FlightGlobal.com
Home
Premium
Archive
Video
Images
Forum
Atlas
Blogs
Jobs
Shop
RSS
Email Newsletters
You are in:
Home
Aviation History
1957
1957 - 0553.PDF
FLIGHT, 26 April 1957 a modification or replacement made by the Germans. The Tri-plane concerned had the original large tailplane. The German fighter experts were greatly impressed by theSopwith. Manfred von Richthofen himself stated that the Tri- plane was the best British aircraft then in service and that, incomparison with British biplane fighters, it was fast, more manoeuvrable, maintained its height in turns, climbed better, andcould be dived vertically. It appears that von Richthofen's opinion was based on combat experience and observation, for there is norecord that he flew a Sopwith Triplane. Perhaps the greatest compliment the enemy paid the Triplanewas the appearance, in rapid profusion, of an astonishing number of German and Austrian triplane single-seat fighters, soon afterthe Sopwith machine proved its mettle. Triplanes were not altogether new in Germany: an Euler triplane (and doubtlessothers) had flown before the war, and the German aircraft industry had a number of designers who favouredtriplanes. It seems, however, that that favour stemmed from structural considera-tions rather than from operational require- ments. A few German triplanes appearedas early as 1915, but were not accepted for service. The Sopwith Triplane's remarkable suc-cess, endorsed by von Richthofen, was not lost upon Hauptmann Kurt Schwarzen-berger, who was in charge of operational flight testing at Adlershof. He suggestedthat German designers should follow the Sopwith example and produce fighters oftriplane configuration. There followed a remarkable number of triplane single-seatfighters. The A.E.G., Albatros, Branden- burg, D.F.W., Euler, Fokker, Pfalz, Rolandand Schutte-Lanz companies all produced single-engined, single-seat triplanes: theSablatnig company built a triplane version of their SF-4 seaplane fighter; and theSiemens-Schuckert Werke produced the most extraordinary triplane of all, poweredby two Siemens-Halske rotary motors installed one at the nose and the other atthe tail of the central nacelle. Austrian manufacturers followed suit, and triplaneswere built by the Austrian Aviatik, Lohner, Oeffag and W.K.F. concerns. A triplaneversion of the Brandenburg CC single-seat flying-boat fighter also appeared. Of all these types, only the Fokker V4triplane went into production, as a Fokker Dr.I (properly, Fok. Dr.I); thePfalz Dr.I was produced in small numbers, but the greatest number in operationaluse was only nine. That was in June 1918, when 171 Fok. Dr.Is were operational. It has been said that Fokker contrivedto have the remains of a shot-down Sop- with Triplane sent to his factory insteadof to their proper destination, the experi- mental station at Adlershof. Whatever thetruth of that story may be, the Fokker V4 which was designed by Reinhold Platz wasa completely different aircraft from the Sopwith machine: all that the two aircrafthad in common was the triplane configura- tion. For propaganda purposes at the time,as with the alleged Handley Page/Gotha development, it was asserted that theFokker triplane was a copy of the Sopwith; and a natural post-war desire to upholdnational prestige came close to perpetu- ating that misconception (for misconceptionit unquestionably was). The first Fokker Dr.Is in service were at the front in July1917, but the type was not formally adopted until November of that year. It,more than the Sopwith Triplane, suffered from structural weakness. Our allies were quite as interested asthe enemy in the Sopwith Triplane. At least four were transferred to the Frenchgovernment, presumably for evaluation The general-arrangement drawing on the left shows N.5O9 (150 h.p. Hispano-Suiza engine). The large drawing to the right shows a typical production Triplane, with the small (earlier) tailplane shown as a detail. with a view to production of the type in France. These Triplaneswere N.5384, N.5385, N.5386 and N.5388, of which the second and fourth are known to have had the 110 h.p. Clerget. Triplanesreturned from the French were numbered N.524, N.541, N.542 and N.543, but it is not known whether any or all of those numberswere allotted to the four machines mentioned above. At least one Sopwith Triplane, N.5458, went to America. Thereit was exhibited, probably as a veteran combat aircraft, for it had served with Nos. 8 and 10 (Naval) Sqns.; equally probably, it mayhave been tested by American pilots. Another example, N.5486, left the White City depot on May 4, 1917, bound for Russia, butno records of its subsequent history seem to have survived to the present day.Only one Triplane, N.5431, was used outside the Western theatre of war. Early in 1917 this machine was sent to No. 2Wing, R.N.A.S., at Mudros on the island of Lemnos in the Aegean SOPWITH TRIPLANL
Sign up to
Flight Digital Magazine
Flight Print Magazine
Airline Business Magazine
E-newsletters
RSS
Events
