The Schuckert D.IV was the BEST plane offered in the old DOS game "Red Baron". If you could live long enough to get to that late in the war it was a joy to fly.

@VersusARCH

Жыл бұрын

It wasn't in the game. The best allied fighter was the Sopwith Snipe and German - Fokker DVII. At least in the vanilla game but I'm not aware of any expansions.

@alias1719

Жыл бұрын

I believe he is referring to the original Red Baron game, not Red Baron 3D. {I still have both!} BTW, there were a number of excellent player made mods once could download for the latter.

@pastorrich7436

Жыл бұрын

@@alias1719 Yes, the original 1990 DOS version. Lots of fun up to the point I switched to running NT 4 instead of 98.

@thethirdman225

Жыл бұрын

@@alias1719 SWWISA and Full Canvas Jacket were the best! Also La Prieur Pilots…

@lance5041

Жыл бұрын

@@pastorrich7436 that game was excellent. There were even some mods for that one, but you had to know how to hexedit to create them. A truly outstanding game was flying circus, it had the graphics of the original RB but was massively multi-player for the time. Each side only had 2 planes, one a stall fighter and one an energy fighter. Most people would furball in the middle, but the true hunters would Boom and Zoom. Was a great demonstration of energy fighters ruling.

This was also named as the best WWI fighters in the recent Hush Kit book. It looks like a beast.

@MrCenturion13

Жыл бұрын

I got two of those books. Really good.

@williamzk9083

Жыл бұрын

The propellor rotated in the opposite direction to the rotary engine. This got rid of the gyroscopic precession that caused handling issues.

@thethirdman225

Жыл бұрын

@@williamzk9083 Not entirely. They still needed the port wing to be set at a different angle.

@williamzk9083

Жыл бұрын

@@thethirdman225 there would still have been the asymmetry caused by the circulation of the propellor wash as well as p-factor. Wiki says one wing was larger to counter this.

@thethirdman225

Жыл бұрын

@@williamzk9083 I suspect the wing had a small amount of twist in it too. That’s how it looks to me.

I often dis-include the D.VIII, Siemens-Schuckert D.IV, Sopwith Snipe, and others from "best fighter of WW1", but it's hard not to acknowledge them and add qualifiers. They were essentially like the super props of WW2, too late to really do anything, but surely would have been great had they had more time. Whenever I talk about the SE5a, D.VII, SPAD XIII, I am always thinking of these planes in the back of my mind as well.

@EdNashsMilitaryMatters

Жыл бұрын

That's a good point and comparison.. Must admit, as I was writing this up, I kept thinking "Is this like WW1s Do335? Great performance but just too late". Lol probably should've titled it that.

@SoloRenegade

Жыл бұрын

@@EdNashsMilitaryMatters like you, I do consider the Siemens-Schuckert D.IV to be THE best fighter of WW1, and I say as much when it comes up. I think your title in this case was just fine. But it's curious to me that the D.VII saw extensive testing and use Post-WW1 and the SE5a continued in use as a primary fighter after the war, but surely the Allies also had a chance to test the Siemens-Schuckert D.IV? I just never see any pictures, or reports on it from teh Allies after the war.

@RemusKingOfRome

Жыл бұрын

Funny that, isn't it, all these great aircraft happening at the end of the wars. I wonder why .... :D

@dallesamllhals9161

Жыл бұрын

@@SoloRenegade parts?

@lance5041

Жыл бұрын

@@SoloRenegade Just an unformed guess, but was it there were already built SE5s and DVIIs? By the time it warranted spooling up production, it was time for the next evolution? I wonder how many Fokkers were used operationally and for how long (Sorry of that's covered, I just lost my hearing. Ugh.)

You've done it again, Ed. I truly knew, absolutely nothing of this aircraft. Thank you. ☮

@DaveSCameron

Жыл бұрын

Nein

Just had a light bulb moment. My old man, god rest his soul, used to race bikes in the 50's, 60's and 70's, they used vegetable oil in their engines at that time, the oil was called Castrol R, and if anyone has ever been around bikes using this oil, the smell from the exhaust is wonderful. My light bulb moment was Cast part of Castrol, I guess must stand for caster, as in caster oil?

@Skinflaps_Meatslapper

Жыл бұрын

Same basic stuff as Maxima 927, it's castor oil and has a truly distinct smell, different from any other 2-stroke oil. It's also still one of the best oils for racing 2-strokes made before the 90's.

