WW1 Aviation (1 Viewer)

[maddadicus]

Here's the Gearbox 1917 Sopwith Pup, alongside the Britaind Fokker DR1. This Pup weighs (believe it) 1 pound! All metal, as well as the Britains. Both are 1/32 though the Gearbox is slightly larger with a smaller figure
Enjoy,
Mike

Look for the U.S. version of the Gearbox Pup. The decals and paint is amazing..Michael

 

[lancer]

Anybody want to engage in a discussion of the viability of Billy Bishop's victory claims? I realize that all claims can be subject to question and that all sides (in all wars) overclaim, but Bishop's have proven almost impossible to match up to German losses. Just to stir the pot more, how did Bishop earn the VC off his own, unwitnessed, reports (completely against British requirements for the award)? Any comments? -- lancer -- P.S. Lest one believe I have an axe to grind against Bishop, I do not. He is one of my heroes. I just find the whole situation interesting.

No one?

 

[theBaron]

Anybody want to engage in a discussion of the viability of Billy Bishop's victory claims? I realize that all claims can be subject to question and that all sides (in all wars) overclaim, but Bishop's have proven almost impossible to match up to German losses. Just to stir the pot more, how did Bishop earn the VC off his own, unwitnessed, reports (completely against British requirements for the award)? Any comments? -- lancer -- P.S. Lest one believe I have an axe to grind against Bishop, I do not. He is one of my heroes. I just find the whole situation interesting.

Well, I'll bite, but by asking a question first, for more details. It has been a while since I read much of anything on WWI aviation; my focus shifted to WWII, where it stayed for both phases of my scale modeling career (past and current).

When was Bishop awarded the VC, and when did the actions take place, for which it was awarded? Depending on when those actions took place, my educated guess about the award, and bending any requirements, would be that earlier in the war, when military aviation was in its infancy, anyone who carried out a "first" seemed to have accomplished a great feat, compared to someone flying in 1917 or 1918.

To illustrate my reasoning, think about the requirement to become an ace-5 confirmed kills. Even if you allow for actions in which the kill couldn't be confirmed, given enough enemy aircraft, it seems to me that a skilled pilot would reach 5 in a relatively short period of time, and that a truer benchmark would be a higher number, a sign of higher skill, and to a degree, luck, too.

Prost!
Brad

 

[lancer]

Baron, thanks for biting. The action for which Bishop was awarded the VC took place on June 2, 1917. Basically it was a one man dawn raid on a German airfield. The flight lasted 1 hr. 43 min. He put in claims for 3 aircraft as well as having shot up the field. The VC was awarded Aug.11, 1917 on the basis of his (Bishop) reports alone. There were no witnesses or evidence beyond what Bishop provided (his written report). This is unique in the annals of the VC. Post war investigations by many different sources have been unable to confirm the location of the airfield or match the claimed aircraft to any German loss reports. Bishop himself was vague about the field location, claiming early morning bad weather prevented him from knowing what field he hit. No German reports of any such raid have been found and they were pretty thorough in their combat and loss reports. As to the 5 victory ace designation, it was a pretty arbitrary line recognized by the French and Americans. The Germans used 10 and the British did not "officially" recognize it at all, although it was useful for morale purposes. It was an early war recognition of how hard air combat was in it's infancy. -- Al

 

[theBaron]

Thanks for the refresher, Al, I must discard my theory. Although, you touch on another possibility in the discussion about the ace designation. Could it have been that they turned a blind eye and awarded the Cross, because it was Bishop, and he was a popular hero by that time?

Sort of like the situation with the Hornet's action report from the Battle of Midway. Admiral Spruance noted that it contained "inaccuracies", and Admiral Nimitz also noted that it was not to be relied upon, but this was not publicized at the time.

