DR-1 (Sands): Builders Group

[franzkait]

you are right, no one is building a Dr1 , but some guys try with the possibilities they have to build a Dr1. for sure, not everybody has the money for a rotary engine , so in this case it has to be a different radial. but if you change everything , what is it in the end , something with 3 wings ? like Flugzeugbau did say, no character ! and what about the spirit ? a homebuild has no spirit ! and Harley weels ? I think , I do not have the right words for it in your language , and even in my language I can not find them, only in russian I can find the words. The only good part with Harley weels , Harley has the same quality standard like WW1.

[flugzeugbau]

Vongrube:
I let myself think that at least some of the group were trying to build a Fok. DR1. But with steps, Lycoming engines with tiny little props and welded tube bracing it is not even close. May as well build a Cub. Just save a little longer to be able to buy some parts for original design and satisfaction will be high as well as worth if the need to sell would be present.
Flugzeugbau

[Vivian Vamp]

Perhaps Udo and Flugz would like to post photos of thier Fokker Triplanes flying along.
Using steel tube instead of wire and turnbuckle doesn't change the weight, the looks, the aerodynamics, or the way it flies. It still isn't a Cub. But it's easy to complain about the hard work of others.

[franzkait]

hard work ?

[Dogtail2]

Thats right,

Hard work. You should try it sometime

[Jim Bruton]

let's try not to let the opinions of purists OR experts slow us down in our enthusiasm here. i love that we have some people who really do know their stuff involved- they create, discover, or re-discover the type of information that modern day builders can use as a baseline and ruler to measure from. I am sure if it were given to any one of us, we would all be happy to win an original DR1 in some lottery. But between better technologies, methodologies and materials and cost and time available to any one of us - especially with jobs and families- as long as the end product looks like the original, what's the hurt? Also, if any of the betterments listed above had been available to the original builders of DR1s, I think they would have jumped on them. I am sure that this difference of opinion will be argued 100 years from now. Like most things in life not involving life, death or family, I simply wouldn't respond to differences in opinion that seem to me.... trivial. that's my 2 cents.

[franzkait]

years ago, it was not so easy to get info like today. You had to life with redfern and sands. I was talking with ron about original and not original, he did not have the info in this time.And in case you like to sell your Dr1 one day, and you can say it is as original as possible, it is essayer to sell. Look at all the junk Dr1 `s sold in the last years, it is hard to get any money for . Jim you did look at one. Frank Ryder got this projects for nearly nothing, and today this projects go very cheap to NZ. I know 3 guys , building a Dr1 from sands plans , and after the aircraft was ready and flying , changing everything to original , if possible.ask this guys why ?

[baldeagle]

Well, one of these Triplanes has steel tube bracing instead of wire and turnbuckle, and wheel brakes, and a Warner engine. Would anybody turn it down??

[Jim Bruton]

(it's the middle one, and i would gladly take it!)

[vongrube]

Jim,
Nice job. You're table looks identical to mine. I just didn't care for the design of the Sand's table too much. Guess you didn't either.