![]() |
|
|||||||
| View Poll Results: Sopwith Camel vs Fokker Dr. 1 | |||
| Sopwith Camel |
|
1 | 20.00% |
| Fokker Dr. 1 |
|
3 | 60.00% |
| Tie |
|
1 | 20.00% |
| Voters: 5. You may not vote on this poll | |||
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
|
No it's not World War 2 but close enough (hint to Pavel about making a world war one subject.)
Which of ther two was better? Well, I think the Dr. 1 was a superior machine but the traning of the Camel pilots made the camel a formidable opponent. Not to mention the torque from the rotary gave it great manouvreability if you knew how to use it. In this poll, training of pilots and the machine count. ![]()
__________________
Lest We Forget. |
|
#2
|
||||
|
||||
|
Both planes have been built with rotary engines and stationary shafts.
Only the last series of the Fokker was equipped with standard Siemens "round engine" in the last year of the WW I. If the rotary gave any speedier turn-entry in one direction and this is taken as advantage...it should be looked into a little more specifically: This torque-effect must have been (and was indeed) larger on the D VII Fokker, because it's inertia around the roll axis was smaller (wingspan forcing funcion, smaller wingspan than the Camel). But I would yield if one reply: "If a little is good, the more is not always better!"-argues here. Nevertheless, both planes have been built, flown very successfully. By simple physics: the Fokker was harder to fly, easier to crash but "had more in it" for daredevil maneuverings. This either was used well for advantage, or not used, or many times it caused self-inflicted casualties. So the bottom line is: no categoric rule on what is good for you...
__________________
Would it be nice to know, not just believe what you're talking about? I believe it would...No, I know! |
|
#3
|
||||
|
||||
|
confusing... but you have a point
![]()
__________________
Lest We Forget. |
|
#4
|
||||
|
||||
|
The Sopwith Camel.
The fame of the Fokker Dr.I comes from its best pilot, Manfred von Richthofen, who shot down 80 planes in WW1, several of them flying a Fokker Dr.I. Other than that - the Fokker was a plane with three wings which resulted in a very high air drag. This was useful in dogfights, but a menace to speed and economy, resulting in a less-than-optimal power/fuel to speed/range ratio. If the Fokker Dr. I had been flown by another pilot than von Richthofen, I wouldn't have expected any good reports from it. Manfred von Richthofen was one of those pilots who was good in every fighter plane of his time. So - my vote goes to the Camel.
__________________
"Victory is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts." ----- Winston Churchill |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|