Fokker DR.1

Everything in connection with developing aircraft for FlightGear
User avatar
jwocky
Site Admin
Posts: 1833
Joined: Sat Sep 12, 2015 12:04 pm
Contact:

Fokker DR.1

Postby jwocky » Fri Nov 11, 2016 4:14 pm

I started to play around with it for the upcoming USA Tour

Lester, in your endless archive about WWI planes, do you have anything about idle rpms for the Oberursel II or the LeRhone 9ja? The current model of the DR.1 we have runs on the Oberurlse, but it demands 300 rpm idle which is too high for zero throttle, it just dies off. And 300 is a lot of such an engien, I think. So, any idea?
Free speech can never be achieved by dictatorial measures!

User avatar
IAHM-COL
Posts: 6414
Joined: Sat Sep 12, 2015 3:43 pm
Location: Homey, NV (KXTA) - U.S.A
Contact:

Re: Fokker DR.1

Postby IAHM-COL » Fri Nov 11, 2016 4:16 pm

I'd love to join the tour as the Red Baron :D

Image
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/IAHM-COL/gpg-pubkey/master/pubkey.asc

R.M.S.
If we gave everybody in the World free software today, but we failed to teach them about the four freedoms, five years from now, would they still have it?

bomber
Posts: 1379
Joined: Mon Nov 30, 2015 3:40 pm

Re: Fokker DR.1

Postby bomber » Fri Nov 11, 2016 5:53 pm

ah look at those 4 wings..... tri-plane my arse

J-wocky, can I take it this is a yasim job ?

Simon
"If anyone ever tells you anything about an aeroplane which is so bloody complicated you can't understand it, take it from me - it's all balls" - R J Mitchell

User avatar
IAHM-COL
Posts: 6414
Joined: Sat Sep 12, 2015 3:43 pm
Location: Homey, NV (KXTA) - U.S.A
Contact:

Re: Fokker DR.1

Postby IAHM-COL » Fri Nov 11, 2016 6:04 pm

no. JSbsim job.
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/IAHM-COL/gpg-pubkey/master/pubkey.asc

R.M.S.
If we gave everybody in the World free software today, but we failed to teach them about the four freedoms, five years from now, would they still have it?

User avatar
jwocky
Site Admin
Posts: 1833
Joined: Sat Sep 12, 2015 12:04 pm
Contact:

Re: Fokker DR.1

Postby jwocky » Fri Nov 11, 2016 10:52 pm

JSB, flies fine. Landing is also surprisingly good. Taking off, she is a bitch.
Free speech can never be achieved by dictatorial measures!

bomber
Posts: 1379
Joined: Mon Nov 30, 2015 3:40 pm

Re: Fokker DR.1

Postby bomber » Fri Nov 11, 2016 11:50 pm

She should take off in 50 yards and climb at 2200ftmin.
Yes this plane should be hard work...
"If anyone ever tells you anything about an aeroplane which is so bloody complicated you can't understand it, take it from me - it's all balls" - R J Mitchell

User avatar
LesterBoffo
Posts: 766
Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2015 3:58 am
Location: Beautiful sunny, KOTH

Re: Fokker DR.1

Postby LesterBoffo » Sat Nov 12, 2016 1:16 am

jwocky wrote:I started to play around with it for the upcoming USA Tour

Lester, in your endless archive about WWI planes, do you have anything about idle rpms for the Oberursel II or the LeRhone 9ja? The current model of the DR.1 we have runs on the Oberurlse, but it demands 300 rpm idle which is too high for zero throttle, it just dies off. And 300 is a lot of such an engien, I think. So, any idea?


If this is the JSB sim engine are you sure you don't have too high a fixed pitch on the propeller?

Most if not all throttled WWI rotary engines had a limit to their 'tick-over' idle speed mainly due to their not aspirating fuel reliably below 500~700RPM's. That is what a "coupe" switch is for, it shuts the ignition electrical circuit momentarily to 'idle' the engine more on approach The only way to get a rotary aircraft engine of this class to idle. This video illustrates the VA Oberusal testing in New Zealand.



Note that it doesn't 'idle' while all cylinder's sparkplugs are lit off, they have to actually cut the ignition, just like they do in the historic versions. The only WWI engines that really and reliably idled well were the Mercedes and Benz 6 cylinder inline water-cooled engines. They could be idled down to about 190 rpm, which is damn slow.

You will also note that my YASim DRI is perfectly fine for landing with it's adjusted throttling. I don't get the need to rebuild the FDM on something that is already functioning well.

User avatar
Catalanoic
Posts: 251
Joined: Sat Dec 12, 2015 11:33 am

Re: Fokker DR.1

Postby Catalanoic » Sat Nov 12, 2016 7:52 am

I tested it near EGOD yesterday, quite difficult for beginners to takeoff/land but with some practice (and crashes :-X ) you can control it, but i don't know how chaotic can be online with some trying to take off at the same airfield. in flight was flawless, nice plane thanks all involved!!

User avatar
LesterBoffo
Posts: 766
Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2015 3:58 am
Location: Beautiful sunny, KOTH

Re: Fokker DR.1

Postby LesterBoffo » Sat Nov 12, 2016 4:30 pm

Catalanoic wrote:I tested it near EGOD yesterday, quite difficult for beginners to takeoff/land but with some practice (and crashes :-X ) you can control it, but i don't know how chaotic can be online with some trying to take off at the same airfield. in flight was flawless, nice plane thanks all involved!!


It's short coupled and has small moments of inertia in all axis', with a full flying rudder/Vstab, large elevators and ailerons on the upper wings. Fokker was trying to emulate the Sopwith Triplane's climb speed and maneuverability. The DRI was actually a lot different in flight manners in many ways to the Tripehound, most of them were not really an advantage. For one it was really slow, and you couldn't dive out of a fight to escape.

The Sop Tripe was longer and had a bigger 130 hp engine that performed better at higher altitudes, it was also faster. The DRI's advantages were that it had a supreme manuverability and climb rate. It was touchy like the Camel in yaw and pitch, but for different reasons.

Tactically in 1917~1918 the playing field for fighter aircraft was going more to the boom and zoom tactics of the SE5a and SPAD, turn fighting, especially the type that the DRI excelled at was falling out of favor. Pilots were starting to understand energy conservation and using long attack approaches also known as "E" fighting.

User avatar
LesterBoffo
Posts: 766
Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2015 3:58 am
Location: Beautiful sunny, KOTH

Re: Fokker DR.1

Postby LesterBoffo » Sat Nov 12, 2016 4:41 pm

bomber wrote:ah look at those 4 wings..... tri-plane my arse

J-wocky, can I take it this is a yasim job ?

Simon


Armstrong Whitworth had a plane that was a quad wing

the F.K.10 Image

There also was the *Pemberton Billings Nighthawk ( *became Supermarine )

Image


Return to “Aircraft Development”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests