Jump to content

pheonix

Members
  • Posts

    2,087
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Everything posted by pheonix

  1. Evening All, After I had completed the painting I added the undercarriage. Following problems which I had with the first of the Nieuport II's I decided to use florists wire for the longitudinal undercarriage strut: this provided more stiffness and prevented the model from becoming a tail sitter. I also replaced the plastic rod with florists wire on the earlier model and correcteda mistake - there should only be a single spade on the longitudinal strut, and that should be at the rear: The final details included adding the wheels, rudder, upper fuselage pylon and propellor. It was rigged with 40 SWG rolled copper wire attached with CA. The other Nieuport II that I completed three weeks ago: I will post photos and some notes in the RFI section soon. Thanks for looking. P.
  2. Evening All, Many thanks James and Baron: your comments are greatly appreciated. Yes James the Gordon Bennett races were very important indeed in causing aero-technology to improve: when one looks at the machines that took part in the first race in 1909 and the speeds that they achieved, and compare them with the race in 1913 the change is truly remarkable, proof if it is ever needed that war is not the only spur to rapid technological change. I did complete the earlier model but I have still not photographed it as I am waiting to finish the seconnd II that I am building. I will photograph both models at the same time later. I have been away from home a lot recently, and will be again in the near future so the second model in this group has been taking a long time to get even near to completion. I have had to remake the fuselage because the first attempt was too narrow: I had not allowed for the larger diameter of the rotary engine when compared with the two-cylinder flat on the earlier model. It was easier to just make a completely new fuselage and scrap the old one, but in doing so I made the rear a little too wide, but by the time I noticed I had already moulded two nose parts and finally got one of them to fit properly, so I decided to leave things as they are and hope that nobody will look too closely. And that includes you lot!!! E. Nieuport's machine had a 75 hp rotary engine which meant that the front of the fuselage had to be widened and a new panel added to the top of the fuselage to allow the engine to be properly installed. This meant that the nose looks like the later Nieuport IV machine: the difference was that the IV had a modified undercarriage and different shaped wings. The II nose however looks the same as a IV: The curved upper part of the nose was push moulded from 30 thou card. The horizontal tail surface was also made from card and is also like that of the IV. I fitted the engine behind a bar which extended horizontally across the nose below the cowling. The wings were fixed to the fuselage - they are butt joined but are strong enough because they will not be carrying any weight: The wings, fuselage and tail surfaces were painted acrylic white with a touch of Revell Beige (314) to give the slightly discoloured shade of clear doped linen. The nose parts were metal on the rotary engined Nieuports so that was painted in Revell aluminium. As usual I applied many very thin coats over the linen areas and an undercoat of gloss black under the metal areas. 2 coats of aluminium gave the desired smooth effect. The numerals on the rudder were printed by me. The undercarriage, rudder and upper pylon have to be added and then I can rig and complete this model. Thanks for looking. P
  3. Evening All, I cut the fuselage sides from 30 thou card and the top and bottom from 20 thou card because it is easier to place the thinner card between the sides and achieve a square cross section. I only added a minimal amount of internal details as they would not be visible after the fuselage was assembled. I also added strips of scrap plastic to enable the bottom and top decking to be accurately placed and secured: I glued one side to the bottom first and allowed that to dry out. The cockpit floor, seat and a control column was put into place next: I did not add a control wheel because this was tricky to make as it was so small and it would not be seen anyway. The second side was glued in place and also allowed to set. Finally the upper decking was glued in place but only after I had cut and filed the cockpit cut-out: The photo shows what I had intended to be Nieuport's machine with a 75 hp Gnome rotary engine. However the shape of the nose is wrong so I will have to make a new fuselage for that model. In the meantime I had assembled Chevalier's model which had the two cylinder engine but I did not photograph it until after the next stage. The joints were cleaned up with a file and glasspaper and any small gaps filled and sanded. The engine was covered by a small plate on Chevalier's machine so I laminated some card and filed the shape required from the resultant block, and cut two side pieces from 20 thou card: The engine cover parts were cemented to the front of the fuselage, gaps filled and the whole sanded and smoothed. I made a small windscreen from card - again this was filed into shape before it was cemented to the fuselage and the gaps filled and sanded smooth: The front of the fuselage and inside of the engine cover was painted