WWI Digest 1101 Topics covered in this issue include: 1) Re: HiTech Bregeut 14B by DavidL1217@aol.com 2) Re: History of Guillows kits by "Charles Duckworth" 3) The Great War Fly-In (St. Louis, MO) by "Charles Duckworth" 4) Re: Flashback W.29, dimensional notes by Charles Hart 5) Re: HELP by Bill Bacon 6) Re: Flashback W.29, dimensional notes by Joey Valenciano 7) Re: First British Armoured Brigade by Bruce by "Tom Werner Hansen" 8) Re: Bruce: First British Armoured Brigade. Part 1/1 by "Paul Bourke" 9) Young Turks-AEQ 75&76 (2nd & 3rd installments) by Graham Nash 10) J M Bruce-Warplanes of World War One-D/J's scanned by Graham Nash 11) Lozenge Application by John Berlien 12) Re: Lozenge Application by John Berlien 13) Re: Airfix Mk.I et al by Geoff Smith 14) Re: Lozenge Application by Charles Hart 15) Re: Lozenge Application by bshatzer@orednet.org (Bill Shatzer) 16) Re: July Aviation What-Not by KarrArt@aol.com 17) Mike Fritz by "Randy J. Ray" 18) Hawkeye Dr.I by "Randy J. Ray" 19) Re: Lozenge Application by John Berlien ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 5 Jul 1998 18:49:07 EDT From: DavidL1217@aol.com To: wwi Subject: Re: HiTech Bregeut 14B Message-ID: <68a16498.35a002e4@aol.com> Is there any word on this kit. One of the British mag, (Scale Modeler International or Scale Aircraft Modeler had stated last August). Any wine served before its time.... ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 5 Jul 1998 18:23:00 -0500 From: "Charles Duckworth" To: Subject: Re: History of Guillows kits Message-ID: <199807052334.SAA10932@mail.primary.net> > Charles, I have the Guillow Rumpler plans. I can make you a copy and send > it to you. Let me know your snail mail address. Scott > >Please tell me you still have the Rumpler plans, I would dearly love > >to get > >a copy of those. I can envission a 36" span enlargement. > > > >Bill, Scott, believe Bill Bailey was looking for a copy of the plans - but I appreciate the offer. Am sure he'll be emailing you his snailmail address ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 5 Jul 1998 18:37:23 -0500 From: "Charles Duckworth" To: "ww1list" Subject: The Great War Fly-In (St. Louis, MO) Message-ID: <199807052334.SAA10945@mail.primary.net> Colin (my eight year old) and I had a great time at the first St. Louis, Missouri Great War Fly-in. Looked like a Nieuport gathering two N.17's, two N.23 or 27's, one N.11 and one N.12. One scaled down SE5a and a restored 1917 Canadian Canuck with all the original hardware, OX-5 and cockpit fittings. My son couldn't figure out why I was taking so many photos of the Canuck! The pilot few it several times around the small airport - was a real treat, a guy swinging the prop several times to get it going, four guys holding on to the wings while the pilot reved the OX-5 up and then a SLOW takeoff down a grass runway. Bought a neat T-shirt with the 1914 Fokker ad on the front of the Eindecker coming at you. No German a/c, one guy said he saw a Fokker D-VII on Friday and Saturday over his house but apparently the out numbering by the Nieuport Escadrille had him flying east on Sunday. Asked a kid working the t-shirt and coke stand if they were going to do it next year and he wasn't sure but they has a great turnout on Sunday so I hope it turns out to be an annual event. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 5 Jul 1998 18:23:29 -0700 From: Charles Hart To: wwi Subject: Re: Flashback W.29, dimensional notes Message-ID: >I received my Hansa-Brandenburg W.29 from Barry of Rosemont. I'm just >finishing up a Sierra W.29 and thought a little comparison would be >worthwhile. =20 < Thanks for these comments. Charles hartc@spot.colorado.edu ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 05 Jul 1998 18:15:51 -0500 From: Bill Bacon To: wwi Subject: Re: HELP Message-ID: <35A00927.8EC08860@netjava.net> Pedro, You owe me nothing but welcome to the club. If it hasn't happened to tje rest of you, IT WILL!!!!! Cheers, Bill B. Pedro e Francisca Soares wrote: > ------ =_NextPart_000_01BDA86E.7F6F2020 > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > > Guys, > > In the process of making way to install a scanner I dumped all my = > ancient mail and address book. Please Alberto, Geoff, Peter Crow, and = > any of you whom I might have promised something but not delivered let me = > have your addresses again, by e-mailing me directly. > > I'm now ready to blow myself out. How could I do such a stupid = > thing!