WWI Digest 1646 Topics covered in this issue include: 1) Off-topic help by bucky@ptdprolog.net 2) Re: this year's datafiles by mgoodwin@ricochet.net 3) Re: Windsock Datafiles by "Robert M. Farrar" 4) Re: this year's datafiles by Ernest Thomas 5) Re: this year's datafiles by KarrArt@aol.com 6) RE: this year's datafiles by Shane Weier 7) Re: this year's datafiles by Ernest Thomas 8) Re: Flashback's Berg D.I and Taube by Ernest Thomas 9) Re: this year's datafiles by Ernest Thomas 10) Re: this year's datafiles by "David R.L. Laws" 11) Re: RB 1/was Windsock Datafiles by "Bill Neill" 12) Re: this year's datafiles by "Bill Neill" 13) Re: Windsock Datafiles by "Charles and Linda Duckworth" 14) Re: late/post war history question by mgoodwin@ricochet.net 15) Re: this year's datafiles by Matthew E Bittner 16) Re: this year's datafiles by Matthew E Bittner 17) Re: Windsock Datafiles by Matthew E Bittner 18) Re: Windsock Datafiles by Matthew E Bittner 19) Possible Scratchbuild Subject? by "P. Howard" 20) Re: this year's datafiles by mgoodwin@ricochet.net 21) Fokker D.VII by Matthew E Bittner 22) Re: late/post war history question by "Robert Johnson" 23) Re: The Search for TRANSLUSENCE by "Robert M. Farrar" 24) RE: this year's datafiles by Shane Weier 25) Re: More and Different Dr.1 Questions!! by REwing@aol.com 26) Re: Fokker D.VII by "Bob Pearson" 27) I got bumped again! by "DAVID BURKE" 28) Re: Happy Birthday to . . . by REwing@aol.com 29) Re: late/post war history question by Albatrosdv@aol.com 30) Re: Happy Birthday to . . . by "DAVID BURKE" 31) Re: this year's datafiles by KarrArt@aol.com 32) Re: Happy Birthday to . . . by KarrArt@aol.com 33) Re: I got bumped again! by Albatrosdv@aol.com 34) More Squadron/Signal "Fokker Dr.I in Action". by bshatzer@orednet.org (Bill Shatzer) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 15 Jun 1999 21:19:41 -0400 From: bucky@ptdprolog.net To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Off-topic help Message-ID: <3766FBAD.5C9FEDA6@ptdprolog.net> To supplement this request, it needs to be in 1/72. He has a few trade kits if anyone can help. All I had was 1/48 for WWII stuff. Mike Muth Greetings all, Just got this in, and thought perhaps someone here could help Keith in his quest. If so please contact him directly Regards, Bob Pearson ---------- From: Keith Butterley To: Bob Pearson Subject: Aircraft parts needed Date: Sun, Jun 13, 1999, 11:01 PM Hi Bob, I need your aircraft connections again. On Sunday nights, I volunteer at a group home for seriously mentally and physically handicapped young adults. We were building a Frog F-4F Wildcat. Long story short, I need the upper half of the starboard wing and the landing gear. I know this could be a real bitch, but if you can help with this, it will really be appreciated. Thanks Keith ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 16 Jun 1999 06:24:57 -0700 From: mgoodwin@ricochet.net To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: this year's datafiles Message-ID: <3767A5A9.FEC@ricochet.net> Matthew E Bittner wrote: > > Zzzzzz.... I have to second Matt's snore with a gaping yawn... I think we might have all been served better by a mini-file on aero engines or two-seater/multi-engine gun rings/mounts. Or, how about a bloody file on bombs of all nations, early to late, with colors and DRAWINGS, please!! Riordan ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 15 Jun 1999 20:32:55 -0500 From: "Robert M. Farrar" To: Subject: Re: Windsock Datafiles Message-ID: <004b01beb798$4fce8880$b92d88cf@rmf> Shane, When all else fails, I go and play RB II. I get to find out, overall, how poorly these a/c truly performed. But there's NOTHING like toasting 3 - 5 enemy fighters or two seaters (regardlessof which side you play) not to mention downing as many as three Gothas in the same mission! (Gothas have mgs which cover all avenues of def. fire). It is as as they say, TFC!!! It's a LOT of fun toastin' the enemy...I have several pilots in the game... the most manourvreable is the Sopwith Tripe. Just yank and crank, but DO NOT overspeed in a dive , and 'yer on his tail. I am NOT a "computer gamer"....but RB II is muy festivo!!! "Hoping that ALL manufacturers will wake up and make the kits that we all want! Bob -----Original Message----- From: Shane Weier To: Multiple recipients of list Date: Tuesday, June 15, 1999 7:44 PM Subject: RE: Windsock