WWI Digest 445 Topics covered in this issue include: 1) Re: fokkers by NPWE28A@prodigy.com ( KENNETH L HAGERUP) 2) Brisfit tailplane by Hirohisa Ozaki 3) WW1 Aircraft Stability by Sandy Adam 4) Re: Cannon Armed Spads by Pedro Soares 5) Re: Nieuport request by mbittner@juno.com 6) Americal by mbittner@juno.com 7) Re: E. III Decals? Injection kit? by aew (Allan Wright) 8) Saturday, 24 February 1917, Raoenel near St Just by "Marian Hollinger, Bradley Omanson" 9) Sunday, 25 February 1917, Raoenel near St Just by "Marian Hollinger, Bradley Omanson" 10) Re: Brisfit tailplane by hartc@spot.Colorado.EDU (Charles Hart) 11) Re: Saturday, 24 February 1917, Raoenel near St Just by ci010@freenet.carleton.ca (Jim MacKenzie) 12) Re: Saturday, 24 February 1917, Raoenel near St Just by THENRYS@aol.com 13) Re: Cannon Armed Spads by "Rob " 14) Rep : Re: Nieuport request by Fportier@aol.com 15) Caquot Balloons by Brian Nicklas 16) Re: Rep : Nieuport request by bucky@mail.prolog.net (Mary-Ann/Michael) 17) Re: Saturday, 24 February 1917, Raoenel near St Just by bucky@mail.prolog.net (Mary-Ann/Michael) 18) Re: Caquot Balloons by bucky@mail.prolog.net (Mary-Ann/Michael) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 24 Feb 1997 22:03:27, -0500 From: NPWE28A@prodigy.com ( KENNETH L HAGERUP) To: wwi Subject: Re: fokkers Message-ID: <199702250303.WAA13916@mime2.prodigy.com> -- [ From: Kenneth Hagerup * EMC.Ver #2.5.3 ] -- > >Can anyone suggest a good match for the "olive-brown" streaky colour > >used by Fokker on his later machines? To add one more variation, I've found it easier to start with an overall brownish green and streak the linen color from the bottom of the fuselage toward the top, trailing edge of the wings toward the front, etc. Same effect, but less brush work than dark over light. A word of advice: do the streaking before the lower and middle wings are attached . It's difficult to get a good application on the fuselage between the wings if they are in place. Ken ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Feb 97 12:43:33 JST From: Hirohisa Ozaki To: wwi Subject: Brisfit tailplane Message-ID: <9702250343.AA03486@wight.miln.mei.co.jp> Hi all, I am interested in tailplane of Bristol fighter now. I believe, there are 5th variation. 1) F2A prototype and early. squared, like BE2. 2) F2A production. enlarged span with rounded wing tip. 3) F2B early. more enlarged span, short chord horizontal stabilizer. 4) F2B mid. 2) elevator and 3) horizontal stabilizer. 5) F2B later. enlarged 4), squared. But I could not identified these on photograph, DATAFILE No.2 and InAction, without 5). So I have some questions. I am correct to understand Brisfit tailplane variation? Which is DATAFILE plan above? InAction plan? Moderaid plan? Thanks for any suggestion. Hiro. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Feb 1997 09:52:55 +0000 (GMT) From: Sandy Adam To: wwi group Subject: WW1 Aircraft Stability Message-ID: I remember participating in a thread a month or two back concerning the general east wind that blew aircraft ever deeper into German territory and somebody opined that WW1 aircraft were inherently unstable and had to be flown at all times. (I think it was Bill Shatzer.) I knew I had a reference somewhere that completely disproved that and having looked at the time with no success, of course it popped out of the blue last night when I was going through PK's book on Richthofen for soemthing else. p121. Lothar von R relates "At the front when nothing is wrong, from time to time...one puts one's hands on the fuselage sides and admires the view. Then the aeroplane flies by itself, so to speak." Now there were obvious exceptions - Camels, Morane Monoplanes (ref McCudden-Flying Fury) and I'm sure many others. But apart from the Fok Dr1, most German aircraft of note used in-line engines and could be expected to behave as LvR records. I can't think offhand of any two-seaters (which were about the only German planes that ever ventured behind Allied lines in daytime) that used rotary engines. Anyway, if anybody's interested - better late than never! Sandy ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Feb 1997 10:06:35 +0000 From: Pedro Soares To: wwi Subject: Re: Cannon Armed Spads Message-ID: <3312B9AB.555B@anaep.pt> Bill Shatzer wrote: > > While I'm 30 years removed from my high school French > class, I'd suspect that 'reducteur' probably refers to the > reduction gearing for the propeller. > > Cheers, > > -- > - Bill Shatzer bshatzer@orednet.org - > "Oh, what sad times are these when passing ruffians can say 'ni' at will to > old ladies." Bill and Fran輟is Thanks for your notes. You're right of course. What led me into thinking that it might be other thing than the reduction gearing for the propeller was the fact that I thought all motors would have to have those reduction devices installed and