WWI Digest 3067 Topics covered in this issue include: 1) Re: Dimes and 5c pieces [was RE: Saturdays] by "Lee J. Mensinger" 2) Drat, Rats and @#$%^&*() by "Steven M.Perry" 3) WWII Ace in Luxembourg was RE: the battles was RE: Uniforms by "Gaston Graf" 4) RE: How big is your interest into the early battles of the Great War? by "Gaston Graf" 5) RE: How big is your interest into the early battles of the Great by "Gaston Graf" 6) Re: How big is your interest into the early battles of the Great War? by "Robert Fabris" 7) Re: Guns by KarrArt@aol.com 8) RE: Gaston's novel by "Nigel Rayner" 9) Kits for kids and further thoughts by "Steven M.Perry" 10) Re: Aeroclub BE2c? by VMA324Vagabonds@aol.com 11) Re: Aeroclub BE2c? by VMA324Vagabonds@aol.com 12) RE: Gaston's novel by "Gaston Graf" 13) Re: WWI digest 3065 by Steve Cox 14) RE: How big is your interest into the early battles of the Great by fedders 15) Re: Model Expo 1:16 Nieuport by "Jim Landon" 16) error correction by "Gaston Graf" 17) Re: Kits for kids and further thoughts by "Matt Bittner" 18) filling in seams, etc. by Stephendigiacomo@aol.com 19) Aircraft performance terms. by Stephendigiacomo@aol.com 20) Re: filling in seams, etc. by Ernest Thomas 21) Re: filling in seams, etc. by KarrArt@aol.com 22) Re: filling in seams, etc. by "TOM PLESHA" 23) Re: Aircraft performance terms. by "TOM PLESHA" 24) Re: Aircraft performance terms. by Ernest Thomas 25) Re: Aircraft performance terms. by Stephendigiacomo@aol.com 26) Re: Aircraft performance terms. by "TOM PLESHA" 27) Re: Aircraft performance terms. by Stephendigiacomo@aol.com 28) Re: Aircraft performance terms. by "TOM PLESHA" ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 10:19:24 -0600 From: "Lee J. Mensinger" To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: Dimes and 5c pieces [was RE: Saturdays] Message-ID: <3A856A0C.AA1BEC39@x25.net> Shane. I was in 47 different countries during 25.5 years in the US Army and Air Force. My biggest problem was learning to count, and asking "How Much" so I could understand the money system Them millimeters and inches were little problems compare to taking a taxi. They don't cost as much to use. The Kilometers and the cost per... will get you and then it's the poorhouse. Australia was simple compare to many others but I could not remember which coin was which. It has been over 40 years. I usually try to get in a small "inches or mm" rule when dimensions are important.. Take care. Lee M. Shane Weier wrote: > Cam says: > > > > Same as a sixpence once was. > > > > The US Dime is about the same size and width as > > an Australian 5c piece. > > Okay, but the point was that putting a coin in a photo is a usefull > reference only for those resident in the country of origin of the coin - and > using a "dime" and saying > > Same size as 5c Australian > a trifle smaeller than 1 kina > 2.5 public hairs larger than (Old) sixpence > a bees butt smaller than a 3 dinero > etc... > > ..is all kind of complicated compared to a section of ruler with *Imperial* > inches on one side for the Americans and centimetres on the other for the > rest :-) > > 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 > phone: Australia 1800500646 > ********************************************************************** ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 11:35:38 -0500 From: "Steven M.Perry" To: Subject: Drat, Rats and @#$%^&*() Message-ID: <00aa01c0937f$80a376e0$04f1aec7@default> I just started gluing the top wing on my Alb and then realized that I hadn't repositioned the ailerons yet. :-( Reminds me of my favorite line from The 70s Show......."Dunb ass!" sp ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 18:31:04 +0100 From: "Gaston Graf" To: Subject: WWII Ace in Luxembourg was RE: the battles was RE: Uniforms Message-ID: Gabe, thats too funny - Charlie Gaul was one of our very few Luxemburgish winners of important sports events in history. The man is still alive indeed and considerd to be a national hero. Next year the Tour de France wil have its start in Luxembourg, where Mr. Gaul will certainly be present. It's depending on the region you rode your bike because the country is devided into the "Éisléck" - the Northern and very hilly part of the Ardennes - and the "Guddland", the Southern flat part. In WWII, the tanks of the German General Guderian had much trouble getting through the Ardennes in Luxembourg. As for my research I just ordered a book written by a French Army captain who participated in the battle of Virton. And - well it's ot but.... half an hour ago, Indridi