Pfalz Fokker or Albatross

sightreader · 26 October 2009, 03:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by John McKenzie

Hi all. NONE of the aircraft used in the " Blue Max " Film , can be used as any sort of a " Yardstick " from which the performances of the ORIGINALS may be judged .

LOL.. I don't think anyone was trying to draw conclusions about the performance of the historical Pflaz just from a mock-up!

I think he was just saying that the mock-up may not have been a very good fit to the underlying aircraft, which may have made it scary or worrisome to fly.

John McKenzie · 26 October 2009, 05:27 PM

Sightreader ,Contrary to what you have understood ,in terms of the BM "Pfalz " being only a "...not very good fit to the underlying aircraft..."
If you would please like to read again the post that I believe you are refering to , it says: " Also , one of the B M Pfalz.....was built AS PER THE ORIGINAL using the wooden structure......not well liked........The fuselage WOULD MOVE IN FLIGHT ..."
I can assure you that ,( having been a personal friend of the late deseigner , with whom I have had occasion in the past to disagrea on its structure ) ,..This (wooden ) " Pfalz " , was NOT " built as per original.".. as stated above , and therefor any conclusion as to the " ...fuselage would move in flight .." .is misleading to anyone who accepts as fact ,the first statement .
My sole purpose in posting ,was to prevent just this sort of faulse conclusions being drawn about the original PFALZ , and accepted as FACT by those students of more recent study .
This thread , as far as most here are concerned , was about the REAL WWI aeroplanes structural and flight characteristics , ...and well researched views and facts have been meticulously transelated and presented as to the various attributes , particularly of the D XII .

Chock · 26 October 2009, 05:44 PM

Thought you might like this picture of one of the Blue Max Pfalz aircraft. This is how it looked after having been purchased by Javier Arango, who rebuilt it and replaced the original Gypsy Major engine with a 200hp Gypsy Queen. The colour scheme is that of Fritz Holn from Jasta 21:

Al

Dan_San_Abbott · 26 October 2009, 05:54 PM

Hello Chock:
Several years ago when Javier had me prepare detailed color data fo His Pfalz D.III, exDH Tiger Moth, I had an opportunity to examine the machine. It was very crudely done. Javier picked Fritz Hahn's scheme, and I did a three view drawing from which Chuck worked. Peter Jackson has it now.
Blue skies Chock,
Dan-San

John McKenzie · 26 October 2009, 06:08 PM

I think that may be the "Tiger Moth" Pfalz .....It does have a " superficial resembalence " to a PFALZ D III...But that's about it !

......It does have German crosses !

As far as I know , the only Good , DIII Repro' to date to have been built with real effort , and using all the info,. available at the time , was built years ago by Ron Kitchen, of Carson City , Nevada ..To Fred Hennel drgs.( I have a photo somewhere )
Another VeryGood accurate Pfalz , this time a D XII was recently shown on this forum by .....WERKE ( So sorry to have forgotten the name )
Both the above with Rangers as is naturaly , quite acceptable/ understandable .
There are of course as you all know , original (in varying degrees ) D XII 's around still .

Dan_San_Abbott · 26 October 2009, 06:40 PM

Gentlemen:
There weresome pilots who flew the Pfalz D.III or Pfalz D.IIIa by choice, one example is Oblt.

Rudolf Berthold while Führer of Jasta 18, and later flew the Pfalz D.IIIa as Kommandeur of Jagdgeschwader Nr.2. A few other well known pilots who flew the Pfalz D.III or Pfalz D.IIIa were: Ltn.

Josef Jacobs Führ. of Jasta 7, Ltn.

Hans Klein, Führ. Jasta 10; Ltn.

Fritz Hoehn, Jasta 21s; Ltn. Hennrich Kroll, Jasta 24s, and Ltn.

Emil Thuy, Führ. Jasta 28w, to name a few.
The Pfalz D.IIIa was in service at least up to 31 August 1918, when 166 were in service and most likely served up to the end of the war. Had it been a bad machine, it would not have lasted very long at the front.
Blue skies,
Dan-San

sightreader · 26 October 2009, 10:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by John McKenzie

I can assure you that ,( having been a personal friend of the late deseigner , with whom I have had occasion in the past to disagrea on its structure ) ,..This (wooden ) " Pfalz " , was NOT " built as per original.".. as stated above , and therefor any conclusion as to the " ...fuselage would move in flight .." .is misleading to anyone who accepts as fact ,the first statement .

Wow... clearly I sounded a lot harsher than I wanted to be and aggravated some sort of past bitterness. My apologies for that - I'm just one of these guys who opens his mouth only to change feet - plus I'm going through some emotional stress and disillusionment, which clearly manifested itself in the tone of my post.

Quote:

Originally Posted by John McKenzie

My sole purpose in posting ,was to prevent just this sort of faulse conclusions being drawn about the original PFALZ , and accepted as FACT by those students of more recent study .

Well, at least when I read it, the "interestingly enough" disclaimer implied some level of mystery as to why the mock up behaved that way. It certainly didn't occur to me to read the "built per original" statement as an aggressive attempt to place all performance blame on the historical Pfalz; rather, it sounded more a statement of construction intent rather than any sort of fact, but I wouldn't know, as I'm not the guy who posted it.

John McKenzie · 27 October 2009, 03:04 AM

Sightreader ....You did not sound harsh in any way ...neither have I any idea as to how you have come to interpret my ..." having had occasion in the past to disagrea on its structure "..(with a friend ) , into....." agrevated some sort of past bitterness .."
BTW , writing .." interestingly enough " is not a disclaimer ...Again you are bringing into all this your own flawed interpretation by implying that I have read " built as original " as an " Aggressive statement " !

I have stated only the facts . There are no emotional slants to be taken or implied at all from any of my or anyone elses statements.

And now I realy think that ENOUGH has been said about these two " movie aeroplanes."

Can we please stick to contributions about " real" WWI aircraft .

sightreader · 27 October 2009, 04:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by John McKenzie

Can we please stick to contributions about " real" WWI aircraft .

Awesome! Now on to real WWI aircraft...

The previously posted account noted that the Pfalz D12 had a good climb rate and seemed to hold its own but felt, perhaps, sluggish. Could I infer that, perhaps, it didn't have a good roll rate (thus appearing unresponsive) but otherwise had a decent turn circle?

I haven't read the other suggested accounts yet (I'm still focusing on the Camel as described in Winged Victory) but wanted to get a head start on this aircraft that's somewhat enigmatic to me.

mik · 27 October 2009, 06:51 AM

If it looks good it probably is good. Sums up my oppinion of the Pfalz D111a. I have read similar stuff to the German translation of pilots complaining about the DX11. How I interpret this document is this. Note the date in this document, october 1918, this pilot has not flown a Fokker DV11. He has heard it is a very good machine and wants to fly one. Rather makes my point don't you think.