alex revell Posted 24 March , 2011 Share Posted 24 March , 2011 Lou, Both interplane struts and centre section struts were wood. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RAF_Louvert Posted 24 March , 2011 Share Posted 24 March , 2011 . Hmmm...I am sure over the years I have read, and more than once, that the center struts were fabric-wrapped steel tubes. Or was this perhaps only on the early models, and went the way of the metal tube undercarriages found on the first SE5s? . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alex revell Posted 24 March , 2011 Share Posted 24 March , 2011 Lou, try this. A Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RAF_Louvert Posted 24 March , 2011 Share Posted 24 March , 2011 . Oh, don't get me wrong Alex, I am not doubting that they're wood, as noted by you and your man in NZ. My only point now is that I am sure I have seen them described as fabric-wrapped steel tubing in a few old sources, and when I can locate one of those I will point you towards it. It is possible they are in error, (or that a few of the early kites did indeed have the steel tubes), but I am quite sure at least one of the writings I am remembering was penned decades ago while the author inspected an SE5 that was sitting right in front of him. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alex revell Posted 24 March , 2011 Share Posted 24 March , 2011 Lou, I queried this with my NZ friend. Here's his reply. Ah good question, the struts have a steel tube up the middle on which the front ones have tubing up to the fuel and water tank in the top wing centre section...steel tube with wooden front and rear...then bound up...the rear ones are constructed the same way - but nothing inside the tube... The SE5a is a very Edwardian aircraft - and a Govt one at that - very complicated for those reasons - where as the Sopwith aircraft were built to a price - and much more 'production friendly' Rgds John So, more complicated than we thought - eh! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RAF_Louvert Posted 26 March , 2011 Share Posted 26 March , 2011 . A-ha, now all the pieces come together and get wrapped up...literally. Be sure and tell John I said "Thank You" for his very informative reply. And really Alex, why would the government want something done in a simple fashion when unnecessarily overcomplicating it is a viable option? . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alex revell Posted 26 March , 2011 Share Posted 26 March , 2011 Lou, I've already thanked John, on my behalf as well. I'm more of a people person than an aeroplane person, as you know, but I was pleased to have that confirmed. Especially after my earlier dogmatic statement - something I'm always warning other people not to make - that they were wood. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RAF_Louvert Posted 26 March , 2011 Share Posted 26 March , 2011 . "It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so." That Mark Twain feller, he twern't no dummy niether. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alex revell Posted 26 March , 2011 Share Posted 26 March , 2011 Quite so!! I stand corrected. Now, I'm waiting for Johan to come back with his latest finds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trebrys Posted 29 March , 2011 Share Posted 29 March , 2011 I think the surprisingly crude comment on MvR's activity the night before he died might have precipitated the banning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alex revell Posted 30 March , 2011 Share Posted 30 March , 2011 Trebrys I don't think so. That was sometime before, and most people took it in the spirit it was said. Partially as a joke, admittedly perhaps not in the best of taste; partly in frustration with the constant adulation of von R by people who seem want to know the smallest minutia of his life, minutia which is irrelevant from the point of view of worthwhile reseach, which can't be proven and which adds nothing to our knowledge. Actually, I did ask that the question of Dave, myself and the other site should not be aired here, so I'm not sure why you have brought it up again. I'm told there was recently a thread there, which has since been deleted/censored by the administrators, asking for us to be reinstated. Perhaps it would have been nore appropriate if you had have posted your comment there.:-) Regards Alex Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonathan Saunders Posted 30 March , 2011 Share Posted 30 March , 2011 I think the surprisingly crude comment on MvR's activity the night before he died might have precipitated the banning. I dont think I have posted on The Aerodrome since a particularly crass comment was made by one regular member along the lines of "Rhys-Davids murdered Voss" followed by "I am glad Rhys-Davids was killed". That comment was made about 3 years ago and to the best of my knowledge is still there. Apologies to those that wish us to move on, but in view of Trebrys comment this does seem a very relevant reply concerning the impartiality/ integrity of The Aerodrome board administrators. Regards, Jonathan S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alex revell Posted 30 March , 2011 Share Posted 30 March , 2011 Jonathan, Yes, the statements regarding RD being a murderer and being glad he is dead were allowed to stand without censure of any kind. That is typical of the kind of thing which some of us were continually complaining about, with no result. Much more offensive than my jokey remark about something which - let's be honest - we have all indulged in from time to time.:-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RAF_Louvert Posted 30 March , 2011 Share Posted 30 March , 2011 . (apologies to "Bloom County" fans everywhere) . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alex revell Posted 31 March , 2011 Share Posted 31 March , 2011 Lou, As far as I can make out from my dictionary, 'steuerknuppel' means to steer and cudgel. Trust the Germans to come up with a long word for a simple operation. :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SiegeGunner Posted 31 March , 2011 Share Posted 31 March , 2011 'Steuerknüppel' means 'joystick', which may go some way to clarifying the cartoon ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fitzee Posted 31 March , 2011 Share Posted 31 March , 2011 'Steuerknüppel' means 'joystick', which may go some way to clarifying the cartoon ... The yokes on you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SiegeGunner Posted 31 March , 2011 Share Posted 31 March , 2011 I think you are over-egging the pudding ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alex revell Posted 1 April , 2011 Share Posted 1 April , 2011 Thanks for the clarification. I only had my dictionaries to go by. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RAF_Louvert Posted 1 April , 2011 Share Posted 1 April , 2011 . hee, hee...very punny Gents. And Alex, you have to watch out for those dictionary translations. Not always 100% reliable and can result in you inadvertently getting someone's Eier up. DING-A-LING DING-A-LING ... I believe your bilingual homophone is ringing. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SiegeGunner Posted 1 April , 2011 Share Posted 1 April , 2011 ... inadvertently getting someone's Eier up. 'Eier' is also a slang word for testicles, so they are probably somewhere in the cartoon too ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RAF_Louvert Posted 1 April , 2011 Share Posted 1 April , 2011 . Indeed it is Siege Gunner, and it's the very dual meaning of the word, (and the fact that it sounds the same as the English "ire"), that gave me cause to choose it. And thus the remark about a bilingual homophone. There is nearly always a method to my madness. Now then, about "ding-a-ling"... . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SiegeGunner Posted 1 April , 2011 Share Posted 1 April , 2011 I am beginning to suspect that you chaps got rusticated from the other place for being silly — but good humour is welcome here, within reason on serious threads, and without any reason at all in Skindles, the forum's off-topic area. You need 100 posts to qualify, so Alex is very nearly there, and you need to up your work-rate ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alex revell Posted 2 April , 2011 Share Posted 2 April , 2011 Sieg Gunner, Yes, I agree. Let's get back to the original topic of the thread, chaps. I didn't know about Skindles, but if it's anything like the Off Topic thread on the other site, I'm not holding my breath. Some of the astonishing opinions expressed there made my blood run cold. On another tack, does anyone know how to find what each of the emoticons signify. I've tried several things, but with no success. Just tried one for this post, which I thought was self explanatory, and it turned out to be something entirely different to what I wanted to express. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RAF_Louvert Posted 2 April , 2011 Share Posted 2 April , 2011 . Fair enough SG, and my apologies Sir on leading this thread temporarily awry. I do tend to find humour in nearly everything, (much to the dismay of my lovely wife). Also, I can occasionally become distracted from the topic at hand, which has been...oh look...fresh scones! . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now