Palsson called me on the phone. Indi is a workmate of mine and the grandson of the famous Iclandic WWII Ace Tony Palsson, who scored 8 victories and 7 probable flying Hurricanes, Spifires and P-51 (iIrc) for the RAF. He was the only Icelandic pilot in the RAF. After the war, Tony Palsson flew as a commercial pilot for Icelandair and later for the Luxemburgish Cargolux. He currently is in the country to visit the family and I will have a chance to meet him on Monday. Diving into history is such a fascinating thing... I'm really thrilled, not only because Tony Palsson will be my first Ace to meet in person, but also because of the whole Richthofen thing and the early battles of WW1. Thanks for confirming the posting of my previous message, Gabe. cheers Gaston Graf (ggraf@vo.lu) Meet the Royal Prussian Fighter Squadron 2 "Boelcke" at: http://www.jastaboelcke.de > -----Original Message----- > From: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu [mailto:wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu]On Behalf Of > Limon3 > Sent: Saturday, February 10, 2001 5:16 PM > To: Multiple recipients of list > Subject: Re: the battles was RE: Uniforms > > > Don't worry, Gaston, it came through fine. I haven't had time to > reply, but > I have always been fascinated by this period of the First Big One. It was > still a war of movement, and not the bloody stalemate it became > later. BTW, > I just read an article about another famous Luxembourgeois, > Charly Gaul. I > have done some bicycle riding up in your area, and always found > it difficult > to believe that such a great climber could develop in such a > relatively flat > country. In any case, keep up the great work on your website. > Regards, > Gabe > -----Original Message----- > From: Gaston Graf > To: Multiple recipients of list > Date: Saturday, February 10, 2001 1:43 AM > Subject: the battles was RE: Uniforms > > > >Friends, > > > >yesterday I posted a question asking you about your interest > into the early > >battles of WW1 but downloading my mail now didn't even contain a single > >reply to that message so I am now wondering if: > > > > 1) there is no interest at all > > 2) or if that message maybe wasn't delivered to the list > > > >sincerely > > > > Gaston Graf > >(ggraf@vo.lu) > >Meet the Royal Prussian Fighter Squadron 2 "Boelcke" at: > >http://www.jastaboelcke.de > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu [mailto:wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu]On Behalf Of > >> Shane Weier > >> Sent: Saturday, February 10, 2001 7:28 AM > >> To: Multiple recipients of list > >> Subject: RE: Uniforms > >> > >> > >> James, > >> > >> > 1. British Officers (love those Sam Browne belts.) > >> > >> Plenty of armies used Sam Browne belts. Still do for that matter > >> > >> 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 > >> phone: Australia 1800500646 > >> ********************************************************************** > >> > > > > > ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 18:36:41 +0100 From: "Gaston Graf" To: Subject: RE: How big is your interest into the early battles of the Great War? Message-ID: LOL Diego - but I think that a good author does not need to hide and always should be open to discuss his work with other. I don't want to say that I am a good author since I never published a book yet but it's my goal to do things right so you will always be welcome to ask me whatever silly questions you want to ask, mon ami ;o) Gaston Graf (ggraf@vo.lu) Meet the Royal Prussian Fighter Squadron 2 "Boelcke" at: http://www.jastaboelcke.de > -----Original Message----- > From: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu [mailto:wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu]On Behalf Of > Diego Fernetti > Sent: Saturday, February 10, 2001 2:27 PM > To: Multiple recipients of list > Subject: Re: How big is your interest into the early battles of the > Great War? > > > >How big is your > >interest into the early battles of the Great War? Would you buy a book > >about > >this chapter of WW1? > > Gaston! > I'd love to have a book as the one you describe. And more yet if I can > contact the author to ask him silly questions ;-) > Alors, mon ami, ecrivez! > D. > _________________________________________________________________________ > Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. > ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 18:39:00 +0100 From: "Gaston Graf" To: Subject: RE: How big is your interest into the early battles of the Great Message-ID: Ehmmm....... now tell