# WW1 Bombers.



## cheddar cheese (May 20, 2004)

What were WW1 bomberes like? any pics would be good too


----------



## kiwimac (May 20, 2004)

Depends on when in the war you start looking. Let me post a few for you!!! 



> The Bombers of World War I
> 
> Bombing did not play much of a role in World War I, though the attempt to build planes capable of carrying large loads did advance aviation technology, particularly toward the end of the war. The earliest bombs used in the war weren?t bombs at all, but thin steel darts called fléchettes, dropped over soldiers in trenches or on enemy aircraft. The Germans used the Zeppelin effectively in bombing Paris in 1914 (though more as a psychological weapon), and attempted to use Zeppelins to bomb London in May 1915, but the ships were so easy to spot and bring down, and so costly when lost, that the bombing soon stopped. (In fact, the British had successfully bombed the Zeppelin sheds at Friedrichshafen, but soon determined that it was better to allow the airships to cross the Channel and be shot down over British soil.)
> 
> ...



Source: http://www.pilotfriend.freeola.com/...tory/airplane at war/airplane at war menu.htm









> Patterned along the lines of the Caproni Ca.3 series of biplane bombers, the larger triplanes of the Ca.4 series were designed to be more effective in combat. Sometimes armed with up to eight machine guns, these cumbersome bombers were capable of accurately delivering large payloads of bombs to distant enemy targets. Although mainly used at night, they took part in daylight raids towards the end of the war. Of thirty-two Ca.42s manufactured in 1918, six of them were used by the Royal Naval Air Service.
> 
> Country: Italy
> Manufacturer: Società di Aviazione Ing. Caproni
> ...



_Same source as photo_








> In late 1916, the demand for a durable observation aircraft capable of performing ground attack missions led to the introduction of the Junkers J.I. Developed in early 1917, it was the world's first all-metal aircraft produced in quantity. Eliminating the need for external bracing wires, the fuselage, wings and tail were constructed of Duralumin while the engine and two-man crew were protected by a nose-capsule of 5-mm chrome-nickel sheet-steel. Although this unique design resulted in a strong and durable aircraft capable of surviving the effects of enemy ground fire, the Junkers J.I was heavy, cumbersome and took forever to get off the ground. The only surviving example of the J.I biplane was sent to Canada in 1919 and is now part of the National Aviation Museum's collection.
> 
> Country: Germany
> Manufacturer: Junkers Flugzeug-Werke AG
> ...



_Same source as photo_








> Country: Great Britain
> Manufacturer: Handley Page Ltd.
> Type: Heavy Bomber
> Entered Service: 1918
> ...



_ibid_








> The Handley Page O/100 biplane was the first true heavy bomber manufactured by the British. Specifically designed for the purpose of bombing Germany, an order for forty aircraft was placed while the design was still on the drawing board. On 1 January 1917, four new O/100 bombers took off for delivery to France. Unfortunately, one of the new bombers was captured by the Germans when its pilot inadvertently landed at an enemy aerodrome.
> 
> Country: Great Britain
> Manufacturer: Handley Page Ltd.
> ...



_ibid_








> The Airco D.H.9a biplane bomber was an enlarged version of the D.H.9 with much needed improvements. It was equipped with the more efficient American Liberty engine, had a nose mounted radiator and even featured a spare tire mounted under the fuselage. Although a bit shorter than the D.H.9, its larger wings provided more lift for carrying heavier payloads. The D.H.9a entered service too late to have much of an impact on the outcome of the war.
> 
> Country: Great Britain
> Manufacturer: Aircraft Manufacturing Co. Ltd.
> ...



_ibid_

And there are many, many more!

Kiwimac


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (May 23, 2004)

the 0/400's pretty good.............


----------



## cheddar cheese (May 30, 2004)

cheers, i rather like that triplane one


----------



## GermansRGeniuses (Jun 2, 2004)

cheddar cheese said:


> cheers, i rather like that triplane one


You would, it's Italian.


