Was The Fokker D.VIII The Best German Fighter Aircraft Of WW1?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 8 фев 2020
- Many people certainly think it was one of the best. What do you think? Let us know in the comments below. Please share our video with your friends!
If you like/fly 'Rise Of Flight', or any other WW1 flight simulator, chances are you'll love this video.
In March 1918 the German Air Service ran the second of their competitions for aircraft manufacturers which was designed to encourage the development of new fighter aircraft. By early August, it was Jasta 6 who was one of the first units to receive the new Fokker E.V in significant quantity.
The Jasta 6 unit colours of black and white stripes on the aircraft nose which had been used on the earlier Fokker D.VIIs was not practical for the round engine cowlings of the D.VIII's, so a black and white 'flower petal' pattern was adopted instead.
Jasta 6 only operated the E.V models of the aircraft for around 10 days before they were withdrawn from service after a number of aircraft had structural failures in the air. Returning to service in October 1918 as the newly redesigned Fokker D.VIII, the type only had around three weeks of active
service before the end of the war. There were roughly 85 examples of the E.V/D.VIII is service up to 11th November 1918.
Despite using a relatively underpowered rotary engine, the D.VIII proved to be an agile and capable fighter, and some German pilots reported that it was easier to handle than the earlier Fokker D.VII.
Following the war most of the D.VIII's were scrapped, although eight captured examples served in the Polish Air Force during the Polish-Soviet War of 1919-1920. A single original example is thought to exist in the Caproni Museum in Italy.
Historical Aviation Film Unit (HAFU) :: www.aviationfilm.com
Aviation, Motorsport, Military Vehicles, Vintage Machinery & Steam
----
** Historical Machines TV - Free 7-Day Trial ** : See much more video material like this, and more, on our premier video-on-demand streaming service at www.historicalmachines.tv/page....
It'll cost you less that the price of a cup of coffee for a monthly subscription, and stere's heaps to see that you won't find on this channel.
----
Copyright © 2020 Historical Aviation Film Unit
This video material may not be reproduced in any form (except on other websites as an unedited embedded video which links back to to this RUclips master), without the written permission of the Historical Aviation Film Unit.
This particularly applies to television broadcasters and other media outlets. 
Авто/Мото
I was always impressed by the D.VIII's very modern wing planform, and obviously the fact that it was a monoplane. It was seriously handicapped by the old Oberursel UR.II rotary engine (I could only imagine what it would have done with a Sh.III or even a Bentley BR.2). Yet despite this, it was quite a performer.
I have been reading ‘Winged Victory’ recently and one observation repeatedly made is that the Fokker Dr1 had a tendency for all three wings to crumple up when hit by bursts from twin Vickers; it isn’t said directly but a distinct implication is that Fokker’s methods of (so far as possible) using internal bracing for the wings (further developed in D7s & D8) whilst having aerodynamic advantages also by concentrating all of the strength into a more limited area could make the aircraft more vulnerable to concentrated machine gun fire - the D8 would be the ultimate step in this direction.
Successful combat with Dr1 & D7 are described but D8 does not appear - the book is strongly based upon the author’s direct experience as a Camel pilot.
Very nice but I would've liked to hear about climb rates and other tech stats. Thanks.
The Germans didn't have to give up the Fokker D.VII as a requirement of the Treaty of Versailles. The Armistice Agreement required this.
Correct
I just learned this today in school. The TOV had Germany surrendering all their military aircraft.
Appreciate the level of detail. E V designation was unknown to me, though D VIII was. Thanks for posting.
The true story behind the award winning movie "The Blue Max" was the story of this aircraft and its fatal flaw.
I love the parasol design idea. Many single engine types of the times had wings in the way of pilot view during approach and landing-two of the three most dangerous times for any pilot ever. The parasol wing idea did away with these blind spots . . . at the cost of suffering twice the wing loading stresses per lifting member. The tech/metallurgy wasn't quite up to it yet, but it would soon be.
As for the Dreidekker . . . from what I've read it seems the plane was meant to transfer any forward impetus into pure lift. It could outclimb and out banked turn, anything else in the sky. As with any design whose operation often approached the stress limits of materials, it was a dangerous plane to fly. But, for a banked turn, a spiraling climb, a snap roll, or Immelmann, it couldn't be beat.