aluminium as these were metal parts on the original. The engine was cemented into place when the painting was finished: The model was painted in a mixture of Revell white with a tiny amount of beige (314) to cause the white to be slightly discoloured. The metal panels of the nose were aluminium: The small details of the engine were fixed - the carburetor and fuel pipe underneath the engine block, and the brackets on the sides of the engine. The undercarriage consisted of two pairs of V struts joined by a single central rod with a spade at the front. There was a second rod which passed from under the nose to the rear V struts. The V struts were filed into aerofoil section from 30 x 40 thou strip. Plastic rod made the central parts with the spade cut and shaped from card: I will make the wheels next. I will provide details of Nieuport's model later as I want to finish the model of Chevalier's machine for a club show at the weekend. Thanks for looking. P
  4. Many thanks James. These two have been by far the most difficult to research as I have had no drawings to work from and only a few photographs: of the latter even fewer show any real detail! P
  5. Malc Here are some links to contemporary photos and modern examples in museums: https://www.ctie.monash.edu.au/hargrave/nieuport.html https://www.alamy.com/a-vintage-black-and-white-photograph-from-1910-showing-a-nieuport-monoplane-with-the-engine-exposed-whilst-two-men-prepare-the-aircraft-for-flight-image331611626.ht https://simpleflying.com/a-look-at-nieuport-ii/ https://flyingmachines.ru/Site2/Crafts/Craft28471.htm Hope these help. P
  6. Evening All, These models of the Bleriot XXIII have proved to be among the most difficult that I have had to research. I was not happy with the tail skids which I originally made for them, but I could not find any reliable information concerning exactly how these looked. I therefore based those on the model on the type XXI, which was a precursor of the XXIII. However I recently visited the Eastchurch Air Museum and they provided a photograph of the rear of the wreck of Hamel's machine which shows clearly how the rear undercarriage looked. The white feature to the right of the tail skid is a mark on the negative: (Photo published with kind permission of of Eastchurch Aviation Museum, copyright reserved). Therefore I have changed the models so that they now have more conventional skids at the rear: This is a big improvement as the models now sit in a more representative way when compared to the photographs of the real machines: I believe that I have now a pair of models which are as close to being accurate as I am able to make them. There could still be some small details which are not 100% accurate, but unless more evidence turns up to show me what the inaccuracies are, I am happy to claim that these are representative of the original machines. P
  7. Evening All, The next topic(s) in this project are the two Nieuport II's which were flown by L. Chevalier and E. Nieuport, (the designer and owner of the company). (In fact Chevalier flew two aircraft in the race, but I will only build one to represent his entry). Like the Bleriots I am having problems with these models as I only have one decent photo of Chevalier's machine, and I cannot see the tail surfaces properly on that! As is the case with most, if not all, of these pioneering types, they varied considerably during their flying careers, so although there are preserved and reconstructed examples of the Nieuport II in museums, I cannot be sure that they accurately represent the machines flown on 1 July 1911 at Eastchurch. It is also evident that some authors have confused the type II with the type IV: easy enough given that the designations are probably post-construction and that the latter was derived from the former. What I have been able to establish beyond doubt is that Chevalier's machine had a 30 hp Nieuport flat twin cylinder engine, and Nieuport's machine had a 70 hp rotary. The only, (very poor), photo that I can find of Nieuport's machine shows that it had a similar rudder to Chevalier's aircraft, but I am still not certain what the horizontal tail surfaces looked like. I have two drawings of the Nieuport II, one of which I am sure is from Flight which shows a V shaped horizontal stabilizer with small elevators. The second drawing shows the early tail arrangement with double rudders and a large elevator, and separate horizontal stabilizer. I have a very good photograph of the front of a machine with the flat two cylinder engine and that will be very helpful when I construct Chevalier's model. Th rotary engine seems to have been completely uncowled and without a cover on the top of the fuselage: in the museum exhibit photos that I have seen a curved plate has been mounted over the engine even though they are two cylinder types. I am going to work on the principal that as these were racing machines, weight would have been kept to a minimum, so on both models the engines will be uncovered as on the very early models of the type. However the front of the fuselage sides was slightly different as shown in the image below which also shows the fuselage top and bottom, horizontal tail surface and wings. I have added ribs to the wings using Jammy Dog tape: I have made the 40hp Nieuport two cylinder flat engine from card and pieces of rod but there will be more pipework and wires to be added when I attach it to the front of the model. The seats were cut from card and painted: I intend to use a Small Stuff 70 hp Gnome rotary for Nieuport's machine - why reinvent the wheel when there is no need to because a near perfect example is readily available in the drawer? Thanks for looking. P
  8. Evening All, After a bit of a struggle and numerous mistakes, many of my own making, I have managed to complete the two Bleriot XXIII models to represent the aircraft flown by A. Le Blanc and G. Hamel in the Gordon Bennett Air Race held on 1 July 1911 at the Royal Aeronautical Society's flying field at Eastchurch, Isle of Sheppy, Kent. Both models are scratch built form plastic card, rod and strip and wood, and are rigged with 40 SWG rolled copper wire. The spoked wheels are Everard photoetch. There were only two Bleriot XXIII's built and they were specifically designed for racing. There are no drawings available and a limited number of photographs so I had to construct my interpretation of these aircraft from the sources available. The XXIII seems to have been a variation on the XXI for which I had a poor quality line drawing. The Bleriots were powered by 100 hp Gnome Omega Omega rotary engines which were two 50 hp Omega engines bolted together. Originally the wings were of a greater span than shown on the models: prior to the race they had been cut down against the advice of Bleriot, and this seems to have made the aircraft difficult to fly because Hamel crashed after hitting the ground when turning around a pylon. Fortunately he was not hurt, but Le Blanc seems to have flown more slowly and therefore did not win the race. Earlier in May 1911 he had set a speed record in his Bleriot XXIII, but that was with the full wing span. The published dimensions of the wingspan for these aircraft was too short so I had to work out that the quoted figure was for a wing from the fuselage to the tip: when I made the parts to these dimensions they better matched the evidence from the photographs. The rigging is also part guesswork as the photographs do not show clearly enough how it was arranged, so I have based it on the XXI and what seems reasonable from other types. Most of the photographs are of the model which represents Le Blanc's machine, (no 5). Hamel's machine varied very slightly in small details from Le Blanc but these are difficult to see unless one looks very closely. Thanks for looking. P
  9. Evening All, I am pleased to be able to report that further blunders have been avoided and that I managed to rig the undersides of both models with rolled 40 SWG copper wire before I added the pylons on the top of the fuselage. After those were painted I rigged the upper surfaces and added the rudders and propellors, so the models are now complete. I must point out that some of the rigging is guesswork as I have no plans of these machines and only a limited number of photographs, not all of which are as clear as I would have liked them to be. I do have a set of plans for the Bleriot XXI from which the XXIII seems to have been derived, but the rigging diagram is a little vague too, so what I have put on to the models is part known and part guessed. I will post more photographs of the completed models in the relevant section shortly. Thanks for looking. P
  10. Ian The wing surface area is very small: the wingspan was reduced before the race, apparently to reduce drag (or so I have read). Hamel crashed just after turning at the first pylon and I have often wondered if the aircraft was highly unstable. Le Blanc did not win the race even though he had set a speed record in May 1911 in one of these machines - but with a full span wing. I suspect that in the GB race he flew more slowly because the machine was so unstable - only a guess as I am not a pilot and do not have sufficient knowledge or experience to comment with any certainty. P
  11. Evening All, I have been away rather a lot recently which has really slowed this project down. Added to that I managed to make yet more errors which caused even more delay and frustration. When I made the second pair of wings with the wider chord, I cut them too short! So I had to make a third set of wings, this time with the correct span and fix them to the fuselage....but after I had painted the models!!! Grrrrrr. Fortunately the wings are small and therefore did not take long to make but I had to remove the old pairs first and then fix the new ones into place. After that I had to paint the new wings and touch up the joints so that they do not show. After all that, when I was ready to put the markings on I saw that one of the wings on Hamel's model had drooped, necessitating its removal and replacement! As I write this I am waiting to repaint and clean up that joint... It never seems to end! I painted the numbers on a sheet of white paper, copied and reduced them for printing and varnished them with artist's varnish to seal them. I originally used Humbrol matt enamel to seal them on the models and discovered that the varnish turned yellow after a couple of days! The old transfers were duly removed with a scalpel and new ones printed and fixed in place, this time with acrylic varnish. In contrast with the above self-inflicted disasters making the wheels and undercarriage turned out to be simple. The tyres were 30 thou rod wound around a paintbrush handle and dipped into bioling water for a few seconds. The centres are Eduard spoked wheels. I used