WWI Digest 431 Topics covered in this issue include: 1) Cannon armed Gothas by "Shelley Goodwin" 2) Re: Cannon armed Gothas by bshatzer@orednet.org (Bill Shatzer) 3) Re: Shops in London by Graham Nash 4) Cannon Armed Spads by James Gibbons 5) Re: Scale by "Brian Bushe" 6) Re[2]: Cannon armed Gothas by "Shelley Goodwin" 7) New Kits by Bob Norgren 8) Airfix UN-releases by Shane Weier 9) Re: Scale by "Valenciano . Jose" 10) Re: Cannon Armed Spads by mbittner@juno.com 11) Re: Cannon Armed Spads by gspring@ix.netcom.com 12) Blowing off steam by Shane Weier 13) Sign/Eduard Fokker D VIII by barrett@iplink.net (barrett) 14) Re: Re[2]: Cannon armed Gothas by bshatzer@orednet.org (Bill Shatzer) 15) Re: Re[2]: Cannon armed Gothas by "Rob " 16) Re: Re[2]: Cannon armed Gothas by "Rob " 17) Re: Cannon Armed Spads by "Bill Bacon" ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 11 Feb 97 23:02:59 PST From: "Shelley Goodwin" To: wwi Subject: Cannon armed Gothas Message-ID: <9701118557.AA855730939@mx.Ricochet.net> PK et al, Some of you may have seen the two photos in the Gotha! book featuring the expiramental mounting of a Becker cannon on the nose of an LVG-built G.IV. Was this intended as a specialized anti-tank armament, and if so, what kind of camo scheme might have been used had this variant become operational? Riordan ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 11 Feb 1997 23:38:38 -0800 From: bshatzer@orednet.org (Bill Shatzer) To: wwi Subject: Re: Cannon armed Gothas Message-ID: <199702120738.AA01698@ednet1.orednet.org> Riodan writes: > PK et al, > > Some of you may have seen the two photos in the Gotha! book featuring > the expiramental mounting of a Becker cannon on the nose of an > LVG-built G.IV. Was this intended as a specialized anti-tank armament, Good God, no! I can't imagine anyone so crazed as to imagine that a G. IV "tank buster" cruising over the battlefield would have a life expectancy of more than 3 or 4 minutes. I suspect this cannon installation was more or less a "let's see how this works" experiment, perhaps with the idea that a cannon would allow intercepting fighters to be "potted" at longer ranges than would rifle caliber machine guns. But, more likely, with no clear tactical concept at all. After all, the Becker cannon was a BIG gun and if you want to find out how it is actually going to work in the air, you are going to have to put it on a BIG aircraft - tucking it aboard an Albatros D.V is simply not going to work. In other words, the cannon installation was more a test of the cannon itself than a test of the G.IV/cannon "weapons system" (as we would term it today.) Cheers, -- - Bill Shatzer bshatzer@orednet.org - "Oh, what sad times are these when passing ruffians can say 'ni' at will to old ladies." ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 12 Feb 1997 09:19:13 -0800 From: Graham Nash To: wwi Subject: Re: Shops in London Message-ID: <199702120917.AA28089@egate.citicorp.com> Charles A. Duckworth wrote: > > I recently found out that I will be making a business trip to London on 2/16 > for two weeks. I have been to Motor Books and picked up several books on our > favorite topic what are the really good WWI modeling/book shops in the city I > should hit? Unlike Bill Bacon, I wouldn't bother much with Foyles as they now seem only to have the 'in-print' stuff. For your best book bet, try the Aviation Bookshop, 656 Holloway Road, Nearest tube station is Archway, and its about 10 minutes walk down the Holloway Road. For models, try Comet Minatures (good/old stuff Vee-day,Czechmasters,Merlin but all v.expensive), 'nearest' tube being Clapham Common (about 15 minutes walk) or Hannants which is next to Colindale tube (Pegasus,Smer lots of vacuforms some bargains in the back). I wonder why all the good places can be reached on the Northern Line? P.S. Don't forget your Credit Card... ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 12 Feb 1997 07:58:24 -0500 From: James Gibbons To: "'wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu'" Subject: Cannon Armed Spads Message-ID: <01BC18BA.8B17AEA0@jgibbons.together.net> Hiro, Mike M, Rob, Bill S, Thanks for your help, it was very useful and exactly the sort of information I was looking for. Thanks again, James ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 12 Feb 1997 14:28:09 +0000 From: "Brian Bushe" To: wwi Subject: Re: Scale Message-ID: <199702121427.OAA06333@itl.net> re: Re: Scale > > This to save money to allow expansion of popular classes (1/35 > > tanks that never were, 1/35 tanks that no-one even drew on a > > napkin, 1/35 german soldiers pissing on a lamp-post, that sort > > of frequently moulded stuff) > > The same is happening with a/c: all those dang German paper > projects. As far