Performance of the Pfalz DIII/DIIIa

[Mode One]

Why was the Pfalz DIII/DIIIa's performance considered medioker? Was the power/weight ratio low?

If this has been discussed previously, where and when was this?

[Dan_San_Abbott]

Hello Mode one:
I am not so sure about the performance difference, between the Alb.D.V, D.Va and the Pfalz D.III & D.IIIa. At 3000 meters, all had the same maximum airspeed at 165 km/hr. The difference was between the Albatros and Pfalz versus Fok.D.VII @ 183 Km/hr @ 2000 meters and D.VIIF 205 Km/hr @ 2000 meters.
Strengthwise the PfalzD.III and D.IIIa aircraft, did not shed its lower wings like the Alb D.V and D.Va had problems with. So you did not have to worry about airspeed buildup in a dive or high speed turns.
The Alb.D.V weighed 915 kg, the Alb.D.Va weighed 950 kg, The Pfalz D.III and D.IIIa weighed 932 kg. The Fok.D.VII and D.VIIF weighed 910 kg.
When the engineers at Albatros designed the D.V an effort was made to improve the performance over the Alb.D.III (886 kg) through a lightening the airframe weight. They went too far and this resulted in a weakened airframe, after a series of structural failures, the Alb.D.V was redesigned increasing the weight by 35 kg.(77 lbs.) This affected the performance and reduced the ceiling of the Alb.D.Va. The Pfalz D.IIIa was lighter in gross weight but did not have the ceiling of the Alb.D.Va. The Alb. D.Va and Pfalz D.IIIa were both equipped with the 170 P.S. Mercedes D.IIIa and later with the 180 P.S. Mercedes D.IIIaü engine. The Pfalz D.IIIa while stronger than the Alb.D.Va, did not match the performance of the Alb.D.Va. I think the difference was probably the could be made up by a pilot who knew the best points of the Pfalz D.IIIa and how to use it.
Blue skies Mode one,
Dan-San

[dglewwe]

Why do you want to know?

Not meaning to be be snide, but: what's the point?

[lamarzocco]

Old threads have details of interest.. note Gregvan's comments in: http://www.theaerodrome.com/forum/ai...ad-really.html

While many pilots derided the plane there were some strong supporters. The sharp left-spins and the dive and the general toughness of the airframe made this a useful aircraft in the right hands.

[dirtyshirt]

Good morning,

I can't see the relevance of your post, dglewwe,
"Why do you want to know? what's the point?".

You may as well ask why does anybody want to know anything about anything. I thought Mode One raised an interesting point about an interesting aeroplane.

With regards,
Mike.

[dglewwe]

Apologies for the poor writing = mistaken intent communicated.

I simply wondered if there were a specific reason -beyond general interest/curiosity- for the inquiry.

Again: sorry it came across badly.

[Mogadeet]

From what I've gathered in my reading, the Pfalz D-IIIA was one of those aircraft with some good strengths. It had a great dive, was not so underpowered like the D-III, and had a good rate of turn. The D-IIIA was a decent angles fighter. Against superb energy fighters like the SPAD XIII and the SE-5A the pilot had to know his mount well (much as the MIG-17 pilots when facing the Phantom or Crusader in Vietnam) to get the best out of it, but it could hold its own and did its share of damage.

As a balloon buster it was excellent.

I suspect some of its bad reputation came from the tactic of dropping out of the sky to shake an opponent which was frequently interpreted as "Falling out of Control." Jump on the Pfalz and it would tumble away from you. Then, when you were otherwise occupied (thinking you've just shot a German down) you would not see it recover and fly away.

The D-III was quite underpowered and the covered MGs was not a successful experiment. But the D-IIIA, while not in the class of the Fokker D VII, Roland D-VIB or the Pfalz D-XII was a perfectly serviceable airplane that could get the job done.

Ultimately it was up to the pilot. It was a worthy foe in the hands of a good one, but in the hands of a mediocre pilot it could stink.

Mogadeet

[Mode One]

Originally Posted by dglewwe

Why do you want to know?

Not meaning to be be snide, but: what's the point?

I have loved the Pfalz since I built my Aurora Pfalz DIII kit back in the early 1960s! I think it is the prettiest airplane ever designed. I'm simply interested in this airplane and wanted more information. I have Tom Polapinks 1/5th scale plans for the Pfalz DIII and someday will build a model from these plans. I guess you could call me a "Pfalzpfile"! Is that a good enough "Point"?

Thanks to Dan_San_Abbott for your insite and also thanks to all others!

[Dan_San_Abbott]

Hi Mode One:
I consider the Pfalz D.IIIa along with the Nieuport 28c1 as the most beautiful aircraft of WW1.
Where some people have have considered the Pfalz and the D.IIIa as dogs in regard to performance, I can name who did not, that was Obltn. Rudolf Berthold who flew a Pfalz D.III while Jastaführer of Jasta 18. Also as Kommandeur of Jagdgeschwader Nr.2 he flew a Pfalz D.IIIa. he could have picked any machine in the Luftstreitkräfte inventory, but he picked the Pfalz D.IIIa, Hptm.Berthold did not consider the Pfalz D.IIIa a dog. A number of pilots in Jasta 15 also flew the Pfalz D.IIIa who were aces also.
So much for the dog!.
Merry Christmas Mode One,
Dan-San

[Mode One]

My favorites are the Pfalz DIII and the Nieuport 28! Pretty similar tastes, Dan!