SUMMARY / RELATED TOPICS

Fokker Dr.I

The Fokker Dr. I known as the Fokker Triplane, was a World War I fighter aircraft built by Fokker-Flugzeugwerke; the Dr. I saw widespread service in the spring of 1918, it became famous as the aircraft in which Manfred von Richthofen gained his last 19 victories, in which he was killed on 21 April 1918. In February 1917, the Sopwith Triplane began to appear over the Western Front. Despite its single Vickers machine gun armament, the Sopwith swiftly proved itself superior to the more armed Albatros fighters in use by the Luftstreitkräfte. In April 1917, Anthony Fokker viewed a captured Sopwith Triplane while visiting Jasta 11. Upon his return to the Schwerin factory, Fokker instructed Reinhold Platz to build a triplane, but gave him no further information about the Sopwith design. Platz responded with the V.4, a small, rotary-powered triplane with a steel tube fuselage and thick cantilever wings, first developed during Fokker's government-mandated collaboration with Hugo Junkers. Initial tests revealed that the V.4 had unacceptably high control forces resulting from the use of unbalanced ailerons and elevators.

Instead of submitting the V.4 for a type test, Fokker produced a revised prototype designated V.5. The most notable changes were the introduction of horn-balanced ailerons and elevators, as well as longer-span wings; the V.5 featured interplane struts, which were not necessary from a structural standpoint, but which minimized wing flexing. On 14 July 1917, Idflieg issued an order for 20 pre-production aircraft; the V.5 prototype, serial 101/17, was tested to destruction at Adlershof on 11 August 1917. The first two pre-production triplanes were designated F. I, in accord with Idflieg's early class prefix for triplanes; these aircraft, serials 102/17 and 103/17, were the only machines to receive the F. I designation and could be distinguished from subsequent aircraft by a slight convex curve of the tailplane's leading edge; the two aircraft were sent to Jastas 10 and 11 for combat evaluation, arriving at Markebeeke, Belgium on 28 August 1917. Richthofen first flew 102/17 on 1 September 1917 and shot down two enemy aircraft in the next two days.

He reported to the Kogenluft that the F. I was superior to the Sopwith Triplane. Richthofen recommended that fighter squadrons be reequipped with the new aircraft as soon as possible; the combat evaluation came to an abrupt conclusion when Oberleutnant Kurt Wolff, Staffelführer of Jasta 11, was shot down in 102/17 on 15 September, Leutnant Werner Voss, Staffelführer of Jasta 10, was killed in 103/17 on 23 September. The remaining pre-production aircraft, designated Dr. I, were delivered to Jasta 11. Idflieg issued a production order for 100 triplanes in September, followed by an order for 200 in November. Apart from the straight leading edge of the tailplane, these aircraft were identical to the F. I; the primary distinguishing feature was the addition of wingtip skids, which proved necessary because the aircraft was tricky to land and prone to ground looping. In October, Fokker began delivering the Dr. I to squadrons within Richthofen's Jagdgeschwader I. Compared with the Albatros and Pfalz fighters, the Dr.

I offered exceptional maneuverability. Though the ailerons were not effective, the rudder and elevator controls were light and powerful. Rapid turns to the right, were facilitated by the triplane's marked directional instability. Vizefeldwebel Franz Hemer of Jasta 6 said, "The triplane was my favorite fighting machine because it had such wonderful flying qualities. I could let myself stunt – looping and rolling – and could avoid an enemy by diving with perfect safety; the triplane had to be given up because although it was maneuverable, it was no longer fast enough." As Hemer noted, the Dr. I was slower than contemporary Allied fighters in level flight and in a dive. While initial rate of climb was excellent, performance fell off at higher altitudes because of the low compression of the Oberursel Ur. II, a clone of the Le Rhône 9J rotary engine; as the war continued, chronic shortages of castor oil made rotary operation difficult. The poor quality of German ersatz lubricant resulted in many engine failures during the summer of 1918.

The Dr. I suffered other deficiencies; the pilot's view was poor during landing. The cockpit was furnished with materials of inferior quality. Furthermore, the proximity of the gun butts to the cockpit, combined with inadequate crash padding, left the pilot vulnerable to serious head injury in the event of a crash landing. On 29 October 1917, Leutnant der Reserve Heinrich Gontermann, Staffelführer of Jasta 15, was performing aerobatics when his triplane broke up. Gontermann was killed in the ensuing crash landing. Leutnant der Reserve Günther Pastor of Jasta 11 was killed two days when his triplane broke up in level flight. Inspection of the wrecked aircraft showed. Examination of other high-time triplanes confirmed these findings. On 2 November, Idflieg grounded all remaining triplanes pending an inquiry. Idflieg convened a Sturzkommission which concluded that poor construction and lack of waterproofing had allowed moisture to damage the wing structure; this caused the wing ribs to the ailerons to break away in flight.