pieces of wire from a paper clip for the axle: The front of the airframe formed the basic structure for the undercarriage on these machines - I had already made most of that from strip and rod: Hamel's machine had two extra rods: I do not know what purpose they served but they are very clear in the photos: The brackets which joined the axles to the lower part of the chassis at the front were made from 20 thou rod bent into shape. Pieces of 20 thou rod were used to make the arms which were attached to the oleos at the front of the machine: In spite of the mild complexity of this structure, it was remarkably quick and simple to make, and it is fairly strong and looks as it is supposed to do! Holes had been drilled in the underside of the fuselage to take the pylon and supports which carried the control cable to the wings. The pylons and supports were made from 30 thou and 20 thou rod respectively. On the original aircraft the rear undercarriage was made from wood which had been steamed and bent into curves. I represented this by using 30 thou rod and bending it to shape. First one complete length was glued into place: When that had set hard I took the second length and cut it into two parts so that they could be fixed on each side: Both the undercarriage and pylons have been painted and I can now start rigging the underside of the models before I add the rudders and upper pylons to the top surfaces. That at least is the plan which assumes that I do not make any more blunders that will need correcting! Thanks for looking. P
  12. Thanks all for the kind comments. Ian: I do not have plans for this type but the photographs that I do have show that the wings really were long and narrow. The original wings had a slightly longer span but were cut down just before the race in an attempt to increase speed. I have used the published dimensions for the span as explained above: the chord has been estimated from photographs and when allowance is made for the original span, the wing area is also very close to that published. It is perhaps noteworthy that Hamel, who flew the first of the types in the race, crashed while turning at the first pylon, indicating I think the highly unstable flying characteristics of the type. However unlike you I am not a pilot, so I can only guess. P
  13. Evening All, Thanks @marvinneko for the kind comment: - sometimes checking and redoing can be frustrating, but it is worth it in the end! The undercarriage arrangement for the early Bleriot designs was far from simple - as I found when I scratch built a Bleriot XI Penguin some years ago, and as anyone who has tried to build a kit of the type will know. I wanted to start the undercarriage before adding the wings, so made the supports under the fuselage from plastic strip, the under crossbar form strip and the oleo tubes on the sides from thin rod. I drilled the upper and lower horizontal bars so that I could insert the rods: the unit is not cemented in place yet - just the fuselage supports: Now I could return to the wings. I have not been happy with the original wings that I made from the very start as they do not look anything like the wings in the photographs. The problem was that the wings that I made are too short and the chord is too wide. I had used the published dimension for the "span" which was 17 feet (approx 5m). I studied a photograph of one of these machines with a figure in the foreground and used the latter as a scale. From my (very) crude measurement it was clear that a single wing was approximately 8 /12 feet long. I used another photograph and again using a crude method measured the ratio of span of a single wing and chord: the result was approximately 2.9:1. When I drew a plan with a single wing scaled at 8 1/2 feet with a chord 1/3 of the span, I had a shape that looks very close to that seen in the photographs. Compare this with the shape that I had originally made: The new wing shape is in the top of the photo. A quick calculation of wing area using the new dimensions came close to that published in my source. Clearly the span of the wings was correct only if the fuselage gap was omitted: then the "span" and wing area match the published data. Clearly the source made a mistake with "span" which I take to mean the distance between wing tips including the fuselage. Now I could get the correct number of ribs on each wing, (as per the photographs), and attach the wings to the fuselage: Painting and numbers will be applied next. Thanks for looking. P
  14. Super model of a classic type Dave. Despite the fit issues you have been able to produce a first class model. P
  15. You have probably only found one because there are not many available. The best sites that I have found which appear to have the best photos are at: https://flyingmachines.ru/Site2/Crafts/Craft29202.htm https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Blériot_XXIII#/media/File:Alfred_Leblanc_en_avril_1911_à_l'école_d'aviation_de_Pau,_sur_Blériot_100CV.jpg The second site shows LeBlanc in the machine before the wingspan was reduced to 5m - the reduction occurred just before the race at Eastchurch. I cannot find what the original span was as my source only states that it was "reduced to approximately 5m" (Opdike 1962) Also http://www.airwar.ru/enc/law1/bleriot23.html the second grainy photo shows the rounded wing tips before they were clipped. If you look up Google images you will also find photos of the Bleriot XX and XXI which seem to have similar fuselages: the XXI was a two seat reconnaisance machine and certainly seems to have the same horizontal tail surfaces as the XXIII. I have also found a drawing of the Bleriot XXI: I suspect that the XXIII was essentially a single seat XXI with different wings: that at least is the assumption that I am I working on, but if anyone has any better information I would be very pleased to hear from you. Hope that helps. P
