Early Phalz D.IIIa

[DMCEOWEN]

Does anybody know how many early Phalz D.IIIa where built with D.III lower wings. Also what jastas they went too. I know jasta 7 and jasta 15/18 had some. I am wondering if jasta 20 could have recieved some. Any help would be greatly appreciated.

[Patrick]

Probably impossible to know exactly. The Frontbestand tables Jack Herris provides on page 154 of his book Pfalz Aircraft of World War I show that as of Oct 31 1917, there were 145 D.IIIs at the front and no D.IIIas. But in Windsock DF 107, Peter Grosz states that the Jasta 24 War Diary mentions a few Pfalz D.IIIa on-hand in September and October of 1917; there was clearly some confusion about recognizing and properly counting the new model. Presumably, early D.IIIa examples with D.III lower wings were one source of this confusion and maybe Jasta 24 had a few like this. Other units may have received them too and counted them as D.IIIs rather than D.IIIas for the Sept-Oct report. As of Dec 31 1917, there were 276 D.IIIs and 114 D.IIIas reported in frontline units.

Herris also states that 4165/17 was the D.IIIa prototype and that production shifted from the D.III to the D.IIIa "approximately" at 4190/17. Both 4165/17 and 4190/17 were part of the same batch of 190 planes with S/Ns 4000/17 to 4190/17. These were all supposed to be D.IIIs, so it's possible that all 25 planes from 4165/17 to 4190/17 had the pointed style lower wings.

But the question remains -- how many of the last 25 planes in this order had the D.IIIa fuselage mods? And, were there a few odd sets of pointed lower wings in inventory that found their way into the next productions batch, S/N 4191/17 to 4299/17, that were all supposed to be D.IIIas?

25-35 planes is probably the maximum number that could have been built in the mixed configuration (D.III lower wings & D.IIIa fuselage), but I can't answer your question with any more precision than that.

[FOKKERJ]

Originally Posted by DMCEOWEN

Does anybody know how many early Phalz D.IIIa where built with D.III lower wings. Also what jastas they went too. I know jasta 7 and jasta 15/18 had some. I am wondering if jasta 20 could have recieved some. Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Hello DMCEOWEN and Patrick,

I haven't proved it yet, but I believe there is a strong possibility that Ltn. Karl Degelowe flew an early Pfalz D.IIIa with the D.III style lower wing.

In the old Profile on Pfalz D.III/D.IIIa I recall it saying that the D.III and the D.IIIa were built pretty much side by side in that the D.IIIa contract was initiated before the D.III contract was fulfilled. That means that they were building both units simultaneously while they were fulfilling both contracts until their obligations were met on the first design. They needed their money and that was how it was done. For the first contract to be canceled, the D.III would have had to be an awfully inferior and or dangerous machine, or the factory would have had to been in a position that they could not fill their orders. Again they needed their revenue. If the powers that were had been better business/money mangers, I'm sure they could have handled this type of problem to the benefit of all. This is just my interpretation of what I have studied and by no means a direct quote. Under the circumstances it makes sense!

HAPPY TRAILS, FOKKERJ

[Dan_San_Abbott]

FokkerJ:
I read your posting and found it interesting. Could you tell your source of data about Pfalz Flugzeugwerke and the managers needing money and the D.III contracts being canceled for the D.IIIa. Could you fill me in on this
on this.
Blue skies,
Dan-San

[FOKKERJ]

Originally Posted by Dan_San_Abbott

FokkerJ:
I read your posting and found it interesting. Could you tell your source of data about Pfalz Flugzeugwerke and the managers needing money and the D.III contracts being canceled for the D.IIIa. Could you fill me in on this
on this.
Blue skies,
Dan-San

Hello Dan-San,

All apologies for taking sooo long for a reply to you.
I have not been able to find my PROFILE PUBLICATIONS Pfal D.III, it is probably with several half built Pfalz D.III/IIIa kits that I had to put into storage last year.

From memory, next to the last page (#9?), top right paragraph, under "Production" is an explanation of building D.III's and D.IIIa's simultaneously.
My perception is that they were fulfilling the earlier contract for D.III's while starting on the new and improved D.IIIa. That it would be easy to use some D.III parts on the D.IIIa (lower wing). Did the Prototype D.IIIa have the early or later lower wing? I don't know!

Nobody canceled any contracts to my knowledge.

