Since we have about a week to wait before we actually get to fly the Dr I in RoF, it's time to spend an idle minute speculating on what its’s going to be like. Here’s my stab:

1) Truly terrible ground handling. This is an aircraft with a very nose-up sit on the ground, a high centre of gravity and a narrow track undercarriage. Prepare to groundloop. A lot.

2) Lots of drag. All those wings will slow it down a lot. Put the nose down and it’s not going to rocket away into the distance.

3) Not as much torque effect as people expect. There never is enough torque effect for some people. And anyway, we will never convince ourselves how much it should really have.

4) Sloooow. It’s the ultimate turn fighter, but it will be outsped by small children on bicycles with toy windmills attached to their handlebars.

5) More stable in yaw than it should be. Flight sims never seem to get yaw instability correct. But if it does turn out to require constant dancing on the rudder pedals to keep it straight, then we will all complain about it.

6) A good rate of climb, but is it going to outclimb an SE5a? Hmmmmm… not sure.


Cheers,

RD

2) Lots of drag. All those wings will slow it down a lot. Put the nose down and it’s not going to rocket away into the distance.

Well it may have three wings but it's actually a clean(ish) design with minimal wire rigging. Have heard from a person who flies a Dr.1 that it is a "slippery" aircraft, making reference to is relatively lessor drag compared to aircraft of the period.

4) It is not that slow (compared to other german planes). Usually quoted 102mph is from altitude of 13 120ft (4km). At sealevel it should have about 115mph.

6) climb rate depends what sources are used. If fastest possible then it is faster than SE5a in climb. If they use slower figures then it is slower (but still best of modelled german planes)

Oh, it'll be butt slow in the hands of a human pilot, who will be too ham handed and flying in a slip most of the time.

I'm really looking forward to shooting them down with my Nieuport 17!



Seriously, though, it will all come down to how one handles the plane, and how one fights against it that will bear the fruit of how accurately they get the FM.

The plane was designed as an answer to the Sopwith Triplane IIRC, which never really got fielded (A+ for R&D espionage; D- for plans and policies espionage), which means that it's not really built to take on SPADs and SE5a's, who can dive away from it if they're in a bad way and dive down on it at great speed if they aren't.

Digging back into distant RB3D forum discussion memories, it also had problems staying together in the air; at any rate I think that something like only 350 of them were ever built before they were taken off of the line.

Great plane for harvesting the odd man that fell out of a larger fight, especially if he was damaged, low on energy, or simply terrified (MvR's specialty, which isn't a bad thing), but as a front line fighter facing what the Entende forces were putting up in 1918 it didnt' really cut the mustard.

[edit]

That said, it was a dead sexy airplane.

I think it'll be comparable to the Fokker D.VII we already have in RoF, but slower. As the D.VII It'll roll rather slowly at manoeuvering speeds, lose a lot of speed in a turn, accelerate and dive slower than the D.VII. I don think it'll be able to compete in climb or speed with either the S.E.5a, S.P.A.D. or Camel. It'll probably turn a bit better than the D.VII but the Camel will outturn it. In short, I expect a lot of long faces from people who like the aircraft.

Peter, Im interested why you think so? Sopwith Camel with 130hp Clerget perfomance numbers are pretty much equal to Dr.I conservative numbers (in best numbers, Dr.I has much better climb).

Some books I have reference the actual Dr.1's airspeed in service as 83 mph. Compare this to the Dolphin @ 137 mph ...... Ouch!

Can't wait to fly her, wonder if she will have a vanity mirror? Hummmm ....

its up to mission creators (server admins?) not to mix camels and fokkers DrI with dolphins and fokkers DVIIs in the same mission....or they could make a mission with 2 dolphins, 2 DVIIs and 8 DrIs and 8 Camels

I can't comment on your speculation, but I sure can imagine all the fun we're all gonna' have in a week or so.

And there is test flight of Camel (B2312) that list flight speed 97,5 mph (That Dr.I 83mph figure is taken from altitude just like that camel figure.) Official figure for Dr.I was 102,5 mph at 4km altitude (13 120 ft). Mercedes powered Fokker D.VII had 103,5 mph at same altitude, so Dr.I was not that slow.

I'm glad the DR1 and Camel are finally on their way, ROF should never have shipped without them imo.

I'd imagine that the DR1's going to be slower than its fans expect and wont climb as fast as its fans expect. In anything but the hands of an expert pilot it'll be monstered by a BNZ Se5, Spad and Dolphin, I suspect it'll have a difficult time even against a Camel if t keeps its speed up. Get slow though and with all that lift the DR1 will come into its own

It'll be interesting to compare it to the Sopwith Tripe when we get it, and I'm sure we will.

In the subjective realm of WWI combat pilot impressions, and aircraft vs. aircraft reports, the Fokker Dr.I is never mentioned as having anything but marginal airspeed.

Using the diving attack was very important for it to be able to intiate engagement.