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! > > Even worst I dleted all of my wife's achives too.=20 > > Pedro > ------ =_NextPart_000_01BDA86E.7F6F2020 > Content-Type: application/ms-tnef > Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 > > eJ8+IjkVAQaQCAAEAAAAAAABAAEAAQeQBgAIAAAA5AQAAAAAAADoAAEIgAcAGAAAAElQTS5NaWNy > b3NvZnQgTWFpbC5Ob3RlADEIAQ2ABAACAAAAAgACAAEEkAYAsAEAAAEAAAAQAAAAAwAAMAIAAAAL > AA8OAAAAAAIB/w8BAAAASQAAAAAAAACBKx+kvqMQGZ1uAN0BD1QCAAAAAHd3aUBwZWFzZTEuc3Iu > dW5oLmVkdQBTTVRQAHd3aUBwZWFzZTEuc3IudW5oLmVkdQAAAAAeAAIwAQAAAAUAAABTTVRQAAAA > AB4AAzABAAAAFgAAAHd3aUBwZWFzZTEuc3IudW5oLmVkdQAAAAMAFQwBAAAAAwD+DwYAAAAeAAEw > AQAAABgAAAAnd3dpQHBlYXNlMS5zci51bmguZWR1JwACAQswAQAAABsAAABTTVRQOldXSUBQRUFT > RTEuU1IuVU5ILkVEVQAAAwAAOQAAAAALAEA6AQAAAB4A9l8BAAAAFgAAAHd3aUBwZWFzZTEuc3Iu > dW5oLmVkdQAAAAIB918BAAAASQAAAAAAAACBKx+kvqMQGZ1uAN0BD1QCAAAAAHd3aUBwZWFzZTEu > c3IudW5oLmVkdQBTTVRQAHd3aUBwZWFzZTEuc3IudW5oLmVkdQAAAAADAP1fAQAAAAMA/18AAAAA > AgH2DwEAAAAEAAAAAAAAAtlYAQSAAQAFAAAASEVMUAApAQEFgAMADgAAAM4HBwAFABcAKQA0AAAA > VQEBIIADAA4AAADOBwcABQAXACYAKwAAAEkBAQmAAQAhAAAAN0Y0M0MzNjQ2MDE0RDIxMUFBNzY0 > NDQ1NTM1NDAwMDAAuAYBA5AGAPAEAAAhAAAACwACAAEAAAALACMAAAAAAAMAJgAAAAAACwApAAAA > AAADAC4AAAAAAAMANgAAAAAAQAA5AODNybhdqL0BHgBwAAEAAAAFAAAASEVMUAAAAAACAXEAAQAA > ABYAAAABvahduJdkw0OAFGAR0qp2REVTVAAAAAAeAB4MAQAAAAUAAABTTVRQAAAAAB4AHwwBAAAA > GQAAAHBuc29hcmVzQG1haWwudGVsZXBhYy5wdAAAAAADAAYQavcWOQMABxA5AQAAHgAIEAEAAABl > AAAAR1VZUyxJTlRIRVBST0NFU1NPRk1BS0lOR1dBWVRPSU5TVEFMTEFTQ0FOTkVSSURVTVBFREFM > TE1ZQU5DSUVOVE1BSUxBTkRBRERSRVNTQk9PS1BMRUFTRUFMQkVSVE8sR0VPRgAAAAACAQkQAQAA > AOIBAADeAQAAagIAAExaRnU5xhA7AwAKAHJjcGcxMjWmMgD4C2BuZwHQNwHoTiACpAPjAgBjaArA > c7BldDAgBxMCgH0KgNkIyCA7CW8OMDUCgAqBbHVjAFALA2MAQQ8CMTgwMzMLpwqxCoBHdVh5cywW > RBZESQOgdNBoZSBwA2BjB5AEIChvZiAAwGsLgGcgSHdheRfQbyALgHNlAZBsAyBhIATwAHBuAQSQ > IEkgZHVtcLcJgBogGgFtGWAAcGMIkJ8CMBjBAxEAcBtBZGQJcAMEEQbgb2suIFBszGVhETARcGxi > BJAZgFAsIEdlGKBmHqBQaxFAGqFDA2B3HqAco27bGWAYoXkIYBkwaANwGsGwbWlnaAVAEQB2GAO3 > IVARMBtAcwNwEUBoGQJkYnUFQG5vBUABAGz2aSHQCXEgHdAcMRgAIbPPIKEFwBzlB5FhZwtxHqBy > YhlgZS0cUhkCJJFkgmkJcGN0bHkuFvv+JyEQI3AH4AlwHOAZYwJgtykRG6ARMGwYsAhgdB2g5kgp > EQWgdWwbQBrRGZAKcxRwaBoidHVwadsbQCLTIS0NFvpFIdADoP53BbAZ0BrCJFEbNRiiGWDxA/Bm > ZScl4RDwI+EEIL0ZgG8doBb6HzAdAG8WRAUR8QAzkAAAAwAQEAAAAAADABEQAAAAAAMAgBD///// > QAAHMGBHCkhdqL0BQAAIMGBHCkhdqL0BCwAAgAggBgAAAAAAwAAAAAAAAEYAAAAAA4UAAAAAAAAD > AAKACCAGAAAAAADAAAAAAAAARgAAAAAQhQAAAAAAAAMABYAIIAYAAAAAAMAAAAAAAABGAAAAAFKF > AAC3DQAAHgAJgAggBgAAAAAAwAAAAAAAAEYAAAAAVIUAAAEAAAAEAAAAOC4wAAMACoAIIAYAAAAA > AMAAAAAAAABGAAAAAAGFAAAAAAAACwATgAggBgAAAAAAwAAAAAAAAEYAAAAADoUAAAAAAAADABSA > CCAGAAAAAADAAAAAAAAARgAAAAARhQAAAAAAAAMAFoAIIAYAAAAAAMAAAAAAAABGAAAAABiFAAAA > AAAAHgAlgAggBgAAAAAAwAAAAAAAAEYAAAAANoUAAAEAAAABAAAAAAAAAB4AJoAIIAYAAAAAAMAA > AAAAAABGAAAAADeFAAABAAAAAQAAAAAAAAAeACeACCAGAAAAAADAAAAAAAAARgAAAAA4hQAAAQAA > AAEAAAAAAAAAHgA9AAEAAAABAAAAAAAAAAMADTT9NwAAD/w= > > ------ =_NextPart_000_01BDA86E.7F6F2020-- ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 06 Jul 1998 01:17:06 +0800 From: Joey Valenciano To: wwi Subject: Re: Flashback W.29, dimensional notes Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19980706011706.00b37e34@philonline.com.ph> >I think it will look very good sitting next >to the Sierra, although it's completion won't be quite as satisfying as >the hard work required on the vacuform. Wish Sierra's Bob Norgen could have more business come his way, especially as regards to WWI kits. Wonder when he gets to release the gotha. ********************************************************************* Joey Valenciano WW1 modeller, teacher, jazz musician, joeyval@philonline.com. sitarist Metro-Manila, Philippines "The more you know, the more you don't know." ********************************************************************* ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Jul 1998 00:28:01 +0200 From: "Tom Werner Hansen" To: Subject: Re: First British Armoured Brigade by Bruce Message-ID: <199807060830.KAA22446@d1o211.telia.com> Mike What do you have on armoured Nieuports? Where can I find out more about this? I paged through the FMP very quickly, but didn't find anything there. Tom ---------- > From: Mike Fletcher > To: Multiple recipients of list > Subject: Re: First British Armoured Brigade by Bruce > Date: 05. juli 1998 23:03 > > I'd like to hear it either way > > fwiw There was several armoured Nieuports (and machines from other > companies) built at the request of the Military Aviation Authorities but > they ended up being