  16. Evening All, Recent progress has been more glacial than normal on account of some important family events and a combination of stupidity and experiment on behalf of yours truly! I assembled the fuselage parts illustrated in the last post in the usual way: glue one side to the bottom, insert internal bracing, and allow to dry out: Then I added the second side and upper fuselage rear, and moulded the front part using an old set of moulds from a Bleriot XI scratch build of a decade ago, only to discover that I had made two errors: first the fuselage was too narrow by approximately 1.5mm which matters because the engine has to fit in the front. Secondly, after much scrutiny of photographs, particularly one of le Blanc taking off at Eastchurch, I decided that the rear end of the fuselage was not blunt as I had modelled it, but probably tapered towards the elevator. I am not certain of the detailed shape of the rear of the fuselage, so I am using modeller's license to interpret a rather poor quality photo. I decided to start again and make up new fuselage parts, including a new mouding for the upper fuselage front. However because of my sheer incompetence I managed to mis-measure (twice!) and cut once the width of the fuselage so that the new part was even narrower than the first attempt!! A third attempt succeeded in producing a pair of fuselages which were of the correct width and tapered in the horizontal plane at the rear. In addition the new upper part for the front fuselage fitted properly at last: The difference between the fuselage shapes of the first and final attempts are shown here: The engine was mounted at the front on a cross brace which I cut from 20 thou card: The engine had a piece of plastic rod inserted through the centre with a small length extending to the rear to allow a small piece of plastic card to be attached that could be glued on to the fuselage sides. The front and rear mounts hold the engine in place. I cemented the cockpit floor with the seat and control unit into the fuselage, and the oil and fuel tank in front of the cockpit opening - they were cut from plastic rod: The upper fuselage moulding was cut and filed to shape and the cross bar which held the undercarriage legs added from strip. I placed the new part of the fuselage structure to allow a photo to be taken: the cross bar will be painted before I cement the parts together: The grey on the front of the moulding is filler: a small dimple occurred in the moulded part which had to be filled and smoothed with Mr Surfacer. Thanks for looking. P
  17. Congratulations Peter - that is a first class model and one to be proud of for sure. With the gun in place it certainly looks the part and the simplified rigging still gives it a realistic look. (I got my figure wrong in an earlier post: the number of wires if you add them all is nearly 190 so you certainly saved your wire, time and sanity by simplifying the rigging!) P
  18. Congratulations on finishing the model: no mean feat given that it is a pusher and your first attempt to build one. If you had put in all of the rigging you would have had approximately 120 lengths of wire to insert/fix.... Pushers are wonderful types to build but they can be a bit more tricky to rig than the standard tractor types, except for the early monoplanes which had wing warping. P
  19. Success! Well done for aligning the skids and legs properly - hopefully the rigging will help to strengthen this part. The wing and tail skids should be straightofrward after this. P
  20. Rigging looks very good. The undercarriage could still be a problem as it has to splay outwards slightly when viewed from the front, and the main struts are angled slightly forward, but if you have a secure location on the nacelle it should work out. Time and patience are winners in these situations in my experience. Good luck with the last parts. P
  21. Excellent work so far: with reference to the rudder, try drilling the top and bottom and add two short pins to the holes. The pins can then be set between the rear of the booms and will provide a quick and secure mounting. I frequently us that method when I build pushers with the boom arrangement of the FB 5. P
  22. Peter, A long time ago I scratch built one of these in 1/72 scale, and some time later another in 1/32 scale. I have also scratch built a few other pushers in the meantime and find that if the outer struts are in place and secure, and the rudder is in place between the rear of the booms, it should be possible to handle the assembly to put in the inner wing struts and boom struts without tears. I can provide links to some of my builds if you wish, or alternatively look through the scratch builds section of ww1aircrafftmodels.com and you will find build logs there under Lone Modeller. Best of luck with the continuation of the project - it looks first class too me. P
