Sesli Chat
Sesli Sohbet
Sesli Chat
Sesli Sohbet
Seslikent
SesliChat
SesliSohbet

As for the engines I’m not sure what you mean there. The Pfalz DIII and the Albatross DIII both used the Mercedes 170 and 180 HP inline engines for the most part.

You might be thinking of the Pfalz DXII (which did away with the V Strut which they had copied from the Albatross and used the N strut, which was obviously copied from the Fokker DVII.

The Pfalz DXII came out in service in July 1918, just two months after the Fokker DVII and was intended to be a direct competitor to the Fokker DVII.

I didn’t make myself clear. The Pfalz DIII was a generation (half generation?) later than the original Albatross but lacked the engine to make much difference. It, along with the Albatross DV and Fokker DrI was meant to answer the 1917 designs of the allies and couldn’t hack it in sheer performance. It was the pretty one.

The Pfalz DXII (the ugly one) was the contemporary of the Fokker D VII. Of course, if we want to be picky, the Siemens-Schuckert DIII-IV and Fokker DVIII, representing the next generation, were even better than the DVII.

And now? I really have to go to bed. G’night, again.

pete Says:

I can’t disagree. In any possible conflict we owe our forces the best chance of success/survival. I’m just saying that N.Korea is a known threat that could be countered with lesser equipment.

The F-22, as I see it, is designed for the unknown threats and future threats. I still want them in the front line in any future air war even if they outclass the competition. And I don’t even need to mention how hard, and expensive, it will be to counter the F-22.

Agreed. Giving our guys an overwhelming tactical advantage in my book is the only way to go. What better way to demoralize your enemy than by demonstrating complete and utter air superiority.

Unfortunately though the Chinese and Russians are steadily working on more advanced aircraft than they currently have, and the SU models are trying with the SU 37, (which is an amazing plane and some claim can compare to the 22 due to its high maneuverability and speed at Mach 2.5), the SU47 , the MIG 39 (4.5 Generation fighter) and the new MIG 1.44 which is a 5th Generation fighter designed specifically to compete against the F22, and of course the Sukhoi PAK FA which is a 5th Gen fighter that is expected to enter service this year in the Russian Air Force. Also the Chinese have several other next gen fighters under the XX designation designed to hit service by 2012.

In other words, as fantastic as the F22 is, it’s only fantastic until these other planes start seeing service. Then it’s suddenly on par with them, and we will lose air dominance as the Russian and Chinese air forces start employing these newer, equally superior next gen fighters.

Which means canceling the F22 is a bad move. With Russia and China producing planes in the same class, we’re going to find ourselves losing that edge that the F22 now gives us. We need to keep producing these planes, and improving on them. Not back off on them.

The one used in “The Blue Max” was a DIIIa, which you can tell by the bigger teardroped stabilizer, and the exposed machine guns (Pfalz first made the concealed guns which they copied from the Roland’s they originally produced). It was a great plane, mostly because of stability (plywood construction) and dive capabilities but the Albatross was generally considered a superior aircraft.

pete Says:

Actually, the Pfalz was a contemporary of the Fokker DVII. The Albatross was at the end of it’s run when the Pfalz came on the scene. It was better, with a stronger airframe, than the Albatross “V strutters” but? It used the same engine and suffered for it.

Well I hate to be disagreeable (yea right lol) but that’s just not correct. I’m a big buff on this stuff and have been since I was a kid.

The Pfalz DIII came out in April of 1917 known famously as “Bloody April” when the DIII was at the peak (and when Richtofen was knocking everyone out of the sky) of its use and just a month prior to the DV (which came out in May 1917 into production).

The Pfalz began being shipped to the Jasta’s in August, 1917 for combat use, and was always seen as a direct competitor of the Albatross DIII and DV both by the pilots and the manufacturers.

The Fokker DVII on the other hand wasn’t even in the air yet.

The Fokker DVII wasn’t shipped to the Jasta’s until May, 1918, almost a year later.

Thus, the Pfalz DIII and the Albatross DIII and DV were the contemporary’s of each other, and the Fokker DVII was the plane that was designed to replace them.

If they had built enough of the BMW engines used in the later Fokkers it would have made a great compliment to the Fokker. And it probably would have been faster. The BMW engine turned the DVII from a very good plane into a dominant plane.

Since the F22 has been tested against MIG29 comparisons and produced a 240 to 1 kill rate, I’d say the F22 would play a key role in dominating the skies over North Korea with a very limited loss of American pilots, if any at all. The F22 guarantees our complete unfettered dominance over the skies of North Korea.

