FlightGlobal.com
Home
Premium
Archive
Video
Images
Forum
Atlas
Blogs
Jobs
Shop
RSS
Email Newsletters
You are in:
Home
Aviation History
1918
1918 - 1108.PDF
OCTOBER 3, 1918. accur THE FOKKER BIPLANE, TYPE D VII. the Technical Department, Aircraft Production, Ministry of Munitions, we have just received an official report on the Fok Except for extreme pressure on our columns the first instalment of our own description of this machine wouia n, aPPearea in last week's issue of " FLIGHT," the greater part of the material for this article being made-up ready for Pf^fj* After carefully perusing the official report we have decided to adhere to our original intention of publishing our own descnpt, of this machine Receded by certain items in the official report compiled from sources not available to the general Press. At lame time we feel obliged to point out certain discrepancies between the official report and our own. These occur ««t«Iv i« \cale drawings of the machine. Thus in the side elevation the inter-plane struts are shown, in the official drawing, as Parallel whereas as a matter of fact they are very far from being so. This mistake has apparently been caused by placing I nf the lower plane too far forward, bringing it into line with the chassis strut attachment, while, as a matter of fact, it isplu^u, «»«. lltherTftin the recJss in the body, as clearly indicated in " FLIGHT'S "side view. Fig. 1. In the same manner the rear spat the bottom Plane appears to have been placed too far aft. Turning our attention to the front elevation of the official general arraj Znt-drawing. it is found that the top wing is represented as having its top surface set at a negative dihedral and its lower sur) Mive dihedral angle. This does not tally with our own measurements, which show that the top surface of the top plan, v straight, the lower surface sloping up to it. Again, the taper of the top spars is shown in the official drawing to ext itre line to tip This is not correct. The top spars are parallel between the points of attachment of the struts slop the body, tapering from these points to the tip. This may appear only a small matter and one not »•"»*« <*"*" nttmtion 10 It should be remembered, however, that a change in the particular example referred to might, and in would considerably affect the stability and manceuvreability of the machine, and the matter may not, therefore, be of as ^sequenZalrniiht be imagined. Inthe official plan view of the Fokker there are one or two points which are not strict'y at sulhasshoZngthe upper wing tip with a sha.p corner at the leading edge instead of rounded oft, and a straig<ht 1eadinge iTsLd ofZe slightl/hvept back* With this, however, we are not quarrelling, as the rounded ^ner'woud.benJdZinsieauujvie s jr r , importance, and the sweep-back, as pointed out in our desc^ tion, may be intentional, or, on the other hand, may have I . , caused by straining the wings badly. We have no desm • find fault merely for the sake of it, but when it comes to sue serious item as the off-setting of the vertical fin, which is sh( in the official plan view as being on the centre line, whilt a matter of fact its front end is off-set to port, we do think the is inexcusable, especially as it is quite correctly pointed out tn text of the repornhat the biplane "has a triangular fin w) foremost point is fixed an inch or two to the port side of the cei line of the machine," and a sketch, Fig. 12, has been dram illustrate this feature. The text of the official report is quite accurate, as jar as have been able to judge, and the respective sketches are excell • '.' with one exception. Fig. 15 in the official report is intend* show the engine bearers and their mounting. Whether it doe with any great success or not does not greatly matter to argument, but what does matter is that important tubes font, . part of the bearer and body structure have been omitted. I%?> - to illustrate our point we are pubhsnin^ ths cjlcia! si «?' well as our own (page 1114).—ED.] THE following data, relating to the performance of this t of machine and the detailed particulars of the weights, wh are reproduced from the official report, should be of c • siderable interest. It will be seen that these data have b compiled from variois sources, some being obtained from mxchine described, while others have been based upon figi — , relating to machines captured by the French :—: The British No. of the machine is G/2B/14, and the Gen No. is Type D7 F.N. 1,450 ; maker's No. 2,455. Fig. 15 of the Official Report on the Fokker biplane. It was brought down north of Haze>rouck on June ( Reproduced to show omission of important tubes in *9i8, by a British S.E.sa, and is a single-seater fighter. the framework. (Compare with "FLIGHT" sketches This aeroplane presents features of very grealNNB51* of same subject.) whether viewed from the standpoint of aerodynamic ties 1 IP* f .dp- ••".•-. 13 V Front view of the Fokker biplane. Reproduced from the Official Report. 1109 . ' „
Sign up to
Flight Digital Magazine
Flight Print Magazine
Airline Business Magazine
E-newsletters
RSS
Events
