WWI Digest 2425 Topics covered in this issue include: 1) Re: Cross & Cockade Vol 13, #3, 1982 by "Andy Kemp" 2) Re: Cool Model For Sale.... by Matthew Zivich 3) Best (Favorite) Two Seater [was cool model for sale] by Brent_A_Theobald@notes.seagate.com 4) Re: Cool Model For Sale.... by Sharon Henderson 5) Re: Cool Model For Sale.... by "Bob Pearson" 6) Re: Cool Model For Sale.... by MAnde72343@aol.com 7) Re: Best (Favorite) Two Seater [was cool model for sale] by MAnde72343@aol.com 8) Re: Cool Model For Sale.... by "Bob Pearson" 9) Two seaters, continued by Matthew Zivich 10) Re: Cool Model For Sale.... by Zulis@aol.com 11) Re: Info needed by Chris Anderson 12) RE: Another one bites the dust by Shane Weier 13) Two Seat Fighters Re: Cool Model For Sale.... by "Matt Bittner" 14) Re: Info needed by Zulis@aol.com 15) RE: Cool Model For Sale.... by Shane Weier 16) RE: Cool Model For Sale.... by Shane Weier 17) RE: Two seaters, continued by Shane Weier 18) Re: Two seaters, continued by Matthew Zivich 19) Two Holers by MAnde72343@aol.com 20) RE: Two seaters, continued by Shane Weier 21) Re: Two seaters, continued by Brent_A_Theobald@notes.seagate.com 22) RE-8's by MAnde72343@aol.com 23) Re: Best (Favorite) Two Seater [was cool model for sale] by Lyle Lamboley 24) Re: Best (Favorite) Two Seater [was cool model for sale] by MAnde72343@aol.com 25) Re: Cool Model For Sale.... by Albatrosdv@aol.com 26) Re: Info needed by Chris Anderson 27) Re: Cool Model For Sale.... by Albatrosdv@aol.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 19:25:26 +0100 From: "Andy Kemp" To: Subject: Re: Cross & Cockade Vol 13, #3, 1982 Message-ID: <00b201bfdae7$c3382380$074a8cd4@675> Hi Otis You could try buying a copy from Cross and Cockade :-) The web site www.crossandcockade.com has all the details you'll need ... Regards Andy Kemp www.crossandcockade.com Society of WW1 Aero Historians ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Multiple recipients of list Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2000 2:47 AM Subject: Cross & Cockade Vol 13, #3, 1982 > Would anyone out there in list land have a copy of this issue? I'm > specifically looking for an article on "Painting Instructions for German > Marine Aircraft." I'm a bit short of references (other than the Osprey book I > have none) for Hubrich's Albatros DVa of Seefrosta 1. Thanks for any help. > > Otis > ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 14:53:35 -0400 From: Matthew Zivich To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: Cool Model For Sale.... Message-ID: <394FBDAE.2456D936@svsu.edu> Successful in terms of doing what? Dogfighting or dropping bombs or whatever else two-seaters are supposed to do that single seaters can't do? How does the Brisfit rack up against the well reputed Salmson and Breguet? Matt Z. Bob Pearson wrote: > Sharon writes (or in this case wrongs) . > > > I had always thought, however, that the most feared planes (in terms, I'm > > assuming, of how the Opposite Team reacted to their presence, NOT the people > > flying them.... ) would have been Airco D.H.4s, or a Sop. Strutters. The > > Bristol AC suffered a bad case of "higher-ups" disease -- wasn't it the > > Brisfit that was believed to be structurally unsound, so that her pilots > > were instructed not to make any hard and fast maneuvers in combat, lest they > > have wing breakage? (Uhh, how DOES one avoid hard and fast maneuvers in > > combat?? ) > > Good heavens no. . the F2b was considered to be a single-seater with a gun > behind the pilot and was flown as such. As much as I like the Strutter, it > was underpowered and not a very successful fighter. No.3 Wing has reports of > the frustration of the escorting fighters falling behind the single-seat > bombers once the bombers dropped their bomb .. in fact the single-seater > then became the faster, more maneuverable aircraft due to its carrying over > 200lbs less (gunner and gun). The DH4 would have been a better aircraft if > the crew were closer together for communication as in the DH9. All in all > the F2b was the most successful two-seater of the war. > > Bob ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 14:06:09 -0500 From: Brent_A_Theobald@notes.seagate.com To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Best (Favorite) Two Seater [was cool model for sale] Message-ID: I'd like to second Matt's question and add a little one of my own. I always felt the Halberstadt Cl's were excellent two seaters. How did the Cl's fare against the Brisfit? Aren't we starting to mix roles though? I thought Breguets and Salmsons were bomber/observer aircraft while the Brisfit was an escort fighter while the Halberstadt evolved into a low level ground attack aircraft... Brent (the woefully under referenced) Matthew Zivich @pease1.sr.unh.edu on 06/20/2000 01:59:58 PM Please respond to wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Sent by: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu To: Multiple recipients of list cc: Subject: Re: Cool Model For Sale.... Successful in terms of doing what? Dogfighting or dropping bombs or whatever else two-seaters are supposed to do that single seaters can't do? How does the Brisfit rack