Of course any business needs to be successful and generate income to not only keep their doors open, but to invest and pursue in new product. Wasn't that a major part of the Aldershof Trials? Regardless of national pride or patriotism, no competent business is going to cancel an existing contract in favor of supplying a superior product. I realize that. They want their product to be the best and most desired. They didn't want to be building other company's designs over their own. I just believe that during a war that the effort should be to provide the best resources available for the most immediate and beneficial outcome.

With that said please take note of the next to last line of what I had said.

Originally Posted by FOKKERJ

Hello DMCEOWEN and Patrick,

I haven't proved it yet, but I believe there is a strong possibility that Ltn. Karl Degelowe flew an early Pfalz D.IIIa with the D.III style lower wing.

In the old Profile on Pfalz D.III/D.IIIa I recall it saying that the D.III and the D.IIIa were built pretty much side by side in that the D.IIIa contract was initiated before the D.III contract was fulfilled. That means that they were building both units simultaneously while they were fulfilling both contracts until their obligations were met on the first design. They needed their money and that was how it was done. For the first contract to be canceled, the D.III would have had to be an awfully inferior and or dangerous machine, or the factory would have had to been in a position that they could not fill their orders. Again they needed their revenue. If the powers that were had been better business/money mangers, I'm sure they could have handled this type of problem to the benefit of all. This is just my interpretation of what I have studied and by no means a direct quote. Under the circumstances it makes sense!

HAPPY TRAILS, FOKKERJ

I hope that this answers any questions that you may have had regarding my earlier remarks. As always I respect and welcome your comments.

Respectfully, Jay

[Dan_San_Abbott]

FokkerJ:
The Pfalz D.III was not a private venture, It was funded by IdFlieg.IdFlieg would award orders to aircraft manufacturer for some number of experimental aircraft, to be designed a developed over some period of time. These prototypes would be tested and developed into production aircraft. IdFlieg would specify the engine to be used. There was no gample by Pfalz on the D.III. This was done to ensure new design developement. Generally there were orders of six to twelve prototypes of progressive designs. The manufacturer as part of this developement had to provide monthly progress reports. Pfalz was providing progress reports to IdFlieg on the Pfalz D.VII, D.VIII, D.IX, D.X, D.XI, these all existed in design and prototypes, of which the D.VIII and the D.XII evolved into production aircraft. This required a substantial design staff, and experimental department to five or six prototypes in design and developement.
The Pfalz Flugzeug Werke production capacity was equal to Albatros in 1918 at 270 aircraft per month.
Because of the complaints and comment from the various Jasta equipped with the Pfalz D.III about sighting problems and cordite fumes, [I]IdFlieg[I] responded by have Pfalz look into improving the design of the D.III, te fuselage was redesigned with machine guns mounted on the upper fuselage, redesign the stabilizer to improve the fight characteristic, , why to change to the lower wing tips, I don't know, one machine was selected in the design for the initial D.IIIa prototype and those changes were made, it did not include the lower wing tips, that aircraft went through flight test and then approved for production. There was probably one given destruction testing as required by IdFlieg. When approval was granted, production was started without interferring with current D.III production. As a result, in the interim period of D.III/D.IIIa in simultaneous production there is an intermingling of serial numbers and wing tips changes.
Blue skies,
Dan-San

[FOKKERJ]

Originally Posted by FOKKERJ

Hello Dan-San,

From memory, next to the last page (#9?), top right paragraph, under "Production" is an explanation of building D.III's and D.IIIa's simultaneously.
My perception is that they were fulfilling the earlier contract for D.III's while starting on the new and improved D.IIIa. That it would be easy to use some D.III parts on the D.IIIa (lower wing). Did the Prototype D.IIIa have the early or later lower wing? I don't know!

Respectfully, Jay

Hello Dan-San,

I found my missing Pfalz PROFILE PUBLICATION, it was hiding inside of OSPREY's "Pfalz Scout Aces of World War I" by Greg VanWyngarden.
It was page #7, not #9, and it said nothing about building Pfalz D.III/D.IIIa machines simultaneously.. My misinterpretation!
It did give numbers of "Front Strength" for Pfalz D.III/D.IIIa's, that is where my wires got crossed. It does show Pfalz D.IIIa's reaching the Front before the D.III's had reached their highest strength at the Front.

Originally Posted by Dan_San_Abbott

FokkerJ:
The Pfalz D.III was not a private venture, It was funded by IdFlieg.IdFlieg would award orders to aircraft manufacturer for some number of experimental aircraft, to be designed a developed over some period of time. These prototypes would be tested and developed into production aircraft. IdFlieg would specify the engine to be used. There was no gample by Pfalz on the D.III. This was done to ensure new design developement. Generally there were orders of six to twelve prototypes of progressive designs. The manufacturer as part of this developement had to provide monthly progress reports. Pfalz was providing progress reports to IdFlieg on the Pfalz D.VII, D.VIII, D.IX, D.X, D.XI, these all existed in design and prototypes, of which the D.VIII and the D.XII evolved into production aircraft. This required a substantial design staff, and experimental department to five or six prototypes in design and developement.
The Pfalz Flugzeug Werke production capacity was equal to Albatros in 1918 at 270 aircraft per month.
Because of the complaints and comment from the various Jasta equipped with the Pfalz D.III about sighting problems and cordite fumes, [I]IdFlieg[I] responded by have Pfalz look into improving the design of the D.III, te fuselage was redesigned with machine guns mounted on the upper fuselage, redesign the stabilizer to improve the fight characteristic, , why to change to the lower wing tips, I don't know, one machine was selected in the design for the initial D.IIIa prototype and those changes were made, it did not include the lower wing tips, that aircraft went through flight test and then approved for production. There was probably one given destruction testing as required by IdFlieg. When approval was granted, production was started without interferring with current D.III production. As a result, in the interim period of D.III/D.IIIa in simultaneous production there is an intermingling of serial numbers and wing tips changes.
Blue skies,
Dan-San

The latest Pfalz D.III S/N that I could find was Pfalz D.III 4185/17 of Jasta 5.
The earliest Pfalz D.IIIa I could find was Pfalz D.IIIa 4117/17 of Ltn. d.R. Aloys Heldmann Jasta 10 Marcke, November 1917.

Note: Pfalz D.III 4184/17 was captured and assigned #G141.


Dan-San, I want to thank you for sharing the enlightening information and helping bring me to speed on this matter of the operations of Idflieg.

Best Wishes, Jay

[FOKKERJ]

Originally Posted by DMCEOWEN

Does anybody know how many early Phalz D.IIIa where built with D.III lower wings. Also what jastas they went too. I know jasta 7 and jasta 15/18 had some. I am wondering if jasta 20 could have recieved some. Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Hello DMCEOWEN,

I don't have anything concrete to offer in answer to your question. I also am interested in the answer. The PROFILE PUBLICATION #43 does say that "At a later date the lower wings were modified to a more rounded tip profile and both the D.III and D.IIIa types were to be found with this style of lower wing eventually." I have not seen any evidence of this , but have seen the reverse, D.IIIa's with the early style "Pointy" tips. Although anything is possible.

I wish that I had a better answer to this question.

Best Wishes, Jay

[FOKKERJ]

Originally Posted by FOKKERJ

The latest Pfalz D.III S/N that I could find was Pfalz D.III 4185/17 of Jasta 5.
The earliest Pfalz D.IIIa I could find was Pfalz D.IIIa 4117/17 of Ltn. d.R. Aloys Heldmann Jasta 10 Marcke, November 1917.

Note: Pfalz D.III 4184/17 was captured and assigned #G141.

Best Wishes, Jay

The latest Pfalz D.III S/N that I could find was Pfalz D.III 4185/17 of Jasta 5.
The earliest Pfalz D.IIIa I could find was Pfalz D.IIIa 4117/17 of Ltn. d.R. Aloys Heldmann Jasta 10 Marcke, November 1917.

This shows an overlap of serial numbers that would suggest simultaneous production of both models, how many of each I don't know. There are some instances of D.IIIa's with D.III features, but I have not found any D.III's with D.IIIa features.

Best Wishes, Jay

[Dan_San_Abbott]

FokkerJ:
Jay, I have been chasing Pfalz.D.IIIa 4117/17, from what I have found, it is not a D.IIIa, it is a D.III. Do you have a photo of D.4117/17? In Peter Grosz's serial number listings, when he has a photo, he lists it with the appropriate serial number, he had a photo of D.4117/17, and has identified as a D.III.
If D.4165/17 was the prototype D.IIIa, D.4117/17 fuselage would have been completed at least four and almost 5 days before D.4165/17 was begun.
In regard to the lower wing wing tips, the very small radius have been most likely not as strong as it was, with the redesigned wing tip bow on the D.IIIa. They may of had problems in the field with the D.III wing tip. I am going to check the Jasta 47w diary and see if there were any reported problems in regard to the wing tip on there Pfalz D.III machines. They were completely equipped the Pfalz D.III. They had all kinds of problems.
Blue skies,
Dan-San