Talk:Gotha G.V

Untitled
Bold texterr... how come there's no photo of a gotha? I'd like to know what it looks like from the outside.


 * here, here and here are some nice pictures of the G.IV. No idea of their copyright status though. Bastie 23:21, 24 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Per Article 72 of German copyright law, the copyright on photos expires 50 years after they've been published, or 50 years after their creation if they haven't been published (http://www.iuscomp.org/gla/statutes/UrhG.htm#I). That would make them public domain in Germany, since they weren't published until more than 50 years after creation.  Since copyright in the country of publication is expired, they're in the public domain in the US.  If one were to argue that they were actually first published in the US, then the copyright would expire 70 years after death, or 2010 in this case. Dabarkey 19:06, 9 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Sorry, I got so excited when I actually found a cockpit shot, which is rare for these old planes! But I agree, we need an outside picture.  I think the pics provided by Bastie are cool, and I can't imagine them being in copyright any longer.  FranksValli 06:19, 25 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Wikipedia also needs an article on its big brother, the Zeppelin-Staaken "Gigant". Biggest wooden airplane until the Spruce Goose, but its been completely forgotten. Bastie 11:38, 25 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Thanks to Buckboard, an article on the Zeppelin Staaken R.VI now exists. Bastie 22:55, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

I added all of the technical specs I compiled for a 4th-Year Aerospace course. I agree that more photos would be excellent. I suspect that the owner of the this page would be willing to release to the public domain if asked. (As he has already indeciated that that was his reason for creating the page int he first place) Supasheep 7:05, Jan 30, 2006 (UTC)

any left?
are there any of these aricraft still in existance?101.117.71.231 (talk) 06:38, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

Rear gunner
The article talks about "expanding" the Gotha Tunnel and goes on about "providing a slot in the upper fuselage that allowed the rear gunner to remain stationary." – I don't understand what is meant by that. I can only imagine that the original tunnel was done away and replaced with some kind of hole arrangement whereby the same MG that could fire aft and high was now able to fire aft and low as well. Is that more or less what went on? Please rewrite. --BjKa (talk) 12:52, 17 April 2018 (UTC)