Analysis of how the Fokker Dr.I was campaigned will note that the type had to have superior altitude in order to close up in the dive against its contemporary scout opponents.

This can be said about all german scouts as they were slower than entente planes

Now, I do believe that front line Dr.I (like all used planes) were slower than official figures (which probalby presented figures from new engine). But Dr.I "slow speed" can be explained that german didnt have that much of castrol oil and rotary engines probably worn out much faster than inline engines (especially if you dont have that castrol oil ). So in front line use planes with inline engine probably were faster unless Dr.I happened to be new one.

This same was reported about SSW IV. Its perfomance was impressive, but its perfomance only lasted for short time (according to Lt Lenz from Jasta 22).

Airspeed is quoted at 103 but that was at 10000 feet. Sea level should be about 115, in the same range as a Camel but maybe a bit slower. It really wasn't quite as slow legend has it. (Camel jockeys said the same thing about their mount as DRI pilots: "Of course we shoot down opponents. We have no other choice since we can't run away").

Comparing climb rate of SE5a and DRI doesn't tell the whole picture. The thing about the DRI is that it will climb much more steeply than the SE5a or any other contemporary. For example (please don't check my math - the numbers are made up :)) in 10 seconds both might gain 100 yards of altitude, but the SE5a will have moved forward 300 yards while the DRI will have moved forward 150. The DRIs steep ascent rate is very useful in combat, as you can climb away from opponents much as a SPAD can dive away. No opponent can follow you through a steep climb.

It should almost willfully refuse to dive. All of that lift in such a small, light plane - not happening.

Against a DRI - keep your speed up. He doesn't have any and will quickly bleed what he does have. Get slow and you're dead.

Albatros fighters vs. DH2s, DH5s, Camels, and Nieuports?

I'm sure Entente pilots flying these types in 1917 would disagree their aircraft possessed superior airspeed.

Recommended reading would be Hawker's last fight against Richthofen.

I tought we were talking about Dr.I and planes that flied same time frame (which means mainly 1918)? Then all german planes were "slow" (well, except perhaps BMW Fokker and SSW IV. But they still were slower than fastest entente planes).

"This can be said about all German scouts as they were slower than entente planes"

True, but not very true of the Fokker D.VII. The D.VII "official" numbers in horse power and speed are IMHO understated, because those numbers come from Allied sources using captured models. Another factor in the statistics game is that German horse power ratings were done at 1500 RPM and not at optimal output. Thus when official HP ratings are trotted out the German engines seem underpowered.

No doubt from the period of mid 1917 to mid 1918 (and for an air war that effectively lasted two years, that is a long time) the allies badly outclassed the Germans in terms of speed. With the D.VII, however, that margin was brought back to acceptable limits. It wasn't as fast as a SPAD or SE5a, but it wasn't that much slower either.

One issue is that we seem to have the worst of the three engines hat the D.VII was outfitted with. A second issue is that the German engines (well, the two that we don't have) were excellent high altitude performers. With all of the combat happening at tree top you don't really get the benefit. In short, the D.VII was a much better plane than we see in the game. If we got the better engines and flew it like the Germans really flew it, we would have much more success with it.

Yes, I know (I started that "Fokker D.VII climb" topic in RoF forums ). But still, mercedes powered fokker has its max speed quite close to correct. It is the climb where it is lacking.

You stated "all german scouts".

The German Jastas fought mostly on the defensive during WWI, and utilized efficient early warning systems to detect enemy incursions, they didn't need long-range fuel loads, and with altitude superiority and surprise could choose the time of their attacks. When the Fokker Dr.I ventured across the lines, inversing the traditional encounter, it was totally disadvantaged by it's lack of range and airspeed. The problem that occurs when expecting the Fokker Dr.I to be the killer of yore within a flight simulation, arises when players try to fight it without the inherent historical advantages fighting defensively allowed it.

Of course mixing it up in dogfights is what so many players enjoy, but then there's no historical advantages in DF modes.....and then the consequences have to be reckoned.

There' no question that the Dr1 was one of the most interesting airplanes of the First World War.
However, the fact that only 320 of them were built, shows that the German Air Force was not happy with the type. Compare that number to the 5,269 SE-5s that were completed.
As was said, the Fokker tripe was designed to combat earlier war types, so that it was outclassed by newer British and French designs almost as soon as the first one reached it's assigned squadron.
Obviously, as has been noted in many discussions about fighter planes of every era,the pilot makes the difference, and it was dangerous in the hands of guys like VonR, and Voss.
Interest aside, it did not have a large effect on the war effort due to it's small numbers. Of the 320 built, some were certainly destroyed in flying accidents before they reached the front, a few retained at the factory for tests, and some assigned to training , so let's guess that a little over two hundred Fokker Triplanes ever saw combat.
The airplanes fascination is all out of proportion to it's actual use.
That all said...I'm buying it!!