Read the original novel by Jack D. Hunter, the story focuses more on the biplane Fokker D VII and Stachel's dark soul.
Also, tri plane could make skidding flat turns and indulge many different a/c without banking ac.
@obimk1 not true, the idea of synchronized machinegun was French, the problem was they couldn’t get it working and it was indeed Fokker who made it working and used it on his planes.
Its performance was nothing compared to the Siemens-Schuckert D.IV. That was a masterpiece that came too late for the war.
Yeah but this design was far simpler to mass produce (which was always a problem with the Albatross for Example) also don't underestimate the advantages of excellent all round vision. Which makes not only finding the enemy easier, but significantly reduced the difficulties of landing safely.
Its also one of the reasons why the DR.1 triplane didn't last long in service, yes it could turn on a dime but with all those wings it was near impossible to see anything in a fight, and Germany never made another triplane fighter.
@@brokeandtired Good points. The visibility issue dogged the DR.1, making it a less attractive aircraft than the Camel or SE5a, with their low profile cockpits. Losing sight of the enemy was certain death. Also, I do agree that the D.IV was an enormously complex aircraft to build and the engine was also complex and tricky to maintain. Thank you, Paul
@@Mannock 🙂
The problem with both the Fokker E.V (DVIII) and the Siemens- Schuckert D.III/ D.IV were the engines. The E.V ended up stuck with basically the same Oberursal engine as the DRI and therefore had only 120 hp. The Siemens engine in the SSW D. series showed great promise but was plagued with reliability issues, not all of which were related to the scarcity of proper lubricating oil which troubled the Oberusals as well.
@@johntischler1634 The Fokker DVIII still had a VERY respectable speed of 127mph due to its streamlined design and was potentially VERY cheap to make in numbers.....Also great visibility would have made it an excellent dogfighter.....Its light weight made it a nimble fighter...
One of the first model kits that I had as a kid was a balsa Fokker D VIII.
YIMMY!!!! Look at the club of a propeller that thing is turning. Wow too cool.
One thing that made the D.VII such a great aircraft was that it did not need drag-inducing bracing wires.
Ultimately, as a production plane it trying to make the most out of an old engine. So, a very sensible progression but despite D. VIII designation it wasn't an attempt to surpass the D. VII. It was more of an attempt to extract more from proven engine due to the delays in the development of more powerful units.
I can imagine the pilots loved it. Great downward visibility, the latest understanding of aerodynamic design and engine power essentially frozen at 1916 levels.
I think by the end of the war the lack of engine development had pushed German designers to higher level of aerodynamic development but I'm guessing the D. VIII would have struggled to catch or run away from fighters with twice the power. With the Allies starting to roll out 300-hp engines in the same period they would have effectively had a third of the power.
It's a very clean design but that power disadvantage would be hard to overcome.
another great video thank you for sharing with a little background history nice work 👍
Thanks. We're going to be trying to move our videos into this style more and more as we go along this year -- always great and useful to have feedback on how we're doing.
Great video and an insight into early aviation, which I have a passion for. (NZ)
My Dad and i built a balsa wood flying model of this back in the 1980's. We also had the D7 and we combined the plans to make the triplane, DR.1.
I was working on a D6 biplane, but never got it finished due to some sagging lower wing issue.
An amazing video Allan, love your work (great intro and captions), keep 'em coming. Cheers.
Hey thanks for that. Good to get some positive feedback, thanks.
Yeah that red subscribe button was amazing, you just got to kneel down and worship such genius.................
I always thought it would be very entertaining to see the DVIII dogfighting a Snipe. Thanks for this beautiful video.
More to come!
Just after the war a German pilot was invited to speak to a mixed group of English and french pilots. He regaled the group with his stories. He said he was never as scared as when one fokker got on his tail and he couldnt shake him. His english host snickered and stopped him and said “ old boy we didnt fly Fokkers “, to which the German pilot stated “ I was not talking about the plane I was talking about that mother foker pilot trying to shoot me down!,”
😂😂
Old corny joke in typically bad taste
TRULY INSPIRATIONAL !!!!!