@yakacm

Жыл бұрын

@@Skinflaps_Meatslapper Yeah the smell is wonderful. It was 4 strokes he raced, I think back then castor oil was used in any high performance applications. By the time I was born it was small capacity Ducati's that he raced. They were haplessly outclassed by the Japanese 2 strokes, but he was just racing for shits and giggles by then. You always knew when he was coming, the bass boom from even a small 4 stroke with unmuffled megaphones cut right thru the 2 stroke, annoyed wasp sound, lol.

@marshja56

Жыл бұрын

If you go to a vintage automobile race some of the old cars still use castor oil. The scent is unmistakable and nostalgic for some. Just don't ingest any of the stuff. WW1 pilots sometimes breathed in enough of it from the engine exhaust that it could be a problem.

@Skinflaps_Meatslapper

Жыл бұрын

@@marshja56 I've flown behind a Clerget 9B, breathing the smoke isn't a huge problem, it's far less noxious than turbine exhaust. The biggest problem I noticed is it eventually coats your entire face with a fine mist if you fly long enough. Get it in your eyes and you're basically done. The goggles I wore had small air vents to keep them from fogging up, and while I was looking off the right wing, I guess a tiny bit of it managed to pass through the vent and got on my left eye. Still couldn't see out of that eye even after I landed. You can't wipe it out of your eye either, as then your one good eye would be vulnerable without goggles protecting it. Could've been that this particular engine had an exhaust leak or something and it was especially bad in this case, but I certainly understood why you never saw pilots back then without goggles.

@jimstanga6390

Жыл бұрын

When WWI pilots fired their machine guns, the burnt cordite would fly back and stick to their faces that were already sticky with oil. That’s why the pilots came back with black chins. Ingesting atomized castor oil also has some negative effects on the GI tract. Like Granny’s Castor Oil, it could give you loose bowels. Many pilots would combat this by drinking brandy after a mission which would cut the taste of the Castor Oil. Chocolate would help with loose bowels. All pilots lost weight during combat operations, and were rotated off the line periodically to rest and get some weight back on with regular meals. You had to wonder how much of this was due to battle stress vs GI problems from the Castor Oil.

Another feature of this craft was it's ability to turn in a radius not much bigger than it's wingspan just above stall speed.

@karlp8484

Жыл бұрын

That's amazing.

@Pierluigi_Di_Lorenzo

Жыл бұрын

@@karlp8484 and false

@jehoiakimelidoronila5450

Жыл бұрын

Care to clarify that up please?

@Skinflaps_Meatslapper

Жыл бұрын

Patently false, not even the most capable aircraft today can get close to that level of maneuverability.

@Pierluigi_Di_Lorenzo

Жыл бұрын

@@jehoiakimelidoronila5450 The smallest turn radius according to a NACA report (no 174) from 1924 was 62 m, the wingspan of the S.S. D. IV was 8.4 m. The report was based on Technische Berichte, VOL III, No 7, 1918 by Heinrich Kann.

Ed, As always, ýour knowledge of these first generation aircraft is humbling ......well , informative ! 😅 l enjoy being made aware of these little known aircraft . Certainly the only four bladed Axis fighter l'm aware of . Thanks Ed

@daveshreeve4413

Жыл бұрын

Maybe not that great. What he called a Sopwith Camel in the begining was actually a Sopwith Pup, which preceded the Camel by about 18 months.

I love that picture of Rickenbacker in front of his SPAD so much. You just know he looked exactly the same in front of one of his race cars too haha.

Hi, guys. I'm new to the site and really enjoy the content and comments. Here goes, in no particular order. I have many hours in small full scale and all manner of RC model aircraft over 45 years and nothing is as treacherous as a WW1 fighter. I had a 60" span Fokker Triplane and, even with an insane amount of nose weight, it was a real beast. I never crashed it but couldn't relax and enjoy flying for a second. I have a 43" span Pfalz DIII that flies beautifully at scale speeds but is a beast to land. I also have a lot of time in a Champ and have flown less benign taildraggers including a Stearman with a 500hp Pratt. The owner didn't offer a landing, and I didn't ask, but the takeoffs were a bit demanding. Even with the amazing Siemens engine I can't imagine the torque and P-factor in a rotary powered crate with primitive aerodynamics. It's always about the engine, almost. The SE.5 was almost written off before they got the Hispano sorted out and everyone knows about sticking a Merlin in the P-51 but I didn't hear a mention of the engines in the Fokker DVII. It was formidable with the Mercedes engine but with the high compression BMW added to its advanced airfoil it was a leap forward. Sometimes it's the airfoil and the airfoil used on the Siemens was revolutionary. The DVII and/or DIV would have made it very bad for SE.5s, Dolphins, and SPADs in 1919 unless one of them got new wings. Cheers!

looks like a bee. insane design. thanks Ed. Great book by the way.