Datafiles >Bob, > > >> I must be a freak of nature; to me nothing's BORING >> when it comes to WW1 aircraft. Especially the freako-queer-o >> A-H stuff or the like. Don't get me wrong...I love the standard stuff >> but the lesser-known a/c are so interesting....you know what I >> mean. > >Hell, me too. I only accused the Breguets etc. of being boring to pull Matts >chain. Sensible discussion followed in the *next* post I made. > >Shane > ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 15 Jun 1999 20:41:11 -0500 From: Ernest Thomas To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: this year's datafiles Message-ID: <376700B7.450@bellsouth.net> mgoodwin@ricochet.net wrote: > > Matthew E Bittner wrote: > > > > Zzzzzz.... > > I have to second Matt's snore with a gaping yawn... > I think we might have all been served better by a mini-file on aero > engines or two-seater/multi-engine gun rings/mounts. Or, how about a > bloody file on bombs of all nations, early to late, with colors and > DRAWINGS, please!! I'll second Riordanofsky's request for a bloody file! :) But seriously, PROPS?! Engines or bombs or rings/mounts would have been much more useful. E. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 15 Jun 1999 21:44:06 EDT From: KarrArt@aol.com To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: this year's datafiles Message-ID: <6499d514.24985b66@aol.com> In a message dated 6/15/99 6:39:47 PM Pacific Daylight Time, mgoodwin@ricochet.net writes: << I think we might have all been served better by a mini-file on aero engines or two-seater/multi-engine gun rings/mounts. Or, how about a bloody file on bombs of all nations, early to late, with colors and DRAWINGS, please!! Riordan >> Maybe even common instruments. Robert K. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 16 Jun 1999 11:59:39 +1000 From: Shane Weier To: "'wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu'" Subject: RE: this year's datafiles Message-ID: <65C968E11318D311B0BD0060B06865CD0410D9@mimhexch.mim.com.au> EtH > I'll second Riordanofsky's request for a bloody file! :) > But seriously, PROPS?! Engines or bombs or rings/mounts would > have been much more useful. You reckon? Me, I just wish it'd been about *German* props so I could better identify and choose between Garuda, Axial, Propulsor, etc ad infinitum on my German types. But....I suggest that the author researched WW1 *British* props, and not engines etc.. If another author researches engines or bombs or rings/mounts, I expect we'll see a Datafile Special on them. In the meantime, if you want them, you get to do the research *yourself*. And if you *do*, send a copy to RLR for possible publication, and make a name for yourself instead of just blowing smoke. Shane ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 15 Jun 1999 21:07:11 -0500 From: Ernest Thomas To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: this year's datafiles Message-ID: <376706CF.26BA@bellsouth.net> The Muswell Hillbilly wrote: > Maybe even common instruments. Or even tires and tail skids. E. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 15 Jun 1999 21:09:17 -0500 From: Ernest Thomas To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: Flashback's Berg D.I and Taube Message-ID: <3767074D.58AF@bellsouth.net> Albatrosdv@aol.com wrote: > Two more reasons why Eduard is definitely among my favorite kit manufacturing > companies. The future is certainly looking brighter. E. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 15 Jun 1999 21:14:48 -0500 From: Ernest Thomas To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: this year's datafiles Message-ID: <37670898.7993@bellsouth.net> Shane Weier wrote: make a name for yourself instead of just > blowing smoke. BUt I'm trying to make a name for myself as a smoke blower. ;) But seriously, I wish I could do the research and write the text for a Datafile. BUt I'm having a hard enough time just being the end user of said publications. Sorry, but I'm a loser. Gimme a break. E. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 16 Jun 1999 12:58:44 +0000 From: "David R.L. Laws" To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: this year's datafiles Message-ID: <37679F85.2C86@webtime.com.au> mgoodwin@ricochet.net wrote: > > Matthew E Bittner wrote: > > > > Zzzzzz.... > > I have to second Matt's snore with a gaping yawn... > I think we might have all been served better by a mini-file on aero > engines or two-seater/multi-engine gun rings/mounts. Or, how about a > bloody file on bombs of all nations, early to late, with colors and > DRAWINGS, please!! > > Riordan Well guys, if'n ya'all wants a job done, ya'all kin do it ye'sel There's enough assembled wisdom on this list to work up a draft on a couple of these topics isn't there - Not a baited remark but a suggestion. david ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 15 Jun 1999 19:54:59 -0700 From: "Bill Neill" To: Subject: Re: RB 1/was Windsock Datafiles Message-ID: <00a001beb7a5$3d6d1b40$fa3bc0d8@bill> ,I got this, but all a/c turn strongy to the right and hardly at all to the left. I thought originally this was rotary engine stuff, but inline (SE5) does it as well. Is this peculiar to the game, or is there something wrong with my setup? Bill Neill > When all else fails, I go and play RB II. I get to find out, > overall, how poorly these a/c truly performed. But there's > ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 15 Jun 1999 20:04:52 -0700 From: "Bill Neill" To: Subject: Re: this year's datafiles Message-ID: <00a101beb7a5$3eac03e0$fa3bc0d8@bill> I picked up some books on my last UK visit, Putnam's 'Armament of British aircraft 1909-1939' Harry Woodman's 'Early aircraft armament' (the aircraft and the gun up to 1918) R W Clarkes 'British aircraft armament' (guns and gunsights 1914 to present) L F E Coombs 'Fighting cockpits 1914-2000' J A McBean's 'Bombs gone' (British air dropped weapons 1912 to present) If you need something specfic, drop me a note. Bill Neill > > << I think we might have all been served better by a mini-file on aero > engines or two-seater/multi-engine gun rings/mounts. Or, how about a > bloody file on bombs of all nations, early to late, with colors and > DRAWINGS, please!! > ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 15 Jun 1999 22:09:23 -0500 From: "Charles and Linda Duckworth" To: Subject: Re: Windsock Datafiles Message-ID: <004601beb7a5$a61a9780$2b9259d8@q1p5x0> >I think Albatros publishes: > >1. What people write for them. >2. What they have photographic material to support. >3. And like all good capitalists, what they believe will sell. Ken raises some good points but realistically if I have a choice between putting down $35 on a DF Special on British props and a new kit from Eduard (or Blue Max/AeroClub/Sierra Models) I'm afraid the money is going to the model. Personally I think Ray made a mistake on this one (3........... what they believe will sell). Instruments would have been a better choice. .. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 16 Jun 1999 07:58:44 -0700 From: mgoodwin@ricochet.net To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: late/post war history question Message-ID: <3767BBA4.712E@ricochet.net> Robert Johnson wrote: > > Lately I have be reading history of the Great War. This reading combined > with my research for the Fokker E-V has left me with some questions. I > though I would throw them out to the collective intelligence and see what > leads might develop? > > Several German airmen, including Gotthard Schsenberg and Theodor Osterkamp, > apparently served in a "Marine Freikorps, MJGrI" that operated in the > Baltic. Is this correct? Does anyone know of reading material or references > that talk of these operations? > > These two pilots, both has planes in a yellow and black pattern. From the > sources I have looked at I feel that Osterkamp's E-V could not have been > painted the yellow and black during the war it self. I would extrapolate > that the paint jobs were for the MJGrI. > > I freely admit that I have only look at general histories of the air war. > The other thing I am up against is that most of them are written by > Americans, thus when it comes to that time frame for the air war the > American biases kicks in full throttle. > > Who were they fighting? White Russians, Americans, or Soviet?. >From "Wings of Revolution": November, 1918: Armistice; end of WW I and subsequent Bolshevik reoccupation of territory abandoned the Central Powers, although German forces are allowed to remain in Latvia and Estonia as a 'bulwark' against communist expansion.