I can’t disagree. In any possible conflict we owe our forces the best chance of success/survival. I’m just saying that N.Korea is a known threat that could be countered with lesser equipment.

The F-22, as I see it, is designed for the unknown threats and future threats. I still want them in the front line in any future air war even if they outclass the competition. And I don’t even need to mention how hard, and expensive, it will be to counter the F-22.

If you get “Von Richtofen and Brown”, they show some great scenes of the Pfalz and they really put it into some harrowing maneuvers.

Speaking of the Pfalz, was that a beautiful plane or what? I don’t care that it was too heavy and underpowered. If I were 19 and had to chose a plane as my very own, and my life didn’t depend on performance? I wouldn’t need long to decide. I don’t know if there has ever been a more elegant warplane.

I don’t know that the F-22 has much to do with N. Korea. We’ve provided S. Korea with pretty good weapons (Their F-15s and Abrams tanks are newer than most of ours) plus our own forces. Let’s face it. One JDAM in their reactor would end N.Korea’s nuclear program. Not that I think that would be a good idea at this time.

N. Korea is disturbing but, without outside aid they are no more dangerous than Iraq in a conventional war. I see the F-22 as an answer to unknown future threats. As I said: we’ve sunk the costs into the program so it doesn’t make much sense to “cheap out” at this point. We’ve got them so we might as well keep them flying.

Well I disagree there. The KPAF is fairly large, MIG 29’s , MIG21’s and various other offshoots.

Since the F22 has been tested against MIG29 comparisons and produced a 240 to 1 kill rate, I’d say the F22 would play a key role in dominating the skies over North Korea with a very limited loss of American pilots, if any at all. The F22 guarantees our complete unfettered dominance over the skies of North Korea.

pete Says:

BTW. “The Blue Max” is awesome! Have you seen “Wings” with David Niven? How about ‘Dawn Patrol”? They were both made when authentic planes were available and it was still legal to crash planes on purpose. CGI can’t compete with that kind of realism.

Oh of course. I have “Wings” remastered on DVD. Wings was the first movie to win an Academy Award for “Best Picture”. And the Dawn Patrol I’ve seen many times. It’s one of the few I need to get on DVD.(I don’t have the Great Waldo Pepper either, another one with some great flight shots of a Triplane in flight). And I couldn’t agree more on the CGI thing.

Recently I watched a movie you’ve probably seen called “Flyboys”. It was just miserable. I watch it on cable a lot just for fun but the flight scenes are ridiculous looking. They did better in 1966 with the Blue Max, and in 1932 with Hells Angels. The CGI just couldn’t get the feel of the real thing, and for me its like watching a cartoon. And the way they dove down in those triplanes, they looked like Japanese Zero’s diving on a battleship. Ridiculous. And what’s worse, everyone was flying Triplanes. No Albatrosses, no Halberstadts, no Pfalz’s, just DRI’s. And considering they were CGI you’d think they’d have made everything. I did like the CGI recreation of the Gotha bomber though. It was the one thing they got right.

One movie you might check out on DVD is “Von Richtofen and Brown”. It’s historically inaccurate and the script is all fabricated and poorly written, but the flight scenes are wonderful. They actually purchased the planes from the producers of the Blue Max and just repainted them. Fun movie to watch just for the air combat scenes. It’s filmed over California though unlike the Blue Max which was filmed in Ireland, so the ground doesn’t look quite right for 1917 France and Germany but the flight scenes are still worth it.

pete Says:

WAYNBRO:

Ah, the Rumpler. Beautiful plane with an unfortunate name. Are you familiar with “Flying Fury” by James McCudden? I think it’s still in print. He dealt with his own personal war against the Rumpler at length. He tuned up his engine (high compression pistons and heads) and added a spinner to his Se5 so he could catch them. He even described the hazards of flying at 20,000 feet without oxygen.

It also includes the best description, I’m familiar with, of Voss’s last fight and a whole lot more. It’s one of the best WW1 books I’ve read.

Great book. It’s where I first read of Voss’s final dogfight.

backup Says:

Waynebro. I support the idea of surging the economy to recovery. I won’t try to defend past Republican or corporate mismanagement of the economy.

But, while I agree with the positive influence of creating jobs, building bridges, and F-22 contracts; the obvious caveat is the bill. Currently, we seem to be funding these efforts by just printing money.

What do you think we’ve been doing since 1971 when Nixon took us off the Gold Standard?