 

[lancer]

Brad - that is an interesting question I do not know the answer to. Bishop had earned his first official kill on Mar.25, 1917 and had 22 by the time of his VC action. I do not Know how well known or popular he was. Bishop being Canadian, the brass might have seen a chance for good publicity and goodwill. I just do not know. -- Al

 

[lancer]

Bishop, although not unique, would seem to be a little unusual in terms of his confirmed kill record. It has proven possible to line up kill claims amongst many of the WW1 aces with loss records of the opposing air forces. Almost all of von Richthofen's line up as do Mannock's, etc. There are many gaps in records and by no means do all confirmed claims have corresponding proof. The problem with Bishop's record seems to be that almost none of the claims are proveable by German loss records or independent witnesses. Bishop mostly flew alone so some unwitnessed claims are inevitable. But, as said, loss records do not correspond either,whether it be plane type, location, or time. This makes for interesting discussion if nothing else and 90+ years later, discussion is all it can be. -- Al

 

[Spitfrnd]

....To illustrate my reasoning, think about the requirement to become an ace-5 confirmed kills. Even if you allow for actions in which the kill couldn't be confirmed, given enough enemy aircraft, it seems to me that a skilled pilot would reach 5 in a relatively short period of time, and that a truer benchmark would be a higher number, a sign of higher skill, and to a degree, luck, too.
...

Nothing could be farther from the truth than the notion that it was easy in WWI, WWII or Korea for a skilled pilot to reach 5 kills, confirmed or otherwise. There are many great pilots that flew much of those wars with less than that. If you take a group of combat pilots for any period, something like 1-2% are true killers, another 5-10% are very good but may or may not make ace, 35-40% are good but not likely to reach ace and the rest are prey. Even then, so much of a fighter pilot's success in air combat comes from opportunity and circumstance. The elite will do relatively better in all those circumstances but even the best are limited by where they fly and what orders they have at any given time.

 

[lancer]

Nothing could be farther from the truth than the notion that it was easy in WWI, WWII or Korea for a skilled pilot to reach 5 kills, confirmed or otherwise. There are many great pilots that flew much of those wars with less than that. If you take a group of combat pilots for any period, something like 1-2% are true killers, another 5-10% are very good but may or may not make ace, 35-40% are good but not likely to reach ace and the rest are prey. Even then, so much of a fighter pilot's success in air combat comes from opportunity and circumstance. The elite will do relatively better in all those circumstances but even the best are limited by where they fly and what orders they have at any given time.

All outstanding points. Opportunity, skill, and as almost all pilots say, luck. -- lancer

 

[theBaron]

Nothing could be farther from the truth than the notion that it was easy in WWI, WWII or Korea for a skilled pilot to reach 5 kills, confirmed or otherwise. There are many great pilots that flew much of those wars with less than that. If you take a group of combat pilots for any period, something like 1-2% are true killers, another 5-10% are very good but may or may not make ace, 35-40% are good but not likely to reach ace and the rest are prey. Even then, so much of a fighter pilot's success in air combat comes from opportunity and circumstance. The elite will do relatively better in all those circumstances but even the best are limited by where they fly and what orders they have at any given time.

Sorry, I don't think I expressed very well what I meant. I'm not saying that downing five enemy aircraft in aerial combat is easy, like driving to the store, just that at the outset of the First World War, it would have seemed like a Herculean achievement, since the airplane itself was new, let alone flying one in combat. But later in the war, when the machines had improved, and pilots had scores of 10s of victories, 5 might not have seemed as much of a benchmark.

But you are correct and I agree with you, in every conflict since the introduction of aerial warfare, there are far more pilots who fly in combat, and might complete a tour of duty without a single victory.

And there's another point we haven't included in this sidebar, and that's the attrition rate. In each conflict, a new pilot's odds of surviving were very long indeed, until he might survive and gain some experience, at which point they improved, relatively speaking.

Prost!
Brad

 

[lancer]

Brad, that last point is a good one and one of the enduring facts of WW1 air warfare. During "Bloody April" of 1917 I think I remember reading that a new British pilot had a life expectancy of less than 2 weeks. Von Richthofen and his men were tough opponents. In relation to the ace mark, the Germans ackknowledged the increase in air activities and air-to-air victories by steadily moving the benchmark for winning the "Blue Max" back. Early in the war Boelcke and Immelmann won the award with around 5-10 victories. It took von Richthofen 20 by 1917 and by the end of 1918, Baumer needed 40. This was because of more opportunity and not ease. -- lancer

 

[lancer]