up against the well reputed Salmson and Breguet? Matt Z. Bob Pearson wrote: > Sharon writes (or in this case wrongs) . > > > I had always thought, however, that the most feared planes (in terms, I'm > > assuming, of how the Opposite Team reacted to their presence, NOT the people > > flying them.... ) would have been Airco D.H.4s, or a Sop. Strutters. The > > Bristol AC suffered a bad case of "higher-ups" disease -- wasn't it the > > Brisfit that was believed to be structurally unsound, so that her pilots > > were instructed not to make any hard and fast maneuvers in combat, lest they > > have wing breakage? (Uhh, how DOES one avoid hard and fast maneuvers in > > combat?? ) > > Good heavens no. . the F2b was considered to be a single-seater with a gun > behind the pilot and was flown as such. As much as I like the Strutter, it > was underpowered and not a very successful fighter. No.3 Wing has reports of > the frustration of the escorting fighters falling behind the single-seat > bombers once the bombers dropped their bomb .. in fact the single-seater > then became the faster, more maneuverable aircraft due to its carrying over > 200lbs less (gunner and gun). The DH4 would have been a better aircraft if > the crew were closer together for communication as in the DH9. All in all > the F2b was the most successful two-seater of the war. > > Bob ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 15:24:51 -0400 From: Sharon Henderson To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: Cool Model For Sale.... Message-ID: >All in all the F2b was the most successful two-seater of the war. In the terms you propose, I quite agree -- but I was looking at this from the perspective of the Germans, for instance. If you want to argue which was best in terms of the overall war, with our more comprehensive viewpoint, sure! But specifically, if you're talking about who *fears* what, you have to look at it from the shoes of those fighting against it. And they might not think the F2b was the most fearsome. :-) Or the Brisfit, seeing as the Bristol pilots were under orders that prevented them from fighting fiercely in response to attack.... But looking back and determining most successful, with no particular bias in favor of a country -- there, I'm right up there with you. Cheers, sharon! ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 12:27:26 -0700 From: "Bob Pearson" To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: Cool Model For Sale.... Message-ID: <200006201942.MAA31924@mail.rapidnet.net> I made the mistake of only incorporating the combat role for my previous message. If we go in terms of doing what it was designed for, than the much maligned BE2 is a perfect candidate for fullfilling its designed role - a stable recon machine. It would be interesting to see what the RAF would/could have done with the Breguet or Salmson. Bob ---------- >From: Matthew Zivich >To: Multiple recipients of list >Subject: Re: Cool Model For Sale.... >Date: Tue, Jun 20, 2000, 12:00 pm > > Successful in terms of doing what? Dogfighting or dropping bombs or whatever else > two-seaters are supposed to do that single seaters can't do? How does the Brisfit > rack up against the well reputed Salmson and Breguet? > > Matt Z. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 15:35:50 EDT From: MAnde72343@aol.com To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: Cool Model For Sale.... Message-ID: The Bristol F2b was the best two seat "fighter" of the war (although the German Hannover CL series was more manuverable) The Germans ordered pilots to stay away from Bristols when alone, and to avoid groups of four or more Bristols altogether. At least two Bristol crews scored more than 30 air to air victories, (British ace lists aside). The Bristol, in the hands of experienced crews, was more of a handful for fighter pilots than most of them would like to admit, and two or more of them could cover each other effectively. The Bristol, despite it's size, was as manuverable as many fighters, and with the close cooperation possible between pilot and gunner because of the cockpit design, it was a fighter killer. Merrill ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 15:41:34 EDT From: MAnde72343@aol.com To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: Best (Favorite) Two Seater [was cool model for sale] Message-ID: <99.66fe307.268122ee@aol.com> The German's top scoring gunner, Vizef. Ehmann, flew in Halberstadts, so they did pretty well, but the honors for best German two seat fighter goes to the Hannover CL's, where at least two different crews survived, and scored five or more victories IN A SINGLE MISSION. Merrill ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 12:45:22 -0700 From: "Bob Pearson" To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: Cool Model For Sale.... Message-ID: <200006201953.MAA32249@mail.rapidnet.net> Sharon's rebuttal to my reply >>All in all the F2b was the most successful two-seater of the war. > > In the terms you propose, I quite agree -- but I was looking at this > from the perspective of the Germans, for instance. If you want to > argue which was best in terms of the overall war, with our more