Hi all,
Was curious if anybody has experience flying the aerodrome aeroplane Fokker DVIII replica. There is a kit locally for sale. I would like to get more info about the flight characteristics before thinking about purchasing. Thanks. John Weber
Printable View
Hi all,
Was curious if anybody has experience flying the aerodrome aeroplane Fokker DVIII replica. There is a kit locally for sale. I would like to get more info about the flight characteristics before thinking about purchasing. Thanks. John Weber
I am not sure about that brand or model of Fokker, but a friend who is an expert pilot used to have a full scale Fokker replica triplane which he describes as the only plane he ever flew that was really hard to fly. I think it cruised about 60mph and stalled about 50. Also if you pushed the rudder pedal then released it in flight the rudder stayed deflected until you pushed the opposite pedal, thus not self-centering at all like a modern plane.
This may not be at all true of the biplane or the monoplane Fokker. They sure look good.
No experience with flying one but Robert Baslee's replicas are very popular in the WWI replica circles so I wouldn't hesitate to buy it. If they had any bad habits it would be all over the internet and I hear nothing but praise for these airplanes.
I don't think you can infer anything about the flying characteristics of a replica DVIII monoplane from an original Dr3 triplane...Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Greenwood
The only thing I've heard that is 'negative' about them is that they tend to not have the best glide ratio for their weight class and a bit higher stall speed than you'd expect with the size of it. However, there's two answers to that: 1. a parachute (either on the plane or the pilot) 2. a well executed forced landing (in other words, now how to actually fly it and don't ham fist it)Quote:
If they had any bad habits it would be all over the internet and I hear nothing but praise for these airplanes.
That said, I'd not turn one down if I had the chance to fly or own one.
I appreciate the input. Thanks. John Weber
Conventional wisdom in all the Airdrome aircraft is that if one can pilot a Champ there is no problem flying his planes.
From what I heard from Harvey, the test pilot for Robert's planes, the prototype D-VIII was one hot ship - fast, maneuverable - but maybe a bit too hot and unforgiving for newer pilots (most of Robert's customers). So, a bigger wing was put on it which really softened the flight characteristics to more Cub-like and easy to fly. I would imagine the kit you are looking at has the 'big wing'. Airdrome D-VIII take off and landing:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xaQvXFGVLJQ
It's something to keep in mind: All WWI replicas are not alike. Remember, the original airplanes were designed before the "art" was completely understood. In addition, remember that stability was *not* a desired feature for a fighter aircraft back then.Quote:
Originally Posted by snj5
I knew a guy who owned a Fokker Triplane replica. He had several airplanes, but I figure he'd fly the Triplane most of the time. Nope. No yaw stability (as reported earlier) due to a total lack of a vertical stabilizer. Paradoxically, it had an extreme sensitivity to crosswinds...he often used wing-walkers to take him out to the runway. Finally, it was nearly blind on the ground, as the middle wing blocked his view forward in the three-point attitude (that's why the Triplane had those cutouts on the trailing edge).
Almost everyone who wants a WWI replica wants a "Cub with Guns," but the original designs were not Cubs. If you want a plane to fly for fun, you don't want something with the lack of stability, vicious stall, and poorly harmonized controls of the original.
It sounds like Airdrome is on the right track to keep the right appearance while making the plane more fun to fly, but don't assume the same of other replicas until you see some feedback from people who have flown them. Your other option might be to consider some of the more-modern homebuilts that mimic the appearance of WWI fighters but were designed from the ground up as fun, everyday airplanes. There's a nice scale replica of the SE-5A and the Boredom Fighter, for example. Or for that matter, the Fly Baby biplane.
http://www.bowersflybaby.com/pix/wayland1.jpg
Ron Wanttaja
That plane is [almost] better looking than a stock Fly Baby!
edit: okay, I added the part in brackets later.
As a builder, you can work with Robert on certain design parameters, but sometimes the past is still very much in the present. I have a full size Sopwith Camel replica with a Rotec radial and a modified airfoil to be a bit more easy on the break than the original. That said, owing to the Camel's designed in weight concentration , she is still a handful to fly and really likes to change direction. There is no large torque effect from a rotary engine, but a lot of the Camel's original personality is still there. And to some degree, part of the original personality may always be there in many light wing loaded WW1 replicas.
What fun.
http://i214.photobucket.com/albums/c.../123crop-1.jpg
...and one has to ask if it's a Robert Baslee spec (to original plans) build or a modification. Everyone changes something, even myself who has been pretty slavish in following the drawings to the letter!
The largest complaint is the airfoil, which is right on the NACA Cub airfoil, making for a docile type of plane.
One of the downfalls with the Airdrome planes is one of syntax. They're not replicas - they're more like representations of WWI aircraft. My Nieuport closely resembles a Nieuport 11 in appearance and will have some of the same habits (no vertical stab! Flying with a free flying rudder is going to be interesting to learn), but that's about it.
The construction techniques, materials, engine (inline versus rotary), weight, and operating limitations are all different.