In response to the crash investigation, Fokker was forced to improve quality control on the production line varnishing of the wing spars and ribs, to combat moisture. Fokker strengthened the rib structures and the attachment of the auxiliary spars to the ribs. Existing triplanes were modified at Fokker's expense. After testing a modified wing at Adlershof, Idflieg autho

Tomol

Tomols are plank-built boats and used by the Chumash and Tongva Native Americans in the Santa Barbara and Los Angeles area. They were called ti'aat by the Tongva. Tomols are 8–30 feet long, they were important as both tribes relied on the sea for sustenance. Tomols were preferably built out of redwood; when supplies of redwood were lacking, local native pine was used. When splitting the wood the crafters would seek straight planks without knotholes sand them with sharkskin. To bind the wood together, small holes were drilled in the planks so they could be lashed to one another; the seams were caulked with'yop', a mixture of hard tar and pine pitch melted and boiled. Red paint and shell mosaics were added as decorations. Tomols were propelled with kayak-like paddles with the user in a crouching position, unlike kayaks where sitting is the norm, they were maneuverable. The Chumash and Tongva used them to paddle to the Channel Islands through long-established routes, they were so useful as to give rise to a new class, most notably shown in such guilds as the Brotherhood of the Tomol.

The Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History, the Santa Barbara Maritime Museum, The Chumash Maritime Association of California house tomols built by Chumash descendants. Https://web.archive.org/web/20040626200523/http://www.mms.gov/omm/pacific/kids/watercraft.htm Californian Indian Watercraft by Richard W Cunningham 1989 Tomol: Chumash Watercraft as Described in the Ethnographic Notes of John P Harrington, 1978. This book lists 7 pages of references

Queen Elizabeth-class aircraft carrier

The Queen Elizabeth class is a class of two aircraft carriers of the United Kingdom's Royal Navy. The lead ship, HMS Queen Elizabeth, was named on 4 July 2014, in honour of Elizabeth I, she was commissioned on 7 December 2017, with an initial operating capability expected in 2018. The second, HMS Prince of Wales, was launched on 21 December 2017, was commissioned on 10 December 2019. At the NATO 2014 Wales summit, the Prime Minister David Cameron announced that the second carrier would be brought into service, ending years of uncertainty surrounding its future; this was confirmed by the November 2015 Government Strategic Defence Review, with both carriers entering service, one being available at any time. The contract for the vessels was announced on 25 July 2007, by the Secretary of State for Defence, Des Browne, ending several years of delay over cost issues and British naval shipbuilding restructuring; the contracts were signed one year on 3 July 2008, with the Aircraft Carrier Alliance, a partnership formed with Babcock International, Thales Group, A&P Group, Rosyth Dockyard, the UK Ministry of Defence and BAE Systems.

The vessels have a displacement of 65,000 tonnes, but the design anticipates added weight over the lifetime of the ships. The ships will have a Carrier Air Wing of up to forty aircraft, they are the largest warships constructed for the Royal Navy. The projected cost of the programme is £6.2 billion. Both carriers were completed as planned, in a Short Take-Off and Vertical Landing configuration, deploying the Lockheed Martin F-35B. Following the 2010 Strategic Defence and Security Review, the British government had intended to purchase the F-35C carrier version of this aircraft, adopted plans for Prince of Wales to be built to a Catapult Assisted Take Off Barrier Arrested Recovery configuration. After the projected costs of the CATOBAR system rose to around twice the original estimate, the government announced that it would revert to the original design on 10 May 2012. In 1996, the British Defence Secretary Michael Portillo signed a letter of intent with his French equivalent to establish Anglo-French naval study groups, one of, to be about future development of aircraft carriers.

This was followed by the Saint-Malo declaration of 1998, in which Tony Blair and Jacques Chirac agreed to work together on an integrated European Union defence force. In December 1999, the European Council established the Helsinki Headline Goal, which focussed on creating a European Union Rapid Reaction Force to operate at the global level. One element of such a force was to be three large aircraft carriers, two provided by the Royal Navy and one by the French. According to this plan, other western European navies were to provide the escort cover needed by the carriers. In May 1997, the newly elected Labour government led by Tony Blair launched the Strategic Defence Review, which re-evaluated every weapon system active or in procurement, with the exception of the Eurofighter Typhoon and the Vanguard-class ballistic missile submarines; the report, published in July 1998, stated that aircraft carriers offer the following: Ability to operate offensive aircraft overseas, when foreign bases may not be available early in a conflict All required space and infrastructure, as where foreign bases are available infrastructure is lacking A coercive and deterrent effect when deployed to a trouble spotThe report concluded: "the emphasis is now on increased offensive air power, an ability to operate the largest possible range of aircraft in the widest possible range of roles.

When the current carrier force reaches the end of its planned life, we plan to replace it with two larger vessels. Work will now begin to refine our requirements but present thinking suggests that they might be of the order of 30,000–40,000 tonnes and capable of deploying up to 50 aircraft, including helicopters." Initial Ministry of Defence design studies for what was the Invincible class replacement were conducted in the mid-1990s. Options considered at this early stage included the possibilities of lengthening the hulls and extending the life of the existing Invincible class ships, converting commercial ships to carriers, the construction of purpose-built new aircraft carriers. On 25 January 1999, six companies were invited to tender for the assessment phase of the project – Boeing, British Aerospace, Lockheed Martin, Marconi Electronic Systems and Thomson-CSF. On 23 November 1999, the MoD awarded detailed assessment studies to two consortia, one led by BAe and one led by Thomson-CSF; the brief required up to six designs from each consortium with air-groups of thirty to forty Future Joint Combat Aircraft.

The contracts were split into phases. Final carrier design submissions by the two rival industry teams in November 2002 led to a design down-selection decision in January 2003, in which the UK government decided to discontinue the BAE Systems carrier designs and to proceed instead with the rival ‘adaptable’ carrier design offered by the Thales team; the political decision was taken at this point to progress CVF through a joint Aircraft Carrier Alliance team formed of representatives fr