German WW1 Fighters and Recce Aircraft Prototypes and Projects

[hesham]

many thanks my dear Tuizentfloot.

 

[hesham]

and as I know the DFW C.IV had a three different variants.

They are C.IV T.25,C.IV Avro and C.IV F.37.

 

[Maveric]

Lange listed no C.IV Avro (?) and the T.25 is listed without a C.IV designation.

 

[richard B]

SO FAR I KNOW : (but I don't know much about the D.F.W ...)

The DFW C.IV was a "normal" C. type , very similar to the later well known DFW C.V .

The T.25 was described as C.IV in the Gray & Thetford and Wagner & Nowarra 's books , but I think it is not right .

The T.29 looks like a C.IV / C.V with single bay wings. ( // or I )

The F.37 was the C.VII .

 

[hesham]

Thank you my dear Richard,

but F.37 was allocated to C.IV.

 

[richard B]

but F.37 was allocated to C.IV.

I am pretty sure : the F37 was C.VII for the army , later the civil (with cabin for three passengers) DFW P.I . (What is your source for C.IV / F37 ?)

 

[hesham]

Maybe, Typenhandbuch der deutschen Luftfahrttechnik

 

[richard B]

Maybe, Typenhandbuch der deutschen Luftfahrttechnik

Yes , Lange wrote "C IV (F 37)" and "F37 III (modified C IV)" , but the pictures of the C VII , P I , and F 37 all show a different plane with short fuselage , tall fin&rudder and no more V shaped horizontal tail surfaces .

 

[hesham]

OK my dear Richard.

 

[hesham]

Hi,

the Friedrichshafen D quadruplane of 1917 was not related to FF.54 quadruplane of 1918.

 

[richard B]

There was only one Friedrichshafen Vierdecker , the FF 54 , designed by Diplom-ingenieur van Grieß . It was flown late in 1917 .
It was unsuccessful , and modified several times ; At last , it crashed in summer 1918 , killing its pilot .

For some sources it was in 1918 modified as a Dreidecker (bottom fuselage wing deleted) , but watching the three pictures I know , it seems that only the wing-tips , outside the struts , were deleted )

 

[hesham]

Thank you my dear Richard.

 

[Tuizentfloot]

A late reaction about the DFW F 37.

Concerning the F 37 conflicting information exist. On the one hand "F 37 = C IV" (Lange, Typenhandbuch …), and the record breaking F 37/III was a re-engined C IV. On the other hand "F 37 = C VII" (eg. Nowarra). I limit myself to German authors.

About DFW there is other conflicting information. T 25 is often considered as the in-house designation of the C IV (eg. Kroschel, Militärflugzeuge …). For Lange and Nowarra (Entwicklung …) the T 25 was an experimental single bay C-type, designed by Dorner. The dimensions given by Nowarra are smaller than those of the C IV.

In my very humble opinion the assumption F 37 = C VII is the correct one. As earlier said by richard B photographs of the C VII show a short fuselage and a tall fin and rudder. Completely different from the C IV.

Only … it is not 100% sure that the designation C VII ever existed…

In 1918 DFW apparently didn't use any longer the in-house designation "T", but instead used "F" (F 34, F 37). So, the identity of the 1918 type F 37 with the C VII seems logical.

And why a C IV should have been used to re-engine for a 1919 record-breaking flight? The C IV was an "old" 1916 type, built in small numbers.

Conclusion: This is not the end of DFW mysteries. But that's the charm of early German aviation.

 

[hesham]

Many thanks my dear Tuizentfloot,

and anyone heard about Germania C.III ?.

 

[Tuizentfloot]

Unfortunately no idea...

 

[hesham]

Unfortunately no idea...

Thank you my dear Tuizentfloot,

and what about Germania Type C (KDD) ?.

