Is that the same chauffeur from post 17, who was being 'monitored' by the little spook with the big 'piece' ? LFH

sillhoed:- Not a DH4 but a Curtiss R-6 I think.

http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c6...ps52928e2d.jpg

ed,

It's not so much a "trained eye" as it is familiarity. I'm sure that you don't recognize another nearby aircraft by it's individual features. You automatically assess the overall picture and say that's a 737 or DC-9 or Cherokee or 172, etc.

Your Camel/SE5 photo was a difficult one, but if it was viewed on a video or in real life, the identification would be immediately obvious as the aircraft rolled upright.

Simon

Same or Different
 

Thanks Mel, I think you are probably right. I did see a picture of a Curtiss that seemed to match but I couldn't put it together with the rest.

I am going to post two pictures of what I think is the same plane but I am not sure. http://i944.photobucket.com/albums/a...ps2dda8455.jpg

Same?
 

This is the second.

http://i944.photobucket.com/albums/a...pse1304334.jpg

Look Different Now
 

Ok, so now that I look at them, they don't look the same at all. Shows you how much I have learned. By the way, I only have a few more to go of this group of photos and it has certainly been an education. The mystery will still remain "where were they taken?" perhaps. The Jenny's appear to be a U.S. Army or Marine training unit since the planes just have numbers on the sides and no unit decal. The army did training in the U.S. as well as France so it still leaves it up in the air. The individual that gave me these pictures lived in Washington State and there is plenty of water and float planes there but none of the background looks much like Washington to me.

Again, many thanks. I plan to mark these photos properly and put them on photobucket or some other site. I will do my best to acknowledge you all for the help you have been.

Regards,
ed

First photo looks like a Standard Caproni.
Second looks like a Gallaudet Pusher.

Amazing photos mate. :)

As Graeme says amazing photos. The one you post at post# 45 I would agree that it is possibly an example of the Gallaudet D-1
http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c6...ps7496a9b7.jpg



The original tri-motor twin-boom aircraft was the Caproni Ca-3 from which a number of aircraft were developed. One being the Caproni Ca-36:-

http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c6...ps4057ff6a.jpg

Another development was the larger Ca-42 of which 3 examples were sent to the USA:-
http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c6...ps10894ce8.jpg

The construction of the aircraft in Post #44 is very different. It is a very interesting series of photographs. Many thanks for posting them.

One thing about Aviation History and Nostalgia one learns something everyday. Doing further digging on the mystery aircraft posted at Post #44 and Graeme's comment that it could be a Standard Caproni I found the following photograph:-

http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c6...psfcacf309.jpg

This aircraft is reported to be a Caproni ca.5, or Caproni 600 hp, was designed in 1917 as a replacement for the old and effective Ca.3 bomber. I have also discovered that The aircraft in ed's photograph may well be a Caproni Ca.5 if so I would say it is a very rare photograph.

What made me think of the Caproni Mel, was this illustration. Not exactly the same as Ed's photo but the struts around the engine and on the fuselage under the wing looked remarkably similar...

http://i43.tinypic.com/efhz69.jpg

Good find Graham. It looks a very interesting aircraft. I am not sure I would have liked to be the gunner standing in that "basket" affair right above the engine and propeller.

I believe this aircraft was also known as the Caproni Ca-44

Very interesting story included in this article regarding the delivery of the Caproni 600
World War I: American Caproni Pilots in Italy

Last Two Of the WW1 Series
 

Looking at this aircraft plus some of the descriptions of others it makes me wonder where they found people with the courage and skill to actually fly some of these airplanes. They all just look like little box kites compared to what even I flew which now look pretty primitive.

http://i944.photobucket.com/albums/a...ps653c1ce4.jpg

Last One
 

This shows how diverse the field was at the time. What an exciting period.

http://i944.photobucket.com/albums/a...ps3d3a7ffc.jpg

Thanks to You All
 

I still have a couple of old photos that I am going to post here because I need a little help with them but this is the last of the WW1 series that were given to me by my friend. I have searched through everything I could find to identify the unit or location of the Jenny's but have so far come up empty handed.

Everyone who has helped me and contributed to this conversation are certainly welcome to use these pictures as you see fit with no credits to anyone. The photographer is in all likelihood deceased long ago and my friend would be proud to have them exposed to anyone interested.

Regards,
Ed

Great photos Ed! :ok:

New one on me...the monster in your first photo....The 1920 Johns Multiplane?

15 Early Aeroplanes With More Wings Than A Bucket Of Fried Chicken | Gizmodo Australia

Cheers
Graeme

Thanks Mel
 

Very interesting story indeed, considering the type of aircraft and the objects in the way. Many thanks for bringing it to my attention.

It certainly looks like it, Graeme.

I'm envisaging the following conversation:

"Chief, she's not flying straight. Could you check the rigging?"

"Yes, Sir. It might take a couple of weeks, though". ;)

Roundup
 

Here is the link to the pictures. It seems like such a small collection considering all of the work that I put you all through! I am sure that you will find some errors so don't hesitate to call me on them.

Regards,
Ed

Aircraft of WW1 by sillohed | Photobucket

I don't know if aircraft have published coefficients of drag, but I would love to see the figure quoted for that Johns Multiplane.

I42 - it appears that question was asked on several occasions already, the difference being that each previous answer was "Let's try adding another wing".

Quote:
I don't know if aircraft have published coefficients of drag, but I would love to see the figure quoted for that Johns Multiplane.

if you remember that calculating non-dimensional drag coefficients involves the wing area as a divisor, you'll easily understand that huge drag would, in this case, nevertheless give a very low Cd.;)