a poor illicite dude like me WHY he was right, please! Gaston Graf (ggraf@vo.lu) Meet the Royal Prussian Fighter Squadron 2 "Boelcke" at: http://www.jastaboelcke.de > The fact she won a Pulitzer means that Abraham Lincolm was right. > > Michael > > _________________________________________________________________ > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com > > ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 10:20:37 -0800 From: "Robert Fabris" To: Subject: Re: How big is your interest into the early battles of the Great War? Message-ID: <005a01c0938e$2ca7afc0$3dcf480c@garage> Diego - I have a copy of "Great Battles of World War I" by Anthony Livesey. Each battle (ground, air, sea ) is covered by a descriptive text, photos, maps, and usually some sort of pictorial to show troop actions, sometimes with topographic maps to show terrain. 200 pages, 10 x 12 inches Let me know if interested.... Bob > Gaston! > I'd love to have a book as the one you describe. And more yet if I can > contact the author to ask him silly questions ;-) > Alors, mon ami, ecrivez! > ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 13:28:29 EST From: KarrArt@aol.com To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: Guns Message-ID: <34.10b65458.27b6e24d@aol.com> In a message dated 2/9/01 2:18:24 PM Pacific Standard Time, tbittners@sprintmail.com writes: << > I have some brass tubing, .006 dia. Is that small > enough for 1:72 barrels? I got it from Hobby Hanger. I don't know. What do others think? These will be for the barrels of Lewis guns. Matt Bittner >> Well, a Lewis barrel tapered from 1" to 3/4" at the muzzle and in 1/72, .006= .432", jjust a little under a half inch. With a coat of paint, that may work out about right. RK ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 19:30:13 -0000 From: "Nigel Rayner" To: Subject: RE: Gaston's novel Message-ID: <000001c09397$e38590a0$983bedc1@w1o0t3> Gaston asked: > What I now want to ask you is written in the subject line: > How big is your interest into the early battles of the Great War? Would you > buy a book about this chapter of WW1? I'm potentially interested in any book about WWI. However, if you can get it something like August 1914 by Solzhenitsyn, then I'm definitely interested! A tall order I know, but the combination of military history with strong personal viewpoints makes for interesting reading (and a potentially wider audience). And I think you have a slightly controversial subject matter that has not been written about that much. Combine this with MvR, you have somethng that could appeal to a wider audience. Cheers, Nigel ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 14:31:58 -0500 From: "Steven M.Perry" To: Subject: Kits for kids and further thoughts Message-ID: <00e401c09398$231589a0$04f1aec7@default> I want to thank everyone who contributed to making it possible for those kids to have their own little OT "Make & Take" . We all talk about how few kids build models these days and it was real good to see the response from everyone when the opportunity to do something presented itself. Makes me wish we could do the same for every school kid in the world. Shoot, even trying to do that for a few full size classes adds up to a lot of plastic. Yet reaching out and touching some young imaginations with the history and hobby that we all so enjoy is a tempting thought and a worthy exercise. Let me toss this idea out: We could sponsor an essay contest, say 5th thru 12th grades, Top three esays in each grade win a WWI kit. Any teacher worth his or her salt would jump at the opportunity to squeeze an extra essay out of their class, especially on what is getting to be a less well covered period of history. We get the fun of reading all the essays and selecting the best ones. We would touch a lot more young minds than we could ever find kits for. A great many of us can trace our current interest in the period back to reading a story about WWI as a kid. This might do a lot to see that same seed of interest planted in the next generation. What do y'all think? sp ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 15:11:00 EST From: VMA324Vagabonds@aol.com To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: Aeroclub BE2c? Message-ID: <6d.f4485f0.27b6fa54@aol.com> Thanks Fella's, I have checked and rechecked my box and there is nothing that looks even remotely like a camera, I guess I better check with Aeroclub to find out how to get one as this was one of the main reason I purchased this kit. Thanks again Jon In a message dated 2/10/2001 