Jump to content
Chill31

Fokker Dr.I Discussion

Recommended Posts

Well done Szelljr!

What a genuinely nice thing to do, to just skin Chill31's Tripe and off the top of your back - Good on you mate! :salute:

 

Have the +1 :good:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, Chill, we have a doubt about the forward stick pressure in the Dr.1. Can you dive pushing the stick forward or this is not possible and you have to kind of cheat the elevator and sort of roll to dive it? As it seems, there is a player who can only fly straight with full forward pressure in the Il-2 Fokker Dr.1. In other words, he cannot dive the plane pushing the stick forward by any means. Is that correct?

Edited by SeaW0lf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SeaW0lf said:

Hi, Chill, we have a doubt about the forward stick pressure in the Dr.1. Can you dive pushing the stick forward or this is not possible and you have to kind of cheat the elevator and sort of roll to dive it? As it seems, there is a player who can only fly straight with full forward pressure in the Il-2 Fokker Dr.1. In other words, he cannot dive the plane pushing the stick forward by any means. Is that correct?

 

This is rubbish - the FC Dr 1 can be pushed nose down at any speed, level flight at SL only requires about 1/3 forwards pressure. Please check it yourself before you repeat this nonsense.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is absurd! Embrace!

 

S! P.

 

Ps. Sorry I am not taking the p@#S Sir! Just thought it was too good a opportunity to pass... excuse the pun.

 

 

Edited by Plank
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Plank said:

This is absurd! Embrace!

 

 

Touché.  I must say, however, that if the stick pressure in the FC Dr 1 was absurd I might have to embrace it. As it is, it is only people posting on the forum who are being absurd, so I do not have to live up to my motto. (Except in your case, of course.  :) )    

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, unreasonable said:

 

This is rubbish - the FC Dr 1 can be pushed nose down at any speed, level flight at SL only requires about 1/3 forwards pressure. Please check it yourself before you repeat this nonsense.

 

You were the one to question it. I though the idea was ludicrous so I'm asking Chill. I'm not so sure where you are going with this.

 

A player was saying he needed full stick forward to flight straight, and then I asked how he dived then (below) and unreasonable answered me:

 

-------

 

PjR7hH5.jpg

 

-------

 

I replyed that it made no sense at all and then I came here to ask you Chill. But since he seems to have come clear on it, don't bother. He must have been confused.

Edited by SeaW0lf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The key to keeping it level is not to fly with the throttle fully open.  It cruises at around 95kph iirc without any stick pressure.  At full speed you have to apply a lot of downward stick.  Without an adjustable horizontal stabilizer (like the SE5a has in ROF) it's stuck this way and totally normal.

 

The ffb in this are great btw!  Really enjoying both planes with my MS ffb2.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/26/2018 at 11:52 AM, CAFulcrum said:

The key to keeping it level is not to fly with the throttle fully open.  It cruises at around 95kph iirc without any stick pressure.  At full speed you have to apply a lot of downward stick.  Without an adjustable horizontal stabilizer (like the SE5a has in ROF) it's stuck this way and totally normal.

 

 

"It cruises at 95 kph" are you serious? The real DR1 stalls at 72 kph, you should be cruising around 144 kph with little forward stick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, HiIIBiIIy said:

"It cruises at 95 kph" are you serious? The real DR1 stalls at 72 kph, you should be cruising around 144 kph with little forward stick.

 

He is saying "not to fly with the throttle fully open".  Cruising usually understood to mean below full throttle.  I got 95 kph at 800 rpm as well (edit close to SL). So yes he is not only serious he is absolutely correct at least at SL.  That is a very comfortable margin over stall speed.  To cruise at altitude you would need higher speeds: but 105 at 1000rpm and 3-4km is perfectly comfortable.

Edited by unreasonable

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, unreasonable said:

 

He is saying "not to fly with the throttle fully open".  Cruising usually understood to mean below full throttle.  I got 95 kph at 800 rpm as well. So yes he is not only serious he is absolutely correct.  That is a very comfortable margin over stall speed. 

95 kph is NOT cruise speed for the DR1, it should be a descending speed. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, HiIIBiIIy said:

95 kph is NOT cruise speed for the DR1, it should be a descending speed. 

 

The is no single cruise speed - if you mean hands off level flight, that is altitude dependent.  You can cruise at 95kph hands off level close to sea level - it was about 200m when I tried it.

 

Realistically for players in the "game zone" of altitudes up to 2km or so I would say that 900rpm and 105kph is a realistic cruise setting.    

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, unreasonable said:

 

The is no single cruise speed - if you mean hands off level flight, that is altitude dependent.  You can cruise at 95kph hands off level close to sea level - it was about 200m when I tried it.

 

Realistically for players in the "game zone" of altitudes up to 2km or so I would say that 900rpm and 105kph is a realistic cruise setting.    