insanely heavy for the power available. I have > drawings that I might be able to scan in. In order to reduce weight many > of these had armour on the bottom and one side of the fuselage only. > > Mike Fletcher > -- > ___ ., > |-\|^----! ; > |--n--""*" > @ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Jul 1998 18:42:38 +1000 From: "Paul Bourke" To: Subject: Re: Bruce: First British Armoured Brigade. Part 1/1 Message-ID: <199807060841.SAA24597@magna.com.au> Tom, Fascinating article. Would love a copy of the scans. Thanks. Paul ---------- > From: Tom Werner Hansen > To: Multiple recipients of list > Subject: Bruce: First British Armoured Brigade. Part 1/1 > Date: Monday, 6 July 1998 6:42 > > Greetings all > I've divided the article in two since it is quite long. > There are two more parts.=20 > Some of the illustrations are well-known, others I have not seen elsewher= > e. > If people want scans of the illustrations, let me know. > Tom > > This appeared in Air International/February 1979 > > J.M.Bruce > The First British Armoured Brigade > > > BEFORE the war of 1914-18, aircraft designers had much greater faith in > their creations and a more imaginative belief in their potentialities tha= > n > did the contemporary military authorities. It was aircraft designers and > aeronautical engineers, not the military, who thought of ways of arming > aircraft, thus greatly enlarging their capabilities beyond being merely > eyes in the sky. With the active use of aircraft over the battlefield thu= > s > clearly adumbrated well before 1914, it came quickly to be realised that > protective armour of some kind was desirable in order to safeguard the > crews, engines and fuel of the aircraft. > > The precise origins and attribution of the idea of applying armour to > aeroplanes are uncertain, but one of the earliest creators of armoured > aircraft was certainly Louis Bleriot. I n March 1913 he built a bizarre > canard pusher monoplane of nightmarish configuration, evidently intended > for military purposes. Of this creation, Flight of 29 March 1913 said: "T= > he > body of the machine, which is arranged so that the observer lies flat and > looks through windows, is covered with steel plate to protect the occupan= > ts > from rifle fire." It also seems reasonably certain that the French were, = > by > a long way, the first officially to specify the fitting of armour to > military aircraft. In September 1913 General Bernard was appointed Chef d= > es > Services aeronautiques militaires in succession to General Hirschauer, an= > d > he introduced a programme that stipulated that all French military > aircraft, with the exception of trainers, were to be armoured. French > constructors were invited to produce aircraft in four categories: > > (i) Armoured single-seaters with a speed in excess of 120 km/h (75 mph) f= > or > artillery spotting, scouting and shortrange reconnaissance; > > (ii) Armoured two-seaters for Headquarters reconnaissance missions with a > speed of more than 100 km/h (62 mph); > > (iii) Armoured two-seaters armed with machine guns or automatic rifles; > these were to fight enemy aeroplanes and airships and must have a speed > greater than 120 km/h (75 mph); > > (iv) Armoured multi-seat long-range aircraft for special missions, their > speed to be over 100 km/h (62 mph). > > These specifications most probably provided the inspiration for various > armoured aeroplanes built by French manufacturers that appeared from late > 1913 onwards. Not surprisingly, nothing more was heard of the Bleriot fre= > ak > of March 1913, but Louis Bleriot persevered with the design of armoured > aircraft and at the Paris Aero Salon in December 1913 he exhibited a neat > monocoque fuselage for a single-seat monoplane, in which all of the > fuselage ahead of the back of the cockpit was armoured with 3-mm (0.118-i= > n) > chrome-nickel steel. A contemporary report in Flight of 20 December 1913 > stated that it had been "found that rifle bullets fired from a distance o= > f > 400 yards (366 m) either glanced off or made but a small dent in the > armour.