Speak your mind about Albatri!

[ian141]

I know Nieuports have wash in and although I've never flown one myself, I've never observed one with stall problems.
Btw, does anyone know what kind of plywood was used in the sheeting of Albatros fuselages?

Ian

[bristol scout]

Originally Posted by ian141

I know Nieuports have wash in and although I've never flown one myself, I've never observed one with stall problems.
Btw, does anyone know what kind of plywood was used in the sheeting of Albatros fuselages?

Ian

Birch 3-ply, varying in thickness between 2 to 2.5 mm according to the NASM book (page 33).

Dave.---are you certain about the wash-in Ian? I thought the incidence on, say, a 17 was a constant 1 degree 50 minutes...and sweep back is a distinct stability aid..

[Breguet]

Dallas, who flew a captured example, felt that, comparative to allied aircraft, they were very heavy on the controls. He didn't like them at all.

[ian141]

Originally Posted by Breguet

Dallas, who flew a captured example, felt that, comparative to allied aircraft, they were very heavy on the controls. He didn't like them at all.

I thought that Albatroses were fairly light on the controls. Didn't Dallas only fly Nieuports and SE5's? If so, then he has no apparent reason to say that an Albatros is heavy on the controls.

Ian

[Breguet]

Originally Posted by ian141

I thought that Albatroses were fairly light on the controls. Didn't Dallas only fly Nieuports and SE5's? If so, then he has no apparent reason to say that an Albatros is heavy on the controls.

Ian

Dallas flew Breguets, nieuports, pups, triplanes, camels and SE5a's in Combat - and a lot of other aircraft beside - so he certainly had plenty of experience and was no mug of a pilot. The Albatross he flew was a captured example that he wanted to test out to see what it could do. In his opinion it was heavy on the controls compared to the aircraft he flew regularly.

[DamianL]

Hi

The Vintage Aviator replica DVa has flown recently, with pilot reports by Gene De Marco being featured in several magazines, & commenting on operation and handling characteristics.

He describes the aircraft as having heavy controls (particularly in the role plane), and also that the controls are not well harmonised.

I thought that Albatroses were fairly light on the controls. Didn't Dallas only fly Nieuports and SE5's? If so, then he has no apparent reason to say that an Albatros is heavy on the controls.

Interesting line of thought. Adrian could probably expand, but my understanding is that Dallas was a respected and experienced front line pilot, and was selected to conduct field trials of the Sopwith Triplane, and flew the prototype in combat.

Here is an extract from "Sopwith Scout 7309" by Sir Gordon Taylor. Chapter 19, The Albatros, page 116. A reference to P.G.Taylor test flying captured Albatros Scout G42 on 18th June 1917:

I held the machine in a steady climb to a thousand feet, then applied the controls to a left-hand turn. Laterally it was quite light, but when I steepened the turn and tried to pull the machine round with the elevator it seemed very heavy, putting up a resistance to the turn. I could see immediately why the Albatros pilots kept out of close duelling turns.

Sopwith Scout 7309 gives an excellent insight into the tactics employed by Sopwith Pup & Albatros pilots respectively. It is clear that the Albatros pilots, with the advantage of speed and superior climb rate, would employ dive & zoom tactics against the underpowered but highly manoeuvrable Sopwith Pup, and would generally avoid turning fights against these opponents.

P.G.Taylor lamented not having additional horsepower and climb performance. This was addressed with the Triplane, then Camel, which possessed greatly improved climb rates, enabling the later aircraft to compete on more favourable terms. During 'Bloody April', the Triplane was probably one of the few aircraft (only aircraft?) to better the Albatros in 1v1 combat.

Cheers

Damian

[WolfOfBadenoch]

Damian, do you have any details of the pilot reports - which magazines and months/numbers ? I'd like to make sure I don't miss any ! Thanks,

Alex

[DamianL]

Hi Alex

Classic Wings, Vol16, No5 2009, Issue 73. This issue has an air-to-air photo of the Albatros on the cover.

I remember seeing one of the British magazines also, can't remember if I bought it or browsed through it, but the content and handling description seemed to match the text from the Classic Wings article.

Gene DeMarco's comments on general handling:

In flight the D.Va performs well, not nearly as well balanced and harmonized as the RAF SE.5a though. The ailerons are heavy and the roll rate isn't very spectacular, the elevator is very sensitive, almost too sensitive while the rudder is less than adequate. For me the best part is the engine, something about it gives the feeling of security, it has a healthy rumble and good throttle response.

His last words in the article were:

All in all it is a sexy sleek design that performs well but not quite as good as it looks...!

Once again, the book 'Sopwith Scout 7309' gives great insight into the tactical use of the Albatros scout, and an appreciation of how outclassed the Sopwith Pup was in 1917.

It describes the Albatros being used as a dive and zoom fighter against it's outclassed but highly manoeuvrable opponent. Combats invariably started with jockeying for position and advantage, followed by slashing attacks.

Once more capable British aircraft were encounted, I think that the Albatros pilots would have been more selective and patient for the right conditions to attack. Once again, I can imagine slashing attacks then quickly disengaging by diving away, with reluctance to be drawn into a turning dogfight.

I don't mean this as a slight on German aircrew, it makes perfect sense that this is how the tactics evolved, utilising the strengths of your aircraft. Probably very similar to Australian & US tactics against the Zero in WW2.