 

I think you have a great misconception of cruise speeds, yes cruise speed is less than full throttle but not in the lower envelope of flight.

Cruise speeds are usually about 80% throttle, example  Aeronca Chief has a top speed of 105 mph and a cruise speed of 95 mph.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, HiIIBiIIy said:

I think you have a great misconception of cruise speeds, yes cruise speed is less than full throttle but not in the lower envelope of flight.

Cruise speeds are usually about 80% throttle, example  Aeronca Chief has a top speed of 105 mph and a cruise speed of 95 mph.  

 

 

Cruise speed is whatever is most applicable depending on circumstance.  If the limiting factor for pilots, flying aircraft without trim, was pilot fatigue then, all things being equal, that defines cruise speed, not relative performance figures. Obviously, pilots or flight commanders can modify those criteria, depending on tactical awareness, but it is always a compromise.  If the Dr1 flies at a certain speed, at a certain altitude, hands off, and pilot fatigue is the most pressing concern, to the player, then that is what it is. If that makes the Dr1 slow then that is for the pilot to decide what his priorities are. I do understand that players with FFB sticks might be at an advantage here but flying in a virtual space has never been equal.

 

No doubt, just to piss me off and teach me not to be so objectionable, my G940 will now go tits up and I'll have to find a non FFB alternative.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Cynic_Al said:

 

No rotary, no comment.

 

That's Chill31 out of the picture then !!!!

Edited by HagarTheHorrible

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good morning chaps.

 

How is the yaw when rolling? ( I am self banned from the game due to being slack)

 

I read the article on it , and what does landing "diagonally" actually entail?

 

see here:

 

"b) Always land into the wind. Land diagonally, off to the side, on taxiways, aprons, etc., to minimize the crosswind component.

Our home field has a 200 ft. wide grass strip and most landings are on a diagonal directly into the wind."

 

Bamboozled a bit by this. How can one land into the wind diagonally? Would prefer diagrams...

 

Salute!

 

Planky.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very simply, he means that you don't need to follow the laid down runway, even landing diagonally to the usual line, if needed. The IMPORTANT thing is to land into the wind.

 

Might upset people with epilates though, so I suggest finding a hanger as far as possible from the control tower.

Edited by HagarTheHorrible
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

oh I see.

 

So they mean land INTO THE WIND not along the painted stripes on the tarmac.

Even if that means landing DIAGONALLY across the stripes, lanes, access paths, pediways, rose beds, carparks etc

 

oh, I am phobic of epilates these days as I tend to borrow them... it's a long sordid and entertaining story.

Bet you a fiver I can get into any exclusive club you care to name!

 

S! P.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Obedient Wives Club (OWC),  try that for starters.

 

Ok, scrub that last one try this one instead ; 

The Order Of Chaeronea

Edited by HagarTheHorrible
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right, I will need to borrow a moustache and a Mercer type 35, a special handshake and of course the right uniform.

 

S! P.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/25/2018 at 2:17 AM, SeaW0lf said:

Hi, Chill, we have a doubt about the forward stick pressure in the Dr.1. Can you dive pushing the stick forward or this is not possible and you have to kind of cheat the elevator and sort of roll to dive it? As it seems, there is a player who can only fly straight with full forward pressure in the Il-2 Fokker Dr.1. In other words, he cannot dive the plane pushing the stick forward by any means. Is that correct?

 

It seems this may already be addressed, but...the real Dr1, flying with as much down elevator as is depicted graphically in FC/ROF, would be pretty much unable to pitch nose down due to the stick hitting the ammo can.  That being said, in my version of FC, I have plenty of elevator authority to pitch down.

 

On 8/26/2018 at 12:52 PM, CAFulcrum said:

The key to keeping it level is not to fly with the throttle fully open.  It cruises at around 95kph iirc without any stick pressure.  At full speed you have to apply a lot of downward stick.  Without an adjustable horizontal stabilizer (like the SE5a has in ROF) it's stuck this way and totally normal.

 

The ffb in this are great btw!  Really enjoying both planes with my MS ffb2.

 

95 kph is about 60 mph.  60 mph in a Dr1 is...way to slow for patrolling the sky.  If you were to get surprised at that speed, you would have very little energy to use for maneuvering.  On page 2 of this thread, I posted a video of my Werner Voss tribute, and the second turn I made in that video was at about 65 mph, and it was not eager to turn very tight.

 

I flew the Dr1 on a cross-country flight (5.5 hrs that day), and it cruises along nicely at about 85 mph with a little forward stick pressure (didnt have a way to measure it at the time, but I will in the future).  After a couple of hours, my hand cramped up though...

 

2 hours ago, Cynic_Al said:

 

No rotary, no comment.

