Why a triplane?

Ricky wrote:
I am not an expert on aerodynamics so I do not know much about the
pros & cons of a monoplane vs. a biplane or triplane.
I've a re-kindled interest in the Red Baron recently and was looking
at a Fokker Triplane replica picts & videos and doing a bit of reading
about it's flying characteristics.
I have not, however, read much about the "advantage" of 3 wings. I can
guess that there would be quite a bit of maneuverability but also a
lot of drag.
Why a triplane? What are some of it's "advantages?" What are some
"disadvantages?"

I think you mentioned the main advantage: maneuverability. Also the British
Sopwith Triplane and the German Fokker Dr.I appear to have had good climb
rates relative to their biplane counterparts.

If you think three wings are something, check our the multiplanes of
Horatio Phillips:

http://www.centennialofflight.gov/es...lips/DI113.htm

After reading more on this I have found that the German's were very
concerned with the ability of their aircraft to get above the enemy as
quickly as possible. An attack from above (especially from out of the
sun), was found to be an extremely effective method of victory. The
amount of lift generated from 3 wings was found to enhance climb
performance quite significantly, thus affording German pilots the
abilty to attack from above as was desired.

Ricky

Ricky wrote in news:db128a64-d6f7-42ac-8648-
:


After reading more on this I have found that the German's were very
concerned with the ability of their aircraft to get above the enemy as
quickly as possible. An attack from above (especially from out of the
sun), was found to be an extremely effective method of victory. The
amount of lift generated from 3 wings was found to enhance climb
performance quite significantly, thus affording German pilots the
abilty to attack from above as was desired.

Yeah, the triplane climbed quite quickley. The neccesity for climb was an
advantage in combat, but also neccesary to intercept recce airplanes that
were flying as high as 20,000. That was th eairplane's primary role n that
war. Observation.
The third wing didn't help, though.



Bertie

Ricky wrote:
After reading more on this I have found that the German's were very
concerned with the ability of their aircraft to get above the enemy as
quickly as possible. An attack from above (especially from out of the
sun), was found to be an extremely effective method of victory. The
amount of lift generated from 3 wings was found to enhance climb
performance quite significantly, thus affording German pilots the
abilty to attack from above as was desired.

I really doubt that was the reason as lift can easily be increased in a
number of ways other than adding wings. I think structural strength was
the primary reason for more wings in that era.

Matt

Matt Whiting wrote in newsj6pj.130$kD5.1392
@news1.epix.net:

Ricky wrote:
After reading more on this I have found that the German's were very
concerned with the ability of their aircraft to get above the enemy as
quickly as possible. An attack from above (especially from out of the
sun), was found to be an extremely effective method of victory. The
amount of lift generated from 3 wings was found to enhance climb
performance quite significantly, thus affording German pilots the
abilty to attack from above as was desired.

I really doubt that was the reason as lift can easily be increased in a
number of ways other than adding wings. I think structural strength was
the primary reason for more wings in that era.

Not in this case. One of the advantages of a bipe is the rigging allows an
extremely rigid structure with light weight and an ability to have a wing
that is unrestrained by the need to conceal a lot of structure ( thick
spar). The DR1 was revolutionary in that all the panels were canitlever.
There was no external bracing except the roll wires between the cabane. The
interplane struts were redundant.

Bertie

On Feb 2, 4:40*pm, Matt Whiting wrote:
Ricky wrote:
After reading more on this I have found that the German's were very
concerned with the ability of their aircraft to get above the enemy as
quickly as possible. An attack from above (especially from out of the
sun), was found to be an extremely effective method of victory. The
amount of lift generated from 3 wings was found to enhance climb
performance quite significantly, thus affording German pilots the
abilty to attack from above as was desired.

I really doubt that was the reason as lift can easily be increased in a
number of ways other than adding wings. *I think structural strength was
the primary reason for more wings in that era.

Matt

Well, hey, that's what I read from a guy who spent years of research
on the Fokker Triplane and then built one himself from scratch. Maybe
he's mistaken? I doubt it.

Ricky

Ricky wrote in news:87914aea-450f-4f96-bf63-
:

On Feb 2, 4:40*pm, Matt Whiting wrote:
Ricky wrote:
After reading more on this I have found that the German's were very
concerned with the ability of their aircraft to get above the enemy
as
quickly as possible. An attack from above (especially from out of
the
sun), was found to be an extremely effective method of victory. The
amount of lift generated from 3 wings was found to enhance climb
performance quite significantly, thus affording German pilots the
abilty to attack from above as was desired.