----------



## plan_D (Jun 2, 2004)

I'll have to disagree with the first part 'Bombers did not play a big part in World War I' maybe as a large cumbersome plane they did not but bombs dropped from aircraft did. 
A great disruption to the ground forces especially in the reserves being brought up to plug the holes. They provided great support to any operation, and after 1917 any sane Commander used aircraft to attack the ground and this would require bombs.


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jun 3, 2004)

GermansRGeniuses said:


> cheddar cheese said:
> 
> 
> > cheers, i rather like that triplane one
> ...



honestly, i didnt know that


----------



## GermansRGeniuses (Jun 3, 2004)

Neither did I, I had to read the text myself.


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jun 4, 2004)

just shows how much i love the italians


----------



## kiwimac (Jun 6, 2004)

Fact is that Bombers _qua_ heavy bombers did not really begin to develop until they had engines powerful enough to support them, so 1917 onwards.

Light bombers were a very different thing. More of 'em than you could shake a stick at.

Kiwimac


----------



## cls12vg30 (Jun 6, 2004)

Handley Page O/400 bomber, one of the larger ones of WWI:





And of course the German Gotha bomber:


----------



## plan_D (Jun 7, 2004)

You keep it at heavy bombers, and they could be no dispute. Bombers alone is a different matter.


----------



## Crazy (Jun 7, 2004)

They had a Caproni Ca.3 at Dayton AFB. Wow.   They are massive, impressive pieces of work 8)


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jun 8, 2004)

cool 8) did you get any pictures of it?


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jun 20, 2004)

the thing about WWI bombers was that they were just as fast as the fighters of the time .......................


----------



## Anonymous (Sep 28, 2004)

cheddar cheese said:


> cheers, i rather like that triplane one



SO do I, that i s why I built this. It spans 6 feet with a 5.5"wing chord and 3 Saito 4 stroke engines. Sounds great. Flies great. Lands not so great.


----------



## cheddar cheese (Sep 28, 2004)

Wow  Thats one hell of a machine  I must congratulate you 8)


----------



## Crazy (Sep 28, 2004)

Impressive piece of work there, mate!


----------



## cheddar cheese (Sep 28, 2004)

Im really jealous now.


----------



## HealzDevo (May 24, 2005)

The Bombers were very primitive, it was hard to hit your target. There was no radar, no laser, no blind-bombing sights, just a pair of binoculars and your own two eyes to conduct the bombing. Bombs were dropped on dead-reckoning and map reading.


----------



## jrk (Jul 26, 2005)

i think the dh4 was the best bomber of ww1.quick enough to get to the target and depending on crew able to fight its way out of trouble.also the fastest bomber of ww1.


----------



## Sour_kraut (Jul 26, 2005)

correct me if I'm wrong,but i beleive the dh.4 was the RFC bomber with the engine in the back and the gunner in the nose...It may have been fast but the german fighters were faster,and i know (from experience on flight simulators) that a quick burst in the rear where the engine is can put that machine out of order.


----------



## Glider (Jul 27, 2005)

Sour. The DH4 was a traditional layout with the engine in front and the gunner at the back. With a top speed of 140 (with the Eagle engine) it was a lot faster than most fighters who normally had a top speed of 120. Not all I admit, but most


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jul 27, 2005)

and don't base eveything on flight sims lol........................


----------



## JCS (Jul 27, 2005)

Sour_kraut said:


> and i know (from experience on flight simulators)



 I always find that funny when somebody says something like that....


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Jul 27, 2005)

JCS said:


> Sour_kraut said:
> 
> 
> > and i know (from experience on flight simulators)
> ...



I'm a flight instructor - how do you think I feel when I hear a student say that!