--Evidently the armour weighed about 75 kg (165 lb), a sufficient > weight to make it impossible for the monoplane to carry an observer, and = > it > was built and flown as a single-seater of pleasing form and proportions. > Also exhibited at the Paris Salon was an armoured Nieuport monoplane. Thi= > s > was a two-seater and was probably seriously underpowered; it was reported > to be flying early in 1914. > > By the time war broke out, Bleriot had developed a two-seat armoured > monoplane powered by a 160 hp Gnome two-row rotary engine. Apparently two > were built and both were quickly assimilated into the Aviation militaire. > One was flown by Vedrines, who named it enigmatically La Vache (the cow). > Perhaps he knew best. This aircraft had a fuselage of some aerodynamic > refinement, provided by a streamlined casing of papier-mache clothed in > fabric and fitted over the basic structure. The forward portion about the > cockpits and engines was encased in 3-mm (0.118-in) chrome-nickel steel, > and the crew of two sat in close tandem under the cabane structure. A doo= > r > was provided in each side of the fuselage under the wing to enable the > observer to fire at objects under the aircraft. > > Other pre-war French armoured aircraft included the > Morane-Saulnier Types M and WR, and by the early summer f 1914 the > Clement-Bayard company had also produced an armoured shoulder-wing > monoplane. On a more ambitious scale, and probably intended to meet the > requirements of' General Bernard's fourth category, was the large > three-seat armed and armoured twin-engine biplane built to the design of > Commandant Dorand. > > It is perhaps curious that, despite all of this pre-war concern for > armouring aircraft, the French services made relatively little use of > armoured aeroplanes during the First World War. There was an armoured > version of the Caudron G.IV late in 1916, but not until the Salmson 4 Ab.= > 2 > of 1918 was there a French armoured aircraft in production and it was too > late to see operational service in numbers. > > Ideas on armouring aeroplanes were stirring in Britain at much the same > time as in France (and doubtless elsewhere). In July 1913, the Royal > Aircraft Factory at Farnborough completed the first of two R.E.1s > (originally, but briefly, designated B.S.2) designed as experimental > armoured reconnaissance biplanes. The R.E.1s were officially numbered 607 > and 608, but armour was not fitted until February 1914 and such armouring > as was fitted was apparently only of 1 -mm (0.039-in) thickness, so it is > not surprising that it was abandoned. The second R.E.1, No 608, was brief= > ly > on the strength of No 2 Squadron, RFC, in France from 23 August until 1 > September 1914 but it is not known whether it carried any armour at that > time. > > Somewhat more prophetic, in relation to the war that was to convulse > Europe, was a stubby little single-seater built by the British and Coloni= > al > Aeroplane Co to the design of Henri Coanda. This single-bay biplane was > designated Bristol S.S.A. (signifying Single-seat Armoured) and had the > Bristol works sequence number 219. It was probably the first armoured > aeroplane to have the armoured portion of its fuselage built as a monocoq= > ue > shell, the armour plate providing the structural strength of a rectangula= > r > box in which were contained the engine, pilot and the fuel and oil tanks > and systems. A large steel spinner was designed for the S.S.A.; it was > necessarily provided with apertures to admit cooling air to the 80 hp > Clerget engine, and it incorporated a central cone to deflect any bullets > entering the central opening in the spinner. The attachment of the lower > wings to the fuselage left a gap on each side to improve the pilot's > downward view; there were large endplates on the lower wing roots. The > Bristol S.S.A. provided a link with the contemporary French requirements > for armoured aircraft, for it had been designed and built in fulfilment o= > f > a French official request. > > The S.S.A. was flown at Larkhill by Sidney Sippe on 8 May 1914. A larger > rudder was fitted and the aircraft had to be given a temporary aluminium > spinner owing to vibration experienced with the steel original. A heavy > landing put the aircraft out of action for a few weeks, but it arrived at > Brooklands on Wednesday 16 June 1914, and was flown by Harry Busteed on t= > he > 18th. Apparently it was back at Filton a week later, for on 25 June part = > of > the bracing of its castoring undercarriage failed on landing there and th= > e > aircraft was damaged. Despite this set-back, the French authorities were > willing to accept it for repair, and for this purpose it was sent to the > Breguet works at La Brayelle, Douai, on 3 July. Soon after the war began > the Breguet firm had to transfer its activities from La Brayelle to > Villacoublay, in view