Biplanes and Triplanes were the best !

I think Biplanes and Triplanes were the best planes ever made.

I think the Red Baron could beat any plane of today with his triplane !

I even think that Zeppelins are better than most modern planes !

"Alberto Panno-Peano" wrote in message
om...
I think Biplanes and Triplanes were the best planes ever made.

I think the Red Baron could beat any plane of today with his triplane !

I even think that Zeppelins are better than most modern planes !


Score on Trollmeter

1/10 - Very Poor Effort

Keith

"Keith Willshaw" wrote:


"Alberto Panno-Peano" wrote in message
. com...
I think Biplanes and Triplanes were the best planes ever made.

I think the Red Baron could beat any plane of today with his triplane !

I even think that Zeppelins are better than most modern planes !


Score on Trollmeter

1/10 - Very Poor Effort

Keith

C'mon Keith!...he's just starting out, cut him some slack
here!...
--

-Gord.

"Gord Beaman" wrote in message
...
"Keith Willshaw" wrote:


Score on Trollmeter

1/10 - Very Poor Effort

Keith

C'mon Keith!...he's just starting out, cut him some slack
here!...

Than he should be using the practise forum, alt.disasters.aviation

Keith

"Alberto Panno-Peano" wrote in message
om...
I think Biplanes and Triplanes were the best planes ever made.

I think the Red Baron could beat any plane of today with his triplane !

I even think that Zeppelins are better than most modern planes !

Saw an interesting documentary on Discovery channel called Great Military
Clashes. The episode focused on WWI, and started with the German Howitzer
versus the British 18 pounder field gun.

The second half was the Fokker triplane versus Sopwith Camel. In the end it
came down to speed - the drag of three wings of the triplane limited the
designs speed. It had an advantage in climb and turning, but speed is life.
The wings also made take off and landing difficult as they blocked the view
of the runway. The red baron was a superb pilot who could make the most of
his airplane.

Interestingly enough they speculated that the Fokker was inspired by an
earlier Sopwith Triplane, which didn't have as man vices in the visibility
department. But it was abandoned in favour of the biplane because of speed.

James Linn

Closeup examination of the Dr.1 at Old Rhinebeck Aerodrome indicates
that its main airfoils had far less wire bracing than any Sopwith design
(can't recall if Rhinebeck has a Camel or not at the moment). Were the
differences in parasitic drag enough to cause difference in max
attainable speed?

Memory suggests that Rhinebeck's airframes are as faithful to original
as can be found anywhere.

James Linn wrote:

"Alberto Panno-Peano" wrote in message
om...

I think Biplanes and Triplanes were the best planes ever made.

I think the Red Baron could beat any plane of today with his triplane !

I even think that Zeppelins are better than most modern planes !


Saw an interesting documentary on Discovery channel called Great Military
Clashes. The episode focused on WWI, and started with the German Howitzer
versus the British 18 pounder field gun.

The second half was the Fokker triplane versus Sopwith Camel. In the end it
came down to speed - the drag of three wings of the triplane limited the
designs speed. It had an advantage in climb and turning, but speed is life.
The wings also made take off and landing difficult as they blocked the view
of the runway. The red baron was a superb pilot who could make the most of
his airplane.

Interestingly enough they speculated that the Fokker was inspired by an
earlier Sopwith Triplane, which didn't have as man vices in the visibility
department. But it was abandoned in favour of the biplane because of speed.

James Linn

"sddso" wrote in message
...
Closeup examination of the Dr.1 at Old Rhinebeck Aerodrome indicates
that its main airfoils had far less wire bracing than any Sopwith design
(can't recall if Rhinebeck has a Camel or not at the moment). Were the
differences in parasitic drag enough to cause difference in max
attainable speed?

Memory suggests that Rhinebeck's airframes are as faithful to original
as can be found anywhere.


As discussed in the program, the wires did make the Sopwith more vulnerable
to enemy fire.