----------



## JCS (Jul 27, 2005)




----------



## Smokey (Jul 27, 2005)

*Eres a vid of a Zeppelin Staacken XIV*







http://www.aeiou.at/aeiou.film.f/f041a <----Clicky





Zeppelin Staacken
http://aircraft.lintec.ru/src/mod/zest_r.htm





Linke-Hoffman R.I
http://www.raravia.com/lhri.htm






Linke-Hoffman R.II
http://www.overthefront.com/issues/01_4.html

The Riesenflugzeug (Giant aircraft) Linke-Hoffman R.II 55/17 seen under construction at the Linke- Hoffman Werke in Breslau. *This aircraft is purportedly the largest single airscrewed aircraft ever built. (The wheels were 5ft. in diameter!) Four 260 h.p. Mercedes D.IVa engines were mounted in the nose section of the fuselage in tandem, and drove a massive propeller at 545 rpm.* The design philosopy was based on the successful C type aircraft design and enlarged upon. The aircraft was finished after the Armistice but flew and fulfilled it's design expectations. (photo via the W.R. Puglisi collection.)

Nice site about alleged paper projects and actual aircraft
http://www.bravenewworld.demon.co.uk/lists/germangiants/





Siemens-Schuckert R VIII



> This six-engined giant was intended to carry a wire-guided missile. It's a pity that it so narrowly missed its chance to get into the air. It had undertaken a series of taxiing trials, SSW R VIIIand was preparing for its first flight when a propeller came apart, causing great damage on the left hand side. This was now 1919 and despite thoughts of conversion into a civil transport, it wasn't repaired and the second machine was never finished. With a wingspan of 48m/157ft it was the largest aeroplane built by anyone during the war, and the biggest biplane ever built. What's more, I've seen a current Siemens booklet, Milestones, which asserts that the R VIII did indeed fly. Doubtful, but I'd love to believe it.




http://boards.historychannel.com/thread.jspa?forumID=88&threadID=300026369

The raid on London on January 28, 1918, was carried out by three Gothas and one Giant. The Gotha twin-motor pusher biplane is well known, but the 'Giant', built by various firms, including Zeppelin and Siemens, was almost twice as big as the Gotha and could carry a bomb load six times larger over a much greater range. Depending on the manufacturer, it had anywhere from three to six motors. It was the Giant that caused the damage.
On the January 28th raid the Giant carried 1200 kg of bombs, two of them of the 300 kg type. One of these was dropped, not upon, but next to Messrs. Odhams Printing Works in Long Acre. The resulting explosion was thus directed at the basement, which, since the building had 9" concrete floors, had been used as a shelter. An outbreak of fire caused the death of those imprisoned in the debris.
*On the return trip, the Giant ran into barrage balloon cables and actually carried away two of them but managed to land safely.*

The aircraft was a Staaken R.VI, serial R.39, commanded by Hptm. von Bentivegni.





Caproni Ca.36 Bomber


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Jul 27, 2005)

Neat Stuff Smokey!!!!


----------



## Smokey (Jul 28, 2005)

Insane WW1 story






http://leachintl.com/heritage/heritage-6-2000.html

KAZAKOV AND HIS KATZE

The startled Germans couldn’t believe their eyes. Behind them, trailing a five-pronged anchor and an iron ball, was a Russian pilot in a Morone scout. Before they could get away, the Russian struck from above and behind, swinging the anchor on its steel cable. As he turned, it hooked into the left wing of their two-seater Albatros DVa. For a moment, the two planes were locked in combat, then the cable tore loose and the iron ball completely shattered the wing. The Albatros collapsed and fell.

Staff-Captain Alexander A. Kazalov, using a weapon unique in the history of aerial fighting, had scored another victory on the Russian front. It was June 1915.

The anchor of “katze” was part of an experiment that had interested Kazakov during his days at the Sevastopol Flying School, founded by the Grand Duke Alexander to train pilots for the Imperial Russian Air Service. To the katze, an old form of German battering ram, Kazakov added a medium-sized iron ball weighing about 20 pounds, which acted like a sinker above a fishhook. It was Kazakov’s last experiment with an untried weapon, but it was not his last aerial adventure. Before his career ended, Kazakov had scored 32 kills. He held every known Russian decoration for gallantry, received the French Croix de Guerre and served as a major in the British army, which awarded him the Distinguished Service Order.

The plane Kazakov used in his katze attack was a French-built Morone-Souinier scout, a wire-braced, mid-wing monoplane that first saw military service in 1914, principally with the French and British. It was powered by an 80-hp Le Rohne engine to a maximum speed of only 78 mph. Fitted with a 110-hp Le Rhone in 1916, the Morone reached a top speed of 102 mph.

