer@orednet.org - -- I'd have to check, but I seem to recall a picture in either the Squadron/Signal DRI book, Nowarra's other DrI/DVII book, or Imrie's Triplane book that shows where a squadron or personal level modification was done making a 'rain gutter' type fairing to steer the spent cartridges around the cockpit coaming. This would seem to indicate that they just popped out of the breech to fall on the midwing area and go where they would from there. This has been Mark and/or Mary Shannon at Shingend@ix.netcom.com Remember that every cliche started out as a stroke of genius. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 11:33:31 -0500 (EST) From: aew (Allan Wright) To: wwi Subject: Re: Sopwith Hobbies Message-ID: <199701021633.LAA01880@pease1.sr.unh.edu> > Anyone have the email address for Juan at Sopwith Hobbies? > > Bob > Sierra Scale Models > smodels@ekx.infi.net >From the Mailorder sources list on the WWW page: SOPWITH@worldnet.att.net -Al =============================================================================== Allan Wright Jr. | You fell victim to one of the 'classic' blunders! University of New Hampshire+--------------------------------------------------- Research Computing Center | WWI Modeling mailing list: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Internet: aew@unh.edu | WWI Modeling WWW Page: http://pease1.sr.unh.edu =============================================================================== ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 02 Jan 1997 12:31:34 -0800 From: "Marian Hollinger, Bradley Omanson" To: wwi Subject: Re: Sunday, 31 December 1916, Plessis (2nd entry of the day) Message-ID: <32CC1B26.414A@host.dmsc.net> Rob wrote: > > > Nothing from beloved Gertrude as usual.... Wrote a > > long letter to her and addressed it, as I have done for some time lately, > > in care of her aunt Mrs Curry Barlow, in Ossining. > > A ha! Could it be that Mrs. Barlow is the villain of the piece? > Perhaps she disapproves of this mercenary flyboy and his (no doubt) > newly acquired French habits. Perhaps she hopes a heart-broken > Gertie will settle down with that nice dentist from Auntie's bridge > club. > Rob, > robj@speechsys.com. I'll second this suspicion! (I haven't read ahead). Bradley ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 02 Jan 1997 10:39:12 -0600 From: Mark Shannon To: wwi Subject: Nieuport/Macchi 11 Bebe Message-ID: <32CBE4B0.29D6@ix.netcom.com> Since we're currently touching on the topic of Nieuports, I'm wondering what 1/48 scale (of course) kits are or are planned as available. Has Smer or Glencoe put out the old Aurora Nieuport 11? Is there a rumor that Eduard will release a new kit? The reason I ask is that the Scale Models article shows information for the factory finish of the Macchi built Bebes. Picture this, overall natural or silver doped, underside of outer 2/3's of port wings red, starboards green, Tricolori diagonal band behind cockpit (or roundel), rudder, and sometimes tailplane, green/white/red, cowling green/white/red, and black rib tapes on fuselage longerons and tailplane. It sounds more like a demonstration team than a warplane, doesn't it. -- This has been Mark and/or Mary Shannon at Shingend@ix.netcom.com Remember that every cliche started out as a stroke of genius. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 09:51:06 +0000 From: Rob To: wwi Subject: Re: Who won? Message-ID: <9701020951.aa10983@scosysv.speechsys.com> Riordan: I do. A book on the Freikorps (title and author elude me, but I will make a note to look it up tonight). My opinion on the motives of the German High command are based on this book in large part. It certainly blows away the "good soldiers vs. Nazis" excuse we hear so often about German conduct in the other war, as well as making the atrocities in Belgium easier to understand. I think you will find the German Reds far more sympathetic figures after reading this. Did you get the Griffin GIF? What do you think? Ciao. Rob, robj@speechsys.com. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 10:59:48 -0600 (CST) From: Joseph Gentile To: wwi Subject: Re: Sopwith Hobbies Message-ID: <199701021659.KAA09221@Walden.MO.NET> At 11:26 AM 1/2/97 -0500, you wrote: >Anyone have the email address for Juan at Sopwith Hobbies? > >Bob >Sierra Scale Models >smodels@ekx.infi.net > >SOPWITH@worldnet.att.net ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 02 Jan 97 12:04:57 -0500 From: Howard Rifkin To: wwi Subject: Re: Sunday, 31 December 1916, Plessis (2nd entry of the day) Message-ID: <9701021704.AA27012@velantia.unx.dec.com> > > Nothing from beloved Gertrude as usual.... Wrote a > > long letter to her and addressed it, as I have done for some time lately, > > in care of her aunt Mrs Curry Barlow, in Ossining. > > A ha! Could it be that Mrs. Barlow is the villain of the piece? > Perhaps she disapproves of this mercenary flyboy and his (no doubt) > newly acquired French habits. Perhaps she hopes a heart-broken > Gertie will settle down with that nice dentist from Auntie's bridge > club. I have to point out that I suggested months ago, that it was Gertie's mom who is intersepting the letters in both directions. He only started sending the letters to Aunt Curry in Oct. or so after not receiving anything. I think that Aunt Curry is just giving them to Getie's mom who is then tossing them. Howard ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 2 Jan 97 15:38:03 EST From: Brian Nicklas To: Subject: Book: The Jasta Pilots Message-ID: <199701022041.PAA02750@pease1.sr.unh.edu> Before I spend $45.00, does anyone have a review or comments on the Grub Street Press book "The Jasta Pilots"? Thanks, Brian Nicklas ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 02 Jan 1997 16:44:57 -0800 From: "Marian Hollinger, Bradley Omanson" To: wwi Subject: Re: Sunday, 31 December 1916, Plessis (2nd entry of the day) Message-ID: <32CC5689.13F3@host.dmsc.net> Howard Rifkin wrote: > > > > Nothing from beloved Gertrude as usual.... Wrote a > > > long letter to her and addressed it, as I have done for some time lately, > > > in care of her aunt Mrs Curry Barlow, in Ossining. > > > > A ha! Could it be that Mrs. Barlow is the villain of the piece? > > Perhaps she disapproves of this mercenary flyboy and his (no doubt) > > newly acquired French habits. Perhaps she hopes a heart-broken > > Gertie will settle down with that nice dentist from Auntie's bridge > > club. > > I have to point out that I suggested months ago, that it was Gertie's mom who is > intersepting the letters in both directions. He only started sending the letters > to Aunt Curry in Oct. or so after not receiving anything. I think that Aunt > Curry is just giving them to Getie's mom who is then tossing them. > > Howard Duly noted, Howard. If this theory proves true, we'll acknowledge you our Sherlock. I wonder why this suspicion hasn't occured to Genet! A poor trusting soul, I guess. Bradley ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 15:22:42 +0000 From: Rob To: wwi Subject: Re: Sunday, 31 December 1916, Plessis (2nd entry of the day Message-ID: <9701021522.aa14125@scosysv.speechsys.com> > Duly noted, Howard. If this theory proves true, we'll acknowledge you our > Sherlock. I wonder why this suspicion hasn't occured to Genet! A poor > trusting soul, I guess. > Bradley Hmmm. Maybe it has. Maybe that's why he started sending stuff to Auntie. If I were him, I'd send a Registered Letter then I'd contact the Postal Inspectors. Rob, robj@speechsys.com. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 02 Jan 1997 17:21:23 EST From: mbittner@juno.com To: wwi Subject: Re: Nieuport/Macchi 11 Bebe Message-ID: <19970102.162255.14798.0.mbittner@juno.com> On Thu, 2 Jan 1997 11:43:11 -0500 Mark Shannon writes: > Since we're currently touching on the topic of Nieuports, I'm > wondering what 1/48 scale (of course) kits are or are planned as > available. Has Smer or Glencoe put out the old Aurora Nieuport > 11? Is there a rumor that Eduard will release a new kit? Blue Max did one a few years ago. Nice kit, although their typical early efforts with no cockpit detail. Yes, I have one...hey! it's a Nieuport!! > The reason I ask is that the Scale Models article shows > information for the factory finish of the Macchi built Bebes. > Picture this, overall natural or silver doped, underside of > outer 2/3's of port wings red, starboards green, Tricolori > diagonal band behind cockpit (or roundel), rudder, and sometimes > tailplane, green/white/red, cowling green/white/red, and black > rib tapes on fuselage longerons and tailplane. > It sounds more like a demonstration team than a warplane, > doesn't it. Mark, you really need to get the Datafile Specials, if you don't already have them. A must if you model the Nieuport "v-strutters". Matt mbittner@juno.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 08:33:07 +1100 From: Shane Weier To: "'wwi'" Subject: Some Albatros photos for sale. Message-ID: <01BBF950.BF49B800@pc087b.mim.com.au> GDay all, Back on 17 November last year, Bill Bacon asked me what I knew about the present and "at capture" markings of the Canberra Albatros. My answer was short and sweet. "F... all, but I *do* know who could tell me" To cut a long story short, I subsequently posted a letter to Eric Watson, a past president and fellow society member of the Australian Society of WW1 Aero Historians, and one of the members who took part in the restoration of the aircraft almost 30 years ago. I have received a reply from Eric, who is in extremely ill health. He is selling off the last of a lifelong collection of memorabilia and has asked me to pass on this It relates to the full set of restoration photos taken at the time of the work, some of which were reproduced in the Windsock Datafile Special on the Albatros. "Some weeks ago, I received an inquiry from an Italian enthusiast, whom I was unable to assist and advised him so, with "due apologies. Subsequently I was going