as I see it, who cares? > I see several reasons for this: 1. everyone wants something different in there collection 2. you can tell the colour police to sod off (to some extent) 3. details can be skipped due to lack of reference 4. most of this creations are fairly whimsical, innovative or just bizarre! is there any other 'period' that allows this sort of flexibility? wwi springs to mind! Now if only people would see it that way. Brian 'My mind is going. There is no question of it' - Hal 9000 Brian Bushe syclone@itl.net Syclone Systems Fieldhouse Lane (44) 01628 476 500 Marlow Fax 01628 475 522 Buckinghamshire England ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 12 Feb 97 07:36:40 PST From: "Shelley Goodwin" To: wwi Subject: Re[2]: Cannon armed Gothas Message-ID: <9701128557.AA855761770@mx.Ricochet.net> Bill, I posed this question because there was a specialized heavily armored anti-tank AEG G.IV that went into limited production armed with 2 Becker cannons, one in an armored front turret and the other presumably on the aft gun ring. I thought perhaps the Gotha had been considered for the same role. Riordan ______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________ Subject: Re: Cannon armed Gothas Author: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu at Internet Date: 2/11/97 11:41 PM Riodan writes: > PK et al, > > Some of you may have seen the two photos in the Gotha! book featuring > the expiramental mounting of a Becker cannon on the nose of an > LVG-built G.IV. Was this intended as a specialized anti-tank armament, Good God, no! I can't imagine anyone so crazed as to imagine that a G. IV "tank buster" cruising over the battlefield would have a life expectancy of more than 3 or 4 minutes. I suspect this cannon installation was more or less a "let's see how this works" experiment, perhaps with the idea that a cannon would allow intercepting fighters to be "potted" at longer ranges than would rifle caliber machine guns. But, more likely, with no clear tactical concept at all. After all, the Becker cannon was a BIG gun and if you want to find out how it is actually going to work in the air, you are going to have to put it on a BIG aircraft - tucking it aboard an Albatros D.V is simply not going to work. In other words, the cannon installation was more a test of the cannon itself than a test of the G.IV/cannon "weapons system" (as we would term it today.) Cheers, -- - Bill Shatzer bshatzer@orednet.org - "Oh, what sad times are these when passing ruffians can say 'ni' at will to old ladies." ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 12 Feb 1997 12:20:11 +0000 From: Bob Norgren To: wwi Subject: New Kits Message-ID: <3301B57B.6F43@ne.infi.net> Sierra has released the following new vacform kits: 1/48 DFW C.V with injected exhausts (two types), radiators (cheek and standard), prop with separate spinner, and guns. 1/72 Friedrichshafen FF.49C Floatplane with injected prop/spinner, exhaust, radiator and Aeroclub Benz engine, guns and gunring. (See...I'm still making 1/72. Now where did I put the plans for that Poll Giant?!) Write for prices. Bob ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Feb 1997 08:11:14 +1100 From: Shane Weier To: "'wwi'" Subject: Airfix UN-releases Message-ID: <01BC1985.7C1C3760@pc087b.mim.com.au> Hi all, Just pulled this off of the rec.models.scale newsgroup. ========================================== >As I've just obtained the 1997 Aifrix catalog I've compared it to last >year's and the following items have been deleted. > >AIRCRAFT >srs1 >01064 1/72 Focke Wulf FW190 D >01078 1/72 Albatros DV >01079 1/72 Airco DH4 >01080 1/72 Bristol F.2B >01081 1/72 Spad VII >01082 1/72 Sopwith Pup >01076 1/72 RE 8 >01077 1/72 LFG Roland C-II >============================================ Yes, well, this is the full list of 1/72 changes - and note that all but one are WW1 birds. Seems Airfix doesn't want to play with us just now. By way of some comfort, at least we know there's probably not a huge market, so the kits that are in the shops won't disappear overnight Shane ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Feb 1997 07:16:07 +0800 (GMT+0800) From: "Valenciano . Jose" To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Scale Message-ID: On Wed, 12 Feb 1997, Brian Bushe wrote: > I see several reasons for this: > > 4. most of this creations are fairly whimsical, innovative or just > bizarre! > > is there any other 'period' that allows this sort of flexibility? wwi > springs to mind! Now if only people would see it that way. Did they actually fly the assymetrical Gotha? ********************************************************************* Joey Valenciano WW1 modeller, teacher, jazz musician, joeyval@pusit.admu.edu.ph sitarist