The best known of Russian World War I aces, Kazakov was quiet and modest – a born pilot gifted with a combination of daring and discipline. He was a cavalry officer when Germany declared war on Russia in August 1914, but quickly transferred to the air service.

In the spring of 1916, Kazakov was named to command Russia’s 19th squadron, the famed “death of glory” squadron formed on the Central Front. The 19th, used as a shock unit, preceded von Richthofen’s “Flying Circus” by nearly a year.

With revolution rife in his country and an armistice signed between the Central Powers and Bolshevik Russia, Kazakov and several Russian war pilots joined the Slave-British aviation group in 1917 to fight against the Bolos.

When the Allied forces withdrew from Murmansk in the summer of 1919, Kazakov turned down a post in London to remain with his squadron. He and two comrades decided to join the White Russian army in Siberia, and, on August 1 took off from Bereznik Aerodrome. His Sopwith Camel collapsed in mid-air, and Russia’s leading ace was killed instantly.


----------



## evangilder (Jul 28, 2005)

Interesting. What an idea!


----------



## plan_D (Jul 28, 2005)

I know, I've always thought the trailing bombers of a formation could trail steel cable out the back to cover the formation. Obviously they would be able to winch the cable in and out, it'd have been a great idea. Seeing all the interceptors getting tangled up and then blasted by the gunners.


----------



## Smokey (Jul 28, 2005)

Steel cables were no guarantee against the large planes of WW1......



> http://boards.historychannel.com/thread.jspa?forumID=88&threadID=300026369
> 
> The raid on London on January 28, 1918, was carried out by three Gothas and one Giant. The Gotha twin-motor pusher biplane is well known, but the 'Giant', built by various firms, including Zeppelin and Siemens, was almost twice as big as the Gotha and could carry a bomb load six times larger over a much greater range. Depending on the manufacturer, it had anywhere from three to six motors. It was the Giant that caused the damage.
> On the January 28th raid the Giant carried 1200 kg of bombs, two of them of the 300 kg type. One of these was dropped, not upon, but next to Messrs. Odhams Printing Works in Long Acre. The resulting explosion was thus directed at the basement, which, since the building had 9" concrete floors, had been used as a shelter. An outbreak of fire caused the death of those imprisoned in the debris.
> *On the return trip, the Giant ran into barrage balloon cables and actually carried away two of them but managed to land safely.*



The aircraft was a Staaken R.VI, serial R.39, commanded by Hptm. von Bentivegni.





Zeppelin Staaken R.VI

http://www.squadron.com/ItemDetails.asp?item=rd0055

http://www.darkmatterinc.tv/rmipms/ZepplinRVI.htm


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jul 28, 2005)

FLYBOYJ said:


> JCS said:
> 
> 
> > Sour_kraut said:
> ...



At ATC we get taught how to fly on FS2002...I suppose its useful for navigation techniques before they let us up in a real plane.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Jul 28, 2005)

cheddar cheese said:


> FLYBOYJ said:
> 
> 
> > JCS said:
> ...



I have FS 2002 - I used it for intrument training - very good tool. Its good for navigation, instrument work and "flying by the numbers." After that that's it! I have found that students who think they know how to fly based on PC SIM experience flair high when landing, get spooked when doing stalls, and have a hard time doing steep bank turns (30 degree bank angle) because they have forces acting on their bodies while in flight.

CC - What's ATC?


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jul 28, 2005)

Air Training Cadets.........


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Jul 28, 2005)

the lancaster kicks ass said:


> Air Training Cadets.........



Sought of like our Civil Air Patrol here in the states?!?

Do they provide flight training?


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jul 28, 2005)

Air Training Corps, actually 

Yeah I think so...Yeah we get flight training, then they let us up to fly in a Grob Tutor. When im 16, I can train to get my Glider wings! 8)


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Jul 28, 2005)

cheddar cheese said:


> Air Training Corps, actually
> 
> Yeah I think so...Yeah we get flight training, then they let us up to fly in a Grob Tutor. When im 16, I can train to get my Glider wings! 8)



THAT'S GREAT CC! The Tutor is a fun little airplane. Learing to fly a sailplane makes you really proficent in other aircraft. Are you hoping to eventually enter the military?