through my lifelong collection of WW1 photos etc and came across my own "personal set of the Albatros restoration photos. These consist of 166 hand-made black and white enlargements, each "measuring a nominal 16cm x 11cm (some have been cropped to better match the subject matter). among them are "several photographs of the fully restored machine, taken just prior to its return to the AWM (Canberra). " "I have offered the complete set (only) to Mr. G.... for a price of $300 (Aust.) plus insured airmail. To date he has not "responded to my offer which will expire on December 31st. After that date the offer will be open to the first taker. If "you (and/or your Internet friends) are interested, I suggest that you advise me accordingly, so that we can commence "negotiations immediately after the expiry date of my offer" So, if anyone is interested, mail me as soon as possible, and I will contact Eric. Finally, I am typing up the content of Erics FIVE page reply vis a vis the Albatros D.V which is relevant to this list and will post it as soon as possible Regards Shane ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 09:48:28 +1100 (EST) From: Mick Fauchon To: wwi Cc: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Fokker Dr.I machine guns (was: This List) Message-ID: Bill, > > In our last episode, Mick diligently typed: I like it! 80) > > Hmmm, a genuine ponderable! Imrie sez: "Empty cartridge cases were > > ejected overboard from the bottoms of the guns, while the empty belts > > were collected in a special box situated immediately in front of > > the box for the loaded belts, via curved aluminium tubes which had > > spring-loaded access flaps near the feed blocks" Imrie is quite correct, as far as this goes. > > Rimmel, on the other hand, in the Datafile identifies the "curved > > aluminium tubes" as "cartridge ejectors" and sez: "Some photos indicate > > lower portions of the cartridge ejectors (port side) were tubular, rather > > than rectangular as shown." Rimmel is incorrect in this: the tubes are for the spent *belts*, not the cartridge-cases. I doubt if aluminium would have take the impact of the cases anyway. So we can rule that one out. What I'm saying is that the port- side dischargees were emphatically *not* for the shells. > > > > Nowarra, not unexpectedly, sez nothing at all. Be thankful for small mercies. > > > > Now, if the "curved aluminium tubes" are "cartridge ejectors", it appears > > the one for the port MG would discharge somewhere just below and forward > > of the trailing edge of the middle wing. Which leaves, however, the > > question of where the one for the starboard MG would go. And, my own > > understanding of the operation of the Spandau would lead me to believe, > > however, that Imrie is correct and that spent cartridges _could not_ be > > ejected into the "curved aluminium tubes" which show up in a lot of the > > photos and that these could only serve to collect the empty belts. Thus > > Imrie is correct that these "tubes" were for the belts and not for the > > spent cases. > Absolutely correct. The shells discharge just underneath the end of the barrel, and are ejected in line with the line of fire, i.e. the diischarge *at a lower level* than the feed and belt-discharge chutes. > > > a satisfactory answer. They gotta _get_ overboard somehow, but how and > > where? Clearly there do not appear to be any "ejection ports" in the > > bottom of the fuselage so that seems to be out. Can we be sure of that? It's reallt a pity that there isn't an extant DrI, or failing that, a really clear photo. Nor, do there seem to > > be any photos which show appropriate holes in the fuselage sides - > > although the area underneath the middle wing is almost always in deep > > shadow so there _might_ be something hiding there. Yet, I can't > > find it. That's what I'm getting at, and you'll see why in aminute 80) > > Which leaves the entire question as a "ponderable" for the nonce. > > Alex Imrie knows the answer, I suspect, but, alas, he failed to > > publish it so far as I can determine. Maybe we should ask him. Or better still, maybe the venerable Peter K. could ask him on our behalf. > > > > Any chance the spent cases were not "ejected overboard" at all but > > rather were collected in some sort of box or bag immediately under > > the MGs? After a quick check of my books, I can't find any holes > > for spent cartridges to eject overboard on the Albatros D.V or the > > Fokker D.VII either. Aha! Now you're onto it! If you crawl around underneath an Albatros, or a Pfalz DXII [as I've done 80)], you'll notice that there *are* discharge ports underneath the fuselage. This was the common system for Albatros, for Pfalz, and I suspect at least Fokker DVVs, though I'm not prepared to be dogmatic about the latter at this stage. If you have a look at the Windsock datafile on the Pfalz DIII and the drawings and photos in the Smithsonian Albatros book, you'll find that the system they used worked as follows, and