11:06:38 AM Eastern Standard Time, Limon3@email.msn.com writes: << Hi Jon, You're not going crazy, there should be a very nice white metal camera in the kit. Gabe >> Jon, I have the BE2e and its in with the metal parts Large glass plate style camera rectangular base with what look like handles on. Then a pedestal box shape on top. Sorry poor description. But if you need I can take a photo of it and send it to you so you can identify it or know its not in the box?? Ray Best Regards, Jon ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 15:11:58 EST From: VMA324Vagabonds@aol.com To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: Aeroclub BE2c? Message-ID: <7d.10c1da70.27b6fa8e@aol.com> In a message dated 2/10/2001 1:12:11 AM Eastern Standard Time, Ray_Boorman@telus.net writes: << Jon, I have the BE2e and its in with the metal parts Large glass plate style camera rectangular base with what look like handles on. Then a pedestal box shape on top. Sorry poor description. But if you need I can take a photo of it and send it to you so you can identify it or know its not in the box?? Ray >> Thanks Ray, if you can do it digital I would like to see it. Best Regards, Jon ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 21:27:29 +0100 From: "Gaston Graf" To: Subject: RE: Gaston's novel Message-ID: Thanks Nigel - but where the heck is Solzhenitsyn? Gaston ;o) > > > Gaston asked: > > > What I now want to ask you is written in the subject line: > > How big is your interest into the early battles of the Great War? Would > you > > buy a book about this chapter of WW1? > > I'm potentially interested in any book about WWI. However, if you > can get it > something like August 1914 by Solzhenitsyn, then I'm definitely > interested! > A tall order I know, but the combination of military history with strong > personal viewpoints makes for interesting reading (and a potentially wider > audience). And I think you have a slightly controversial subject > matter that > has not been written about that much. Combine this with MvR, you have > somethng that could appeal to a wider audience. > > Cheers, > > Nigel > > > ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 20:35:17 +0000 From: Steve Cox To: Subject: Re: WWI digest 3065 Message-ID: Well that scales to 0.432 inches, sounds a little bit fine to me for .303 ammo, but I'm no expert. Perhaps you should use .0065 tubing :-) Steve =========================================== steve@oldglebe.freeserve.co.uk http://www.oldglebe.freeserve.co.uk/steveshome.html If I didn't spend so much time on line ‹‹ I'd get some models finished ================ > From: "Matt Bittner" > Subject: Re: Guns > > On Fri, 9 Feb 2001 15:17:27 -0500 (EST), Todd Hayes wrote: > >> I have some brass tubing, .006 dia. Is that small >> enough for 1:72 barrels? I got it from Hobby Hanger. > > I don't know. What do others think? These will be for the barrels of > Lewis guns. > > > Matt Bittner ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 15:04:01 -0600 (CST) From: fedders To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: RE: How big is your interest into the early battles of the Great Message-ID: Tuchman's "The Guns of August is incredibly one-sided. Objectivity is not her strong wuit. "Tannenberg, A Clash of Empires" is an excellent even handed book. peter ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 21:16:57 From: "Jim Landon" To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Cc: RNew3040@aol.com Subject: Re: Model Expo 1:16 Nieuport Message-ID: Ben said <> Thanks Ben Jim Landon (Originator of the original question) _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 22:20:37 +0100 From: "Gaston Graf" To: Subject: error correction Message-ID: Friends, I talked about meeting the grandvather of my friend Indy.... his correct name is Thorstein (Tony) Elton Jonsson, not Tony Palsson, as stated earlier. Palsson is the lastname of Indridi (Indy). I think I'll never understand the change of Scandinavian names through the generations :o(. Sorry for the confusion. Gaston Graf (ggraf@vo.lu) Meet the Royal Prussian Fighter Squadron 2 "Boelcke" at: http://www.jastaboelcke.de ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 15:28:56 -0600 From: "Matt Bittner" To: "wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu" Subject: Re: Kits for kids and further thoughts Message-ID: <200102102128.NAA17948@falcon.prod.itd.earthlink.net> On Sat, 10 Feb 2001 14:35:11 -0500 (EST), Steven M.Perry wrote: > What do y'all think? It could be a time-consuming project, but it sounds