The Fokker D.VII with the BMW IIIa powerplant climbs to 1000 meters in 1 minute and 40 seconds. The 4 minutes and 15 seconds belong to the version with the Mercedes D.III engine.

_Another_ great video, Ed...👍

I must admit to having a fair amount of prior knowledge about this stubby-looking but fast and nimble aircraft due to having built kits of both the D-III and D-IV. Even so, I still found your video very informative and enjoyable, and I'm happy to report that I even learned some new things about it, like its very impressive service ceiling! I have to say, though, that my favourite Central Powers aircraft still remains the venerable Albatros D-III. First entering service in December of 1916, it got almost everything right; fast, powerfully armed and almost wildly maneuverable, it offered the best possible combination of speed, climb, agility and twin-gun armament. It was so good that many Albatros D-III's soldiered on right up to the armistice. Thanks for all the time and effort you put into your excellent videos.😁

@That70sGuitarist

Жыл бұрын

@@user-kn6pn1cn8m Look at the Albatros D-I, D-II and D-III and you'll see that the fuselage remained pretty much the same until the D-V came out with a more rounded, cigar shaped fuselage. What really changed on the Albatros D-III was the wing design, which was pretty much copied straight from the French Nieuport 11 and 16. Interesting fact; the D-III and D-IV had identical wings. You could pull the wings off one and put it on the other, no problem. That's German efficiency for you.😉

@jackaubrey8614

Жыл бұрын

@@That70sGuitarist "..copied straight from the French Nieuport 11 and 16" and with the same propensity, sadly, for coming off in a dive....:)

@That70sGuitarist

Жыл бұрын

@@jackaubrey8614 The reason they shed their wings was quickly figured out; it seems they put the single spar of the lower wing too far back from the leading edge. To fix this, they added thicker formers and a small strut joining the leading V-strut to the leading edge of the wing. The discovery was made by the Austrian branch of the company, and was soon copied by both the Albatros Werke and Ost Albatros Werke. After that, pilots of the D-III and D-V/Va could safely dive at higher speeds without shedding wings.

So pleased to see this one. I love your work.

First! Thanks for reviewing an excellent but obscure aircraft

@EdNashsMilitaryMatters

Жыл бұрын

My pleasure 😁

I learned about this aircraft as a gamer many years ago in the board (later PC) game "Red Baron". As a model builder I really regret that Wingnut Wings declined to build a model of this aircraft as it would have been a fantastic model but they told me that since Roden already had a kit of it they were not going to do it (and have since gone out of business). Anyway, one interesting fact that I discovered from building the Roden kit is that Siemen-Schuckert used a special lacquer on their wooden fuselages that when dried had a reddish-purple color. It took me quite a while mixing paints to come up with a clear 'varnish' to replicate the color, although I could only use descriptions as no color pictures exist.

Ed Nash is my new favorite channel.

@EdNashsMilitaryMatters

Жыл бұрын

Wow! Thank you! 😁

This was great - thanks! WW1 fighters have been a favorite of mine for ages, and you have many photos that I have never seen before. Lots of content could be had from WW1 planes . . . . I suggest the Fokker DVIII and the Nieuport 28 as some of the lesser known fighters.

Excellent and very timely as I’m building a 1/3 scale rc version of the D111, thanks !

Thanks my friend Ed Nash..... Old Navy Flying Shoe🇺🇸

I saw this aircraft this morning at the Omaka aviation heritage centre, Blenheim, S. Island NZ. I'd never heard of it before. A great museum stacked full of WW1 aircraft courtesy of Peter Jackson. Thank you for the informative video. Love this channel!

Thank you for reminding me that there is always something more to learn. I've never heard of this aircraft before, but now I have something new to study about.

Keep it up Ed!looking forward to your concise description of the P51 evolution.

@EdNashsMilitaryMatters

Жыл бұрын

Lol, that might require a while before I get around to it. It's a big one.

Ive always considered myself a bit of an expert on aircraft. This video knocked me back somewhat. Ive never heard of this plane. Feeling a bjt humble now 🤣

Another excellent vide Ed. I hadn’t heard of this one before…

I want to tell you how much I appreciate your videos. Between Ed Nash's Military Matters, Rex's Hangar, and IHYLS, I'm filling in huge gaps in my knowledge of interwar and WW2 aircraft. Thank you very much for you meticulous work!

