Why a triplane?

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

On Feb 3, 8:06*am, Matt Whiting wrote:
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.../red_baron.php...

Care to post your research source?

Matt- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Wasn't research exactly, just the builder/owner of a "Fokker" Triplane
commenting on his own research into the plane. He's Canadian, I think,
and built one from the ground up with a partner, then sold it in the
early 80s. I think it was on Youtube, lemme see if I can find it
again.

Ricky

Ricky wrote in
:

On Feb 3, 8:06*am, Matt Whiting wrote:
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/2008/december-
january/red_baron.php.
..

Care to post your research source?

Matt- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Wasn't research exactly, just the builder/owner of a "Fokker" Triplane
commenting on his own research into the plane. He's Canadian, I think,
and built one from the ground up with a partner, then sold it in the
early 80s. I think it was on Youtube, lemme see if I can find it
again.

Walt Redfern? He made a few nice replica WW1 airplanes. But there wasnt
really anything for the builder, whoever he was, to research. Though the
original probably went through some wind tunnel testing at Aldershof or
maybe Fokker had one of their own, they weren't entirely sure of what
they were looking for. Nobody would have wasted time and effort on the
thing afterwards and it really wasn't viable to do so until the age of
computers. Most aerodynamicists even back then would have pooh poohed
the triplane, but it was worth a shot, the airplane had some good
attributes, so they made some and they had a bit of success. They were
clearly wanting in a lot of ways, though, thus the short production run.
All of those WW1 airplanes were experimental in extremis in every way
you can imagine. Materials, adhesives, engines, aerodynamics, you name
it. . they learned fast, though and the performance gains from the
Taubes and Moranes of 1914 to The Seimens Schuckerts and Sopwith Snipes
of late 1918 was only spectacular. Steel tube fuselages were introduced
by Fokker and are still used today. Hugo Junkers introduced the first
all metal airplanes. Some of the engines were fantasitc too,
particularly the Hispano Suizas which are still impressive and powered
airplanes well into the thirties.
It must have been an exciting time to live through. If you lived through
it..


Bertie

On Feb 3, 8:06*am, Matt Whiting wrote:

Care to post your research source?

Matt-

Sure, here it is;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Arcvl...eature=related
Since this guy is a pilot of a modern replica and, I believe, built
the one he's sitting in and standing next to, I took his comments
about the 3 wings as somewhat authoratative.
This is a good little ditty about the Triplane.

Ricky.