Am I missing something?

[Belis4rius]

I am putting together all the specifications about the model aircraft I have i.e. max speed, max range, rate of climb, operational ceiling, all in imperial measurements.

Some are fairly hard to come by and many books and websites use the same information over and over. From what I have the Fokker DVII seems to be pretty inferior in every statistic to other planes and from what I can find doesn't even outclimb an Albatros. I find this amazing as I keep hearing what a perfect fighter it was and that it had an amazing climb rate.

So can someone explain the figures to me?

I am not putting the machine down, but I am thoroughly confused.

[Poliorketes]

I know the problem. On the other hand in some sources the Fokker Dr.1 is quoted as rather slow (as it is in WoW), in other books it's top speed is similar to a Sopwith Camel.

I think some problems are caused by the way you measure speed. it is a great difference if you measure at NN or at 10.000 feet altitude. Sadly only a few sources tell you which speed stat they mean, and even worse in some they compare plane As speed at 100 feet with plane Bs speed at 5000 feet without telling and then make the conclusion that plane B is faster. This is as silly as comparing the speed of two rowboats, one going downstream, the other upstream.

[KirkH]

It depends on which engine is in the DVII. The early DVII's had the 160hp Mercedes engine which was OK, but the performance really improved when it got the 185hp BMW powerplant.

[Belis4rius]

I still find it impossible to come up with a decent set of statistics for either engine.

[Jureweah]

The Fokker DVII was one of the best planes in the WWI. Albatros III and Albatros D.V were really worse than the Fokker.

Manfred von Richthofen words about the Albatros: "so obsoletely and so ridiculously low than the english men that one almost could not do anything with this aircraft ".

[Poliorketes]

Just temember the Albatros was an early 1917 design and it was this plane that was responsible for bloody April ('17)

[LGKR]

The D. VII had the capability of adjusting it's speed better than earlier planes. This gave it an edge when manuevering.

[Pooh]

One of the problems might be the listed climb to altitude (6000 m - 19,670 ft) of 38 min for the 160 hp engine. The 185 hp engine to the same altitude as 14 min. I suspect, though I'm not sure, the the 160 hp engine actually has a good rate of climb until it gets to high altitude then it runs out of breath. 14 min to 6,000 m is very fast. The Sopwith Camel with its best climbing engine (140 hp clerget) takes 15 min 45 sec to get to 15,000 ft. (Osprey, Camel vs. DR1).
The Osprey books that compare planes are nice as they give time to altitude for several altitudes so you can plot them on a graph and get a truer picture. Same goes for level speed. I don't know if they have a book for the D VII.

Pooh

[Pooh]

Found the Osprey book "Spad XIII vs. Fokker D VII" and it answers some of the questions.
One of the things it gives is climb to various altitudes so climb rates can be compared acrosss the whole range of their envelope.
The mercedes engine was an older engine and the climb rate with that engine was slow at all altitudes. The BMW gave the D VII a phenominal rate of climb, much better than the Spad or the Dr1 and Camel (from the book "Sopwith Camel vs. Fokker Dr1").

It also gives the max speeds for the allied planes but unfortunately not the German planes. They have only 1 speed listed and for the D VII it doesn't give the altitude the speed was achieved.

In the text from the book on the Dr1 it does state that the Dr1's official top speed was listed as 102.5 mph @ 13,120 ft but that test results by the Germans in 1918 showed it was slower than that. The numbers they gave are 97 mph @ 9,200 ft and 86 mph @ 13,800 ft. Given that WW1 aircraft lose speed as altitude increases, it seems likely that it could achieve something over 100 mph on the deck. The book also provides comments from German Dr1 pilots complaining they could shoot down a lot more planes if they could catch them.

I'll see if I can do up an excel graph this weekend showing relative climb rates.