I really doubt that was the reason as lift can easily be increased in
a
number of ways other than adding wings. *I think structural strength
was

the primary reason for more wings in that era.

Matt

Well, hey, that's what I read from a guy who spent years of research
on the Fokker Triplane and then built one himself from scratch. Maybe
he's mistaken? I doubt it.

Well, unles he's an aeronautical engineer, he probably is. A lot of
stuff has been written about that airplane over the years and it just
gets regurgitated. There's no doubt about it, the thing climbed well,
but it would have gone up faster if he had sawn off the middle wing. To
make matters worse, there was no difference in the incidence between the
planes. Each plane affects it's neighbor and each wing has to be set at
the best incidence to take advantage of the available airflow. Sinc the
wing above and the wing below are affecting the flow around the center
it was pretty much just cancelled out.
The Air and Space article mentions that the prop was pitched pretty fine
on the triplane, which may have explained it's climb rate. But Fokker
and the Air Ministry must not have been all that impressd with it since
only a few undred were made as opposed to several thousand Albatros D-
V's. Fokker abandoned it and went the other way with first the D-VII and
then the E-V,/DVIII. The D-VII initialy had a relatively short fuselage
like the DR-1, but test flights ( done by Richtofen, I think) showed the
airplane to be desperately unstable. They lengthend the fuselage over
night and tried again, and probably the best fighter of the war was
born.
He went even further form the multiplane arrangement with the next one
of course.. the EV/D-VIII


Bertie

Ricky wrote:
On Feb 2, 4:40 pm, Matt Whiting wrote:
Ricky wrote:
After reading more on this I have found that the German's were very
concerned with the ability of their aircraft to get above the enemy as
quickly as possible. An attack from above (especially from out of the
sun), was found to be an extremely effective method of victory. The
amount of lift generated from 3 wings was found to enhance climb
performance quite significantly, thus affording German pilots the
abilty to attack from above as was desired.
I really doubt that was the reason as lift can easily be increased in a
number of ways other than adding wings. I think structural strength was
the primary reason for more wings in that era.

Matt

Well, hey, that's what I read from a guy who spent years of research
on the Fokker Triplane and then built one himself from scratch. Maybe
he's mistaken? I doubt it.

I don't. If triplanes were more efficient we would see modern versions
of them.

Matt

Matt Whiting wrote in
:

Ricky wrote:
On Feb 2, 4:40 pm, Matt Whiting wrote:
Ricky wrote:
After reading more on this I have found that the German's were very
concerned with the ability of their aircraft to get above the enemy
as quickly as possible. An attack from above (especially from out
of the sun), was found to be an extremely effective method of
victory. The amount of lift generated from 3 wings was found to
enhance climb performance quite significantly, thus affording
German pilots the abilty to attack from above as was desired.
I really doubt that was the reason as lift can easily be increased
in a number of ways other than adding wings. I think structural
strength was the primary reason for more wings in that era.

Matt

Well, hey, that's what I read from a guy who spent years of research
on the Fokker Triplane and then built one himself from scratch. Maybe
he's mistaken? I doubt it.

I don't. If triplanes were more efficient we would see modern
versions of them.


Well, in a way you do. Double slotted fowler flaps....


Bertie

Ricky wrote:
On Feb 2, 4:40 pm, Matt Whiting wrote:
Ricky wrote:
After reading more on this I have found that the German's were very
concerned with the ability of their aircraft to get above the enemy as
quickly as possible. An attack from above (especially from out of the
sun), was found to be an extremely effective method of victory. The
amount of lift generated from 3 wings was found to enhance climb
performance quite significantly, thus affording German pilots the
abilty to attack from above as was desired.
I really doubt that was the reason as lift can easily be increased in a
number of ways other than adding wings. I think structural strength was
the primary reason for more wings in that era.

Matt

Well, hey, that's what I read from a guy who spent years of research
on the Fokker Triplane and then built one himself from scratch. Maybe
he's mistaken? I doubt it.

I'd be curious to see his research. It seems quite counter to every
other authoritative source I've seen such as:

http://www.airspacemag.com/issues/20...ron.php?page=1

Care to post your research source?

Matt