Albatros DIII Lozenge (1 Viewer)

[vincent1973]

Hi guys,

Does anyone know when the Germans abandoned the dark green/mauve upper wing camo and started to use lozenge camo on the Albatros DIII? Would it be around august/september 1917? Also, how did the DIII fare against the new Sopwith Camel? Was it hopelessly outclassed or did it still pose a serious threat? I know many pilots preferred the DIII over the new DV.

Thanks for any insights.

Vincent

 

[lancer]

Hi guys,

Does anyone know when the Germans abandoned the dark green/mauve upper wing camo and started to use lozenge camo on the Albatros DIII? Would it be around august/september 1917? Also, how did the DIII fare against the new Sopwith Camel? Was it hopelessly outclassed or did it still pose a serious threat? I know many pilots preferred the DIII over the new DV.

Thanks for any insights.

Vincent

Rather a tough question to answer accurately in regards to the camo patterns used. The lozenge camo actually appeared as early as April, 1917 on various German aircraft, including some Albatros. That said, the Albatros D-3, D-5, and D-5a all used the green and lilac camo. Prior to April, 1917, the D-3's were camoed with brown, reddish-brown and green wings but this changed by directive in April, 1917 to the green and lilac colors. There is no demarcation line for the use of the lozenge camo on the Albatros, although the lozenge camo became more common later in the war. It would be almost impossible to label anything as certainly correct or incorrect without photo evidence, there was just so much mixing and matching going on as different runs were produced in different time frames and as losses were replaced bit by bit. Green and lilac predominated through 1917, with lozenge becoming more common later in the war. Sorry I can't be more specific.
As to how the D-3 matched up against the Camel, it was a worthy opponent in the hands of a good pilot, but the Camel was the far superior dogfighter. Tactics and pilot ability told the tale in most cases. It is noteworthy, though, that von Richthofen thought the Albatros (all models) outclassed by Allied fighters as 1917 plowed on, and he scolded manufacturers for not providing better aircraft. He eagerly awaited the Fokker D-7, firmly believing that it could return air superiority to Germany. Richthofen liked the Fokker Triplane well enough, but realized it was also outclassed and because of it's slow speed, the tactical advantage lay with the faster Allied fighters who could initiate attack and break off combat as necessary. The Albatros was a workhorse, but there was very little difference in the performance level from one model to the next. The Germans were just treading water with it until the Fokker D-7's arrived. -- Al

 

[ivanmoe]

Hi guys,

Does anyone know when the Germans abandoned the dark green/mauve upper wing camo and started to use lozenge camo on the Albatros DIII? Would it be around august/september 1917?

Vincent, I'm not sure that use of the lozenge camo was date dependent as much as it was a function of where the aircraft was manufactured. I believe that some factories used the lozenge fabric, in the second half of the war, and some didn't.

Also, how did the DIII fare against the new Sopwith Camel? Was it hopelessly outclassed or did it still pose a serious threat? I know many pilots preferred the DIII over the new DV.

The Albatros set the pattern for what would become the standard WWI biplane fighter. It was a stable gun-platform that wasn't particularly difficult to fly. As newer types entered service, it's vices, heavy controls and potentially catastrophic structural weakness, put it at a disadvantage.

In the hands of a capable pilot, the Camel had significant advantages over the Albatros. It was faster, more maneuverable and had a better rate of climb. However, it was way too unstable, or "twitchy," for the barely trained pilots that entered the ranks of Allied air services for much of the war.

I certainly don't know for certain, but I suspect that an examination of the attrition rates for squadrons that employed the two types would reveal very similar outcomes. Put another way, a lot of Albatros and Camels (and pilots) were lost, just to different causes.