great!! Matt Bittner ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 16:36:40 EST From: Stephendigiacomo@aol.com To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: filling in seams, etc. Message-ID: I'm using Squadron's Fast Drying White Putty. I wish I knew of a way to apply it with at least some measure of precision. Are there any techniques for this? Are there better products or solutions than this putty? ~Steve ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 16:39:18 EST From: Stephendigiacomo@aol.com To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Aircraft performance terms. Message-ID: <78.1061369c.27b70f06@aol.com> I'm wondering if someone could help me understand the various terms which describe aircraft performance. What are the specific terms and what do they mean in layman's terms? Any help would be appreciated. Cheers, ~Steve di Giacomo ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 15:45:22 -0600 From: Ernest Thomas To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: filling in seams, etc. Message-ID: <3A85B672.1B116DCD@bellsouth.net> Stephendigiacomo@aol.com wrote: > > I'm using Squadron's Fast Drying White Putty. I wish I knew of a way to > apply it with at least some measure of precision. Are there any techniques > for this? Yes. Mix some putty with liquid cement until it's the consistancy of goo. Then apply with a toothpick, or some similar small stick like thingie. Hth E. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 16:58:41 EST From: KarrArt@aol.com To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: filling in seams, etc. Message-ID: <24.10fc30ba.27b71391@aol.com> In a message dated 2/10/01 1:38:02 PM Pacific Standard Time, Stephendigiacomo@aol.com writes: << I'm using Squadron's Fast Drying White Putty. I wish I knew of a way to apply it with at least some measure of precision. Are there any techniques for this? Are there better products or solutions than this putty? ~Steve >> I use some red stuff I get at auto parts stores. I think it's usually Bondo brand.....comes in tubes. I always keep a pre-thinned supply of this stuff around- I squeeze a big glob out into a film canister- maybe 2/3 full, pour in a little lacquer thinner, stir, and adjust the consistancy till it pleases me. I apply it with an old brush, and literally paint it on just where I want it. I've got models twenty years old using this stuff and nary a crackout or flake. RK ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 17:03:15 -0500 From: "TOM PLESHA" To: Subject: Re: filling in seams, etc. Message-ID: <000501c093ad$453b18a0$1a434c0c@tom> Hi- I use miniature spatulas both those made by squadron and homemade ones out of styreen scraps. TP ----- Original Message ----- From: To: "Multiple recipients of list" Sent: Saturday, February 10, 2001 4:40 PM Subject: filling in seams, etc. > I'm using Squadron's Fast Drying White Putty. I wish I knew of a way to > apply it with at least some measure of precision. Are there any techniques > for this? Are there better products or solutions than this putty? > ~Steve > ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 17:04:06 -0500 From: "TOM PLESHA" To: Subject: Re: Aircraft performance terms. Message-ID: <000b01c093ad$63ad4920$1a434c0c@tom> Which terms? TP ----- Original Message ----- From: To: "Multiple recipients of list" Sent: Saturday, February 10, 2001 4:44 PM Subject: Aircraft performance terms. > I'm wondering if someone could help me understand the various terms which > describe aircraft performance. What are the specific terms and what do they > mean in layman's terms? Any help would be appreciated. > Cheers, > ~Steve di Giacomo > ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 16:10:10 -0600 From: Ernest Thomas To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: Aircraft performance terms. Message-ID: <3A85BC42.F77EDE76@bellsouth.net> Stephendigiacomo@aol.com wrote: > > I'm wondering if someone could help me understand the various terms which > describe aircraft performance. What are the specific terms and what do they > mean in layman's terms? Ok... Ceiling = Maximum sustainable altitude, expressed in feet above mean sea level. Load factor = How sturdy is the airframe, expressed in G's, neg. and pos. VA = Maximum speed at which full and abrupt control pressures can be applied with out damaging the airframe. Also defined as the speed at which an airplane will stall before it breaks. VNE = Never exceed speed(red line) VNO = Top of the normal operating speed range VS = Stall speed in the clean configuration VSO = Stall speed in the landing config. VFE = Maximum speed at which the flaps can be extended VLE = Same as VFE except it applies to the landing gear VY = Best rate of climb VX = Best angle of climb Endurance = Maximum amount of time the engine will run on full fuel at cruise speed. (I think this figure assumes a 1/2 hour reserve that isn't included in the endurance figures.) And that's what I could come up with off the top of my head. Did you have any other specific performance questions? E. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 17:20:55 EST From: Stephendigiacomo@aol.com To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: Aircraft performance terms. Message-ID: <84.113ea1eb.27b718c7@aol.com> Actually, of those which I know - speed, maneuverability, stability - I *think* I understand them but the latter two have confused me. I guess it's enough to say that stability is the opposite of maneuverability. I think of the Sopwith Camel which had great maneuverability, but poor stability. Then there's the greatest aircraft of all time (because it's my favorite), the Dr. I, which had excellent stability and maneuverability - I *think*. (I'm not well read in these things.) What the Dr. I didn't have was speed. ~Steve diGiacomo In a message dated 2/10/1 5:03:45 PM, Tom Plesha writes: << Which terms? TP ----- Original Message ----- From: To: "Multiple recipients of list" Sent: Saturday, February 10, 2001 4:44 PM Subject: Aircraft performance terms. > I'm wondering if someone could help me understand the various terms which > describe aircraft performance. What are the spe >> ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 17:38:29 -0500 From: "TOM PLESHA" To: Subject: Re: Aircraft performance terms. Message-ID: <000901c093b2$31ada820$1a434c0c@tom> Hi- generalities: Stability and maneuverability are almost mutually exclusive. Stability is the ability of the aircraft to return to normal flight (straight and level) after control movements which are abrubt, the ability of an aircraft to fly in normal flight (staight and level) with minimal control changes. Manueverability is the ability of the aircraft to deviate from normal flight (straight and level) with ease, meaning that the aircraft is not attempting, through stability, to return to normal flight (straight and level). Typically, the less stable an aircraft is the more maneuverable/aerobatic it is, thus the flexibility of "dog-fighting". Hope this helps TP ----- Original Message ----- From: To: "Multiple recipients of list" Sent: Saturday, February 10, 2001 5:24 PM Subject: Re: Aircraft performance terms. > Actually, of those which I know - speed, maneuverability, stability - I > *think* I understand them but the latter two have confused me. I guess it's > enough to say that stability is the opposite of maneuverability. I think of > the Sopwith Camel which had great maneuverability, but poor stability. Then > there's the greatest aircraft of all time (because it's my favorite), the Dr. > I, which had excellent stability and maneuverability - I *think*. (I'm not > well read in these things.) What the Dr. I didn't have was speed. > ~Steve diGiacomo > > In a message dated 2/10/1 5:03:45 PM, Tom Plesha writes: > > << Which terms? > TP > ----- Original Message ----- > From: > To: "Multiple recipients of list" > Sent: Saturday, February 10, 2001 4:44 PM > Subject: Aircraft performance terms. > > > > I'm wondering if someone could help me understand the various terms which > > describe aircraft performance. What are the spe >> > > ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 17:49:02 EST From: Stephendigiacomo@aol.com To: wwi@pease1.sr.unh.edu Subject: Re: Aircraft performance terms. Message-ID: <68.bee50f3.27b71f5e@aol.com> *gulp* Thanks, E. Do these terms date back to WWI? Not important, just curious. I never imagined that landing gear or flaps could not be extended at or above a certain speed. Now, I can see the relevance of these terms for not crashing a plane. But I was thinking of terms which assess aircraft performance for combat. In this case I would be interested in understanding such terms. But maybe there isn't much to understand: horse power or thrust; weight empty & loaded; Rate of climb; top speed; cruising speed; range (endurance); ceiling. A working definition for maneuverability would be nice to have for each aircraft. How quickly can the plane complete a 360 degree turn at what power and altitude; how quickly and safely can it perform any of the other standard aerobatic maneuvers at x speed, x thrust/rpm/hp, x