Author Topic: Voss... (Read 1299 times)

Furball · « **Reply #30 on:** September 15, 2005, 12:36:25 PM »

The tripehound would have been far more famous and successful had it not been for navy/RFC BS (Only around 150 sopwith triplanes were build because of this..) The RFC were stuck with sub standard equipment while the Germans actually avoided fighting the RNAS Tripehounds up in the north.

The Sopwith entered service in June 1916, with the DRI entering service over a year later in August 1917, so it is quite unfair comparing them.

Also, comparing the DRI vs the SE5A is like comparing an A6M to a 190. The SE5A was by far the better combat aircraft.

SaburoS · « **Reply #31 on:** September 15, 2005, 01:06:09 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Furball
The tripehound would have been far more famous and successful had it not been for navy/RFC BS (Only around 150 sopwith triplanes were build because of this..) The RFC were stuck with sub standard equipment while the Germans actually avoided fighting the RNAS Tripehounds up in the north.

The Sopwith entered service in June 1916, with the DRI entering service over a year later in August 1917, so it is quite unfair comparing them.

Agreed. The Sopwith Tripe was so superior to the then German planes, the German's did the right thing, avoid combat against them. Richtofen's report was a shocker to the German High Command.

Quote

Originally posted by Furball Also, comparing the DRI vs the SE5A is like comparing an A6M to a 190. The SE5A was by far the better combat aircraft.

Agreed. The Germans realized that also. Hence the D.VII.
Same reason the Camel was phased out. Hence the Snipe.
BnZ all the way!

Furball · « **Reply #32 on:** September 15, 2005, 01:16:54 PM »

You know what this is? (without looking at image link you cheater!)

This could have been the real star had the British air ministry not been so short sighted and biased against monoplanes.

130mph... in 1916.

Dux · « **Reply #33 on:** September 15, 2005, 03:08:18 PM »

Furball, what museum or collection is that? I must go there.

Furball · « **Reply #34 on:** September 15, 2005, 03:22:19 PM »

its the Royal Air Force Museum, in the Grahame White Factory exhibition...

http://www.rafmuseum.com/london

although the Shuttleworth Collection would be up your street if you like WWI stuff, most of theirs are airworthy.

http://www.shuttleworth.org/shuttleworth/index.htm

Dux · « **Reply #35 on:** September 15, 2005, 03:25:16 PM »

Sweet. Thanks. :-)

every few years I make the 4-hour drive to this place...
http://www.oldrhinebeck.org/

Furball · « **Reply #36 on:** September 15, 2005, 03:32:52 PM »

wow, great collection they have

MiloMorai · « **Reply #37 on:** September 15, 2005, 04:45:31 PM »

Furball, it is a Bristol but would have to look up the model.

The French also had a monoplane fighter. Name is ???

Links to WW1 a/c,

http://mars.ark.com/~mdf/nieuport.html
http://www.theaerodrome.com/aircraft/
http://www.earlyaviator.com/archive1.htm

straffo · « **Reply #38 on:** September 15, 2005, 05:07:50 PM »

Are you thinking of the Deperdussin monocoque ?
It's a pre WWI design

Debonair · « **Reply #39 on:** September 15, 2005, 05:20:48 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by SaburoS
...Some of the early Dr.1's had a bad habit of shedding its upper fabric, causing cautistophic failure. Seems the aileron was coming unhinged because of the moisture buildup inside the wing...

I knew they were ahead of the curve on thick wing, but not wet wing...I went to the muesem at Boeing Field recently and was surprised to see they have an actual WW1 aircraft there, not a replica. First time i've ever seen that. Unrestored too & looks quite nice for 90years SMOH. I know an 'airworthy' C-150 that looks about the same

http://www.museumofflight.org/Collection/Aircraft.asp?RecordKey=7A5379CF-8257-4B13-AAFE-355856B8DB6C

MiloMorai · « **Reply #40 on:** September 15, 2005, 06:19:03 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by straffo
Are you thinking of the Deperdussin monocoque ?
It's a pre WWI design

Nope.

They were still around building a/c for France in the late '30s. Some of these even got some German kills.

Debonair, let me answer for Saburo. He did not mean 'wet wing' as in a wing that carried fuel. Think of rot.

Debonair · « **Reply #41 on:** September 15, 2005, 06:50:44 PM »

That was a poorly executed attempt at humor on my part

Squire · « **Reply #42 on:** September 15, 2005, 07:49:12 PM »

The most famous of the Sopwith Tripe pilots was Raymond Collishaw RNAS (and ironically, as a triplane advocate, one of Canadas greatest WW1 pilots, if not the greatest), and the pilots of "Naval Ten" also known as the "Black Flight".

http://www.fiddlersgreen.net/aircra...fo/trp_info.htm

The RNAS was stationed north as it was their assigned area, nearest the sea. As for being "avoided" I have never read that. The RNAS carried out its ops as assigned, over its section of the front.

straffo · « **Reply #43 on:** September 15, 2005, 11:47:46 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by MiloMorai
Nope. They were still around building a/c for France in the late '30s. Some of these even got some German kills.

Debonair, let me answer for Saburo. He did not mean 'wet wing' as in a wing that carried fuel. Think of rot.

I think I remember , Roland Garros plane ?
it was a Morane saulnier I think

Furball · « **Reply #44 on:** September 16, 2005, 02:14:58 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by MiloMorai
The French also had a monoplane fighter. Name is ???

well.. the most famous of the french monoplanes has to be the Bleriot, but i doubt anyone was stupid enough to use that as a fighter

i know i have read about it, not sure where, but i will try and dig it up!