-Moe

 

[lancer]

One further note about the Albatros D-3, it stayed in production right alongside the D-5. This was to keep the number of aircraft in production at necessary high numbers for the war effort. It also shows that the 'new and improved' D-5's and D-5a's, weren't enough of an improvement over the D-3 to merit the halt in production of the D-3. In fact, the last D-3's rolled off the assembly lines after the last D-5's did. -- Al

 

[vincent1973]

Rather a tough question to answer accurately in regards to the camo patterns used. The lozenge camo actually appeared as early as April, 1917 on various German aircraft, including some Albatros. That said, the Albatros D-3, D-5, and D-5a all used the green and lilac camo. Prior to April, 1917, the D-3's were camoed with brown, reddish-brown and green wings but this changed by directive in April, 1917 to the green and lilac colors. There is no demarcation line for the use of the lozenge camo on the Albatros, although the lozenge camo became more common later in the war. It would be almost impossible to label anything as certainly correct or incorrect without photo evidence, there was just so much mixing and matching going on as different runs were produced in different time frames and as losses were replaced bit by bit. Green and lilac predominated through 1917, with lozenge becoming more common later in the war. Sorry I can't be more specific.
As to how the D-3 matched up against the Camel, it was a worthy opponent in the hands of a good pilot, but the Camel was the far superior dogfighter. Tactics and pilot ability told the tale in most cases. It is noteworthy, though, that von Richthofen thought the Albatros (all models) outclassed by Allied fighters as 1917 plowed on, and he scolded manufacturers for not providing better aircraft. He eagerly awaited the Fokker D-7, firmly believing that it could return air superiority to Germany. Richthofen liked the Fokker Triplane well enough, but realized it was also outclassed and because of it's slow speed, the tactical advantage lay with the faster Allied fighters who could initiate attack and break off combat as necessary. The Albatros was a workhorse, but there was very little difference in the performance level from one model to the next. The Germans were just treading water with it until the Fokker D-7's arrived. -- Al

Thank you for your elaborate answer, sir. I had read about the april 1917 directive regarding the green and lilac camo, but could never find any info about the exact time lozenge came into use. Indeed your explanation seems to be the most logical. And thanks for sharing your insight on the Albatros-Camel comparison. Much appreciated.
Vincent

 

[vincent1973]

Vincent, I'm not sure that use of the lozenge camo was date dependent as much as it was a function of where the aircraft was manufactured. I believe that some factories used the lozenge fabric, in the second half of the war, and some didn't.



The Albatros set the pattern for what would become the standard WWI biplane fighter. It was a stable gun-platform that wasn't particularly difficult to fly. As newer types entered service, it's vices, heavy controls and potentially catastrophic structural weakness, put it at a disadvantage.

In the hands of a capable pilot, the Camel had significant advantages over the Albatros. It was faster, more maneuverable and had a better rate of climb. However, it was way too unstable, or "twitchy," for the barely trained pilots that entered the ranks of Allied air services for much of the war.

I certainly don't know for certain, but I suspect that an examination of the attrition rates for squadrons that employed the two types would reveal very similar outcomes. Put another way, a lot of Albatros and Camels (and pilots) were lost, just to different causes.

-Moe

Hi Moe. Useful insights on both questions and much appreciated. Thank you!
Vincent

 

[ivanmoe]

Hi Moe. Useful insights on both questions and much appreciated. Thank you!
Vincent

You're welcome, Vincent. If you're really interested in these old birds, models or the real thing, and you'd like to interact with others who are similarly afflicted...let me suggest Facebook to you. There are groups for just about EVERYTHING, and many that are focused on aviation and modeling. My only advice is to avoid gatherings related to politics, your health and ANYTHING else that you don't want the WHOLE world to know!

-Moe

 

[vincent1973]

You're welcome, Vincent. If you're really interested in these old birds, models or the real thing, and you'd like to interact with others who are similarly afflicted...let me suggest Facebook to you. There are groups for just about EVERYTHING, and many that are focused on aviation and modeling. My only advice is to avoid gatherings related to politics, your health and ANYTHING else that you don't want the WHOLE world to know!

-Moe

^&grin^&grinYeah, those are definitely topics to avoid. Will check it out Thanks again.