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jul 28, 2005)

Ahhhh I really dont know. Im in two minds about it.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Jul 28, 2005)

cheddar cheese said:


> Ahhhh I really dont know. Im in two minds about it.



It's a big commitment. To work in aviation you really got to love aircraft. Here in the states the job market really fluctuates, that's one of the reasons why I became a flight instructor, something else to fall back on.


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jul 28, 2005)

Id wanna be a pilot, but my medical history is bound to prevent that. I dunno whether I wanna go through the hassle of it all to just be disappointed.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Jul 28, 2005)

cheddar cheese said:


> Id wanna be a pilot, but my medical history is bound to prevent that. I dunno whether I wanna go through the hassle of it all to just be disappointed.



What do you have (had) wrong, if you don't mind me asking?


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jul 28, 2005)

Im epileptic.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Jul 28, 2005)

Yes, I would think that would probably disqualify you form the military. In the civilian ranks however, you still might be able to learn how to fly. I know over here the FAA has relaxed many of the rules regarding epilepsy and diabetes. I know the FAA over here and the JAA and CAB usually walk to the same beat on many issues like this.


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jul 28, 2005)

I am actually cleared of it - it was detected when I was young and Im not on meds anymore, and it wasnt serious in the first place. But because its a Mental Illness its possible that it could return, consindering that many of my relatives in the same generation have epilepsy.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Jul 28, 2005)

I just checked with some folks here at the USAFA - if you had it when you where young and cleared and are not on meds, you are good to go. On the civilian side, the FAA takes into consideration your last seizure. One of the guys that work for me was an Alaskan Bush pilot. He actually knew a pilot who had epilepsy and had no problem retaining his medical.


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jul 28, 2005)

Wow that sounds promising...and seeing as my last seizure was way back in early 2003, and that curing me was no problem I can get my hopes up again. Thanks, FBJ!


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Jul 28, 2005)

Do your homework about it first. If down the road you decide on the military, you could probably access policy on the internet and cite that policy and regulations when speaking to a recruiter. If you go for a PPL, check your CAA regulations and see what they have to say. Many times people will say "no" because they don't understand the requirements and don't want to do the research....


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Jul 28, 2005)

FLYBOYJ said:


> I just checked with some folks here at the USAFA - if you had it when you where young and cleared and are not on meds, you are good to go. On the civilian side, the FAA takes into consideration your last seizure. One of the guys that work for me was an Alaskan Bush pilot. He actually knew a pilot who had epilepsy and had no problem retaining his medical.



Hey - I double checked on this and the feedback I got was it's basically going to be up to the doctor that reviews your case. If you been cleared and are not on any meds you may have a good chance. On the negative, the doctor may not want to accept the liability if anything turns up later.

I don't know how a case like this would go over in the UK, but the best thing I could tell you is keep the faith until you get a solid no!


----------



## plan_D (Jul 29, 2005)

When my brother was in ATC, they got to fly the Chimpmunk and Bulldog. (random note there)


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Jul 29, 2005)

plan_D said:


> When my brother was in ATC, they got to fly the Chimpmunk and Bulldog. (random note there)



There's a guy who imported about 10 Bulldogs, left them in RAF markings, would love to get my hands on one!


----------



## plan_D (Jul 29, 2005)

RAF Finningley was SAR-HQ and a training base when we arrived. They had all the training aircraft for flight crews (except pilots); Domonies, Chimpmunks, Bulldogs, Jet Streams, Jet Provost and Techanos. The Bulldogs and Chimpmunks were soley for the ATC.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Jul 29, 2005)

Very cool - Jet Provost, there's a few of them flying around here.