The Fokker D.VII was not mentioned in the Treaty of Versailles other than that all military aircraft needed to be surrendered. The pertinent articles are 198 - 202. Article 202 states - in part (and this is the important part):
"...all military and naval areonatical material (except some seaplanes) must be delivered to the Governments of the Principal Allied Powers."
It was specifically mentioned in the Terms of the Armistice.
Totally agree !!!!
I wish I had a T-shirt like that, Sir!
Wow - that's great footage - thanks.
Glad you enjoyed it
I always liked the Fokker D-VI. It had all the typical WWI aeroplanes with the biplane layout, radial engine and twin machine guns. Essentially, the plane was a DR-I fuselage with shortened D-VII wings.
It had a rotary engine, not a radial.
Informative and professional video. Thank you very much.
We have lots like this (and even more coming soon) on our new streaming service: www.historicalmachines.tv
Thanks for sharing.
You bet
Fokker WW1 airplanes: I am reminded of a very old commercial for a laxative, which talked about how many prunes to take for constipation. The line was "Is one enough? Is three too many?" In this case, it is wings.
nice video thanks interresting
Remarkable collection of flying historic aircraft.
Looks like a clear and smooth design
On which basis we should judge? DVIII come late in the war, in small numbers. Anyway, it has a max speed of 200Km/h for a ceiling of 6300m, compared to DVII 185 km/h for 6000m ceiling. Judging on this, it was better (faster and with better ceiling), but its operational life was too short to make a good comparison with contemporary fighters.
The ceiling of WWI aircraft was pretty irrelevant since very few pilots ever flew at those altitudes. Without oxygen masks and enclosed cockpits it was more a test of pilot endurance. The real strength of the Fokker DVII was that it was a forgiving and stable aircraft which worked as an extension of the pilot and never gave him any nasty surprises - something was was common on aircraft in those days. The inline-6 engine was also very smooth and free from bad vibration which meant that it was a good platform from which to aim and fire. The allied V8's and rotary powered aircraft really felt like untamed beasts and the rotaries suffered from the gyroscopic effect. Good radials had just emerged and were still mostly fitted on bombers.
The later BMW powered version of the Fokker DVII could get close to 200km/h as well. The BMW engine was a significant improvement of the old Mercedes engine.
By the end of WWI Germany had trouble finding fuel for their aircraft and the allies outproduced them in aircraft engines four times to one. Had the conflict gone on any superior German aircraft wouldn't have made any difference simply because Germany was economically broke by the end of WWI. This is btw why food riots happened on the German home front and why the German Revolution broke out in October 1918 about 3 weeks before the armistice. In fact it was the main reason the armistice was signed because Germany risked going the same way Imperial Russia did and the country be lost to revolutionaries while they were too busy fighting a war.
Some say the Fokker DVIII was a nimble aircraft but it's also possible that it was less rugged than the Fokker DVII. Parasol monoplanes never really had their heyday even between the wars or during WWII.
A beautiful machine indeed. Great footage.
Many thanks!
Great video
Has always been one of my favorite planes.
The D.VIII must have gotten into some dogfights. The war didn't let up in it's final three weeks. It would be interesting to know what allied pilots who saw the D.VIII in action thought about it. Were they impressed or did they think it wasn't any better than the D.VII or did they think it was just another German plane that wasn't anything special, just unusual because of it's single wing?
aaahhh i see the wings of war/glory boxes on your shelf. bravo!!
You know it!
I feel like the D.VIII, the Siemens-Schuckert range of late-war fighters were equally promising and indeed were far superior to the D,VII and D.VIII.
It's been said that the handling characteristics of the D-VII made average pilots very food, and the very good, great.
Not sure why you would say that about the D.VIII. The D.VII was faster, more sturdy even after the D.VIII's problems were fixed, better dive, and much easier to fly. The same can be said when compared to the SSW, although the SSW could climb like a bat out of hell.