I couldn't figure out why special mention was made to this fact regarding the SPAD's motor - I'm not an engineer so all ignorance in this respect should be forgiven ;-). As such I was wrongly led into thinking that "reducteur" meant some sort of mechanical device meant to prevent the motor from entering over-rev. Cheers Pedro ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Feb 1997 05:34:16 EST From: mbittner@juno.com To: wwi Subject: Re: Nieuport request Message-ID: <19970225.043651.9174.2.mbittner@juno.com> On Sun, 23 Feb 1997 21:41:24 -0500 "Shelley Goodwin" writes: > Is the Nie. IV a monoplane like the 6M? If so, I might have a > couple of scanned pictures of one... Yes, the Nie.IV is a monoplane. However, what's a 6M? Matt mbittner@juno.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Feb 1997 05:54:29 EST From: mbittner@juno.com To: wwi Subject: Americal Message-ID: <19970225.045734.15670.1.mbittner@juno.com> Can anybody tell me what the current postage is on three or four sheets of Americal decals? TIA! Matt mbittner@juno.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Feb 1997 08:35:54 -0500 (EST) From: aew (Allan Wright) To: wwi Subject: Re: E. III Decals? Injection kit? Message-ID: <199702251335.IAA18938@pease1.sr.unh.edu> > > I would like some injection wheels for my Eduard "nekkid" E. III > > and maybe some aftermarket decals. Any thoughts? Rosemont's 9mm wheels with separate tires should work, but wouldn't some photo-etch spoked wheels be more 'appropriate' on this kit? > What about using parts from the Revell E.III? I haven't spec'ed > it out yet, but these wheels should work. > > As far as aftermarket decals go, you're on your own. There are > none specifically (that I know of) for the E.III. However, using > the Superscale sheet containing German crosses and serials > numbers should be a good start (I can't remember the number, > unfortunately). -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: Tue, 25 Feb 1997 10:06:04 -0800 From: "Marian Hollinger, Bradley Omanson" To: wwi Subject: Saturday, 24 February 1917, Raoenel near St Just Message-ID: <33132A0C.5D50@host.dmsc.net> Muggy day. Got up late this morning as there was no flying possible. Wrote to Dave Wheeler and another letter to dear little Mother. The S.P.A.D. Company is putting out a 200 h.p. monoplace aeroplane carrying two machine guns (Vickers) fixed in front which fire thru the propellor the same as the single one does. They must be mighty good. Had some visiting officers to dine with us this evening. from the War Diary of E.C.C. Genet ************************************************* A SPAD monoplane? --Bradley ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Feb 1997 10:10:24 -0800 From: "Marian Hollinger, Bradley Omanson" To: wwi Subject: Sunday, 25 February 1917, Raoenel near St Just Message-ID: <33132B10.58D9@host.dmsc.net> Cleared off this morning but was too foggy to permit flying and this afternoon the ground was too soft and muddy for a machine to roll on around our part of the field. Wanted to get in a couple of hours flight but Captain wouldn't allow me to try to take my machine out. Letter from Louis Ester, my little Legion comrade. Walked into St Just in the latter part of the afternoon with Ted Parsons. It seems a mighty difficult and quite impossible proposition to keep entirely away from drink with this Escadrille. If one goes into town any day with any of the fellows it's impossible to keep from going in and drinking without absolutely being discourteous and uncomradelike. Perhaps I'm a fool but I don't like it one bit. from the War Diary of E.C.C. Genet ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Feb 1997 09:24:19 -0700 From: hartc@spot.Colorado.EDU (Charles Hart) To: wwi Subject: Re: Brisfit tailplane Message-ID: >Hi all, > >I am interested in tailplane of Bristol fighter now. >I believe, there are 5th variation. > > 1) F2A prototype and early. > squared, like BE2. > 2) F2A production. > enlarged span with rounded wing tip. > 3) F2B early. > more enlarged span, short chord horizontal stabilizer. > 4) F2B mid. > 2) elevator and 3) horizontal stabilizer. > 5) F2B later. > enlarged 4), squared. > >But I could not identified these on photograph, DATAFILE No.2 and InAction, >without 5). > >So I have some questions. > > I am correct to understand Brisfit tailplane variation? > Which is DATAFILE plan above? InAction plan? Moderaid plan? > Interesting observations. Having not really looked into this I will suggest something off the top of my head, perhaps the variations you are seeing are due to interchangeability of different components. That is, the stabilizer "fin" might have fit both types of moveable stabilizer pieces. Something I would have to look at in photographs. There are a couple of other references to check, there is a book by Chaz Boyer on the Bristol Fighter that I have never seen, but it was favorably reviewed in Windsock a couple of years back. There was also a book in the "Vintage Warbirds" series from Arms and Armour Press on the Bristol Fighter. The latter is out of print, the former I have never seen in the U.S. Don't know about their relative availability in Japan though. Charles hartc@spot.colorado.edu ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Feb 1997 11:33:21 -0500 (EST) From: ci010@freenet.carleton.ca (Jim MacKenzie) To: wwi Subject: Re: Saturday, 24 February 1917, Raoenel near St Just Message-ID: <199702251633.LAA09977@freenet2.carleton.ca> >S.P.A.D. Company is putting out a 200 h.p. monoplace aeroplane carrying >A SPAD monoplane? --Bradley Since Gertie's ex seems to have written 'monoplace' perhaps he was referring to the number of seats in the airplane and not the number of wings attached to it? We'll see - cheers, Jim. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Feb 1997 12:43:54 -0500 (EST) From: THENRYS@aol.com To: wwi Subject: Re: Saturday, 24 February 1917, Raoenel near St Just Message-ID: <970225124337_1679464420@emout14.mail.aol.com> In a message dated 97-02-25 09:17:34 EST, homanger@ns1.dmsc.net (Marian Hollinger, Bradley Omanson) wrote: << from the War Diary of E.C.C. Genet ************************************************* A SPAD monoplane? --Bradley >> I think he wrote that SPAD was developing a monoplace aircraft - i.e. single seat. Todd Henry ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Feb 1997 11:27:29 +0000 From: "Rob " To: wwi Subject: Re: Cannon Armed Spads Message-ID: <199702251831.NAA14733@newman.concentric.net> Pedro writes: > Thanks for your notes. You're right of course. What led me into thinking > that it might be other thing than the reduction gearing for the > propeller was the fact that I thought all motors would have to have > those reduction devices installed and I couldn't figure out why special > mention was made to this fact regarding the SPAD's motor - I'm not an > engineer so all ignorance in this respect should be forgiven ;-). As > such I was wrongly led into thinking that "reducteur" meant some sort > of mechanical device meant to prevent the motor from entering over-rev. Reduction gearing was rare on early engines because of the difficulty of hardening gears and cutting them to precise tolerances. The geared Hispanos caused endless trouble (overheating, gearbox failure, fires) --so much so that the British licensee, Wolseley, built their own, ungeared version and accepted the loss of power. I believe that the first successful reduction gearing was developed in the 1920s at McCook field using Liberty engines. The results were applied to the Curtiss V-12s. Why loss of power? I'm no aerodynamicist, but as I understand it, propellors of a given length operate most efficiently at an rpm that is generally rather less than the peak-power rpm of the engine. This is because, when the hub is turning at crankshaft speed, the tips are going much faster (they travel a longer arc, hence a longer distance, in the same time). At typical engine speeds, even in WW1, prop tips would approach the local speed of sound. The compressibility of the air at these speeds causes drag to rise enormously (this is why no prop planes can fly supersonically, even if they are very well streamlined). Shockwaves disturb the flow of air around the blade. An experimental, turbo-prop version of the F-84F had supersonic propellors that worked (they were very thin and short), but the high-frequency vibration was so intense that airmen couldn't work around the airplane (made them nauseated). ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Feb 1997 15:35:42 -0500 (EST) From: Fportier@aol.com To: wwi Subject: Rep : Re: Nieuport request Message-ID: <970225153532_-1038641439@emout02.mail.aol.com> Yes, you'd probably be better off with a complete scratchbuild. For one thing, the wingspan on the Russian kit is much too short. The fuselage could be worse (too narrow but that is easy to remedy), note that the floatplane version had two cockpit openings instead of only one and prominent fairings or decking. The floats are* very* odd, wide and flat with a long, three-stepped keel and "winglets" in front. The tail float could easily be converted from a small WWII-type drop tank. The best photos are in the *Deauville 1913* book (wonderfully crisp and detailed). The military version was very similar, apart from the cockpit layout, once again. Two different types of engines and propellers were used in the wartime version. The plans in the Imperial Russian aviation book are of a rather different version, as concerns the wing planform in particular. The Nieuport IV wing had a slightly sweptback leading edge and the military version had gaps at the leading edge wing roots to improve visibility (width: two ribs). The