comprehensive > viewpoint, sure! But specifically, if you're talking about who *fears* > what, you have to look at it from the shoes of those fighting against > it. Arrghhh .. my head hurts following this. . I think I got it now .. the F2b was not feared by the Germans because it was flown improperly. .. true - for a brief period. However this only lasted for the first weeks of April 1917 .. from that point on the F2a gained an ascendancy in the skies. . it could be, and was flown like a single-seater .. with the advantage of a sting in the tail. As for just being a 'fighter' there were plans to replace corps machines with re-engined F2bs had the war gone on much longer. .. various units were testing them .. ie No.35 Sqn had some on strength. > And they might not think the F2b was the most fearsome. :-) Or > the Brisfit, seeing as the Bristol pilots were under orders that > prevented them from fighting fiercely in response to attack.... Again .. that was just the early F2As. By the time the F2b was in service, tactics had changed to take advantage of the F2b's abilities. Bob ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 15:51:08 -0400 From: Matthew Zivich To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Two seaters, continued Message-ID: <394FCB2B.FCC53AD7@svsu.edu> It seems a difficult task to arbitrarily select a two seater aircraft out of the hordes of planes and call it the "best" of its kind. Yes, on one hand the Brisfit is the best, but by default. What other aircraft falls into its category of design? Matt Z Bob Pearson wrote: > I made the mistake of only incorporating the combat role for my previous > message. If we go in terms of doing what it was designed for, than the much > maligned BE2 is a perfect candidate for fullfilling its designed role - a > stable recon machine. > > It would be interesting to see what the RAF would/could have done with the > Breguet or Salmson. > > Bob > > ---------- > >From: Matthew Zivich > >To: Multiple recipients of list > >Subject: Re: Cool Model For Sale.... > >Date: Tue, Jun 20, 2000, 12:00 pm > > > > > Successful in terms of doing what? Dogfighting or dropping bombs or whatever > else > > two-seaters are supposed to do that single seaters can't do? How does the > Brisfit > > rack up against the well reputed Salmson and Breguet? > > > > Matt Z. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 16:03:58 EDT From: Zulis@aol.com To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: Cool Model For Sale.... Message-ID: << ... the much maligned BE2 is a perfect candidate for fullfilling its designed role - a stable recon machine. >> Very true. And once they were inevitably shot down, they became even more stable than before.... For what its worth, my vote goes to the Brisfit. It took me a long time to get used to thinking of it as a fighter, but the more I read about it, the more impressed I have become. As for the Central Powers machines.... I defer to the experts on this list. I have no idea. Most of the material available to read (at least to anglophones) is written by Brit commonwealth pilots, or americans, and I dont recall any of them speaking with great reverence of their two-seater opposition, though I do remember McCudden being angry with himself for attacking a two-seater as if it were a single-seater. " If you liked the BE2.... wait till you see the new, improved BE12.... " :-) DZ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 15:53:59 -0400 From: Chris Anderson To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: Info needed Message-ID: Re: >plus the Austrian federal heritage office chemical work on Berg D.I 101.37 >that revealed the true gray nature of these colors pretty much makes the case >for gray... RK, Thanks for the particulars. What a thorny question! This matters more to me then the ever-present Voss cowling issue! I can feel OK about making a guess concerning a cowl color or fuselage band - personal markings, but there is a huge difference between grays and the green/tan covering the entire aircraft! Who am I to question the scientific methods of the Austrians? Yet I still feel uncomfortable with this coming out of left field, as it seems - was there any reference at all to a two-toned gray scheme before this recent analysis? Was the motivation for these tests because of the discredited RG samples, or was it just part of the restoration project on 101.37? Is there a 2 cent version of the RG story you can relate? "The aged grays with the greenish/brownish tints were used by Gerrard to make his "sample", which was picked up by O'Conner." Were these RG O'Co samples authentic, but misinterpreted (assuming the theory correct), or were they actually counterfeit? Guess that's enough for now, hope I can settle down with one scheme someday! Chris ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 06:11:19 +1000 From: Shane Weier To: "'wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu'" Subject: RE: Another one bites the dust Message-ID: <65C968E11318D311B0BD0060B06865CD01A9EFE8@mimhexch.mim.com.au> David, > After months of delay as I painted, rubbed back and > repainted many times I > achieved the perfect (ahem) CDL finish on the underside of > the 1/28 DH5. > Then I dropped it..... > Oh sh*t. Even the master suffers from dropsy.... I hope it isn't too badly damaged - QMHE is getting close and I'd love to see it win the scratchbuilt class (WW1 uber alles) Shane ************************************************************** The information contained in this E-Mail is confidential and is intended only for the use of the addressee(s). If you receive this E-Mail in error, any use, distribution or copying of this E-Mail is not permitted. You are requested to forward unwanted E-Mail and address any problems to the MIM Holdings Limited Support Centre. E-Mail: supportcentre@mim.com.au or phone: Australia 07 3833 8042. ************************************************************** ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 14:43:25 -0500 From: "Matt Bittner" To: "wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu" Subject: Two Seat Fighters Re: Cool Model For Sale.... Message-ID: <200006202014.QAA11928@pease1.sr.unh.edu> On Tue, 20 Jun 2000 15:41:44 -0400 (EDT), MAnde72343@aol.com wrote: > The Bristol F2b was the best two seat "fighter" of the war (although the > German Hannover CL series was more manuverable) The Germans ordered pilots > to stay away from Bristols when alone, and to avoid groups of four or more > Bristols altogether. At least two Bristol crews scored more than 30 air to > air victories, (British ace lists aside). The Bristol, in the hands of > experienced crews, was more of a handful for fighter pilots than most of them > would like to admit, and two or more of them could cover each other > effectively. The Bristol, despite it's size, was as manuverable as many > fighters, and with the close cooperation possible between pilot and gunner > because of the cockpit design, it was a fighter killer. Unfortunately we may never know how the Hanriot HD.3 faired as a two-seat fighter. It could be interesting. Matt Bittner __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 16:14:40 EDT From: Zulis@aol.com To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: Info needed Message-ID: << Yet I still feel uncomfortable with this coming out of left field, as it seems - was there any reference at all to a two-toned gray scheme before this recent analysis? >> This is the part which bothers me about this whole discovery. Sure, we can quibble over a mechanic's memory of a specific pilot's cowl colour, but weren't any of these austrian pilots writing anything down? Where are all the letters home to their girlfriends, describing what their planes look like? Surely it wouldnt take long to see if they are talking about grey airplanes or brown/green ones.... DZ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 06:20:48 +1000 From: Shane Weier To: "'wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu'" Subject: RE: Cool Model For Sale.... Message-ID: <65C968E11318D311B0BD0060B06865CD01A9EFE9@mimhexch.mim.com.au> Sharon says: > And they might not think the F2b was the most fearsome. :-) Or > the Brisfit, seeing as the Bristol pilots were under orders that > prevented them from fighting fiercely in response to attack.... Do you mind giving a reference for this particular assertion. IMHO it's a load of rubbish - the Brisfit was flown as a *fighter* and used as aggressively as any single seater. It was structurally one of the strongest aircraft of WW1 and once the RFC discovered that it should be flown just as if it was a scout (but with one or two Lewises to cover the tail) it became an extraordinarilly difficult opponent. Shane ************************************************************** The information contained in this E-Mail is confidential and is intended only for the use of the addressee(s). If you receive this E-Mail in error, any use, distribution or copying of this E-Mail is not permitted. You are requested to forward unwanted E-Mail and address any problems to the MIM Holdings Limited Support Centre. E-Mail: supportcentre@mim.com.au or phone: Australia 07 3833 8042. ************************************************************** ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 06:25:41 +1000 From: Shane Weier To: "'wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu'" Subject: RE: Cool Model For Sale.... Message-ID: <65C968E11318D311B0BD0060B06865CD01A9EFEA@mimhexch.mim.com.au> Bob, > Arrghhh .. my head hurts following this. . I think I got it > now .. the F2b > was not feared by the Germans because it was flown > improperly. .. true - > for a brief period. Sharon is looking at it through Jasta 11 coloured eyes ;-) Sure, the first encounter between the darlings of J.11 and the Brisfit was a resounding failure for the F.2A's involved - but that was before the RFC figured out how best to use them. Then the ratio of win/loss swapped around smartly Shane ************************************************************** The information contained in this E-Mail is confidential and is intended only for the use of the addressee(s). If you receive this E-Mail in error, any use, distribution or copying of this E-Mail is not permitted. You are requested to forward unwanted E-Mail and address any problems to the MIM Holdings Limited Support Centre. E-Mail: supportcentre@mim.com.au or phone: Australia 07 3833 8042. ************************************************************** ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 06:26:27 +1000 From: Shane Weier To: "'wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu'" Subject: RE: Two seaters, continued Message-ID: <65C968E11318D311B0BD0060B06865CD01A9EFEB@mimhexch.mim.com.au> Matt, > It seems a difficult task to arbitrarily select a two seater > aircraft out of the > hordes of planes and call it the "best" of its kind. Yes, on > one hand the Brisfit > is the best, but by default. What other aircraft falls into > its category of > design? McDD Eagle ? Shane ************************************************************** The information contained in this E-Mail is confidential and is intended only for the use of the addressee(s). If you receive this E-Mail in error, any use, distribution or copying of this E-Mail is not permitted. You are requested to forward unwanted E-Mail and address any problems to the MIM Holdings Limited Support Centre. E-Mail: supportcentre@mim.com.au or phone: Australia 07 3833 8042. ************************************************************** ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 16:30:12 -0400 From: Matthew Zivich To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: Two seaters, continued Message-ID: <394FD454.13A4B9BC@svsu.edu> You got me on that one. What's a McDD Eagle? Matt Z Shane Weier wrote: > Matt, > > > > It seems a difficult task to arbitrarily select a two seater > > aircraft out of the > > hordes of planes and call it the "best" of its kind. Yes, on > > one hand the Brisfit > > is the best, but by default. What other aircraft falls into > > its category of > > design? > > McDD Eagle ? > > Shane > > ************************************************************** > The information contained in this E-Mail is confidential > and is intended only for the use of the addressee(s). > If you receive this E-Mail in error, any use, distribution > or copying of this E-Mail is not permitted. You are > requested to forward unwanted E-Mail and address any problems > to the MIM Holdings Limited Support Centre. > E-Mail: supportcentre@mim.com.au or phone: Australia 07 3833 8042. > ************************************************************** ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 16:33:07 EDT From: MAnde72343@aol.com To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Two Holers Message-ID: The many and divergent missions of two seaters makes direct comparisons difficult, but the Bristol did it all, light bombing, recon, even infantry contact and artillery spotting, so... The DH-4, Salmson and Brueguet, were excellent bombers, sturdy and fast, and the RE-8 did yeoman service, but none of the others did it all, And had good air to air- so the Bristol F2B was the best Allied two seater of the war, period. Merrill ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 06:40:55 +1000 From: Shane Weier To: "'wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu'" Subject: RE: Two seaters, continued Message-ID: <65C968E11318D311B0BD0060B06865CD01A9EFEC@mimhexch.mim.com.au> Matt, > You got me on that one. What's a McDD Eagle? > Kero burning heavy metal - but the point is that the Biff was used as an all purpose aircraft capable of acting as a fighter, bomber, recce, interdictor, interceptor if required AND while it may have been shaded by other aircraft in some of these roles it ineviatbly outperformed them in other roles. Kind of a jack of all trades, but good enough not to be disparaged as a master of none. Shane ************************************************************** The information contained in this E-Mail is confidential and is intended only for the use of the addressee(s). If you receive this E-Mail in error, any use, distribution or copying of this E-Mail is not permitted. You are requested to forward unwanted E-Mail and address any problems to the MIM Holdings Limited Support Centre. E-Mail: supportcentre@mim.com.au or phone: Australia 07 3833 8042. ************************************************************** ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 15:36:52 -0500 From: Brent_A_Theobald@notes.seagate.com To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: Two seaters, continued Message-ID: I think he may be referring to a (very ot) McDonald's/Douglas F-15 Eagle? Matthew Zivich @pease1.sr.unh.edu on 06/20/2000 03:36:20 PM Please respond to wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Sent by: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu To: Multiple recipients of list cc: Subject: Re: Two seaters, continued You got me on that one. What's a McDD Eagle? Matt Z Shane Weier wrote: > Matt, > > > > It seems a difficult task to arbitrarily select a two seater > > aircraft out of the > > hordes of planes and call it the "best" of its kind. Yes, on > > one hand the Brisfit > > is the best, but by default. What other aircraft falls into > > its category of > > design? > > McDD Eagle ? > > Shane > > ************************************************************** > The information contained in this E-Mail is confidential > and is