 

[richard B]

https://www.sdtb.findbuch.net/php/view.php?ar_id=3750&link=56492e312e303036x1048&path=c76bf76bdd6dd5dcdddcecc76bf7dc3a383d36fcc1d0f63f3a30fec76bf763dac7e0c7e1e1e3c16e383fc7c1d830373f36c76bf763dac7e0c7e1e1e3c1e1e0e1e6efc739f13f#&path=c76bf76bdd6dd5dcdddcecc76bf7dc3a383d36fcc1d0f63f3a30fec76bf763dac7e0c7e1e1e3c16e383fc7c1d830373f36c76bf763dac7e0c7e1e1e3c1e1e0e1e6efc739f13f

 

[Tuizentfloot]

The KDD (KampfDoppelDecker) was certainly an experimental C-type, but no other designations are known.

 

[hesham]

Thank you my dears Richard and Tuizentfloot,

and I know the Halberstadt A.I called E.14,A.II called F.14 and B.1 called A.15,what
was this designation series ?.

 

[Tuizentfloot]

And B II also called B.15.

No explanation, unfortunately.

 

[hesham]

And B II also called B.15.

No explanation, unfortunately.

Thanks.

 

[Vahe Demirjian]

In the meantime I found this drawing of a Naglo biplane, apparently the D II biplane.
See https://www.facebook.com/pages/Naglo-Bootswerft-Aircraft/222598187820258

Now I know what the Naglo D.II looked like. Are there any photos of the D.II prototype (serial number 1165/18)?

 

[hesham]

From L +K 14/1984.

 

[144printsdev]

the Naglo D.I was a single seat quadruplane fighter (1161/18),actually built.

Maybe a Naglo D.I speculative drawing.

Log into Facebook

Log into Facebook to start sharing and connecting with your friends, family, and people you know.

www.facebook.com

Oh... Many memories came back watching that profile... I've made a 3D model of that Naglo, some yeras ago, using the drawing that mr. Backus sent to me... here there are a pair of (really very, very, very basic) renders I did.

 

[hesham]

Hi,

for Schütte-Lanz company,was there a two designs of seaplane aircraft or not ?.

 

[hesham]

for Schütte-Lanz company,was there a two designs of seaplane aircraft or not ?.

Also anther Mysteries came today,from Aerophile 1915,

I found those unknown designers; Sachsen (maybe related to Albatros ?) and Krieger ?.

 

[Maveric]

Karl Krieger is good known. He built his airplanes at Johannisthal by Berlin. Born 1885 at Krefeld.
K.K.1 from 1910 Monoplane
K.K.2 from 1911 Monoplane
K.K.3 from 1912 a Taube-Type
K.K.4 from 1913 a racing monoplane
K.K.5 from1913 Monoplane
Torpedo-Lancier-Flugzeug Triplane with floats Project

Krieger shut down his workshop in 1915 and became an acceptance pilot in the Germania factories in Leipzig, where he crashed on August 30, 1918 for an unknown cause.

 

[Maveric]

Krieger Types

 

[Maveric]

I would be very grateful for pictures of the other planes.

 

[Apophenia]

and I know the Halberstadt A.I called E.14,A.II called F.14 and B.1 called A.15,what was this designation series ?.

Those were internal designations applied by the Halberstädter Flugzeugwerke GmbH ... versus the official Idflieg designation applied for Luftstreitkräfte use.

There is conflicting information, however. According to Kites, Birds & Stuff by P. D. Stemp (and airwar.ru), E14 was the internal designation for licensed DE Stahltaubes used by the Halberstadt flying school (the Halberstadt Taubes being requisitioned in 1914 as A I recce aircraft). But most sources say that E14 referred to the Idflieg's A II - a Halberstadt licensed Fokker M 8.

Most sources also say that Idflieg designation Halberstadt A I was applied to another version of the Fokker M 8. Oddly, this A I was a follow on to Halberstadt's A II. K.W. Jonker listed "F.14" as Halberstadt's designation for the A II. If he was right, that leaves us with the A I/E14 puzzle. Was it a Halberstadt Taube or a Halberstadt-built Fokker M 8? Or, less probably, was the Halberstadt A I designation repeated by Idflieg?