this, BTW, can be verified by looking at extant examples: a dischage- tube was coupled to the body of the gun by a double banjo-clip on the rear-end of the cooling-jacket; it was led foreward in the direction of fire for a small distance, and then curved *down* through 90 deg. through the fuselage, and exited through a hole in the fuselage bottom, discharging the casings into the slipstream *underneath the aircraft*. This system also appears in one set of drawings for the DVII. Though I haven't seen it referred to for DrIs, it would seem to me that it would have been the standard, or at least logical system to use. It's difficult to provide photographic evidence, because all of the above is hidden at the top-end underneath the fuselage-decking. Lack of photographic "evidence" around the gun/cockpit area doesn't prove to me that it doesn't exist. Given the material shortages Germany faced, it > > would have made some sense for the Germans to attempt to recover > > spent cartridges rather than ejecting them overboard if that could > > have been done without compromising the effectiveness of the aircraft. > > Just a thought. That makes sense to me too, but for some reason no attempt was made to recover the empty cases. > > Oh, and welcome back, Mick. We missed ya'! Cut it out, Bill, you'll make me cry! 80) I missed you guys,too, but sadly it wasn't a matter of my choice. However, it looks like I'm back in business, and glad to be back. I'll have to confess to doing a lot of lurking, but for one reason or another really didn't have time to get as involved as I would have liked. Cheers, > I'd have to check, but I seem to recall a picture in either the > Squadron/Signal DRI book, Nowarra's other DrI/DVII book, or Imrie's > Triplane book that shows where a squadron or personal level modification > was done making a 'rain gutter' type fairing to steer the spent > cartridges around the cockpit coaming. I've seen this too, but I feel that this would be arguing from the particular to the general; my feeling is that it was a personal mdification... and my problem is this: I'm buggered if I can see why you'd do it! This would seem to indicate that > they just popped out of the breech to fall on the midwing area and go > where they would from there. Why? Why shower the fabric and the pilot with hot shell with sharp edges? They could be destructive to both, and certainly a nuisance to the pilot's aim, where a fraction of a second could be critical. In short, this system doesn't make sense to me. It also has a mechanical disadvantage: if you have a look a a cutaway of the LMG [or LMG]08/15 you'll see what I mean. These deflectors are on the level of the fuselage decking; the shell cases are withdrawn from the belt, and then passed *downwards* to eject *underneath* the belt-discharge port, ie underneath the barrel, and therefore under the decking. To get them into the deflectors they would then need to be brought *upwards* 2 to 3" and rotated in their travel-path through at least 90 deg.. Why? They would then ricochet and spin off undpredictably in all directions [witness the deflector-plates on the prop-bledes of Garros, Morane!], in all likelyhood back towards the pilot. To me it would make a lot more sense to use the system that was already being used. Cheers, Mick. -- -- Mick Fauchon | Internet: ulmjf@dewey.newcastle.edu.au Reference Section, Auchmuty Library | Ph (intl+61+49) 215861 University of Newcastle, AUSTRALIA | Fax (intl+61+49) 215833 MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM M M M Tasmanian Devil: "#@%!&^*%%...!#@!&**%^@@#$#-+*+*&##@...!!" M M M M Yosemite Sam : "Cut out that Army talk!..Yer in the Navy now!" M M M MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 17:55:07 -0500 From: JimMaas@aol.com To: wwi Subject: Re: Book: The Jasta Pilots Message-ID: <970102175506_36747383@emout12.mail.aol.com> In a message dated 97-01-02 15:50:25 EST, you write: >Before I spend $45.00, does anyone have a review >or comments on the Grub Street Press book >"The Jasta Pilots"? > >Thanks, >Brian Nicklas > > I got it and would recommend it - but probably you should also get "Above the Lines" as well. "Above..." covers the German aces. "Jasta..." covers everyone else, in alphabetic order. Both books are mainly _real_ (sometimes just date of birth) brief biographies of pilots, plus a list of units they were assigned to and victories, if any. Altho' the aces are included in the alpha roster in "Jasta..." in each case the reader is referred to "Above..." From a modeller's perspective, the key part of "Jasta..." are the unit descriptions and info (with one tone drawing each) on the markings of each of the Jastas, done by Greg v Wyngarden, of Aerofrome Muddler fame (okay, I guess he's done a couple of other things since). Both "Above..." and "Jasta..." are likely to be fundemental references for the foreseeable future, so if you can, get 'em. ------------------------------ End of WWI Digest 382 *********************