Cheers

Damian

[Gregvan]

Josef Jacobs at Jastaschule Valenciennes, 7 January 1917: “On this afternoon Oblt Berr had a combat with Offz. Stv. Reimann; Halberstadt against an Albatros D.II. In a wonderful dogfight, the Albatros was gradually pushed lower and lower, from which can be deduced that a more maneuverable, although somewhat slower aircraft, is superior to a faster one in a dogfight.” (OtF Vol.7 No. 4)
10 January 1917:Jacobs: “Although the Albatros D.II looks very large and heavy it is in reality no larger than the Halberstadt. It does have the 160 h.p. Mercedes with two MGs, climbs to 3000 meters in about 10-11 minutes and is able to do 180 km/hr. Only in maneuverability is it somewhat inferior to other single-seaters.”

In general, Allied airmen who flew captured Albatros fighters felt they were very powerful and climbed well, but were heavy on the controls (as has been mentioned):


Cecil Lewis in “Farewell to Wings” page 63: “It was in this way we had a nice red Albatros (D.III) delivered to use…we were all encouraged to take it up.…already in 1917 the Germans were using a ‘monocoque’ construction of moulded ply (far in advance of us) for the body of the Albatros. I don’t know what it was made of, but it gave the impression of papier maché. However; being rounded out like a fish, it was far more roomy and the whole machine seemed larger because of this cavernous cockpit. The engine, water-cooled, had a neat radiator in the centre-section, but it was big and heavy. In fact the Germanic temperament showed up all along. The machine was sluggish, strong, reliable and determined. It had none of the feeling of lightness and grace that our aircraft had…very few pilots could take over the controls of a strange type and really measure up its capabilities in an hour or so. So it is probable we never really stretched it; but I am certain of one thing – to throw an Albatros around in the air was hard work and it would have made you sweat in a dogfight.”

Captain James T.B. McCudden, in “Five Years in the Royal Flying Corps”, (page 215) : “On November 5th (1917) I went to Hendon with Captain Clive Collett to fly a V-strutter Albatros (D.V) which he had for demonstration purposes, and I had a nice ride in it, but I could think how the German pilots could manoeuvre them so well, for they were certainly not easy to handle. The Albatros Scout Collett flew was the one flown by the Hun Serjeant-Major when he was driven down in our lines by three Spads of another squadron.”


Brigadier General William Mitchell, in his book “Memoirs of World War I”, writes of his inspection of the Albatros D.III D.2096/17, “Vera”. This was flown by Ltn d R Friedrich-Wilhelm Wichard of Jasta 24, on 22 April 1917: “…it was a German pursuit machine of the latest type, with the famous six-cylinder 170 horsepower vertical Mercedes Motor…French pilots said these machines had a ceiling of 20,000 feet. They did not have quite as much speed as the Spad but more than the Nieuport; they climbed better than the Spad; they also dived better than any machine, probably, and were extremely sensitive to control. They were considered very formidable, notwithstanding their motor was so heavy (about four pounds to the horsepower). I suggested that Vera be sent to America for inspection and to show our people a trophy of the war.” And, indeed, it did come to America; note the "extremely sensitive to control" part!! Perhaps the French were comparing it to the SPAD, while the Brits compared it to the light Sopwith Pup and responsive SE5a.

[Gregvan]

As Damian says, Sir Gordon Taylor gives a detailed account of flying Georg Simon's captured Albatros D.III. Thought you might like to see more of it:

Taylor had the opportunity (like Lewis) to fly Simon’s Albatros D.III 2015/16. He wrote: “I immediately felt how heavy everything was after the light, fabric feeling of the Sopwith Scout. Next I noticed the view from the pilot’s seat; excellent, with virtually no blind spots anywhere – a very important feature in a fighting machine.

“The big Mercedes fired on the very first swing and turned over slowly with a deep-throated burble from the exhaust. I let it warm up, and ran it up to full take-off power. The noise was savage and impressive after the little LeRhone…“The machine moved away with a bellowing roar and began to gather speed. It seemed to run quite a distance before it showed any inclination to leave the ground. …A little back pressure on the stick and the Albatros was airborne, and away. I held the machine in a steady climb to 1000 feet, then applied the controls to a left-hand turn. Laterally it was quite light, but when I steepened the turn and tried to pull the machine around with the elevator it seemed very heavy, putting up a resistance to the turn. I could see why the Albatros pilots kept out of the close duelling turns.
“I opened the engine out to full throttle again, and tried the climb. It was deceptive. This machine did not go up with the lift-like action of a slow and lightly loaded aircraft, but rather to surge forward, reaching out for height. But it went up, I realized with some disappointment, very convincingly; and when I drew it up to a high angle of climb it seemed to go reaching up, hanging on the propeller. The climb to 3,000 feet was a few seconds over three minutes; and to 6,000 feet in seven minutes.

“Then I let the nose go down. The speed built up steadily, giving me the impression that the heavy Albatros would go on accelerating indefinitely, drawn on by the power of its engine, unopposed by the beautiful, streamlined fuselage. It was fast, and that was obvious. As far as I could judge, its maximum speed was about a 125 mph; perhaps a little more.
“I brought the machine in; landed, and taxied to the hangars…

“Its personality was utterly different from our own airy Sopwith Scout. Ours was, in some indefinable way, a sporting weapon, with a slightly smiling light-hearted personality; a machine which did not identify itself readily with the slaughter of war. But this Hun was a war machine, a weapon of ruthless efficiency; cold-blooded in the metal of its V interplane struts, the Spandau guns, the big engine under the streamlined cowl in the nose, and in the instruments and fittings in the cockpit…
“My thoughts, as I got out of the Albatros’s cockpit, can be similarly expressed, ‘Give me this aeroplane to fight the war. Let me keep the Sopwith Scout to enjoy myself in the air when the war is won.”

“I…made the following entry in my logbook: “Date 18 June 1917: Albatros Scout G42. Time in air, 20 minutes. Fast, and good climb. Should be a good machine to fly after some practice.”