Such a beautiful airplane
I kind of figured many would start choosing sides about which of all the German Fighter's was master of the skies in WWI. If you look with a jaundiced eye the Eindecker was a cousin of the initial E-1 which was the very synthesis of fighter design in 1914. Lessons learned after four deadly years of that air war had no doubt altered philosophies, but in the final blows, the German High Command opted for the second Eindecker. The D-VII served with distinction, but was far more costly to build, and the Daimler-Benz engines couldn't be had quickly enough with raw materials hardly available any longer, using more metals and wood resources that Germany couldn't afford to waste. The light upper wing struts weren't heavy enough resulting in wing sheering, hence the redesign of light, clean design which could use a readily available radial engine which had good cooling without needing the complexity of liquid cooling required in the in-line and vee configurations of the period. The Grome had powered far more aircraft prior to, and after all the trenches emptied of the nation's dead that brought aerial combat that far. Many of these men, are yet considered the last of what once was Chivalrous Knights in the Europe of Olde. Any balmy young man who's mad enough to strap into what is little more than a combustion-engined, flying kite, rigged with 30 calibre machine guns, to test his metal against another flyer with a like will to kill is a better man than any of us. This was seat of your pants flying with few instruments, and cable linked control surfaces, making controls heavier with increased speeds in a dive or in High-G turns often made in the Aerial Dog Fights. The E-VIII was a compromise, as all aircraft are, and have always been. Enjoy your humble opinions as you like.
BEAUTIFUL
According to Dan San Abbott the DVIII (unlike the EV) never saw ANY service because none were actually delivered to any Jasta units. They were only ordered. Apparently he had looked at all he documents pertaining to this.
The DVIII was created because the Mercedes engine was in short supply with all available being directed to tthe DVII. The Oberursel although by 1918 was rather out dated and with poor reliability but it was available. in addition Fokker had a financial stake in Oberursel so it made financial sense for Fokker to use it. Antony Fokker was always a keen business man. The fuselage of the DVIII was almost identical to the Triplane so its production was well understood and the plywood covered wing was actually fairly simple to make.
Fokker did actually produce a low wing DVIII prototype (V25) which it had been adopted would have pre-dated the classic low wing fighter layout by at least 15 years. In trials the pilots did not like the limited downward visibility so a 'parasol' position was adopted as the pilot could see both above and below it although not an ideal structural arrangement. He also produced a larger version powered by a Mercedes engine.
The DVII was a better fighter which is why Fokker managed to 'spirit away' a couple of train loads of them with spares to Holland at the war's end right under the noses of the allies.
Very interesting. I think the low wing design would look very modern. Are there photos? Was the wing planform different? I love this plane.
Always wonder what these WWI aircraft would have been like if they'd had a light reliable in-line 250 Hp engone.
Well blow me down! I never even knew there was such a thing as the Fokker DVIII. I only knew of the model before it.
Even with the structural issues sorted out, I have to imagine the safe dive speed would be lower than for a study, late-war biplane. A lot of German aces, including Richthofen, made the last flight of their lives in “nimble” aircraft, where perhaps a “quick” aircraft might have seen them back to their aerodromes, at least on the day.
Isn't that how the "Blue Max" died ? testing a Fokker 8 to the max ... blue ... (structural failure = wing came off !)
@@RemusKingOfRome - In the movie. But was the movie factual?
@@scootergeorge9576 I loved the Blue Max, it had some many positives - great sound track, great story, many subplots - Great War, class warfare, sex warfare.
@@RemusKingOfRome - A lot of entertainment value. for sure.
Oh Dear, How Sad, Never Mind.
Those pilots must have been impressed by the visibility of the craft! But it looks damned fragile and everything depends on that wing!
Fokker DVII is a favorite and too late was the Sopwith Snipe but incredible nonetheless.
It certainly looks delicate, but all the Fokkers had welded steel tube fuselages which were intrinsically stronger than the Allied planes, and strong thick wings with beefy spars (when they were built right). I wish they had shown the plane"s aerobatic abilities- it was incredibly nimble. You can see it fly at Cole Palen's Flying Circus in Old Rhinebeck, NY- an amazing sight! (They even have it in a dogfight with a SPAD.)
Fokker D-8 , aka: the flying Razor
Only flew this is simulator (Rise of Flight), incredibly nimble and lower drag means it's still fairly fast, although I do feel the DVII was a more stable gun platform.
How about a dogfight with a Sopwith Snipe or other same period AC?
Fokker always making the best machines of the first world war
I built a plastic model kit of a Fokker D.8 as a kid. Have loved it ever since!
FWIW, I am currently rewatching this video. I just noticed at around 01:44 in the vid, just after the _Fokker D.VII_ becomes airborne, the left-hand main landing gear wheel very quickly stops rotating.