* After the War, some aircraft are flown by volunteers of the Grenzschutz Ost (Border Protection East) force and the Baltic Flying Squadron, which is formed at the request of the Allies in order to help keep the Red Army out of Latvia, Estonia and Lithuania. The BFS is made up entirely of German pilots (such as Kurt Stremple) and is equipped with German aircraft such as Fokker D.VIIs and Hannover CL.IIs. The volunteer 'para-military' Freikorps are formed to defend the Weimar government from Spartacist "People's States", groups of leftist insurgents who attempt to assume authority in sections of Germany following the war. The air units of the Freikorps and Polizerflieger staffeln are equipped with Halberstadt Cl. types, Siemens-Schuckert D.IIIs and IVs, Fokker D.VIIs and possibly D.VIIIs as well as Junkers monoplanes. Junkers D.1s are used in the fighting against Poland that continues after the Armistice; during these operations they are based at Wainoden and Swinemunde. The latter airfield is used by a unit of the famous Geshwader Sachsenberg, one of the most successful wings of the German Naval Air Service. Marine ace Gotthard Sachsenberg later (May, 1919) brings his Geschwader to the Baltic, and along with Theo Osterkamp and Josef(?) Jacobs sees action flying Junkers monoplanes ( Cl.Is and possibly D.1s) against Red forces in Courland, Lithuania from their base at Peterfield. (Sorry for the lengthy 'off topic' reply, but the question was asked.) HTH, Riordan ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 15 Jun 1999 21:47:09 -0500 From: Matthew E Bittner To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: this year's datafiles Message-ID: <19990615.221118.-186161.2.mbittner@juno.com> On Tue, 15 Jun 1999 04:03:35 -0400 (EDT) "Sandy Adam" writes: > No - more of a "Brr...Brrrrr...Brrrrrrr....." ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 15 Jun 1999 21:42:44 -0500 From: Matthew E Bittner To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: this year's datafiles Message-ID: <19990615.221118.-186161.0.mbittner@juno.com> On Tue, 15 Jun 1999 00:23:43 -0400 (EDT) Dennis Ugulano writes: > I do have the Ago C.I built but do not have it on my site. > I can > put it there if you desire. Please! That would be great. Matt Bittner http://www.geocities.com/~ipmsfortcrook http://www.discoveromaha.com/community/groups/plasticmodelers/index.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 15 Jun 1999 21:55:59 -0500 From: Matthew E Bittner To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: Windsock Datafiles Message-ID: <19990615.221118.-186161.3.mbittner@juno.com> On Tue, 15 Jun 1999 17:25:44 -0400 (EDT) Shane Weier writes: > This isn't the X Files mate. The reason is simple - the subjects are > boring. > > Shane > (now, run like hell................................> ) Nothing's as boring as PC10... :-) Matt Bittner http://www.geocities.com/~ipmsfortcrook http://www.discoveromaha.com/community/groups/plasticmodelers/index.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 15 Jun 1999 21:57:27 -0500 From: Matthew E Bittner To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: Windsock Datafiles Message-ID: <19990615.221118.-186161.4.mbittner@juno.com> On Tue, 15 Jun 1999 17:49:16 -0400 (EDT) Suvoroff@aol.com writes: > I agree 100%. All those French aircraft out there with that nice > five-color > camo, and nobody doing datafiles on them. We need some Letords and > AR.1's > and Salmsons and Breguets... Indeed! Matt Bittner http://www.geocities.com/~ipmsfortcrook http://www.discoveromaha.com/community/groups/plasticmodelers/index.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 15 Jun 1999 22:18:55 -0500 From: "P. Howard" To: "WWI Post" Subject: Possible Scratchbuild Subject? Message-ID: <009b01beb7a6$fc15e4e0$4c888ece@phoward> Fellow list dwellers, I'm seriously looking into doing a scratchbuilding project in our mutual era of interest. This may sound kind of strange, but I'm looking for suggestions. I hoping to gleen from some of your experience in researching your favorite planes. Most modelers have a bird that is special to them and about which the tend to obsess. They tend to be experts on certain types and try to accrue every source of info on it. That said, I'm looking for something that I can do a very thorough job on. Whether or not the plane has been kitted is of no concern. This project would probably be in a larger scale such as 1/32 or 1/24, though this too may change. I'm wanting to try some of the techniques I've seen and