DR-1 (Sands): Builders Group - Page 182

Jim Bruton · 22 August 2007, 05:06 AM

Thanks Andrew!

Wow, that is pretty surprising. WF2, hope that helps.

Regarding trailing edge wire, I think Pete has it right. Sands calls for pre-bend, and I can't imagine putting 110 lbs on our rib tips. Ed and I are pulling the wire taut but not super tight, allowing the fabric shrinkage to do the scalloping for us- you don't want to much or too little.

We are getting together again tonight- I'll try to remember to take the camera and get a shot or two for everyone.

Thanks!

Jim

womenfly2 · 22 August 2007, 05:51 AM

Thanks BaldEagle. That is unexpected. Would never think the Dr.1 would do 150, even it a dive.

Scary to think about it if I were in one back in 1917 doing 150 mph!

But then again it is a relatively clean design by that years standards.

Do you think a rotary with it big diameter prop at idle (more frontal drag) be slower in a dive then a Warner/prop combination it comparison?

WF2

Tim Plunkett · 24 August 2007, 11:07 AM

I am happy to see so many DR1 being constructed. I have a DR1 as well as a Sopwith Camel. I have about 120hrs in the DR1 and about 80hrs in the Camel. The DR1 is a very different aircraft to fly. It does not fly at all like a modern aircraft. It is one of the most maneuverable aircraft I have ever flown ,when you know the proper control inputs. I have about 26000hrs ex-USAF and ex-Airline, Pitts Pilot, ATP, CFI and all of that. As you get ready to fly I highly recommend that you contact me about how to fly the plane. This is not the kind of plane you just what to hop in to and take off.

Jim Bruton · 24 August 2007, 03:08 PM

Tim,

Watch out, I think you will be swamped with new DR-1 pilots taking you up on that offer! We very much appreciate your kindness in sharing with us your experience.

By the way, I contacted you around 4 years ago- I think you had a 2nd DR-1 under construction and were selling it. I was in Iraq at the time and wasn't able to purchase it from you, but I remember you answering my email inquiries anyway.

Can you share with us a little bit of your experiences? What was your first flight in the DR-1 like and what were some of the big surprises? What was the first, and second landing like? Were there any "uh-oh" moments?

We look forward to hearing more from you!

All the Best,

Jim Bruton

Tim Plunkett · 24 August 2007, 05:10 PM

I have been thinking about writing a book on flying the DR1 and the Camel. So many people at air shows what to know the same thing. The planes are so different that a simple answer does not suffice. All the aerodynamics forces that you learned about as a student are in play, the difference is that there is no modern engineering to counter most of them. Every single aerodynamic force must be anticipated by the pilot and the proper control input made at the correct moment. Don't get me wrong it can be done. I do loops, barrel rolls, hammerheads, clover leafs and spins of a sort know only to WW1 aircraft fliers. The control inputs to accomplish these maneuvers are nothing like a Pitts for example. Landing in a slight cross wind would take about three chapters to explain. I can not express to you guys what a great feeling of accomplishment it is each time you fly the plane. Many people ask me to compare the two plane, this would truly take a book.

baldeagle · 24 August 2007, 09:14 PM

I've only got about 70 hours of Triplane time, but it seemed to me that the control inputs for aerobatics were the same as in my Pitts, it just didn't react as fast, is that what you meant?

Also, Brian's Triplane that I flew to Dayton in 2003 was able to be landed on pavement in a fair crosswind without too much trouble. I think you have to be careful because a lot of these replicas are quite different from one to another, depending on the builder, with different characteristics.

A lot of people have built and flown Triplanes without extra special qualifications, just being good tailwheel pilots.

Tim Plunkett · 25 August 2007, 09:37 AM

I agree there is large variation in flight characteristics of the experimental aircraft I have flown. The way the aircraft is constructed, the weight, the wing and tail incident angle, the engine used, the c.g. location all play a role. I have landed in about a 10kt direct cross on pavement and that is about all I want. This was during an airshow. As you know as a tail wheel pilot, it is not about the landing it is about the roll out. I also agree that any good tail wheel pilot who has been properly briefed should be able to fly the plane. But I still maintain that before you try and fly this plane you need a good briefing from someone who has actually flown one. I know of several of these planes that were roll up into a ball on the first flight. Ron Sands son showed me a great video of a foreign Air Force Pilot on his first flight crashing the plane on landing while Ron and his son looked on. I do not want this to happen to all the good folks on there building this wonderful aircraft.

Machinbird · 25 August 2007, 12:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tim Plunkett

I agree there is large variation in flight characteristics of the experimental aircraft I have flown. The way the aircraft is constructed, the weight, the wing and tail incident angle, the engine used, the c.g. location all play a role. ............

Tim
Welcome aboard from the Naval Contingent.

I have to agree on the sensitivity of flight characteristics to rigging and balance issues-even on seemingly identically constructed aircraft. I once had a Luscombe which completely changed its spin characteristics with the addition of 1 degree of up elevator authority (which was allowed by the type certificate).
I see you have spun a Dr.1 replica. There has been a lot of uncertainty on Dr.1 roll rates. Could you offer comments on the roll rates you have encountered and the feasibility of enhancing roll rate with snap rolls. Feel free to comment on Dr.1 spin characteristics in the context of the particular aircraft you were flying. (Another little known area.)
Sid

Tim Plunkett · 26 August 2007, 08:20 AM

I once talked to a guy in Texas that said his DR1 spun just like any other airplane. That has not been my experience. It is not a real spin more like a tight spiral. When the stall breaks and the rudder is added the nose comes down and the airplane breaks to the left but then it start flying again. This has happen to me teaching in a Super Decathlon. If I taught from the back seat if would not spin, if I was in the front seat it would. Obviously it is c.g. related. As to roll rate, remember that the ailerons are flat plates and not airfoils. They are very ineffective compared to a modern aileron. You will get a much faster roll rate if you do what we do in high performance sailplanes with long wings, you lead with rudder. The plane will yaw faster that it will roll. In dogfighting with the plane I use this to my advantage. I do not try to roll with my opponent, I out yaw him. Without a vertical stab the aircraft will yaw quickly with very little effort. If you try to snap roll as you pull back on the stick to get a deep stall the aircraft will loose to much energy and the rudder becomes less effective and you fall out. If you keep your speed up you can yaw faster that you can roll and have a high rate of turn with a small radius of turn.

Machinbird · 26 August 2007, 09:36 AM

Tim,
Thank you for the answer to that question on Dr.I snap rolls, I'm surprised at the amount of energy loss you expect.
Although the Dr.I is famous for its high yaw angles and rates, it appears the roll performance was/is a weak spot that could be taken advantage of by a knowledgeable enemy.
Doesn't a yaw turn bleed a lot of energy? Extending Luscombe experience to the Dr.I isn't necessarily valid, but a flat turn in a Luscombe was a real energy eater.

Sid