of the threat posed by the German advance; there is > no record of any work done on the S.S.A. at La Brayelle, still less any > indication that it was taken to Villacoublay, and it was never heard of > again. > > Manufacturers of armour steel plate lost no time in pressing the usefulne= > ss > of their product on the aircraft makers upon the outbreak of war. As earl= > y > as 12 August 1914, Thomas Firth & Sons Ltd, of Sheffield had an > advertisement in The Aeroplane announcing the availability of armour plat= > e > 0.104 in (2,642 mm) thick, capable of resisting 0.303-in (7,696-mm) bulle= > ts > at a range of 500 yds (457 m). > > The Royal Aircraft Factory at Farnborough continued to concern itself > actively with the armouring of aircraft. On 9 September 1914, in a secret > letter to General von Donop, Mervyn O'Gorman (then Superintendent of the > RAF) wrote: "I am getting out an armoured aeroplane and it is of paramoun= > t > importance to use the minimum possible thickness of armour to withstand > German rifle bullets at 1,000 ft (305 m) above the point of fire. The she= > et > will be heavy so that I propose only to use a sort of tray in the lower > part of the aeroplane (Secretary of State has approved of the aeroplane). > The gunner in the aeroplane would be lying on his face at full length so > that the tray could be fairly shallow; the armour used round him would be > probably about 7 mm (0.276 in) thick. The pilot who would be subjected to= > a > more oblique fire at a greater range could have thinner armour, about 2,5 > mm (0.099 in)". This projected armoured aeroplane remains a mystery, for > the Royal Aircraft Factory built nothing remotely resembling O'Gorman's > description. > > One of his designers at Farnborough, H P Folland, sketched out rough > preliminary drawings of two armoured single-seat scouts late in 1914. The= > se > design studies were both of good appearance and may have owed some of the= > ir > proposed geometry to the S.E.4. The first was intended to be relatively > large, with a span of' 36 ft (10,97 m), wing area of 240 sq ft (22,32 M2 = > ), > and a loaded weight optimistically estimated at 1,136 lb (515 kg). The > forward fuselage was to be covered, perhaps as a monocoque, with 24-gauge > manganese steel: the > rear portion was to be of duralumin.=20 > Folland's sketches for the second armoured scout project=20 > are dated 28 December 1914. This was for a quite promising-looking > single-bay biplane with a fuselage of good streamline form. The forward > fuselage was to be a built-up structure incorporating armour only 0,75 mm > (0.03 in) thick; the rear fuselage was also to be of built-up constructio= > n > and was apparently to have a covering of 22-gauge duralumin. Wing area wa= > s > again to be 240 sq ft (22,32 M2 ), but the span was to be 28 ft (8,53 m) > and the loaded weight, 1,200 lb (544 kg). Power was to be provided by an = > 80 > hp Gnome rotary engine. > > Armour in service > Although none of these projects was taken beyond the preliminary-sketch > stage, other moves were afoot to fit limited armouring to existing types = > of > aircraft. At some date earlier than 11 November 1914 Lt Col Sefton > Brancker. then the Assistant Director of Military Aeronautics, personally > instructed Vickers Ltd to fit bullet-proof plates to the B.E.2cs then in > production. The nature, number and disposition of these plates is not > recorded, but at the time Vickers was building a batch of 32 B.E.2cs, > 1748-1779, at Weybridge, and it is known that 40 plates were ordered. > > On 5 April 1915 the ADMA's office asked the General Officer commanding th= > e > RFC for his views on the desirability and nature of armour for operationa= > l > aircraft. The RFC's Wing Commanders expressed various views, but a > remarkably sensible and in some ways prophetic submission was made by Lt > Col R Brooke-Popham, then commanding the 111 Wing. For B.E.2as, he > recommended the provision of only the armoured bucket seats then apparent= > ly > standardised for B.E.2es, but in the case of the B.E.2es themselves, he > recommended, in addition to the bucket seats, that the gravity tanks shou= > ld > have their sides and undersides made entirely of armour plate, that the > carburettors and induction pipes should be armoured, and that the engine > sumps should be made of armour plate. He went on:---Afew machines might, = > I > think, be specially armoured for flying low over the enemy's lines. These > might be single-seaters