learned about over the years and want to do it from a blank slate. I'm hoping for subject ideas with sugestions on where to track down good reference material. My own interests take me into the lesser known types such as the FB 12 the Hansa Brandenburg W20, but reference material and accurate drawings are kind of scarce on those types of aircraft. My hope is that I can do a better and more accurate job by using your experience on what is valid material and what is useless. I'll gladly accept information on what little known details and often overlooked quirks need to be included, and what common mistakes should be avoided. Hopefully the end product will be a something that will satisfy even the one who suggested it. Cheers, Paul H ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 16 Jun 1999 08:10:56 -0700 From: mgoodwin@ricochet.net To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: this year's datafiles Message-ID: <3767BE80.25E4@ricochet.net> Shane Weier wrote: > > But....I suggest that the author researched WW1 *British* props, and not > engines etc.. If another author researches engines or bombs or rings/mounts, > I expect we'll see a Datafile Special on them. In the meantime, if you want > them, you get to do the research *yourself*. And if you *do*, send a copy to > RLR for possible publication, and make a name for yourself instead of just > blowing smoke. OK, I've blown a little smoke, but I also done some research and had an article in Chandelle (with another possibly on the way). Sure, maybe data on obscure G-types is as useful as a 'file on props, but I think it might have earned me some puffing rights. :-) Ryrdn ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 15 Jun 1999 22:21:56 -0500 From: Matthew E Bittner To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Fokker D.VII Message-ID: <19990615.222158.-243849.0.mbittner@juno.com> AWESOME!!! Barry has just re-released new mold noses for the Revell Fokker D.VII. From the photo's, they look 500% better than the old molds. Excellent!! Gads, and to think I have a bunch of Nieuports to build first... :-) Totally cool. These are great. Matt Bittner http://www.geocities.com/~ipmsfortcrook http://www.discoveromaha.com/community/groups/plasticmodelers/index.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 15 Jun 1999 22:33:30 -0500 From: "Robert Johnson" To: Subject: Re: late/post war history question Message-ID: <003801beb7a9$019bdb20$05f99ed0@robjohn.swdata.com> I for one didn't mind the reply. Care to send me off list your sources? ;-) It is starting to make more sense. rob johnson > >>From "Wings of Revolution": > ......................................snip.................................. .. > >(Sorry for the lengthy 'off topic' reply, but the question was asked.) > >HTH, > >Riordan > ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 15 Jun 1999 22:37:38 -0500 From: "Robert M. Farrar" To: "ww1" Subject: Re: The Search for TRANSLUSENCE Message-ID: <00be01beb7a9$b0989be0$b92d88cf@rmf> OK folks, Let's remember that these a/c are of the DINOSAUR age! :-) Many if not most of the wing airfoils were of the UNDERCAMBERED profile. This gives one lots of lift at a relatively low airspeed. The fabric is stitched to the ribs; top and bottom with a continuous lentgth of cord per rib...no mystery here...otherwise the fabric would "balloon" and the a/c would be an instant accident waiting to happen. I have done a lot of of "dope and fabric" on the real thing, and it's really not that big of a deal. The technology is basically the same as it was in 1900 or so. Bob p.s. As far as rib tapes go... I would say that in "real life" they are visible. ....on a model, damned near invisible. Remember...there is such a thing as so-called "scale effect: many times it's better to have LESS detail than too much! I personally prefer the overall effect as apposed to every LAST detail. JMUO! Bob Untill the designers and -----Original Message----- From: Shane Weier To: Multiple recipients of list Date: Tuesday, June 15, 1999 8:22 PM Subject: RE: The Search for TRANSLUSENCE >David, > >> I have a further query which I believe was raised in >> connection with Fok >> Dr 1 's too - The undersurface of the wings in many >> photographs seems to >> show the fabric pulled up to the ribs resulting in a concave abnd NOT >> convex profile - Makes sense when the fabric was stitched to