At about 02:43 in this vid, the left-hand main landing gear wheel of the _Fokker D.VIII_ continues rotating after the aircraft becomes airborne.
Great vid! It would be even better if you could get someone to mount a GoPro on the AC to get some insight into the pilot's perspective like instruments, AC handling, and so on & so forth.
Working on it!
In the final days of the war, Junkers produced a low-wing all metal monoplane. It was certainly a harbinger of things to come. I don't know how it performed, though.
;) Yeeeeh!! Muy bien, ahora síiii
Perhaps the D-VII's Mercedes engine in the D-VIII air-frame would have eliminated the rotary engine torque dramas making it a real tough guy...!
In all honesty I don't think that would have worked, the Oberursel rotary was much smaller lighter than the Mercedes D.IIIa or the BMW IIIa, the D.VIIIs airframe was not designed for such an engine, it would likely have been very nose-heavy and unbalanced.
Look at the Fw-190 when the replaced the BMW 801 radial with the Junkers Jumo 213, they had to extend the tail and the only major physical difference between the engines was the length (width and water cooling notwithstanding).
:)
I read that the DVIII had some serious issues with failure in torsion (Wings flying off) when returning from a nosedive during combat conditions. They were recalled in an effort to solve the problem. They ended up beefing up some of the spars, but if you can imagine, it actually made the problem worse (because they didn't understand what the problem was to begin with). I'm not sure about the validity of these claims, but I came here to look for a better understanding and can't find anything except for where I read it. "Structures or Why Things Don't Fall Down" by J.E. Gordan. CH.12 Pages 259-271. If you're interested in a simplified technical understanding of the alleged problems.
If you take time-in-action and combat success then the DVII beats the DVIII. If you are considering only technical advancement and performance then the Junkers DI is a worthy consideration.
A similar aircraft was featured in the movie The Blue Max and there was a comment on its instability. It crashed in the movie. I was not aware that D8s saw active service albeit only briefly.
The similar aircraft in that movie was a Morane 230 double seater.
It was a structural failure of the Parasol Wing. Under the stress of High G' loading, the wing would depart the fuselage and then the fuselage would eventually hit the ground in one spot and the wing would flutter down someplace else. 🧐
Fokker designed the Dr I with three wings. Then he designed the D VII with two wings. Then he designed the D VIII with one wing. He had a truly revolutionary idea for the D IX but he couldn’t get it off the ground.
Ha! Ha! Ha!
I always wondered how much improvement you'd achieve if you had retractable LG on the D-8.. It sure was a sweet design. The early Lockheed Vegas had a similar layout they they were true record-setters...
Great point
Nice Aircraft, but the first one with upper wing like that was the french Morane Saulnier Parasol in 1913 😉
This is the aircraft that Stachel was supposed to die in at the end of "The Blue Max."
Orémus Y'all.
I love this bird.
It looks like the D.VIII would've had some pretty serious high-visibility issues, given how low that wing sits above the pilot's head.
I’d vote for the Siemens Schuckert
True, the Siemens Schuckert D.IV was a pretty good fighter as well, though it sported a much bigger rotary engine that the poor little Oberursel in the D.VIII!
@@historicalmachines Imagine what the DVIII would've been like if they could've only used the engine that was supposed to go in it. The URIII with supercharger.
When the SS DIII /DIV was flown by an experienced pilot and the engine was running properly, it was truly formidable. Unfortunately, it was plagued with engine problems and had a few nasty handling characteristics that could cause a less experienced pilot grief.
George Pepard's character test flies one of these at the end of the movie The Blue Max. A 1966 film about WW1 fighter pilots from the German perspective.
Hello Chester, it was actually a "dressed up" Morain-Saulnier, of later (20s/30s) vintage. Similar in appearance, but bigger, with a static radial. Best regards. Ex Chief Eng for Personal Plane Services/Bianchi Aviation Film Services(who supplied the aircraft for the film, plus about 38 other films/cameos
Just a question, do you use the blip switch very much in flight, or just let the engine run at its rated RPM.
I'd be interested to know what Biggles thought of this aircraft.
Nothing. Because he doesn’t exist.