article in *Avions* states that at least one N.IV was armed with a machine gun (hotchkiss?) as a makeshift fighter. Unsurprisingly, it was not a successful adaptation and the guns were never fired in anger, so you can just about forget about that fantasy of a Nieuport fighting it out with "Wolfschen": French roundel carried under the wings only, striped rudder and numeral on fuselage "Nxx". My model is N 15. Building it was a challenge, but not my worst modelling experience. Ilya Muromets was bad enough, probably worst of all was the Meikraft Caproni because the PE parts were terrible. Some of my scratchbuilt models were if anything simpler to build. I only make 1/72 models (sorry folks!) because of the sheer variety of available types. I reckon I must have 250+ WW1 built-up models and more in store, the result of some 30 years' modelling, let us say 20 years' serious modelling. I consider myself as a collector more than a super detailer, really. Photos of some of my models have appeared in the Windsock gallery (Gosh! I'm sounding smug. I just want to show what my modelling interests are). I like the thought of having as many different types as possible. It's also nice to have a line up of Spads. Best regards, Francois ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Feb 97 16:49:02 EST From: Brian Nicklas To: Subject: Caquot Balloons Message-ID: <199702252152.QAA20524@pease1.sr.unh.edu> Just in the mail! The new 1/72 Caquot Balloon from Rosemont Hobbies. It has two halves, three fins of two halves each, four sides for the gondola (use scrap for the floor) and misc parts for valves and air scoops. At a glance, nice. Appears a bit more crisp than the earlier Parseval-Sigsfeld Drachen. Two 8x11 double sided sheets of history/instructions, including a rigging diagram and painting callouts for various nations. The recent Cross & Cockade International from England that should be a big help. And I could REALLY use a copy if someone could help me *HINT, HINT* Brian Nicklas nasad003@sivm.si.edu ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Feb 1997 21:19:31 -0500 From: bucky@mail.prolog.net (Mary-Ann/Michael) To: wwi, Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Rep : Nieuport request Message-ID: <199702260219.VAA21211@pease1.sr.unh.edu> At 07:24 PM 2/24/97 -0500, mbittner@juno.com wrote: >On Mon, 24 Feb 1997 07:22:13 -0500 bucky@postoffice.ptd.net >(Mary-Ann/Michael) writes: >> Greetings! I just sent away for the Flying Machines press new >> book on French aircraft. Hope to get it soon. Enjoy the list >> ;-} > >I hope you're not holding your breath. At the earliest I would >say 15 March. However, I would probably venture later - maybe a >lot later (like April). Big Exhale! ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Feb 1997 21:31:50 -0500 From: bucky@mail.prolog.net (Mary-Ann/Michael) To: wwi, Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Saturday, 24 February 1917, Raoenel near St Just Message-ID: <199702260231.VAA21292@pease1.sr.unh.edu> At 09:17 AM 2/25/97 -0500, Marian Hollinger, Bradley Omanson wrote: >Muggy day. Got up late this morning as there was no flying possible. >Wrote to Dave Wheeler and another letter to dear little Mother. The >S.P.A.D. Company is putting out a 200 h.p. monoplace aeroplane carrying >two machine guns (Vickers) fixed in front which fire thru the propellor >the same as the single one does. They must be mighty good. Had some >visiting officers to dine with us this evening. > >from the War Diary of E.C.C. Genet > >************************************************* > >A SPAD monoplane? --Bradley I believe that, early in the war, monoplace meant a single seater, biplace meant a 2-seater. Mike Muth ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Feb 1997 21:31:52 -0500 From: bucky@mail.prolog.net (Mary-Ann/Michael) To: wwi, Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Caquot Balloons Message-ID: <199702260231.VAA21294@pease1.sr.unh.edu> At 04:54 PM 2/25/97 -0500, Brian Nicklas wrote: >Just in the mail! >The new 1/72 Caquot Balloon from Rosemont Hobbies. >It has two halves, three fins of two halves each, >four sides for the gondola (use scrap for the floor) >and misc parts for valves and air scoops. >At a glance, nice. Appears a bit more crisp than >the earlier Parseval-Sigsfeld Drachen. Two 8x11 >double sided sheets of history/instructions, including >a rigging diagram and painting callouts for various >nations. >The recent Cross & Cockade International from England >that should be a big help. And I could REALLY use >a copy if someone could help me *HINT, HINT* Brian I've got one and will send you a copy if you get your regular mail address to me. I saw a piece of a US balloon Barry had at the store. It looked kind of dark yellow-mustard/brown. Mike Muth ------------------------------ End of WWI Digest 445 *********************