WWI Replica Safety

[Machinbird]

The swerve at the end of the landing roll was the result of crosswind forces on the aft fuselage exceeding the counteracting force of the deflected rudder. Rudder effectiveness is dependent on dynamic pressure (Q) which decreases as airspeed decreases.
Ok here is the test.

1.What two pieces of important directional control equipment is the Dr.1 in this video lacking in comparison with most modern tail draggers?
2. What one control can promptly increase rudder effectiveness?
You knew the answers. Right?

[Joe Perkel]

Originally Posted by Machinbird

The swerve at the end of the landing roll was the result of crosswind forces on the aft fuselage exceeding the counteracting force of the deflected rudder. Rudder effectiveness is dependent on dynamic pressure (Q) which decreases as airspeed decreases.
Ok here is the test.

1.What two pieces of important directional control equipment is the Dr.1 in this video lacking in comparison with most modern tail draggers?
2. What one control can promptly increase rudder effectiveness?
You knew the answers. Right?

Sid,

Are you eluding to differential braking and or steerable linkage?

I must admit to having traded some of these issues for a brand new set of problems for the single advantage of 360 degrees of choices with the float plane.

Still, I may very well do a Tabloid style undercarriage in addition to the floats. Will have to do some looking at how others have delt with this particular compromise.

What are your plans here?

[Machinbird]

Originally Posted by Joe Perkel

Sid,

Are you eluding to differential braking and or steerable linkage?

I must admit to having traded some of these issues for a brand new set of problems for the single advantage of 360 degrees of choices with the float plane.

Still, I may very well do a Tabloid style undercarriage in addition to the floats. Will have to do some looking at how others have delt with this particular compromise.

What are your plans here?

Joe, Plans?? I am hoping to build a Fokker DVII replica, which would have differential braking, and a steerable tail wheel. For display purposes, I would swap out the tail wheel for an authentic skid, but I'd fly with the tail wheel.
Nothing sadder than an old man with a badly broken airplane that he put a few years of his life into. And I'd be real sad if I broke my replica flying machine because I had an authentic WW1 type accident caused by too faithfully replicating the original design.
Was that the question you were asking?

[Joe Perkel]

Originally Posted by Machinbird

Joe, Plans?? I am hoping to build a Fokker DVII replica, which would have differential braking, and a steerable tail wheel. For display purposes, I would swap out the tail wheel for an authentic skid, but I'd fly with the tail wheel.
Nothing sadder than an old man with a badly broken airplane that he put a few years of his life into. And I'd be real sad if I broke my replica flying machine because I had an authentic WW1 type accident caused by too faithfully replicating the original design.
Was that the question you were asking?

Yes, that's the question.

I have a tendency to simply assume a steerable tail wheel when thinking about these replicas. I only noticed the skid on that Fokker when you mentioned it.

As for brakes, how can that be dealt with on these covered spoked wheels? That was the other part of the question, I have not spent any time looking at what may have been done by others in this regard.

As for the Fokker in the video, my thoughts are along the same lines as yours, willing to compromise authenticity a bit here and there on my own project.

Still, that puff of smoke at the end there eludes to an original rotary. If one is going as far as an original engine, then I suppose pure authenticity regardless of the pitfalls, is probably the order of the day when replicating a flying historical example.

[Brad]

Originally Posted by Joe Perkel

Yes, that's the question.

I have a tendency to simply assume a steerable tail wheel when thinking about these replicas. I only noticed the skid on that Fokker when you mentioned it.

As for brakes, how can that be dealt with on these covered spoked wheels? That was the other part of the question, I have not spent any time looking at what may have been done by others in this regard.

As for the Fokker in the video, my thoughts are along the same lines as yours, willing to compromise authenticity a bit here and there on my own project.

Still, that puff of smoke at the end there eludes to an original rotary. If one is going as far as an original engine, then I suppose pure authenticity regardless of the pitfalls, is probably the order of the day when replicating a flying historical example.

More than just the puff of smoke. You can clearly see the spinning rotary in part of the video. Yes, it is pretty doggone authentic!

[j ferguson]

I found this, pertinent to current discussion.

Fokker Triplane Flight Characteristics

[RobW]

Originally Posted by Machinbird

1.What two pieces of important directional control equipment is the Dr.1 in this video lacking in comparison with most modern tail draggers?
2. What one control can promptly increase rudder effectiveness?
You knew the answers. Right?

I would say differential brakes and a steerable tail wheel are the things you are suggesting.

However, I will bet that that tail skid does wonders for keeping the aircraft straight on a grass strip as long as you maintain full back stick to keep it digging in.

As for what could the pilot do to promptly increase the rudder (and elevator)effectiveness... a little burst of power would help a lot, though it takes a bit of practice to know how much and when. Since this was a rotary... it may even be easier due to the blip switch and the need to keep that engine turning through the roll out.

Bald Eagle, what do you think?

[Butch]

Steerable tail skid is something I am thinking about. Brakes are not in the plans. That said, my Skybolt, and according to the Baldeagle any biplane, is steerable with the ailerons. Stick to the right and the plane wants to turn left. The down aileron is creating lift and therefore induced drag; it is that effective. Andrew will comment on this, but you need to land with the stick into the wind in order to make less of a directional demand from the rudder. On rollout, stick opposite of where you want to go is a powerful control. I have a friend who is a 757 check pilot. He tells me that the only way to keep that plane on a slick runway on a crosswind is aileron into the wind. Try it while taxiing next time out.
Pete

[Machinbird]

Butch,
A very good point on using aileron drag for steering. I didn't add that in since I wasn't certain how universal it is between aircraft (some machines don't have conventional ailerons). Aileron into the wind is mandatory with a strong crosswind if you want to remain upright.
Sid

[Brad]

Originally Posted by j ferguson

I found this, pertinent to current discussion.

Fokker Triplane Flight Characteristics

I like this comment:

"Rolls — The Triplane can be rolled but this maneuver gets difficult due to the differences in the control sensitivities of elevator, aileron and rudder. The best way seems to be to use high speed entry of 110, nose up 30º, full aileron and hope for the best. Lots of rudder correction is needed to overcome the adverse yaw. Once the roll starts indiscriminate use of the rudder or elevator will quickly stop the roll with some interesting results."

I wonder if those "interesting results" are anything like the ancient Chinese curse "may you live in interesting times."