Fokker Dr I, Significant plane in 1918?

Does anyone have numbers on Dr1s lost in 1917(shotdown, wingfailures and just damaged beyond repair), and how many were operational as of jan 1918?

We got yet another Dr1 fight on the Delphi Flight sim board from the oddest angle yet. This guy seems to think the dr1 was used in force in 1918. I personally don't think it was a hell of a force ever, having had only 320 of them made total and even then, having then recalled in fall 1917 because the weak top wing had to get fixed on them.

Sorry if this is an old topic...if so please post a link to the old discussion.

[Barrett]

Please excuse the slightly unrelated topic, but a good judge of the Dr.I's importance may be gauged by the fact that in nearly 14 months between its combat debut and the end of the war, the type was credited with something under 260 shootdowns. That is infinitessimal compared to the Albatrii designs in that same period, let alone the D.VII (some 2,500 in the last 5 or 6 months.) One suspects that had MvR not been killed in one, the Fokker Tripe wouldn't be very well known today.
Perhaps the most that can be said of the bird was that it was a superb dogfighter (Voss showed what it could do in skilled hands; Jacobs was its greatest exponent) and that it demonstrated the temporary importance of "fads" in aircraft design, coming as it did hard on the heels of the Sop Tripe. Fact is, even by late '17, Allied pilots who understood "blowthrough" tactics (highspeed passes, shoot and scoot) could negate the Tripe's forte' of turn radius and climb rate. On t'other hand, I don't think I've found any allied pilot who destroyed more than 3 or 4 Tripes.

Barrett is right,and the other consideration according to Alex Imrie's fine book on the triplane, was that it was woefully underpowered in comparison to the contemporary opposition. It really only served as an interim fighter until newer and faster designs came along. The real significance of the airplane seems to be in our own romantic view of the machine some 82 years on.
Great plane to model!

[Reinout]

The Tripes were designed and ordered for the 3 Jagdgeschwaderen at a time when doctrine dictated that rate of climb and rate of turn were the most dominant features of a succesful scout plane. Seeing as height could be converted into speed, this wasn't such a bad doctrine particularly if you compare the other mainstay German fighters of the second half of 1917 to their allied counterparts: Allied planes were on the whole more manoeuverable and faster than the Alb DIII, DVa, and the Pfalz DIIIa. The DrI was meant as a stopgap fighter but the legend it spawned outgrew its historical importance. Like Barrett said, the 3 great aces who used them so effectively have a lot to do with that.

Kind regards,

Reinout

[leo]

How available and how reliable were the Goebel 140-160 hp rotary, the 145 HP Oberusel and the the Siemens-Halske 160 HP engine? Would they have increased the performance of the DRI to any great extent? I know these engines were installed in some of the V models, but have never read any commentary as to results.

[Ron_F]

Leo,
From Squadron Signals on the Dr1 in action, the prototypes did the following:
160 hp Sh3 geared rotary was modified to a V7. It was hard to taxi, ungainly on ground and very sensitive to input. Too much for pilots. Climb and altitude performance was increased. Fitted with a 4 blades prop.
2nd V7 proto with 160hp rotary Obersusel U III, was tested and given to Jastaschule II in May '18.
3rd V7 with 170hp Goe III rotary, was tested in jan 18. additional wieght and lenghtening of fuse to accomodate it. Had a definate improvement in climb and altitude performance over standard Dr1. Last flight, engine failed to develop full power and 3 cylinders failed. Fuel consumption was higher than comparable hp engines.. engine failed tests, and production never happened. Dr1 599/17 fate unknown.
Last V7 had Steyr 145hp rotary, but was damaged before Austro Hungarian figher competition and never repaired.

3 Dr1s were fitted with captured 130hp Clergets for tests. never intended for operational use, but to test ersatz (synthetic) castor oil.

1 stock Dr1 was fitted with a Oberursel II with Scwhade gear driven compressor (supercharger type).

Succesful, but war ended before production could begin.

vbr
Ron F.

[Barrett]

In a word, no, putting more horses under the cowling wouldn't have done anything significant for the Dr.I than increase its already excellent vertical performance. As a rule in aerodynamics, more power for a given airframe weight yields more climb rather than top speed. Also, more powerful engines tend to weigh more as well, and then you risk weight & balance/CG problems. An excellent example is the Goodyear F2G version of the Vought F4U Corsair--with almost 50% more power it climbed like a scalded monkey but was not significantly faster.
However, in a WW I context, a 25 mph speed advantage was noteworthy. I seriously doubt you'd get that much increase out of a tripe with all its inherent drag, but if so it'd have been worth the effort.

[leo]

Thanks for the reply, gentlemen. I have pictures of some of the engine conversions and thought the DR1 with the Siemens geared rotary and four bladed prop was a bad looking mother.

Was the Austrian Steyer a knock off of the Orerreusel?

I'm not going to argue the signifigance of the DR1 but...

I still like the way it looks and many of its concepts were carried over to the DVII, such as the cantelever wings and steel tube frame.

It may have been a mere blip but it was an important blip. And I still think it looks b*tchin'.

Tobias

[leo]

The construction of the DR I had an influence on all subsequent Fokkers, DVI,DVII,DVIII and many post war ships as well.