@@MothaLuva I'm sorry, this post is for fun people who have an imagination.
@@hipcat13 damn. You want a funeral for him?
@@hipcat13 "I'm sorry, this post is for fun people who have an imagination." Imaginary, fictional people is your idea of "fun" ? I wonder what Hitler thought of this aircraft? But you tell me he was but a corporal at the time who had no experience of aircraft himself. Then I'll use your fanboy excuse/baby logic against yourself:"I'm sorry my post is for fun people who have an imagination. Can't you see how fun that is?? You must lack imagination."
Fanboys into comic books, games and fictional characters utterly ignore any relevant topic to superimpose their own nonsensical angles onto anything. As soon as you wonder what the point is they all go "Oh, that's just a joke." Usually jokes have a point to them, have a punchline or are clever. There's deadpan comedy too and satire.
"I'd be interested to know what Biggles thought of this aircraft." Is just comic book level fanboyism. Like seeing a fast car and say:"I wonder what Dominic Toretto thinks of this car." or a new jet and say:"I wonder what Tony Stark thinks of this." What kind of humor is that?
Just arbitrary nonsense. And funny? For those into poop-jokes perhaps.
"who have an imagination." There's a huge irony there to talk about imagination when somebody with little to no self-insight never has any imagination other than random gibberish. What you have written and replied is neither funny nor any sort of imagination, it's just arbitrary memes you repeat like parrots. Are parrots funny? No, they're annoying.
You do also realize how the *dumbest* people into conspiracy theories usually say that too."People who doubt conspiracies lack imagination." Imagination is their rationalization of everything no matter how preposterous or silly.
@@Mr_Fancypants Chimp
seimens D4 was the best from a pilots view it was engage and disengage at will since it could out climb every other fighter
wagner24314 Unreliable engine unfortunately.
wagner24314 Perhaps, but at this point of the war Imperial Germany was nigh on bankrupt and couldn't find fuel for its aircraft so any top fighter wasn't going to make any difference no more than the Me262 jet did in WWII. Besides, the rotary engine of the Siemens-Schuckert D.IV needed castor oil and unfortunately there was a huge shortage of that in Germany. The bad additives they had to use shortened the life-span of the engine considerably and an aircraft (as well as any other weapon) is only as useful as its effective operational time. The allies too had some impressive designs merely weeks from entering service too.
The type is credited with the last aerial victory of the war…
It's one thing to see these lovely planes flying nonchalantly in a straight line, but how about some real combat maneuvers?
Certainly appears nimble enough but I would still rather fight in a DVII.
There is something about a D.VII that makes it feel (look) like a more solid and relatable machine -- maybe it's simply that second wing! Ha Ha!
@@historicalmachines how do the your pilots feel about D6 vs. D7 vs. D8 on various aspects of performance
@@historicalmachines Biplanes are structurally sound because the two wings, and the struts and wires work as trusses. This is structurally very efficient, for things that fly slowly. The Fokker Dr.I, the DVII and the DVIII had cantilever wings, eliminating the need for the truss structure. Most books point out that the DVII's N-struts at the end, were not necessary. Not pointed out is Fokker's history of shitty assembly. Maybe they were needed.
I wonder how this plane would have performed with the Siemans-Halske engine.
I had thought it might be a good deal faster, but it's not. I had thought it might be rugged and strong, but it's not. The second version was much better but the original fell apart in use. I had thought it might have been lethal in combat, but it's not. It saw virtually no combat. Some people said it was easier to handle than a D7, but a D7 remained controllable beyond the stall, and that's a trick we use multi million dollar triple redundant computerised fly-by-wire to do today. In 1918, Anthony Fokker did it with good design. Maybe it was feared by pilots and military people after the war? No, that was the earlier D7 - no other aircraft terrified them like the D7...
To claim it as the best fighter of WW1 is I think, slightly a long bow to draw. The D7 has a much better claim. It would offer a superb view, without the lower wing in the way, but it's a single pilot aircraft, not an observation platform...
D8 always sounded like the worlds biggest chainsaw.
It would have easily been the best if they put a 180 hp BMW straight six in it
Wasn't the star of the movie, "The Blue Max" depicted as being killed in a D-VIII at the end of the picture?
I can see the wing tearing off it after a couple of dog fights.