(Repetition seems improbable. Indeed, the Halberstadt B15 shows a reverse trend. That internal B15 was retained for two engine types which Idflieg distinguished between as the Halberstadt B II and B III.)

Another wrinkle is that the A I (M 8) may have followed the A II (M 8). K.W. Jonker mentioned wooden-fuselage construction for the Halberstadt A II (vs Fokker's welded steel-tube structure). I wonder, is it possible that this A I was a follow-on because Halberstadt - despite its earlier Stahltaube experience - was struggling with steel-tube techniques, and thus first adopted a more familiar wooden construction for their A II version?

The early Halberstadt-designed biplanes are less confusing:

Halberstadt A15 = Idflieg B I biplane, 80 hp Oberursel U.0 rotary

Halberstadt B15 = Idflieg Halberstadt B.II biplane, 105 hp Mercedes D I inline

Halberstadt B15 = Idflieg Halberstadt B.III biplane, 120 hp Mercedes D II inline
-- Internal B15 designation unchanged for higher-powered B III version

One presumes that Halberstädter Flugzeugwerke continued to apply internal designations to its designs but I haven't seen any corporate style designations mentioned in the context of their later aircraft types.

 

[Maveric]

The only major plants in Leipzig that had a longer sequence in their type designations are DFW, Germania, NFW and Aviatik. But none of this company called their types SL.

 

[hesham]

From Czech National Technic Museum,

what was Halberstadt CL.V & CL.VIII ?.

 

[richard B]

Krieger Types

Are you sure ?
The first one is usually identified as the first type built at the works of the "Prinz Friedrich Sigismund von Preußen" which was flown by Krieger ... I don't know the part of Krieger in its design .

Der Prinz, der Flugzeuge baute...

war Prinz Friedrich Sigismund von Preussen, * 17.12.1891 Schloss Klein-Glienicke + 06.07.1927 Luzern/ Schweiz. Der Prinz war Flugzeugführer ...

frueheluftfahrt.blogspot.com

Here the KK2 (note the triangular section fuselage) :




Your KK3 is actually the KK5 built in 1913/4

Here the KK3 :

 

[Maveric]

Richard, thank you very much for your corrections.

Can you find a photo of Krieger's KK.1?

 

[Dynoman]

German cameras of WWI:

"The Central Powers used many different aircraft but especially Rumpler and Albatros types mounting Görz and ICA cameras. The Germans used also a standard 70 cm focal length and 13×18 cm plates. The radio-equipped unarmed photoship Rumpler C.VII (Rubild) — for Rumpler-Bildflugzeug (picture-aircraft)[4] — distinguished itself for long-range and high-altitude, reaching 21,000 feet. Unusual recon aircraft included the armored Junkers J.I for low-level flights, the gigantic long-range Ilya Muromets from Russia, and the high-performing (at well over 200 km/h top speed) Italian Ansaldo SVA, considered nearly uninterceptable. Italy standardized on the simple 24-plate Lamperti camera.
German optics was overwhelmingly superior, as exemplified by Carl Zeiss lenses and optical glass. The Allies had to quickly learn to make lenses especially for long foci. In the meantime they had to make do with such short-focus lenses as could be found. When the U.S. entered the war, the Army urgently requested that American civilians turn in their lenses and optics, including telescopes and binoculars, for aerial use, specifically naming several sought-after German manufactures. Cameras quickly became large and mechanically very complex. German and Italian cameras generally used 13×18 cm plates." (Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aerial_reconnaissance_in_World_War_I)

 

[Dynoman]

Roland CII model showing observers position with camera in stowed position.

 

[Dynoman]

NG II

 

[richard B]

Richard, thank you very much for your corrections.

Can you find a photo of Krieger's KK.1?

I would like to get one ...

 

[hesham]

From Czech National Technic Museum,

what was Hannoversche C.VI ?.

 

[Maveric]

Schütte-Lanz C.I