tel. (632) 921-26-75 Metro-Manila, Philippines "The more you know, the more you don't know." ********************************************************************* ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 12 Feb 1997 18:28:42 EST From: mbittner@juno.com To: wwi Subject: Re: Cannon Armed Spads Message-ID: <19970212.172958.14334.0.mbittner@juno.com> On Wed, 12 Feb 1997 08:04:24 -0500 James Gibbons writes: > Thanks for your help, it was very useful and exactly the sort of > information I was looking for. Gads, I've been meaning to do this for awhile. Sorry it took so long. Here's what I have in the database: Arco-Aircam #9 Aviation History, Sep 1991 Windsock, Vol 4 No 3, Vol 9 No 2 and Vol 9 No 3 WW1 Warplanes, Vol 1 HTH. Matt mbittner@juno.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 12 Feb 1997 19:22:30 -0600 (CST) From: gspring@ix.netcom.com To: wwi Subject: Re: Cannon Armed Spads Message-ID: <1997212192043441@ix.netcom.com> On 02/10/97 23:51:25 Bill wrote: >Just a couple additional details on this bird. While apparently 300 >SPAD XIICa.1's were ordered, apparently nothing close to that number >were actually built. The number of SPAD XII's at the front varied between >five in April, '18 and eight at the time of the armistice. > >The SPAD XII was basically a SPAD VII fuselage with the 200 hp Hispano >and larger wing surfaces. The engine was later upgraded to 220 hp. >There were also modifications to increase the wing area. The XIIs fuselage is a variation between the VII and XIII. The wings are the same as the XIIIs but with a bit of stagger. There has been a Hi Tech conversion kit to turn the DML XIII into a XII listed in Aeromaster's catalog for a couple of months with a release date and price TBA. With my previous experience of Hi Tech I will want to examine one or see a review before purchasing it. In addition to the Windsock article (with plans) in Vol.4 #3, there are photos of the engine/gun mount in Harry Woodman's 'Early Aircraft Armament pg. 213 and in 'Fighter Aircraft of the 1914-1918 War' by W.M. Lamberton pg. 182. The presence of the gun barrel between the cylinder banks necessitated moving the carburetor to the bottom of the oil pan. >Guynemer's SPAD XII was S 382 and he scored, apparently, two victories >with this aircraft on August 18. 1917 when he downed an Albatros >with machine gun fire and a DFW with the cannon. The following day, >S 382 was damaged while attacking a German two seater and, so far as >I can determine, never used the SPAD XII again, prefering, apparently >SPAD XIII S 504. There is a film clip of Guynemer showing S 382 to General Franchet d'Esperey. The aircraft has no wings mounted. The radiator has no slats in place, just the core showing. The Deperdussin control shows clearly in the cockpit. I have read that six cannon rounds were carried in a rack for manual feeding to the breech. Some guns had rifled barrels firing explosive shells and some were smooth-bore firing cannister. Guynemer is said to have proposed the latter variant. In the film he seems to be proud of his plane. >From this I would guess that the film clip was shot just after the arrival of the XII at the front. The IPMS decal sheet released prior to 1980 for Revell 1/28 kits has the markings for S 382 which is erroneously identified as a XII. Cheers! Greg ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Feb 1997 11:51:28 +1100 From: Shane Weier To: "'wwi'" Subject: Blowing off steam Message-ID: <01BC19A4.40060AC0@pc087b.mim.com.au> GDay Everyone, A brief followup to the recent discussion about scale, and promoting 1:72 models, plus a follow up to long past posts about promoting WW1 modelling. I went to one of my two clubs last night. It was the first of the bimonthly competition nights, and a quite good turnout of models were there for judging - 38 entries. ONE THIRD of all the aircraft models were 1:72, ONE THIRD were WW1 Fantastic, sounds great, my hounding of the members must be bearing fruit, right? Naaah. Only THREE aircraft entered !!! One 1/48 Fokker D.VII (mine), one 1/48 F4U, one 1/72 Seahawk What the hell is the world coming to.To each his own, and good luck to them but if I *never* see another sci-fi movie critter, sci-fi space ship or Gundam robot again I'll be happy. Back to the solitary pursuit of life, liberty and proper aeroplanes Shane ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 12 Feb 1997 23:26:08 -0500 From: barrett@iplink.net (barrett) To: wwi Subject: Sign/Eduard Fokker D VIII Message-ID: Allan: 10 days ago you were asking about the Sign and Eduard D VIIIs. Mine have finally arrived, and I can pretty much confirm what others wrote about the models. The Eduard is very clean. There is a color sheet for the painting guide. The decals are