of the B.E.2c type with RAF engine, and 21 hours > petrol capacity. The whole fuselage from the back of the pilot's seat up = > to > and including the engine should be enclosed in U-shaped armour plate to > come round the pilot's back and reach as high as his shoulders and the to= > ps > of the cylinders. The propeller boss should also be armoured. It might be > possible to construct the actual fuselage of =BC > -in (6,35min) armour plate and do away with all woodwork and bracing wire= > s. > Otherwise I would suggest covering it with the bullet-proof compound plat= > e, > a sample of which was recently taken by Captain Valentine to England." > > At this same time, proposals for armouring the Voisin pushers then in > service with the RFC were submitted, and in June 1915 the R.E.5 was > measured to determine how much armour would be required to protect the > pilot's seat, engine, tanks and other vital areas. This was estimated at = > 90 > sq ft (8,37 M2 ), but there is no confirmation that any operational R.E.5 > was so armoured. > > On 23 June 1915, RFC Headquarters wrote to the Officer Commanding the 2nd > Wing, noting that B. E.2e No 2030 of No 8 Squadron was fitted with armour > plate underneath the fuselage and requesting---thatparticular attention > should be paid to this machine, and that any points as to the utility or > otherwise of the armouring, and its effect upon the flying of the machine= > , > should be brought to notice as early as possible.- > > No 8 Squadron evidently thought well of their armoured B.E.2c, for on 12 > July 1915 Major L E 0 Charlton, DSO, the squadron's Commanding Officer, > reported to the Officer Commanding 11 Wing:---The value of the armoured > plating as fitted to the B.E.2c No 2030 cannot be over-estimated. It > protects carburettor, petrol tanks, throttle and air controls from all > shell bursts other than a direct hit, and on these and other grounds give= > s > a feeling of confidence to both pilot and observer. > > *'The effect of this armour plating on the flying of the machine is > difficult to estimate. It is certainly very slight since the machine with > passenger and Lewis gun will climb quite comfortably to 7,000 ft (2 134 m= > ) > in 20 minutes." > > It is uncertain whether No 2030 had been armoured at the time of issue to > No 8 Squadron on 15 June, only eight days before RFC HQ's note to the OC = > II > Wing, or was so equipped after arrival in France. The precise nature and > disposition of its armour do not appear to have been recorded in detail, = > so > it is not possible to assess the extent to which it influenced the heavy > armour installation that was applied to a number of B.Es in 1916. > Fortunately a few photographs of the later design exist, and these sugges= > t > strongly that due note had been taken of Lt Col Brooke-Popham's suggestio= > ns > of April 1915. The design of the Heavy Armour installation, as it was > known, appears to have been created at Farnborough, the actual fitting of > the armour being done by the Southern Aircraft Depot. From the nose to th= > e > rear of the pilot's cockpit, the fuselage, engine and cockpits were encas= > ed > on either side and underneath in a box of armour plate applied in > uncompromisingly flat slabs. The weight (no less than 445 lb/202 kg) and > drag of this installation must have reduced the B.E.2c's meagre performan= > ce > to vanishing point. > ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 06 Jul 1998 13:15:01 +0100 From: Graham Nash To: World War 1 Modelling List Subject: Young Turks-AEQ 75&76 (2nd & 3rd installments) Message-ID: <199807061215.IAA14479@egate2.citicorp.com> Are scanned in and available for the price of on-off list e-mail ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 06 Jul 1998 13:17:00 +0100 From: Graham Nash To: World War 1 Modelling List Subject: J M Bruce-Warplanes of World War One-D/J's scanned Message-ID: <199807061217.IAA14608@egate2.citicorp.com> For those of you lucky enough to have the books, but not the dust jackets, I have scanned my copies in. Send me an e-mail of list if you would like the set of 5. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Jul 1998 09:23:51 -0700 From: John Berlien To: wwi Subject: Lozenge Application Message-ID: Hope everybody had a good weekend. I had a chance to try my first lozenge project (a Revell 1/72 DVII) and it brought up a question that I didn't anticipate. Since the upper wing was wider than the "bolt" width of the decal, I decided to apply the strips chordwise rather than span-wise. Was this a mistake? How do you get the lozenges to match up? My decals (old Microscale) don't match up side-to-side. I get odd patterns of small lozenge slivers where the strips meet, and it looks terrible. Help! Thanks and best regards, Jack j-berlien@ti.