|
Hi Gunnar,
I understand what you are saying, I just think that a pilot of Lothar's experience would have reported being in combat with an unidentified biplane if he didn't know what an SE5 was - I believe the usual term for an SE5 at first was "Sopwith type".
I also have no problems with the authorities awarding Ball's crash to Lothar - it's exactly what the Allies would have done had it been the other way round! I do believe however the evidence is at best circumstantial and very weak indeed. As Wulfoo says "would you bet your life on it?"
I just see two versions of a fight, Lothar's and Culling's and think that location, time, descriptions and circumstances tie up remarkably well.
As for your comment about a SPAD, I think that's a red herring, I think that a SPAD 7 was more of a hit and run machine, I don't see that it was suited to a long drawn out engagement with an Albatros, a well flown Albatros at that!
Mike
|