Photo Albatros B.II

[Stig Jarlevik]

Clint

A very interesting find indeed!

Not sure however this is actually a Military B.II
Whenever I am uncertain I just call these prewar civil Albatros types 'B-types'

The marking B2 is not military and the individuals (even if the old man is called a Ltn)
looks very civilian to me.

My guess is that the B2 belongs to the rather obscure pre-war German way of marking civil aircraft.

Cheers
Stig

[musec04]

Stig,


Indeed not necessarily a military B.II. In which case according to Kroschel & Stützer the company designation was a rather unoriginal DD. Yavor Dinkov has a photo captioned as DD at



https://www.flickr.com/photos/33497395@N08/8474802781


The same photo is in the relevant Aeronaut volume captioned as an early B.II! This volune also has a Sanke Card with the caption Albatros Militar-Doppeldecker. So not really helpfull?


I no longer think that the photo I linked to shows the machine as part of the Prinz-Heinrich-Flug as Zwickau was not a destination.


As For the B2, on a purely speculative basis could this be applied just for a competion and indicate a certain class of aircraft be it weight class,engine power or even as a biplane?,with the machine in the photo being the second entrant of the B 'Class' in the competion?


Incidently while searching I found this link to a crashed Taube from the 1914 Prinz-Heinrich-Flug


https://m.facebook.com/landesarchiv....690539/?type=3


Regards,


Clint

[Stig Jarlevik]

Nice Taube Clint

A.52/13 unknown to me....

Cheers
Stig

PS: I don't like the title DD since it could be anything with two pair of wings

[musec04]

Stig,


PM Grosz in WDF 93 also has DD (but it's complicated!),so while I understand your reservations with the obvious abbreviation for Doppeldecker,either DD 1 or DD 2,based on the fuselage length appeared a good possibility at the time he wrote. Possibly more has emerged since (?).


I have tentatively identified the Taube as a Rumpler 3 C, but this is tentative as based on the identity of A.50/13,so if that is incorrect both are wrong. Ibelieve the upper tail is distinctive,but with Taubes, well it's not easy identifying is it?


Regards,


Clint

[Stig Jarlevik]

In 1913 Rumpler was the main supplier of military Tauben, so I have also listed A.52/13
as a Rumpler.

Cheers
Stig