OK, but the lower lozenge color seems washed out. The plastic is excellent. The Sign is molded in black plastic and is, well, in a word, crude; but it dosen't look like it would take any more work than a Pegasus kit to clean up (i.e., OK, a fair bit). The photo etched parts include nice spoked wheels, while the tires are in white metal. The white metal propeller and motor are nice too. In general the decals are good, with plenty of options, but the lozenge is poorly registered. Of more concern to me is the discrepancy between the two kits concerning the wing shape, cockpit location and shape of the fusalage sides. Side by side, these kits would look like somewhat different beasts. As to which one is more accurate, I have no reference. Since both kits are on sale this month (Eduard at $15, Sign at $10), I'd have to say that they are both good value. If either were more expensive I couldn't justify buying them, but the price is right for both now. I'll probably build the Sign first (for practice) then go on to the Eduard and use one of the cool Sign color schemes on it. Hope this ramble helps you make a decision. Good luck to us both! Kevin. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 12 Feb 1997 20:16:22 -0800 From: bshatzer@orednet.org (Bill Shatzer) To: wwi Subject: Re: Re[2]: Cannon armed Gothas Message-ID: <199702130416.AA11395@ednet1.orednet.org> Riordan: You wrote: >Bill, > >I posed this question because there was a specialized heavily armored anti-tank >AEG G.IV that went into limited production armed with 2 Becker cannons, one in >an armored front turret and the other presumably on the aft gun ring. I thought >perhaps the Gotha had been considered for the same role. > >Riordan Boy, that's news to me! I'm learning something new almost all the time. Where did you find this reference on the AEGs? The AEG's "tank busters" were never in operational service or used in that role, were they? Any additional details or references would be appreciated. That all being said, the idea seems like a _really_ dumb one (armored turrets or not) - but the introduction of the tanks at Cambrai did, I know, throw the German General Staff into something of a tizzy for a bit so perhaps they were not adverse to considering even crazed ideas. Cheers, Bill -- - Bill Shatzer bshatzer@orednet.org - "Oh, what sad times are these when passing ruffians can say 'ni' at will to old ladies." ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 12 Feb 1997 22:08:29 +0000 From: "Rob " To: wwi Subject: Re: Re[2]: Cannon armed Gothas Message-ID: <199702130512.AAA20331@cliff.cris.com> > Riordan: You wrote: > > >Bill, > > > >I posed this question because there was a specialized heavily armored anti-tank > >AEG G.IV that went into limited production armed with 2 Becker cannons, one in > >an armored front turret and the other presumably on the aft gun ring. I thought > >perhaps the Gotha had been considered for the same role. > > > >Riordan > > Boy, that's news to me! I'm learning something new almost all the time. > Where did you find this reference on the AEGs? What's-his-name and Thetford refers to it and the Datafile on the AEG has extensive photos. Watch for the next Chandelle--it will have drawings. > The AEG's "tank busters" were never in operational service or used in > that role, were they? Any additional details or references would be > appreciated. They were not, but only just. Several seem to have been built. The forward fuselage appears to have been constructed of armor back to the rear cockpit--it is slab sided and painted with disruptive camouflage (the rear fuselage is five-color lozenge). The front gun fired through an armored embrasure underneath an overhanging projection of the nose. An experimental version had a rotating undernose "dustbin" turret. The tail was a twin-fin biplane unit. The rear Becker gun was mounted on a normal ring-type turret, but could also be mounted in the fuselage floor. Becker guns were also mounted on limited-travers, side-firing (gunship-type) mountings on Albatros J.II airplanes. > That all being said, the idea seems like a _really_ dumb one (armored > turrets or not) - but the introduction of the tanks at Cambrai did, > I know, throw the German General Staff into something of a tizzy > for a bit so perhaps they were not adverse to considering even crazed > ideas. Why dumb? Despite sluggish handling and poor power-to-weight ratios, Henschel Hs 129 and Ilyushin Il-2 airplanes with heavy guns did very well. For that matter, think of the AEG as an A-10. Before the Gulf, alot of flyboys thought it was a dumb idea too. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 12 Feb 1997 22:23:35 +0000 From: "Rob " To: wwi Subject: Re: Re[2]: Cannon armed Gothas Message-ID: <199702130527.AAA27911@cliff.cris.com> In about 1920 the Ordinance Division of the Army Air Service and Boeing developed a twin-Liberty triplane called the GAX/GA-1. It was encased in armor and carried four downward-firing Lewis guns and a 37-mm Baldwin cannon in the nose. It was a pig, due to excessive enthusiasm with the armor and too little concern for drag. I suspect Bill is right re the Gotha (until I see proof one way or the other) though. The AEG was a fairly high-performance short-range tactical bomber, not a strategic airplane. The "potting" idea would tend to be supported by the fact that one of the first uses for Becker guns was to mount them on the gondolas of Zeppelins. On the other hand, I have read of and seen drawings of a Zeppelin-Staaken fitted with a vertically downward-firing 10.5-cm howitzer. At least one Austrian Lohner G.3 carried a 7.0-cm boat cannon on a side-firing mount ahead of the cockpit. Finally, if you want absurd, look up the Junkers-Larsen JL ground-attack airplane, an armored, license-built Junkers F13 airliner with a battery of forty downward-firing Thompson submachine guns (the Chicago Piano-type with the drum). The AEG seems rather practical by comparison. Another plug--the next Chandelle will have a feature on the armored strafers of both sides. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 12 Feb 1997 23:57:42 -0600 From: "Bill Bacon" To: Subject: Re: Cannon Armed Spads Message-ID: <06052575510652@netjava.com> Friends, I can't help but wonder what that Spad XII did when the cannon was fired. Having fire a 37 mm Anti-tank gun, in anger and otherwise, I seem to remember the recoil was substantial. Old Newton's laws still apply eve though I think our Congress might try to repeal them with some of their dumb decisions. The Spad could not of had a recoil system. Hell, it would have splattered the pilot all over France. The only other way would be to have the A/c absorb it. Instant loss of considerable if not all air apeed. Sort of like running into a brick wall. Cheers, Bill Bill Bacon wbacon@netjava.net ---------- > From: gspring@ix.netcom.com > To: Multiple recipients of list > Subject: Re: Cannon Armed Spads > Date: Wednesday, February 12, 1997 7:28 PM > > On 02/10/97 23:51:25 Bill wrote: > > >Just a couple additional details on this bird. While apparently 300 > >SPAD XIICa.1's were ordered, apparently nothing close to that number > >were actually built. The number of SPAD XII's at the front varied between > >five in April, '18 and eight at the time of the armistice. > > > >The SPAD XII was basically a SPAD VII fuselage with the 200 hp Hispano > >and larger wing surfaces. The engine was later upgraded to 220 hp. > >There were also modifications to increase the wing area. > > The XIIs fuselage is a variation between the VII and XIII. The wings are > the same as the XIIIs but with a bit of stagger. There has been a Hi Tech > conversion kit to turn the DML XIII into a XII listed in Aeromaster's > catalog for a couple of months with a release date and price TBA. With my > previous experience of Hi Tech I will want to examine one or see a review > before purchasing it. In addition to the Windsock article (with plans) in > Vol.4 #3, there are photos of the engine/gun mount in Harry Woodman's 'Early > Aircraft Armament pg. 213 and in 'Fighter Aircraft of the 1914-1918 War' by > W.M. Lamberton pg. 182. The presence of the gun barrel between the cylinder > banks necessitated moving the carburetor to the bottom of the oil pan. > > >Guynemer's SPAD XII was S 382 and he scored, apparently, two victories > >with this aircraft on August 18. 1917 when he downed an Albatros > >with machine gun fire and a DFW with the cannon. The following day, > >S 382 was damaged while attacking a German two seater and, so far as > >I can determine, never used the SPAD XII again, prefering, apparently > >SPAD XIII S 504. > > There is a film clip of Guynemer showing S 382 to General Franchet > d'Esperey. The aircraft has no wings mounted. The radiator has no slats in > place, just the core showing. The Deperdussin control shows clearly in the > cockpit. I have read that six cannon rounds were carried in a rack for > manual feeding to the breech. Some guns had rifled barrels firing explosive > shells and some were smooth-bore firing cannister. Guynemer is said to have > proposed the latter variant. In the film he seems to be proud of his plane. > >From this I would guess that the film clip was shot just after the arrival > of the XII at the front. The IPMS decal sheet released prior to 1980 for > Revell 1/28 kits has the markings for S 382 which is erroneously identified > as a XII. > > Cheers! > > Greg ------------------------------ End of WWI Digest 431 *********************