WW 1 Planes

>lol

>>2940377
Wouldn't it make more sense for the tractor to be in front of the pilot, given that it's pulling rather than pushing?

File: Douhet.jpg (3MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3264x2448px

>>2940377

>>2940377
>tractor has the propellor behind the pilot; pusher has the propellor in front
lmao what

interesting anyway

>>2940377
Let me tell you some more since you're interested in the subject.

WW1 planes started out without any flaps, instead, they deformed the wing to achieve turning.

WW1 planes initially couldn't fit machine guns on the nose until they figured out how to prevent them from shooting propellers off.

The world airfield comes literally from fields which were used as dedicated landing zones for the airplanes in WW1 and as such, there were no smooth takeoffs or landings.

Aircraft roundels were initially developed, because ground troops couldn't differentiate between allied and enemy aircraft, so they just shot at anything they saw flying overhead.

>tractor behind pusher in front
So did people just not make sense in 1914 or what

File: 1489196347434.jpg (9KB, 231x218px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 231x218px

how did the first pilots figure out how to make their way back home? must have been confusing

>>2940507
Map and compass.
They initially had dedicated navigators for this reason.

Granted, early planes didn't fly very far as their low powered engines did sort of limit the distance they could travel.
WW1 planes didn't really have much in regards of flight instruments initially.

>>2940507
Landmarks

You simply remember what the terrain looks like and use that for navigation.

>>2940377
You mixed up tractor and pusher. Also cool is that these planes had ludicrous turn rates. The iconic German triplane could yaw 180 degrees in less than 3 seconds IIRC.

>>2940557
biplanes in general have a very low moment of inertia, because that shit is proportional to the span squared

It's crazy how basically no one knew what they were doing and it was basically just guys making up aerial combat as they went along.

>>2940461
Well, the machine gun would hit the propellor if it was in front

File: Flying Circus with D.III.jpg (103KB, 684x446px) Image search: [Google]

103KB, 684x446px

>>2940507
For WW1 pilots, a map and compass would be the best you could hope for. However, with endurances being short and the front being pretty visible and static, going off of landmarks would generally work fairly well.

Fun fact - the Soviets actually used giant cloth arrows to guide planes as late as early 1942 to guide fighters to the front because many were flying without radios.

>>2940932
Those are always the funnest parts of history to read about. Remember when Torpedo Rams were the future of naval warfare? Or all the ridiculous tank designs before the Main Battle Tank became solidified? I always liked the Monitor vs Merrimack because neither side knew what Ironclad warfare was so they spent half a day bouncing shots off each other wasting each others time.

>>2940932
the early dogfights were hilarious. You had guys throwing nets trying to jam the enemys propellers or attempting to use a rifle/pistol to shoot the engine.

>>2940377
>A well known feature of Rotary engines was its use of castor oil. The reason is lost until we examine the lubrication system in detail. With the fuel and oil mixed together in the crankcase it was important that the fuel not dissolve the oil and ruin its lubricating qualities. The perfect choice was pharmaceutical-quality castor oil—it would stand the heat and centrifugal force, and its gum-forming tendency were irrelevant in a total-loss lubrication system. An unfortunate side effect was that pilots inhaled and swallowed a considerable amount of the oil during flight, leading to persistent diarrhea. This also accounts for the pilot’s use of a flowing white scarf—not for a dashing image, but to wipe goggles clear of the persistent oil mist flowing past the cockpit.


>the engines used in the early aircraft were simple by today's standards and used castor oil in the fuel as engine lubricant. As a result, a continuous mist of castor oil was generated and sprayed across the pilot. To counter these problems, early aviators wore long scarves to wipe the mist from their googles. In addition, the fine castor oil spray had a cathartic effect on the gastro-intestinal tract. The reported antidote was a shot of brandy."
in Occupational, Industrial, and Environmental Toxicology
By Michael I. Greenberg


>Interestingly French ww1 sources do not mention these effects. American WW1 aviation medicine sources attribute the nausea to altitude flight and "hypersensitivity to movement" (but they were written while most aircraft in use were no longer equipped with rotary engines). Canadian sources, well, they focus on another aspect: aviators reported that they used to add a cut onion in the castor oil so as to neutralize its side effects...and make excellent potato French fries with it.

>>2942061

>I always liked the Monitor vs Merrimack because neither side knew what Ironclad warfare was so they spent half a day bouncing shots off each other wasting each others time.

To be fair, the Virginia (Merrimack) did have a ram built into the front, it did attempt to use it multiple times, but the Monitor was always able to dodge it. I'm not sure what you'd do differently.

File: tsar tank.jpg (868KB, 1250x884px) Image search: [Google]

868KB, 1250x884px

>>2942061
Name one thing ridiculous about this design

File: acc7786980a2ce55e92d47178615eb4a.jpg (80KB, 564x552px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 564x552px

>>2942726