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Jul 1998 10:44:04 -0700 From: John Berlien To: wwi Subject: Re: Lozenge Application Message-ID: Thanks for the info. I guess the slivers are what bothers me - for example, at the edge of the decal there may be only about 1/8 of a single lozenge. So this looks funny butted up against a whole lozenge, of another color. Anywhere you cut the decal you end up with partial lozenge slivers at the edge, and these stand out against the field of whole lozenges on either side of the seam. Best regards, Jack ------------------ Original text From: fedders , on 7/6/98 10:39 AM: On Mon, 6 Jul 1998, John Berlien wrote: > Hope everybody had a good weekend. I had a chance to try my first lozenge > project > (a Revell 1/72 DVII) and it brought up a question that I didn't anticipate. > Since > the upper wing was wider than the "bolt" width of the decal, I decided to apply > the > strips chordwise rather than span-wise. Was this a mistake? How do you get > the > lozenges to match up? My decals (old Microscale) don't match up side-to-side. > I > get odd patterns of small lozenge slivers where the strips meet, and it looks > terrible. Help! > > Thanks and best regards, > > Jack > j-berlien@ti.com > Most aircraft had the lozenge applied cord-wise so you did it right. A few had spanwise or a 45 degrees. There was no attempt to match pieces and, in fact, this is not possible. It may look odd to you but it is correct. Slivers? you should make sure that the lozenge pieced are adjacent to eachother with no gaps. good modeling peter> ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Jul 1998 12:49:15 -0400 From: Geoff Smith To: "INTERNET:wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu" Subject: Re: Airfix Mk.I et al Message-ID: <199807061249_MC2-5249-63C@compuserve.com> Matt, Here's the full address for Matador - if you haven't already got it: Matador Models 6 Cliffe Rd, Barton on Sea, NEW MILTON, Hants, BH25 7PB FAX 01425 628219 No phone number. I've no fax but if no-one else has offered already, I'll send for a catalogue & scan for you. Let me know. Regards, Geoff ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Jul 1998 11:20:40 -0700 From: Charles Hart To: wwi Subject: Re: Lozenge Application Message-ID: >Hope everybody had a good weekend. I had a chance to try my first lozenge >project >(a Revell 1/72 DVII) and it brought up a question that I didn't anticipate. >Since >the upper wing was wider than the "bolt" width of the decal, I decided to >apply >the >strips chordwise rather than span-wise. Was this a mistake? How do you get >the >lozenges to match up? My decals (old Microscale) don't match up side-to-side. >I >get odd patterns of small lozenge slivers where the strips meet, and it looks >terrible. Help! > >Thanks and best regards, > >Jack >j-berlien@ti.com Application of lozenge at 45 degree angle to the wing leading edge appears to be a trademark of Halberstadt built aircraft. Chordwise was the most frequent method of application. The seams between adjacent strips of lozenge never fall on a rib station, always between. A close look at a few clear D-VII photos will show that funny looking partial polygons are found where the bolt widths of fabric are joined. Charles hartc@spot.colorado.edu ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Jul 1998 11:24:02 -0700 (PDT) From: bshatzer@orednet.org (Bill Shatzer) To: wwi Subject: Re: Lozenge Application Message-ID: <199807061824.LAA23519@ednet1.orednet.org> Jack writes: >Hope everybody had a good weekend. I had a chance to try my first lozenge >project >(a Revell 1/72 DVII) and it brought up a question that I didn't anticipate. >Since >the upper wing was wider than the "bolt" width of the decal, I decided to apply >the >strips chordwise rather than span-wise. Was this a mistake? Nope - chordwise is correct for the Fokker D.VII in all cases which I am aware of. >How do you get >the >lozenges to match up? You don't - the Fokker factory was uninterested in getting the lozenges to "match up" on the 1:1 scale aircraft so there is no particular reason for you to worry about it on your 1/72 scale edition. Mis-matched lozenges on the fabric