the ribs >> top - do my eyes decieve me and is a slight cocavity at the >> undersurface >> rib stations indeed more accurate ? > >Aaaaaaarrrrrggggggghhhhhhhhh! > >Pay attention old bean ;-) > >You are quite right, and the same applies to *all* concave fabric covered >wing surfaces to some degree. Much, much, much discussed here every year >(new people come along so that's good), including, at length, about two >weeks back. > >You must've been frying some deserving solicitor in court that week. > >Shane > ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 16 Jun 1999 13:42:08 +1000 From: Shane Weier To: "'wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu'" Subject: RE: this year's datafiles Message-ID: <65C968E11318D311B0BD0060B06865CD0410DD@mimhexch.mim.com.au> Rio, > OK, I've blown a little smoke, but I also done some research > and had an > article in Chandelle (with another possibly on the way). Sure, maybe > data on obscure G-types is as useful as a 'file on props, but > I think it might have earned me some puffing rights. :-) Exactly. Now blow it in Rimells direction. Ask him whether he'd like to publish it in Windsock, ask him what else he needs, ask him what help he can give you to flesh it out if there isn't enough. Bottom line - the subjects Rimell doesn't have are absent because no-one has provided the material for a book, Windsock article or whatever. Take the opportunity of earning some bragging rights AND getting a wide readership in the enthusiast market. My barb about blowing smoke wasn'y aimed at you. But there's eff all sense all of us sitting here whining that "Rimell won't publish an opus on *my* favourite aircraft" and assuming that the book will by some magical means appear full blown on his desk ready for printing. Also, bitching about his publishing a book about props assumes that there was something *else* all ready to publish which has been omitted. I wouldn't bet on it. Albatros Pubs is *two* people folks. Someone *else* has to research and write the books. Shane ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 16 Jun 1999 00:32:14 EDT From: REwing@aol.com To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: More and Different Dr.1 Questions!! Message-ID: <11778650.249882ce@aol.com> I will second Bill's use of RLM 65. It looks right. I use The Polly Scale stuff and am pleased how it turns out. -Rick- << For the turquoise, I've used WW2 RLM 65 hellblau on the theory that there would have been no particular reason for the resurrected Luftwaffe to invent a new light blue and that RLM 65 must have borne some resemblance to the pre-existing WW1 color. Dunno how good of a guess that might be. Rimmell gives Methuen 25C5 as the spec for that color but not having a Methuen chart, I've no idea how close my guess might be to Rimmell's spec. But the color looks good to my eye, anyway. >> ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 15 Jun 1999 21:35:22 -0700 From: "Bob Pearson" To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: Fokker D.VII Message-ID: <199906160448.VAA18629@mail.rapidnet.net> Matt writes . .. >AWESOME!!! Barry has just re-released new mold noses for the Revell >Fokker D.VII. From the photo's, they look 500% better than the old >molds. Excellent!! Gads, and to think I have a bunch of Nieuports to >build first... :-) > >Totally cool. These are great. > These should be available for viewing in the next Internet Modeler as well as some of Barry's other recent releases in both the "scale of kings" and the "king of scales". Regards, Bob Pearson Visit my WW1 Aviation page http://members.xoom.com/Sopwith_5F1 Managing Editor / Internet Modeler http://www.internetmodeler.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 16 Jun 1999 00:02:30 -0500 From: "DAVID BURKE" To: Subject: I got bumped again! Message-ID: <004201beb7b5$75286de0$1d04c0d1@dora9sprynet.com> Well, I got bumped off the list again, so did I miss anything? Dave B. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 16 Jun 1999 01:11:31 EDT From: REwing@aol.com To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: Happy Birthday to . . . Message-ID: What a real coincidence...it is also mine! 46 years -Rick- << Whatta coincidence - it's mine too. Dave B. >> ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 16 Jun 1999 01:42:33 EDT From: Albatrosdv@aol.com To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: late/post war history question Message-ID: <13a5b4fb.24989349@aol.com> In a message dated 99-06-15 23:10:17 EDT, you write: << (Sorry for the lengthy 'off topic' reply, but the question was asked.) HTH, Riordan >> I don't see it was so "off topic," and quite frankly it was one of the single most informative posts other than Bulent's that's been here recently (no denigration involved for those who might feel denigrable - :-)) Tom Cleaver ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 16 Jun 1999 00:30:54 -0500 From: "DAVID BURKE" To: Subject: Re: Happy Birthday to . . . Message-ID: <002001beb7ba$dc270f60$1d04c0d1@dora9sprynet.com> Have a drink on me, Rick. I've had enough. Dave (32 years old, and miserable. Where's a woman when you need one?) -----Original Message----- From: REwing@aol.com To: Multiple recipients of list Date: Wednesday, June 16, 1999 12:13 AM Subject: Re: Happy Birthday to . . . > What a real coincidence...it is also mine! 46 years > -Rick- > ><< Whatta coincidence - it's mine too. > > > Dave B. >> ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 16 Jun 1999 01:44:11 EDT From: KarrArt@aol.com To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: this year's datafiles Message-ID: In a message dated 6/15/99 7:09:28 PM Pacific Daylight Time, ethomas6@bellsouth.net writes: << The Muswell Hillbilly wrote: > Maybe even common instruments. Or even tires and tail skids. E. >> Kinda kinky....how 'bout some hardcore stuff on ....turnbuckles? Robert K akaMH ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 16 Jun 1999 01:44:09 EDT From: KarrArt@aol.com To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: Happy Birthday to . . . Message-ID: <1ce666ac.249893a9@aol.com> In a message dated 6/15/99 10:13:55 PM Pacific Daylight Time, REwing@aol.com writes: << What a real coincidence...it is also mine! 46 years -Rick- << Whatta coincidence - it's mine too. Dave B. >> >> Well shucks, you guys and Mistress Lorna- hope birthday's are good for y'all! Robert K. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 16 Jun 1999 01:54:08 EDT From: Albatrosdv@aol.com To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: I got bumped again! Message-ID: <2d8e7afd.24989600@aol.com> In a message dated 99-06-16 01:07:28 EDT, you write: << Well, I got bumped off the list again, so did I miss anything? Dave B. >> You are now Coordinator of Cavalry - in other words, in charge of cleaning out the stable. :-) Tom Cleaver ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 15 Jun 1999 23:19:14 -0700 (PDT) From: bshatzer@orednet.org (Bill Shatzer) To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: More Squadron/Signal "Fokker Dr.I in Action". Message-ID: <199906160619.XAA08603@compass.OregonVOS.net> Jest a brief follow-up to my previous conversation with cyg vis-a-vis MvR triplanes and the risable accuracy of the Squadron/Signal book. I had previously referred to the photo on page 18 of the book which is identified as MvR's 152/17 in the caption. I opined that the aircraft was unlikely to be 152/17 and, despite the caption which IDs it as being "parked on the flight line of Jasta 5", was most probably a Jasta 6 aircraft and had no connection to MvR at all. Further investigation reveals that the aircraft in this photo -is-, in fact, a Jasta 6 aircraft - 525/17 to be precise. However, in the interests of full disclosure, the caption describing it as parked on the Jasta 5 flight line is accurate and it -is-, apparently, an MvR aircraft, sorta. Apparently MvR borrowed this aircraft from Jasta 6 when he flew to Boistrancourt on March 17, 1918 for a meeting with Obltnt Richard Flashaar, commander of Jasta 5. The photo was apparently taken during that visit. So, add 525/17 to the list of MvR triplanes - although this one was, apparently, never flown operationally by Richthofen. But, ya' gotta wonder how the Squadron/Signal publication can get a detail like on which Jasta's flight line the aircraft is parked correct and completely misidentify the aircraft itself. For extra credit, one might speculate about the dark colored areas which appear on the leading edges of all three wing tips in the photo. :-) Cheers and all, -- Bill Shatzer - bshatzer@orednet.org "You don't need a weather man to know which way the wind blows." -Bob Dylan- ------------------------------ End of WWI Digest 1646 **********************