 

I always find this comment interesting.  It is as if you are suggesting there is a big difference between a Dr1 with a rotary and one without.  Tell me this, if you shut off the engine of a Lycoming powered Dr1 and the engine of a rotary powered Dr1, how should they fly?  You already know of course, they should be the same!  The majority of the aerodynamics of the plane come from the shape of it.  Some comes from the propwash of the bigger propeller found on rotary powered Dr1s.  And there is some physics involved in the gyroscopic precession.  

 

One of my friends has flown a Dr1 with a lycoming, a 120 Rhone, and an 80 Rhone.  According to him, there isn't as much difference as you might expect.  I guess I shall see for myself soon!  You fine folks will be the first to know of course :)

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Plank said:

oh I see.

 

So they mean land INTO THE WIND not along the painted stripes on the tarmac.

Even if that means landing DIAGONALLY across the stripes, lanes, access paths, pediways, rose beds, carparks etc

 

 

 

No, they mean you do follow the marked runway (if there is one), because in the presence of a crosswind you can approach diagonally, only straightening-up just before touchdown.

 

Examples of diverse quality.

 

=================================

 

2 hours ago, Chill31 said:

I always find this comment interesting.  It is as if you are suggesting there is a big difference between a Dr1 with a rotary and one without.  Tell me this, if you shut off the engine of a Lycoming powered Dr1 and the engine of a rotary powered Dr1, how should they fly?  You already know of course, they should be the same!

 

No argument there, but you won't get very far with the engine off so I don't see how it relates to reality.

 

Quote

 


 And there is some physics involved in the gyroscopic precession.  
 

 

 

Which I would counsel anyone not to underestimate, regardless of anecdotal evidence.

 

Quote

One of my friends has flown a Dr1 with a lycoming, a 120 Rhone, and an 80 Rhone.  According to him, there isn't as much difference as you might expect.  I guess I shall see for myself soon!  You fine folks will be the first to know of course

 

Assuming that project comes to fruition, provided that the C of G is preserved,  I predict a decrease in pitch-up tendency.

Edited by Cynic_Al

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, HagarTheHorrible said:

The Obedient Wives Club (OWC),  try that for starters.

Haha, I remember that well Hagar. Perhaps we need an Obedient Pilots Club ;)

OWC branch up in the far north there?

Edited by US103_Baer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Cynic_Al said:

 

No, they mean you do follow the marked runway (if there is one), because in the presence of a crosswind you can approach diagonally, only straightening-up just before touchdown.

 

 

Might I suggest you read it again :russian_ru: .

 

He absolutely says "land into the wind", regardless of runway direction, only land against the wind as an absolute last resort, having previously ignored the advice to leave the aircraft parked in the hanger.  From all I have read, and observed, there is a point, regardless of how brilliant a pilot someone is where they become nothing more than a passenger and woe betide any Dr1 pilot who forgets that fact.  Flicking the tail around at the last moment, in a Dr1 is not an option, you might get away with it once, even twice, but eventually it's going to be embarrassing and expensive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How loud is the Dr1 engine in reality?  In the game I can hear them quite clearly over the roar of a Rolls Royce Merlin at 85% throttle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Cynic_Al said:

No, they mean you do follow the marked runway (if there is one), because in the presence of a crosswind you can approach diagonally, only straightening-up just before touchdown.

Out of these 10 landings, only one was done such that it wouldn't result in considerable damage to most taildraggers. No.1 was doing a fine job. He must. With that kite, going down crabwise would most certainly have him do somersaulting. But everyone else with their modern "safe" crates, they just put them down as it comes. And get away with it.

 

But  with such taildragers as the Dr:I, you land into the wind. Literally. If not, you MUST be proficient to flair out with an aileron bank such that the nose aligns with the runway. It irequires you to cross controls. It requires some practise. The high center of gravity also makes a significant aileron tilt undesirable. Much easier is going *directly" into the wind. There is a good reason why aerodromes of that era were somewhat square shaped or roundish patches of grass. You had your ground crew towing your aircraft from where you could take off straight into the wind.

 

Operiating these vintage crates not the way they were intended to makes them "hard to fly". The worst you can do is taking off and landing on concrete runways with crosswind. That is like taking off with an F-15 from a field.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Cynic_Al said:

Assuming that project comes to fruition, provided that the C of G is preserved,  I predict a decrease in pitch-up tendency.

 

I couldn't remember the original Dr.I W&B numbers, so I went and looked at them again to see how far off I was with my own Dr.I.  I was surprised to find that I am almost exactly in line with the original.

 

The numbers for the original are: 1406.5 lbs loaded weight with CG at 25.44

 

The numbers for my fully fueled loaded replica with a Lycoming engine: 1384 lbs with CG at 25.97

 

To be fair, the plans used to build my Dr.I used a late war fuel tank as would have been found on the Fokker D8.  To my knowledge, this tank was never used in the Dr.I.  The new tank I install will bring the CG forward some amount (don't know how much yet).  However, as it sits in the hangar right now, it is very close to the original numbers.  