seams is more the rule than the exception in the photographs - not to worry about this. >My decals (old Microscale) don't match up side-to-side. >I >get odd patterns of small lozenge slivers where the strips meet, and it looks >terrible. Help! Perhaps - but it is accurate. Apparently they took the effort to get the hexagons to line up with the aircraft finished with the naval hex pattern fabrics but no such devotion to "neatness" is apparent with the lozenge pattern fabric in most of the photos of the D.VIIs. Cheers and all, -- Bill Shatzer - bshatzer@orednet.org ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Jul 1998 17:32:00 EDT From: KarrArt@aol.com To: wwi Subject: Re: July Aviation What-Not Message-ID: Playing a little catch-up here- another fine edition. If that Canadian guy, what's-his-name- you know- the guy who does the WW I profiles- well, if he get's any better we shall have to do something dreadful and drastic to him! That there off-topic dive bomber thing 'taint bad either! Robert K. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Jul 1998 14:40:10 -0700 (PDT) From: "Randy J. Ray" To: wwi Subject: Mike Fritz Message-ID: <13729.17447.670927.800610@i2496147.nafohq.hp.com> >>>>> "Matt" == mbittner >>>>> wrote the following on Sun, 5 Jul 1998 17:43:23 -0400 Matt> Anybody who attended Nationals: who won the Mike Fritz? My Matt> guess the 1/24th Nine-Ack, but it's just a guess. You are correct, sir... Randy -- """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" Randy J. Ray 408-343-7578 randyr@nafohq.hp.com "Traveling the waves of an infinite ocean, / I feel the deepest devotion." ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Jul 1998 14:42:13 -0700 (PDT) From: "Randy J. Ray" To: wwi Subject: Hawkeye Dr.I Message-ID: <13729.17475.263241.451856@i2496147.nafohq.hp.com> >>>>> "Matt" == mbittner >>>>> wrote the following on Fri, 3 Jul 1998 08:15:05 -0400 Matt> Anybody going/at the Nationals seen the Hawkeye Fokker Dr.I? Matt> If so, what's the going price? $20-22 as I recall. I bought one, but haven't had the time to look at it that closely (still winding down from the show and all). Resin everything except for PE for the pilot tub and other small bits. Body is a one-piece casting with large enough space to drop the PE conckpit into. Haven't laid it across the Datafile lines drawings, yet. Randy -- """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" Randy J. Ray 408-343-7578 randyr@nafohq.hp.com "Traveling the waves of an infinite ocean, / I feel the deepest devotion." ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Jul 1998 17:21:08 -0700 From: John Berlien To: wwi Subject: Re: Lozenge Application Message-ID: Thanks, everybody, for the reassurance on this. Now for a request - does anyone have an already-scanned photo showing a DVII wing in which you can see seam mismatch? Most of the pictures I have in my limited library show angles other than overhead (or underneath). Again, don't go to a lot of trouble, but if someone already has one that could easily be sent... TIA. Jack j-berlien@ti.com ------------------ Original text From: bshatzer@orednet.org (Bill Shatzer), on 7/6/98 2:27 PM: Jack writes: >Hope everybody had a good weekend. I had a chance to try my first lozenge >project >(a Revell 1/72 DVII) and it brought up a question that I didn't anticipate. >Since >the upper wing was wider than the "bolt" width of the decal, I decided to apply >the >strips chordwise rather than span-wise. Was this a mistake? Nope - chordwise is correct for the Fokker D.VII in all cases which I am aware of. >How do you get >the >lozenges to match up? You don't - the Fokker factory was uninterested in getting the lozenges to "match up" on the 1:1 scale aircraft so there is no particular reason for you to worry about it on your 1/72 scale edition. Mis-matched lozenges on the fabric seams is more the rule than the exception in the photographs - not to worry about this. >My decals (old Microscale) don't match up side-to-side. >I >get odd patterns of small lozenge slivers where the strips meet, and it looks >terrible. Help! Perhaps - but it is accurate. Apparently they took the effort to get the hexagons to line up with the aircraft finished with the naval hex pattern fabrics but no such devotion to "neatness" is apparent with the lozenge pattern fabric in most of the photos of the D.VIIs. Cheers and all, -- Bill Shatzer - bshatzer@orednet.org ------------------------------ End of WWI Digest 1101 **********************