But the limiting factor in the design was the drag of three wings. Sopwith
had realised this and not gone into big production with their triplane.

Saw yesterday the same show regarding battle of Britain, and the same
visibility situations existed to an extent. The ME 109 had a blind spot
above the pilots head(fixed on later versions), where as the Spitfire had
excellent visibility.

The show basically had the contest as dead even - they preferred fuel
injection to the Spits carbs, and the ME-109's cannons(did an experiment
with aircraft aluminum at 200 yards, showing the big difference), but
penalised the 109 on visibility and range.

James Linn

"James Linn" wrote in message
...

"sddso" wrote in message
...
Closeup examination of the Dr.1 at Old Rhinebeck Aerodrome indicates
that its main airfoils had far less wire bracing than any Sopwith design
(can't recall if Rhinebeck has a Camel or not at the moment). Were the
differences in parasitic drag enough to cause difference in max
attainable speed?

Memory suggests that Rhinebeck's airframes are as faithful to original
as can be found anywhere.


As discussed in the program, the wires did make the Sopwith more
vulnerable
to enemy fire.

But the limiting factor in the design was the drag of three wings. Sopwith
had realised this and not gone into big production with their triplane.


With the Dr-1 the wing structure was completely internal (it was a
cantilever design) which removed the conventional wire bracing and the
associated high drag. For this reason the Dr-1 had one of the best zero-lift
drag co-efficients of the war.



What's most important is the first use of thick aerofoil sections, based on
the work of Prandtl's Gotteingen laboratory in '17. These were proved
superior over the thin aerofoils used by the Allies, who were plagued with
the associated poor high-lift characteristics of slender aerofoils. The
Dr-1's thick aerofoil gave the lil' Fokker a tremendously high rate of climb
and enhanced manoeuvrability; Sopwith were just simply barking up the wrong
tree.



Anyway, Sopwith's preference for thin aerofoils is based on birds having
similarly slender wing cross-sections, so they weren't even barking.



The D-VII's excellent performance (also due to its high t/c) made it so
respected by the allies that it was the only aircraft to be specifically
listed in the armistice (article IV). Just goes to show how much a couple of
inches on the thickness of a main spar can go a long way!





Jim Doyle

On 18 Jan 2004 02:01:52 -0800, (Alberto Panno-Peano) wrote:

I think Biplanes and Triplanes were the best planes ever made.

I think the Red Baron could beat any plane of today with his triplane !

I even think that Zeppelins are better than most modern planes !

That's nice.

Al Minyard

Alan Minyard wrote in message . ..
On 18 Jan 2004 02:01:52 -0800, (Alberto Panno-Peano) wrote:

I think Biplanes and Triplanes were the best planes ever made.

You should have just said were some of the best planes ever made. No
argument there. Lots of civilian pilots fly WW1 replicas and they are
crowd pleasers. My fave, contrary to what the RAM anti-German fanatics
think I will say, is NOT the Fokker D.VII. I always liked the Albatros
D.Va even with the annoying wing strut problem. If I had the money I'd
buy one today and paint it up the way they did back then.

I think the Red Baron could beat any plane of today with his triplane !

Sorry, not even Erich Hartmann with 352 kills would score with a
Me-109 today. We'll have to wait for WW3 and see if the Germans will
invent new aircraft firing "swarmers" (aka KKVs: Kinetic Kill
Vehicles) that will down 10-12 enemy aircraft at a time. Wouldn't that
be interesting? 35 missions and a new top ace is born!!! (Just a JOKE
guys, so don't even think about flaming)...

I even think that Zeppelins are better than most modern planes !

The new Zeppelin and plans for even larger types from around the world
arouse great interest but lack suitable funding. It WOULD be
absolutely amazing to fly in an 800+ ft long Zeppelin across the
Atlantic. That IMO is comparable to those that flew on the Concorde.

That's nice.

My God, YES it would be nice Al!

Al Minyard

Rob