altitude. A scale or matrix which compares aircraft in this manner would be more telling than simply reading that a plane was "highly maneuverable". I know, I know, it would also be great if I hit lotto and everybody was honest and nice. ~Steve di Giacomo In a message dated 2/10/1 5:10:14 PM, ethomas6@bellsouth.net writes: << Ok... Ceiling = Maximum sustainable altitude, expressed in feet above mean sea level. Load factor = How sturdy is the airframe, expressed in G's, neg. and pos. VA = Maximum speed at which full and abrupt control pressures can be applied with out damaging the airframe. Also defined as the speed at which an airplane will stall before it breaks. VNE = Never exceed speed(red line) VNO = Top of the normal operating speed range VS = Stall speed in the clean configuration VSO = Stall speed in the landing config. VFE = Maximum speed at which the flaps can be extended VLE = Same as VFE except it applies to the landing gear VY = Best rate of climb VX = Best angle of climb Endurance = Maximum amount of time the engine will run on full fuel at cruise speed. (I think this figure assumes a 1/2 hour reserve that isn't included in the endurance figures.) And that's what I could come up with off the top of my head. Did you have any other specific performance questions? E. >> ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 18:14:55 -0500 From: "TOM PLESHA" To: Subject: Re: Aircraft performance terms. Message-ID: <000501c093b7$48a8e3a0$1a434c0c@tom> Hi Steve- Some of the items that you have refered to are of a nature that they must be calculated for each aircraft. In general, again, power or thrust overcomes drag, lift overcomes weight, the other items, roc, speed, etc. are those items needed to be calculated. Highly maneuverable would be related to, for ex: a roll rate of 270 - 360 degrees per minute, etc. There has been considerable graphing done on the WWII aircraft, such as a table comparing an Me 109 to a Spitfire to a P-51 to P38, etc. in maneuvers, speeds, weights, altitudes, etc. I will look into my references and see what publications and books might have the data you are seeking. Hope this helps TP ----- Original Message ----- From: To: "Multiple recipients of list" Sent: Saturday, February 10, 2001 5:52 PM Subject: Re: Aircraft performance terms. > *gulp* Thanks, E. Do these terms date back to WWI? Not important, just > curious. > > I never imagined that landing gear or flaps could not be extended at or above > a certain speed. > > Now, I can see the relevance of these terms for not crashing a plane. But I > was thinking of terms which assess aircraft performance for combat. In this > case I would be interested in understanding such terms. But maybe there > isn't much to understand: horse power or thrust; weight empty & loaded; Rate > of climb; top speed; cruising speed; range (endurance); ceiling. > A working definition for maneuverability would be nice to have for each > aircraft. How quickly can the plane complete a 360 degree turn at what power > and altitude; how quickly and safely can it perform any of the other standard > aerobatic maneuvers at x speed, x thrust/rpm/hp, x altitude. A scale or > matrix which compares aircraft in this manner would be more telling than > simply reading that a plane was "highly maneuverable". I know, I know, it > would also be great if I hit lotto and everybody was honest and nice. > ~Steve di Giacomo > > In a message dated 2/10/1 5:10:14 PM, ethomas6@bellsouth.net writes: > > << Ok... > Ceiling = Maximum sustainable altitude, expressed in feet above mean sea > level. > Load factor = How sturdy is the airframe, expressed in G's, neg. and > pos. > VA = Maximum speed at which full and abrupt control pressures can be > applied with out damaging the airframe. Also defined as the speed at > which an airplane will stall before it breaks. > VNE = Never exceed speed(red line) > VNO = Top of the normal operating speed range > VS = Stall speed in the clean configuration > VSO = Stall speed in the landing config. > VFE = Maximum speed at which the flaps can be extended > VLE = Same as VFE except it applies to the landing gear > VY = Best rate of climb > VX = Best angle of climb > Endurance = Maximum amount of time the engine will run on full fuel at > cruise speed. (I think this figure assumes a 1/2 hour reserve that isn't > included in the endurance figures.) > > And that's what I could come up with off the top of my head. Did you > have any other specific performance questions? > E. >> > ------------------------------ End of WWI Digest 3067 **********************