  23. As usual Frank both your model and photography are brilliant. Like Viking I thought that the first photo was of a real Camel so that we could compare it with your model! P
  24. Evening All, The second subject for the Gordon Bennett racers of 1911 is the Bleriot XXIII. This is causing me a few problems because only two of the type were constructed, (they were built as racing aeroplanes), and apart from a handful of photographs, I have little information about them. There are no drawings that I am aware of. I have a dimension for the wingspan, (17 feet), which is incredibly narrow, and a wing area, so I think that I can calculate the chord. Sources state that the wings of the original design were longer but were reduced by approximately 1 metre before the Eastchurch race. I also know the length of the aircraft and that they were powered by 100 hp Gnome Double Omega engines. Photographs show that the original wingtips were rounded, but for the race they were square. The fuselage seems to have been developed from the earlier two seat XXI, although the latter had a much shallower fuselage, especially at the rear. Both types had a large horizontal tail surface and a rudder but no fin, although the shape of the rudders was different. I am therefore making my own drawings and writing the assembly instructions at the same time.... I make no claims to accuracy of these models - they will be the best that I can do given the source material available. However I am pretty certain that there is nobody who can challenge the overall shape even if some details are not 100% accurate. I am making two models to represent the two aircraft but as with the Nieuport IV I am only illustrating the build of one model: I will show photographs of both when they are complete. I have started as usual by cutting the wing blanks from 30 thou card bent in hot water in a pipe with 10 x 20 thou Evergreen strip for ribs. The strip was sanded almost flat and the Mr Surfacer added to smooth the edges. I have made the rudders in the same way from flat card. The fuselage sides, top and bottom were cut from 30 thou card and pieces of scrap plastic added to keep the joints square. I added some 10 x 20 thou strip to represent the frame in the cockpit area, I have cut a floor and painted it wood, and made a control yoke from 20 thou and 80 thou rod. The engines were made from thick sprue for the crankcase with 30 thou rod for the cylinders. I have painted this assembly but not added the push rods yet: The seats were made from scrap card for the base and 10 thou card with holes drilled for the back. I am carving the propellors from hardwood using plans from the DataFile no 108 of the Bleriot XI at War. I cut the wood into strips of suitable length, marked on the shape of the propellor and filed the shape that I wanted. I will add bosses later from thin card: I shall use the DataFile plans to make the undercarriage and to help with the shape of the fuselage as the XXIII was clearly derived from this earlier design. Thanks for looking: more to follow when I have made more progress. P
  25. Evening All, Recently I completed a scratch build of the Nieuport IV flown by C. Weymann in the 1911 Gordon Bennett air race at Eastchurch Kent. When I started the build I thought that two Nieuprt IV's had participated in the race when in fact only one did so. I was therefore left with a half built model and rather than throw it away I decided to complete it. Research led me to a machine operated by the 2nd Company of the Air Battallion of the Royal Engineers in 1911. It carried the serial B4 and later became 253 when the Air Battallion became 3 Squadron of the Royal Flying Corps on 13 April 1912. It was one of the first aircraft to be bought by the British government for military use. The key difference between Weymann's aircraft and the aircraft flown by the RFC and air units of other countries was the engine: Weymann had had a 100 hp Gnome Omega Omega fitted to his machine, whereas other aircraft were fitted initially with 50hp Gnome Omega engines, although these were later replaced with more powerful rotaries of between 70 and 100 hp. The type first flew in 1911 and was designed primarily as a racing machine, but it was bought in small numbers by Spain, Turkey, Sweden, Japan and Argentina. France had a squadron of Nieuport IV M's and operated some of them in the early months of WW1 until attrition reduced their numbers to zero. Italy bought "several" and Russia undertook serious production - between 280 and 300 machines were built and delivered to the Imperial Russian Air Service where they saw service on the Eastern Front in World War 1. On 14 February 1912 B4 was flown by Lt.B.H.Barrington-Kennett for a record setting 4 hours and 51 minutes covering 249 miles and 840 yards winning the £500 Mortimer Singer prize – at that time a world endurance record in a closed circuit. It is not known exactly when B4/253 was stuck off charge, but it was not with 3 Squadron in 1914. Early aircraft had relatively short service lives because of wear and tear by pilots, rough landing grounds and the limited engine life of these machines. Lt Poytor Nesterov was the first pilot to loop in an aeroplane on 27 August 1913 over Kiev for which action he was promptly placed under arrest for "undue risk to government property". When Adolphe Pegoud repeated the performance a few days later in France Nesterov was released, awarded a medal and promoted! Thanks for looking. P
×
×
  • Create New...