Cannons would. Small caliper bullets... Not so much.
How can an aircraft be considered the best , when it was grounded because a wing kept falling off .
*Check out that tail wheel.*
One thing worth pointing out, the Treaty of Versailles makes no mention of the D.VII. The surrender of military assets was a subject of post-war agreements. It's a common myth. Also, not all D.VII's were confiscated and it's main reason for Allied intrigue was the Cantilever wing design.
In a sense the D.VII was one of the key aircraft leading to the Hurricane, Spitfire, BF-109 and all other modern aircraft.
He doubted that it was the best ww1 fighter plane but I do think it was the best ww1 surveillance plane
"Unfortunately it was introduced too late to affect the outcome of the war." Unfortunate indeed! Gott mit uns, brothers.
from the elevator position in cruise it appears to be tail heavy.
Looks like a Pietenpol air scout... I wonder if there was any influence from the D-8 with the Air Scout?
I'm guessing it was so maneuverable because it has less drag and weight compared to bi or triplanes.
Why didn't they try fitting a stronger motor to the Foker triplane? I think even with it's greater mass it could out turn any place of the war.
The big issue is that by the end of the war, when the D.VIII was about to enter production, there were NO bigger engines available for Fokker's aircraft, but there were still plenty of 110hp rotaries available. Some companies like Siemens were producing much bigger rotary engines, but they were in very short supply.
The reason they didn't fit a better engine to the triplane was that it was to draggy. No matter if you put a 150 hp or a 2,000 hp, you would not be getting anywhere any quicker.
@@No.10_SopwithMan
Good point but I do think it could have had a slightly stronger motor without it reaching the drag limit. I read somewhere that a common complaint among pilots that while it performed well, it felt underpowered. But in the right hands it was truly a menace. A stronger motor would have helped regain energy faster as long as it doesn't add additional weight. But again there is only so much you could gain from this.
Like you said there is only so much you can get out of this particular design. This was my favorite plane to fly in Red Baron 2. It seemed very resilliant compared to many of the other planes. One time I even had a air to air collision that sliced off one entire side of the plane. But when I came out of the roll I slammed the joystick and rudder to the opposite way as much as possible. I was lucky and timed it just right to end up perfectly straight and level. If I let off for a second the plane would have instantly went into a death sprial. I gently eased down the throttle and was able to land in a field. Not sure if that could have happened in real life but it was awesome to survive that.
Not that it's a true comparison, but while the DVIII is a lovely model to fly in scale or semi-scale RC models (I've built a few and love them) both the DR-1 triplane and the DVIII monoplane can be really tricky to handle, at least the ones I've been asked to get sorted. The triplane has a lot of drag and is prone to porpoising due to the short coupling, while the DVIII is just really twitchy, especially on roll (not necessarily a bad thing in a fighter). All three look great in the air though, especially full scale.
Was your DVIII a Balsa USA DVIII?
@@johntischler1634 Sorry, that was a typo, I meant a Fokker DVII. My latest one was from China, about five years ago, it's still going strong. Balsa USA ones are larger and seem very nice indeed.
Rhinebeck Aerodrome, enuff sed!
No, this is not Old Rhinebeck. This is New Zealand -- The Vintage Aviator Collection has two D.VIIIs, not just the one like OR ;-)
If only the wing had been mounted to the lower fuselage.
Imagine this plane as a low wing monoplane
But why? It's a great aircraft as it is -- not sure that a low wing version would be any better...?
@@historicalmachines I’ve got a personal preference for low-wing planes. Nothing personal
The DVII was so lethal it was mentioned *by name* in the Versailles Treaty as a banned weapon. As for the D.VIII,, who knows?
Seems it was not. And I was as surprised as you, but in another video here on RUclips, a guy explained that it was stated in the cease fire, though probably without any special significance. It was not mentioned in the peace treaty itself.
Rotary engines were designed to spin at the same RPM's as the propellor. They were lubricated by the oil of castor bean, Castor Oil. Castor Oil was an excellent lubricant and when it was used in the Rotary engine, it proved to be the best oil for the job of cooling and lubricating the Rotary engines. It also has a nice smell and the aerodromes often were bug free and smelled sweet! 🌬
"Rotary engines were designed to spin at the same RPM's as the propellor......" not quite . The prop was attached via a fixed crankshaft so the propellor DID rotate at the same speed as the engine, not by design as such, but more because it was essentially fixed to an integral part of the engine.
