DR.I Plan Discrepancies

[spandau]

Looking through my old copies of WWI Aero, I see four different plans for the Dr.I fuselage with significant differences in their dimensions. Can someone enlighten me as to the amount of original factory drawings there are for this aircraft? How much of what is know is coming from interpreting photographs?

One particular article form Dec, 1988 shows a revision to Charles Bourget's drawings as a result of the "newly revealed original Triplane now being restored at the Musee de l'Air in Paris" .

The first thing that they teach you in WWI Airplanes-101 is that there are no original Fokker Triplanes left in existence, so I find it hard to believe that WWI Aero would make such a "ridiculous" statement if there wasn't something more to the story.

What am I missing?

Spandau

[Jim Bruton]

Wow- this is interesting! Can anyone shed any light on this? Franzkait or Achim?

[AchimEngels]

I doubt that there is a original Fokker Dr.I fuselage around. The one shown in the photographs of the relavant issue of WWI is a repro.

There are several parts of original aircraft around that allow to loop back to the dimensional design of the aircraft´s fuselage.

I have not seen any Fokker made drawings for the fuselage so far. However, there are drawings of all three wings, including wing rib drawings and details. These also let conclude how the fuselage was designed.

Apart from the fact that Udo Jörges is the only one who claimed to me personally that he has the only known copy of a photograph on glass plate negative of the original Fokker Dr.I fuselage frame*, and that there is one original Triplane fuselage in the Krakow museum, most of the drawings made for the Fokker Dr.I fuselage are based on:

1. Fokker factory drawings as mentioned above which let conclude how the fuselage was laid out,

2. Fokker factory photographs that show details of the airframe and the general layout.

3. The reports and sketches made during the acceptance of the aircraft in 1917,

4. The data avialable for the engine,

5. Flight article and it´s sketches made from a captured Fokker triplane.

6. Several reports on captured aircraft.

Further sources which allow to determine how the triplanes fuselage might have looked are:

7. Fokker factory drawings for the Fokker E.V/D.VIII fuselage frame.

8. meassurments of details of surviving Fokker aircraft, such as the original Fokker D.VIII fuselage in Italy or the D.VII.

But, even the above mentioned original Fokker factory drawings do not confirm that things have done exactly that way, since we know from other Fokker planes that several changes took place during production and many different versions, especially in the scale of small details, took place during production.

As long as no copy of a Fokker Dr.I fuselage factory drawing appears all of the drawings based on this kind of information have the same justice to exist.

Differences are due to different ways of interpretation of the sources.

In this case you have to judge the integrity and intention of those who did the drawings you want to judge.

Merry Christmas

Achim


Sample of my fuselage drawing which shows how I believe the triplane fuelage frame looked like.

You can see more samples of my drawings following this link



*I have not seen this yet, so I can not confirm its existance

[spandau]

Achim,

Thanks for the response. It really helps to clear up why everything is so different. I can see where, if you took the measurements of the known items which survived, you can interpolate the rest of the dimensions pretty close (but not exact).

You mentioned an original Triplane fuselage in Krakow. Was this a misprint?

Regards,
Steve

[AchimEngels]

Hello,

correct! And there is always the human factor to consider and there also is always someone who knows it better.

No misprint about the original fuselage at Krakow, but I was meant to say that Udo Jörges told me that there was one. He said he has seen this, but I have not been able to verify this so far.

I doubt it, but it is possible.

Achim

[spandau]

Achim,

Thanks again! I would certainly imagine that if any museum had an original, they would be boasting about it :^)

Even though the dimensions probably varied (somewhat) among the originals, it sure would be nice if there was at least one original to set the standard.

Steve

[AchimEngels]

I agree!

Merry Christmas

[franzkait]

the original Dr1 fuselage from the Musee del A`air is made from Hall Bishop,Lake Gantersville Alabama.The Musee del A`air is not responsible for this mistake,Memorial flyt started this joke,and we know this joker.And for sure the Krakow museum like to get the original fuselage what is still in Poland, like the Berlin Museum. Mr.Radwan from Krakow and Mr.Steinle from Berlin did not handle the situation very diplomatic, so no fuselage.It is a to long story to put in to the forum.It exist enough info today to build a good original fuselage.All drawings you can get today are good enough to build something with 3 wings what looks like a Dr1, nobody did try to build a authentic one.Ron Sands told me 15 years ago, I am not interested in original,I want that everybody can build a Dr1 at home in his garage. And funny the Sands drawings are still today the best drawings you can get.If you like real info ask Langdon or Udo.

And about the ridiculous Statement! If you did read the WW1 from 1988 to 2000 you anderstand why same people in the USA call it Opdikes Comicsbook.

[spandau]

Originally Posted by AchimEngels

I agree!

Merry Christmas

Danke. Frohe Weihnachten zu Ihnen auch.

Steve

[Tedders]

Curious: who refers to Leo Opdycke's W.W. 1 Aero as his comic book?
Tedders.