----------



## plan_D (Jul 29, 2005)

They're freakin' dump. The Techano was sweet to watch flying and I got to sit in one...oh yes, I've sat in a plane that no one has even heard of.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Jul 29, 2005)




----------



## Smokey (Jul 29, 2005)

I love the Tucano, its very sleek. They occasionally fly over the nearby hills quite low. The noise of the turboprop is damn loud
Its cool to have an airbrake on a prop plane






http://modelingmadness.com/reviews/mod/johnsontucano.htm


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Jul 29, 2005)

Nice!


----------



## plan_D (Jul 30, 2005)

God damn it, he's heard of them!  

Yeah, they are mean little machines. I used to go into RAF Finningley to visit my dad after school (the guards just used to let me walk right in) in his Nimrod hut at the end of the runway where there was him, a rigger, a sooty, a fairey and chief tech. keepin' this Nimrod runnin' for training the flight radar op lads. Anywho, I just used to sit outside and watchin' them take off, land and buzzin' around. 

Obviously they were all red and white in those days.


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jul 30, 2005)

Why do you think no-one knows what Tucano's are? Even I know what they are


----------



## plan_D (Jul 30, 2005)

You're in the ATC, I should hope you freakin' do! They're nice and roomy inside, or maybe it's just 'cos I was like 6 when I sat in one. 

"Do not touch the black and yellow handle!!!!" He was one angry man...probably because I kept stroking the handle.


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jul 30, 2005)

No ive known they existed for ages! Ive only been going ATC for 2 weeks


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Jul 30, 2005)

cheddar cheese said:


> Why do you think no-one knows what Tucano's are? Even I know what they are



A few of them fly around in the states. Here a we use this - similar but I perfer the Tucano.  

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T-6_Texan_II


----------



## carpenoctem1689 (Nov 21, 2005)

What of the gotha bombers? didnt they bomb london for a short time in daylight and then when the british were able to get fighters up to theyre altitude switch to less effective night harassment operations? I cant for whatever reason, due most likely to my less than state of the art computer look at the pages between 2 and 3. So i have to ask now, and risk looking pretty damn stupid, oh well. I saw a picture of an 0/100 with the back of the aircraft being held up by ten men, supporting it, unloaded of course, on there shoulders. Just shows how the technology change from then to now.


----------



## HealzDevo (Jan 12, 2006)

What about the WW1 Avro 533 Manchester Heavy Bomber? It seems to be a relatively little known bomber with few surviving today and next to no photos on the Internet of it. Perhaps that is a sign of how rare it really was. Anyone got any good photos of it, as I was hoping if I could get some good photos I could get a Civ IV unit creator to turn it into a WW1 Heavy Bomber for me to insert in the Unit Upgrades chain when we get the SDK that allows custom units which hopefully should be soon.


----------



## Chief (Jul 12, 2006)

Personnally, I'm a fan of the Handley Page V/1500. That thing was huge.
My second favorite would be the Gotha as it didn't matter were you struck there was always someone there just waiting to tare you a new one. Although, I have to say I hate having to bring those things down on Red Baron 2. Those things are almost impossible to bring down unless you choose to use infinite ammo. They could've used those as heavy fighters if they wanted.


----------



## Glider (Jul 12, 2006)

Handley Page 0400 and the DH4 must be about the best WW1 bombers around.
The 0400 was nicknamed the Bloody Paralyser because of the size of the bomb it could carry. If I remember correctly it was around 1,700lb which when you compare it to the standard 25lb bomb of the time, when 100lb bombs being considered large gives understanding to the meaning.

PS one often forgotten fact the 0400 had folding wings.


----------



## [email protected] (Aug 25, 2009)

I have a collection of WWI1 electric r/c WWI1 planes and would like to add this bomber to them. I saw it on the history channel one time and just loved it. Would you know where I might find a set of planes? I am going to try to keep the wing span in the 5ft rang. I have been looking for them but can't seem to find the right bomber or one that looks like this one.
Thank You for your time and help
Tom
email [email protected]


----------



## B-17engineer (Aug 25, 2009)

I like the Caproni Ca. 1. It was a great bomber, for the time it did have range and could fly pretty high. 

* Crew: 4
* Length: 11.05 m (36 ft 3 in)
* Wingspan: 22.74 m (74 ft 7 in)
* Height: 3.70 m (12 ft 2 in)
* Wing area: 95.6 m² (1,029 ft²)
* Empty weight: 3,302 kg (7,264 lb)
* Gross weight: 4,000 kg (8,800 lb)
* Powerplant: 3 × Fiat A.10, 75 kW (100 hp) each

Performance

* Maximum speed: 120 km/h (75 mph)
* Range: 550 km (344 miles)
* Service ceiling: 4,000 m (13,120 ft)

Armament

* 2 × 6.5 mm FIAT-Revelli machine guns
* Bombs mounted under the hull

That's from Caproni Ca.1 (1914) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## [email protected] (Aug 25, 2009)

I have a collection of WWI1 electric r/c WWI1 planes and would like to add this bomber to them. I saw it on the history channel one time and just loved it. Would you know where I might find a set of planes? I am going to try to keep the wing span in the 5ft rang. I have been looking for them but can't seem to find the right bomber or one that looks like this one.
Thank You for your time and help
Tom


----------



## Graeme (Aug 25, 2009)

[email protected] said:


> I have a collection of WWI1 electric r/c WWI1 planes and would like to add this bomber to them. I saw it on the history channel one time and just loved it. Would you know where I might find a set of planes? I am going to try to keep the wing span in the 5ft rang. I have been looking for them but can't seem to find the right bomber or one that looks like this one.
> Thank You for your time and help
> Tom



Tom it's the Caproni Ca 36. Plenty of 3-view line drawings about but would they provide enough detail?

*Caproni Ca 36*


----------



## sergio_vitalio (Aug 28, 2009)

Caproni Ca.36 The new walkaround by Vladimir Yakubov 
SVSM Gallery :: Caproni CA.36, The National Museum of the USAF, by Vladimir Yakubov


----------



## johnbr (Jul 2, 2018)

*Zeppelin Biplane*

Reactions: Bacon Bacon:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## vikingBerserker (Jul 2, 2018)

Very nice


----------



## Wurger (Jul 2, 2018)




----------



## Graeme (Jul 2, 2018)

johnbr said:


> *Zeppelin Biplane*



Very nice schematics John. 
However the crew layout image belongs to the post-war Breguet 410...

Breguet 410 - Wikipedia


----------



## Zipper730 (Aug 17, 2018)

This is pretty impressive: I wish there were more blueprints that were in such exacting detail.


----------



## Milosh (Aug 21, 2018)

You mean like this Zipper





Google is your friend.


----------



## Milosh (Aug 21, 2018)




----------



## maxmwill (Aug 21, 2018)

cheddar cheese said:


> What were WW1 bomberes like? any pics would be good too


Here's a bomber that might not have been mentioned yet, and it is a stealth bomber, although radar had yet to be developed. "Stealth" in this case refers to the fact that it was covered in transparent fabric so it would be more difficult to see, and the engines were buried, to. The Linke Hofmann R1. It was a failure. 

Linke-Hofmann R.I - Wikipedia

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Like List reactions


----------



## Zipper730 (Aug 21, 2018)

Yeah, everything is measured out


----------



## Glider (Aug 21, 2018)

Another WW1 Bomber for you


----------



## johnbr (Sep 21, 2018)

_ The trial of the first American-built Handley-Page aeroplane, driven by Capt. E.B. Waller, of the British royal air force, yesterday was witnessed by President Wilson and Secretary Baker. A crowd of more than 5,000 greeted the President when he arrived at the polo field in Potomac Park early in the afternoon.



_


----------



## Wurger (Sep 22, 2018)




----------



## nuuumannn (Sep 23, 2018)

World's only surviving D.H.9A




0407 RAFM D.H.9A

FE.2b.




0507 RAFM FE.2b


----------



## Wurger (Sep 23, 2018)




----------



## Gnomey (Sep 23, 2018)

Good shots!


----------



## johnbr (Sep 28, 2018)

*Linke Hoffman, R.II*


----------



## johnbr (Sep 28, 2018)

*Linke Hoffman, R.I*


----------



## Wurger (Sep 28, 2018)




----------



## Gnomey (Sep 30, 2018)

Nice shots!


----------