Pooh

[Pooh]

Guys,

I made a excel chart showing climb rates but can't get it to load so I'll summerize here. I have the climb rates in ft/min for the following aircraft:
Dr1
Camel w/ 130 hp Clerget
Camel w/ 140 hp Clerget (standard late war Camel)
Spad XIII (Early version)
D VII (Mercedes engine)
D VII-F (BMW engine)

Low altitude range is 0 to 6500 ft for the Camels, 0 to 6560 ft for every else
Mid altitude is from low to 10,000 ft for the Camels, low to 9840 ft for every else.
High altitude is from mid to 15,000 ft for the Camels, mid to 13,120 for every else.
Very high is high to 16,400 ft (Camels no data that high)

There is no low altitude range for the D VII-F as there is a typo on the chart in the book. Its mid altitude is 0 to 9860 ft so understates its climb rate.

.........Dr1...Camel 130...Camel 140..Spad...D VII..D VII-F
Low...1078..1083..........1300.........1242...790
Mid....820....764...........1000.........946.....595....1406
High...635....476...........690...........757....365....1009
V High.382...................................462....215.....625

All Data from Osprey Books:
Sopwith Camel vs. Fokker Dr1 &
Spad XIII vs. Fokker D VII

Pooh

[Oberst Hajj]

Where were you trying to get it to load at?

[Pooh]

Col.

I was using reply and trying to add an attachment. Also, I was just tying to load the chart, not the whole spreadsheet.
When I picked the chart to load, the link timed out and gave an error message.

There isn't a way to just cut and paste these things is there?

Pooh

[Oberst Hajj]

You should have been able to attach the whole spreadsheet. By chart only, do you mean just that worksheet or is it some thing else? If it has a different file extension (for example .doc .txt. xls), I could add that extension.

You can't really cut and past this kind of stuff as the formatting will not remain the same. The best you could do is take screen shot of it and put it in the tread as an image.

[Pooh]

Col.

I tried again. It seems to be attached but I was hoping it would display in the message.
A recap; Because the Camel doesn't use the same altitude increments, I've used the following altitude bands:
Mid - 0 to 6500 ft for Camels, 0 to 6560 ft for every else
10,000 - Mid to 10,000 ft for Camels, mid to 9,840 ft for everyone else
High - 10,000 to 15,000 ft for Camels, 6560 to 13,120 ft for everyone else
Very High - 9840 to 16,400 ft, Camels have no data for over 15,000 ft.

All climb rates based on actual altitude measurement used for that aircraft.

The Fokker D VII-F with the BMW has a typo for climb to 6560 ft so its 10,000 ft climb is 0 to 9,840 ft. Its climb rate should be a bit higher than the climb rate shown to 6560 ft but a bit lower from 6560 to 10,000 ft.

Pooh

[Pooh]

I just went out to the Osprey website. In their duel series where i got the data used for the aircraft in the chart, there is a 3rd book by the same author "SE 5a vs. Albatros D V". When i can hunt this down, I'll add the climb info for these 2 planes. All 3 books are from the same author which makes me more confident that we are comparing apples to apples.

Pooh

[Oberst Hajj]

Yeah, it will not display in the thread like an image... you would have to do the screen shot for that to work.

[Pooh]

I picked up the book "SE 5a vs. Albatros DV" and like the others has a lot of good info in it.
It has tables for speed and climb rates for the SE 5 but doesn't give data for the Wolsey W 4A Viper engined DE 5as which was the best one.

the only information the book provides for the viper engined plane is that increased speed by 7 mph, which I take means a top speed of 127 mph @ 6500 ft and improved climb. Most planes where I can find info add 4 or 5 mph more when on the deck.

For the Albatros the books provide data for the DIII and DV but no tables for the DVa. It does state that the DVa's more powerful engine was offset by weight increases for other modifications so performance was similar to the DV.

I'll post what I found this weekend.

Pooh

[Belis4rius]

That sounds just about right for an Osprey book, there is always that piece of information, statistic, shield pattern, armament etc. vital to the subject which you look for in vain.