Brad, that last point is a good one and one of the enduring facts of WW1 air warfare. During "Bloody April" of 1917 I think I remember reading that a new British pilot had a life expectancy of less than 2 weeks. Von Richthofen and his men were tough opponents. In relation to the ace mark, the Germans ackknowledged the increase in air activities and air-to-air victories by steadily moving the benchmark for winning the "Blue Max" back. Early in the war Boelcke and Immelmann won the award with around 5-10 victories. It took von Richthofen 20 by 1917 and by the end of 1918, Baumer needed 40. This was because of more opportunity and not ease. -- lancer

A correction of facts -- B. & I. were awarded "Blue Max" after reaching 8 victories in Jan. 1916. Von R. received his award after reaching 16 victories in Jan. 1917. Von R. reached 8 vics. in Nov.1916 only to discover the benchmark had been moved. He was disappointed but obviously got over it. Baumer was reccomended for the award after reaching 30 kills in Sept. 1918 and had reached 43 by time of the award Nov.2, 1918. Sorry my memory was faulty. -- lancer

 

[Mister Dave]

Here is my budget solution to WWI aircraft after a bit of scrounging at the local model shops. Got a good price on this old kit, so another project for me this winter. I will post a pic or 2 once I've gotten some assembly done. Looking at picking up another kit from Academy in the same scale soon too.

MD

 

[Mister Dave]

Here is my budget solution to WWI aircraft after a bit of scrounging at the local model shops. Got a good price on this old kit, so another project for me this winter. I will post a pic or 2 once I've gotten some assembly done. Looking at picking up another kit from Academy in the same scale soon too.

MD

Sorry, meant to attach this photo.......

 

[lancer]

Here is my budget solution to WWI aircraft after a bit of scrounging at the local model shops. Got a good price on this old kit, so another project for me this winter. I will post a pic or 2 once I've gotten some assembly done. Looking at picking up another kit from Academy in the same scale soon too.

MD

MD, you might look for thr classic Revell kits of WW1 aircraft. They have been around for years and have been re-issued many times but I do not know current status. These kits were 1/32 if memory serves and included a Fokker DR1, a Fokker D-7, a Spad 13, and a Camel. The DR-1 and Spad were excellent, the D-7 and Camel less so. I think Hobbycraft also made a Neiuport 17 in 1/32. Good luck with your project. -- lancer

 

[Mister Dave]

MD, you might look for thr classic Revell kits of WW1 aircraft. They have been around for years and have been re-issued many times but I do not know current status. These kits were 1/32 if memory serves and included a Fokker DR1, a Fokker D-7, a Spad 13, and a Camel. The DR-1 and Spad were excellent, the D-7 and Camel less so. I think Hobbycraft also made a Neiuport 17 in 1/32. Good luck with your project. -- lancer

Thanks for the tips, L.

I shall be browsing ebay for these and other kits I think. In the meantime, assembly has begun on the cockpit of this particular Camel.....

MD

 

[1879fanatic]

Thanks for the tips, L.

I shall be browsing ebay for these and other kits I think. In the meantime, assembly has begun on the cockpit of this particular Camel.....

MD

MD,
This is an excellent idea! I'd love to get back into plastic modells...just did not know 1:32 was out there in WWI! I'm tailgating right behind your bandwagon. Hope you don't mind
Mike

 

[Mister Dave]

MD,
This is an excellent idea! I'd love to get back into plastic modells...just did not know 1:32 was out there in WWI! I'm tailgating right behind your bandwagon. Hope you don't mind
Mike

Nope, I think its really good. Most of these kits are probably out of production so it takes a bit of scrounging, but they are there, and.....you really cannot beat the price point. And, if the results are no good, well then I can always resort to a bit of explosives and gasoline to simulate a fiery crash (that's what my brother did to most of the planes I built as a kid ).

Good luck with your search and let us know what you find.

Cheers,
MD

 

[thebritfarmer]

Found these.........any good?



http://www.netmerchants.co.uk/section.php/404/1/1_32_scale

 

[Mister Dave]

Found these.........any good?



http://www.netmerchants.co.uk/section.php/404/1/1_32_scale

I'd say so. I was looking at the first one listed (the Academy Camel) on another site....I'll probably get that one soon.

MD