@@historicalmachines The crankshaft is bolted to the firewall and the crankshaft is the only structure that connects the engine to the airplane. As for engine RPM vs propeller RPM ...... Which came first? The chicken 🐔 or the egg 🐣?
Shame TVAL have stopped building those beauties
It is. A sad day.
No way the best.. D8 had some innovative features. High wing monoplane was innovative. Fokkers quality issues causing wing skins to shed, and lack of powerful engine to put on it - made it mediocre at best. Fokker D7 was best German plane. D8 could have been great.
Would you this is more maneuverable than dr1? Or less?
Dit it have an on or off Throttle like the Sopwith Camel ? it looks like it.
Yes Chitlika. All rotary engines have two speeds - stop and flat out. The pilot controlled the engine by "blipping" - switching the ignition on and off. This was the principal weakness of all rotary-engine aircraft; They operated at full throttle and had nothing in reserve. The gyroscopic precession generated by the rotating mass of the engine meant that they could turn tightly in the direction the engine rotated, but were much less capable when turning the other way. Combining knowledge of these two 'features', enemy pilots would attack from above (converting height into speed) from the side their target was best at turning toward, give them a spray of gunfire then climb-away in the direction that the target was less able to turn. The pilot under attack couldn't give chase because they were already at full throttle and would stall if they attempted to chase their antagonist. A stall in a rotary-engine aircraft almost always resulted in a spin, from which only the most experienced (or lucky) pilots could recover. This 'feature' killed more Sopwith Camel pilots than the Germans. Cheers! Paul
@@spthompson6501 Not true
Wasn't the D8 featured in the movie The Blue Max?
Yes, and in the film the structural weakness was part of the plot, which eventually killed George Peppard's character. I did not know this was actually a fact of the aircraft.
Did (does) the Fokker D8 have the same rotary torque issues from the rotary that allegedly made the Sopwith Camel (and only the Camel) so "interesting" to fly?
The D8 was my favorite WW1 airplane until I heard the one at Old Rhinebeck - what a racket! The D7's Mercedes was much quieter and smoother. I know, in a dogfight the noise is not a factor! But in this video you do not get to hear the D8's "raw" sound - just warning you!
Why was the rotary engine so ubiquitous? Radials were with in their grasp were they not?
The rotary engine, is its own flywheel. Compression-ratios were very low, about 4:1, by modern standards and the propeller didn't have sufficient momentum to keep the engine turning. Also, the rotating engine effectively cooled itself, eliminating the need (and weight) for a water-jacket and heat-exchanger.
@@spthompson6501 Piston reciprocation did not occur. The piston assembly was 'dragged around in a circle' and did not 'stop, then accelerate in a reverse direction', as do the conventional piston engines. Thusly, the stress loading of piston pins and rod bottom ends is absent. Moreover, all the shaking occurring when a 'mass in motion' stops and starts is eliminated: this shaking of a conventional I.C. engine has to be smoothed out by the presence of heavy counterweights for the crankshaft.
The rotary needs no counterweights as there is no need to balance out the forces from reciprocation motion and is then, lighter in weight. Accordingly, none of the failures from the stresses of reciprocation and lighter weight, plus the absence of cooling issues are inherent merits of a rotary that are not found in the stationary radial.
'Lee Branch
It's always been one of my favorites. I don't know it would be the best, with its higher wing loading I doubt it would be significantly more capable, it's small, and might be only slightly aerodynamically cleaner than the D7 which remember also had no bracing wires. It was a time of experimentation mostly random ideas being tried, sometimes they hit on a design that was a little better than another out of sheer luck.
I'm going to ask a dumb question why did that airplane seem to shut off several times while it was flying
That's just how (some) rotary engines sound.
I wonder, if Richtofen had not lost his life as he did and transfered to the DVII how would he have done in a much superior machine. Mind you, by the time he was killed I think he was suffering from battle fatigue and thus had lapses in concentration. But if he could have been pulled from the front line for awhile, transitioned into the DVII how many more victories could he have achieved?
A lot. He was a killing machine when he was not exhausted.