 

For anyone who wants to play with Dr.I W&B:

1805800442_Dr1WB.thumb.png.3098cfde4a04430947d6a99f78f04f3d.png

 

5 hours ago, HagarTheHorrible said:

 

Might I suggest you read it again :russian_ru: .

 

He absolutely says "land into the wind", regardless of runway direction, only land against the wind as an absolute last resort, having previously ignored the advice to leave the aircraft parked in the hanger.  From all I have read, and observed, there is a point, regardless of how brilliant a pilot someone is where they become nothing more than a passenger and woe betide any Dr1 pilot who forgets that fact.  Flicking the tail around at the last moment, in a Dr1 is not an option, you might get away with it once, even twice, but eventually it's going to be embarrassing and expensive.

 

Ground handling is VERY different in this plane compared to modern planes, because it has no brakes.  Landing with one wing low ie. on one wheel, is very risk.  The tires are very narrow and do not handle side loads very well and are a lot more likely to roll off the rim.  I'm not sure exactly what would happen in that case, but it would be bad :(  

 

In one case, I went to go fly the Dr.I with a ~10 mph wind blowing.  It was diagonal across the runway, 30-40 degrees off runway heading.  I began taxiing to the end with a left, quartering tailwind.  Since there are no brakes, I can steer only from the propeller wind blowing over the rudder.  The wind from the rear caused the air over the rudder to be insufficient for steering, and the plane veered off the runway, disobeying me even after I added throttle to give it more airflow.  I had to shut down the motor to avoid rolling into the spectators watching from the side of the runway.

 

4 hours ago, Feathered_IV said:

How loud is the Dr1 engine in reality?  In the game I can hear them quite clearly over the roar of a Rolls Royce Merlin at 85% throttle.

 

Rotary engines are exceptionally loud because they do not have exhaust stacks.  Instead, there is simply a hole in the top of the cylinder for the exhaust.  In my Werner Voss tribute video, I fly close formation with a Piper Cub, which has a relatively quiet engine.  The Lycoming engine on My Dr.I has very short exhaust stacks, and people often comment on how loud it is.  What you hear in the video is what the people in the Cub hear.  I even asked if they could hear me after the flight, and they said no.  I will be surprised if their answer changes when I finish installing the rotary.

 

That being said, when I fly formation with the T-6 Texan, it is possible to hear the propeller when the wingman changes power settings aggressively, and when a jet powers up beside you in formation, it is audible as well.  This only happens in close formation though.

Edited by Chill31
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/22/2018 at 8:56 AM, Chill31 said:

 

This is true to a limited degree.  You can shim the leading edge of the horizontal stabilizer to change the angle of incidence. However, from the manufactured position, you can only change it to give more nose down "trim".  I don't know if it was done in WWI though, and it would be impossible to get it removed completely since the bolt holes (that attach the horizontal stabilizer) would not line up at that point.

 

EDITED (I had not flown FC , only ROF a while ago, with MS FFB2 at the time I originally posted): I fly ROF/FC with a MS FFB2 and a TM Warthog with stick extension.  With MS FFB2, the FC Dr.I is perfect.  With the Warthog and stick extension, it seems about right as well.  If the elevator position depicted graphically is accurate to what is being simulated, then I think there is something off, and they should consider to rebalance the plane.

 

I just edited this post.  If you have a MS FFB2, you are experiencing a very realistic Dr. I control feel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After flying again it actually flies hands off, neutral elevator at around 85 kph, just above stall speed, not really a cruising speed, but the stick pressure required up to about 100-110 isn't too strenuous.  Maybe it was just considered the optimal 'rake'/angle of the stab for turn fighting.  It must be angled for a specific reason -- setting it just above stall speed makes sense for a turnfighter.  What is the neutral/handsoff speed of the SPAD13 in comparison?

 

What I really like is that you can do spontaneous loops in the dr1 without the gyro effects completely taking over at the end.  Try it in RoF and you have to really fight to keep from spinning, here it falls right back into place.  I've specifically heard of this behavior so I was pretty wowed.

 

I am using an ffb2 and the feeling of the planes is incredible, especially the compression effects of high speed.  Big step up from RoF.  Much smoother too, a lot better feel of the air buffeting over the surfaces.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3:11 is the part I like the best, and honestly is what I miss the most with the FM in FC, and (irrelevantly, but worth pointing out) RoF since the dreaded Dec-2014 patch in RoF as well.
Years ago saw a video of another guy (red baron paint scheme w/white cowling) do the same, but with a bit more angle, then returned to original course as if nothing ever happened.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×