intended only for the use of the addressee(s). > If you receive this E-Mail in error, any use, distribution > or copying of this E-Mail is not permitted. You are > requested to forward unwanted E-Mail and address any problems > to the MIM Holdings Limited Support Centre. > E-Mail: supportcentre@mim.com.au or phone: Australia 07 3833 8042. > ************************************************************** ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 16:52:52 EDT From: MAnde72343@aol.com To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: RE-8's Message-ID: All the talk, a few days ago, about whether the "Harry Tate'" was ugly or not, ,stirred a memory... A fighter pilot, got himself into s bad situation, alone against for or five German fighters, and was further discouraged to see six more planes, coming from the East, diving into the fight. He reported his joy at recognizing the new planes as Harry Tates (probably returning from a mission) To that pilot (I can't remember who) the RE-8 WAS beautiful, as the Germans broke off and left. Two seaters bailing out a fighter.... Merrill ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 16:53:42 -0400 From: Lyle Lamboley To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: Best (Favorite) Two Seater [was cool model for sale] Message-ID: <20000620.165344.-151119.0.lyle.lamboley@juno.com> On Tue, 20 Jun 2000 15:46:06 -0400 (EDT) MAnde72343@aol.com writes: > The German's top scoring gunner, Vizef. Ehmann, flew in Halberstadts, > so they > did pretty well, but the honors for best German two seat fighter > goes to the > Hannover CL's, where at least two different crews survived, and > scored five > or more victories IN A SINGLE MISSION. > Merrill > Never heard of a Rumpler C.IV crew having that kind of luck in the War, although it was a Rumpler that gave McCudden a hard time of it. That was supposedly a tough one to fly, unlike the Hannover and Halberstadt. Lyle ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 17:04:24 EDT From: MAnde72343@aol.com To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: Best (Favorite) Two Seater [was cool model for sale] Message-ID: Lyle, the main problem with the Rumplers, was that they flew very high, as they did most of the long range photo recon. The Rumpler crews had oxygen, whereas the fighter pilots were running on their own stamina; additionally, late Rumplers were set up for high altitude, and were faster and better able to manuver at angels twenty, than the fighters opposing them. Merrill ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 17:08:27 EDT From: Albatrosdv@aol.com To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: Cool Model For Sale.... Message-ID: <79.5af0de4.2681374b@aol.com> In a message dated 6/20/00 1:57:36 PM EST, mzivich@svsu.edu writes: << How does the Brisfit rack up against the well reputed Salmson and Breguet? >> It flew rings around them is what it did. How many fighter aces flew Salmsons and Breguets, or became aces doing so??? TC ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 17:00:46 -0400 From: Chris Anderson To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: Info needed Message-ID: ><< Yet I still feel uncomfortable with this coming out of left > field, as it seems - was there any reference at all to a two-toned gray > scheme before this recent analysis? >> > >This is the part which bothers me about this whole discovery. Sure, we can >quibble over a mechanic's memory of a specific pilot's cowl colour, but >weren't any of these austrian pilots writing anything down? Where are all >the letters home to their girlfriends, describing what their planes look >like? Surely it wouldnt take long to see if they are talking about grey >airplanes or brown/green ones.... > >DZ Yes, that is my feeling as well. With all the personal interviews O'Connor did, one would think grays would have been mentioned at some point. There's for instance the oft-repeated Banfield reference to green on the Eindecker, etc... Of course it is possible that it just so happened that the pilots he met didn't encounter the gray or green scheme, which I believe was introduced fairly late, and only on certain aircraft, or did so without making much of an impression, after all they probably were more concerned with other matters more relevent to their fighting and survival capabilities! Any other ideas? Anyone know what the gentleman responsible for Japo A-H book thinks? Chris ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 17:11:03 EDT From: Albatrosdv@aol.com To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: Cool Model For Sale.... Message-ID: <98.69283ca.268137e7@aol.com> In a message dated 6/20/00 2:30:16 PM EST, wolfchen@netpolicy.com writes: << seeing as the Bristol pilots were under orders that prevented them from fighting fiercely in response to attack.... >> For the first few missions. Let's just count the number of Brisfit aces and compare them with the number of aces in any other 2-seater airplane. I think they figured out they could fight fiercely in response to an attack and in making attacks all on their own. TC ------------------------------ End of WWI Digest 2425 **********************