Good to see some World War I stuff I think the World War II has just been done and done and done and this is awesome

A truly great little plane. For some reason I thought that it was Austrian. Strange, because I know that Siemens is a German company. I have a vague recollection of a picture of it in Austrian colours in a book from my childhood, sadly decades ago. Between model kits and books on planes and ships, there was hardly any pocket money for sweets! 😁 Great video. Thank you. 👍

My favourite German plane when I used to play "Dawn Patrol" back in the day.

Maybe I need glasses, but it definitely reminds me of the FW 190.

I love this little fighter. Thanks for the video. (y)

Best looking WW1 fighter, hands down!

never heard of it before - thanks for the info

By the way guys this got released as a DLC for IL-2 Sturmovik Great battles

TY 🙏🙏

well you learn something new every day 👍

Thank's Ed, I'd heard the name and seen a photo but that was all. 👍🇬🇧🍻

Interesting 👍🎥

Thank you for this. I was aware of this machine from some aircraft encyclopedia and have long wondered about its performance and relative implementation. Would love to have one in my garage .. along with a DVII, and a DVa, maybe a DRI. ...sigh. 😅

I have actually heard of this aircraft, although TBH, knew almost nothing about it. Good vid.

I reckon the Bristol M1C was up there as well.

I never heard of this beast, but (speaking as a member of the Allies) am glad it showed up as late in the game as it did!

Idflieg also had August Euler design Nieuport 11/17 clones for the Luftstreitkrafte known as the Euler D1 and DII.

pretty good looking plane

built a 1/4 scale model of a D4 and it is a joy to fly RC

I used ot love playing these in "Triplane" (plane on a stick!). They had a climb like an elevator!

"The damn thing was a rocket" is one hell of a way to descibe a WW1 biplane fighter.

The S-S D4 - SUPERB machine!

EXCELLENT video - I thought I knew ALL the best WW1 planes ...... Never heard of this one before tho. Advanced plywood skin tho .... Maybe got the idea from Albatross

A genuine example resides in NZ at Omaka air museum owned by Peter Jackson of Lord of the rings fame

A lethal beauty.

There's a story from waaaay back, about a DIV on a test flight. It was with the homeland protection squadrons. It was unarmed and outflew the French fighters that tried to jump it. I'm digging through my old books, looking for the information.

I've read that the Martinsyde Buzzard was the best fighter of WWI. Certainly the Allies were gearing up to mass produce it in France and the USA under licence, as well as UK production. Post-War it had an interesting career, including with Michael Collins of Ireland, as well as with the Paris peace talks. I'd love to see a comparison of the two.

@brom1857

Жыл бұрын

My understanding is that the Buzzard was extremely fast, but lacking in manoeuvrability. A sort of SE5a on steroids. Maybe, in 1919 conditions, that wouldn't have mattered, but if up against more advanced German types like the SSWs (including the new D6 monoplane - capable of 140 mph), Junkers D1 and Fokker D8 and 9 (monoplane with BMW engine), it could have been hard-pressed. I think the French Nieuport- Delage 29 was a better all-rounder, using tge same engine.

Capable maybe, but the Junkers J1 was more forward thinking. It was for its time a radical design, a metal skinned monoplane 😮.

@EdNashsMilitaryMatters

Жыл бұрын

And one very much on my list.

Was that bcs of the paddle shape on the prop,s just crazy blessing,s to all

The Snipe did pretty well against Richthofen's circus in the hands of the Canuck, Major Barker. Look it up.

@patwilson2546

3 ай бұрын

Was that the Snipe's or Barker's? Barker was already a 40+ victory ace by the time he got into a Snipe.

@raypurchase801

3 ай бұрын

@@patwilson2546 Barker was indeed an ace before this combat. It's sometimes written that the Fokker was the best fighter or the war. This combat suggests that's mistaken. One Canadian ace in a Snipe versus a large number of aces in DVIIs. Which pilot and aircraft won the battle?

@patwilson2546

3 ай бұрын

@@raypurchase801 Invalid sample size. You are drawing conclusions based on one combat that was not at all representative of WWI combat in 1918. If you want to draw conclusions about the plane then you have to look at the whole history of the plane. People make the same mistake about the P-47 based on a sample size of 1. Robert Johnson survived in a P-47 that was hit by 20mm, caught fire, stopped burning, and was then hosed by a German fighter pilot with MG fire while flying helplessly. Conclusion: nothing short of as naval gun can bring down a P-47. Sample size: .1. Reality: lots of P-47s were lost in combat. It was a very rugged plane, but Johnson was an outlier, not the norm. Back to the Fokker D.VII. It shot down a lot of allied planes. Barker was an outlier, not the norm.

It's amazing how these late war models improve so much with literally the same engines of older models...the fokker D.VIII would be another example.

I'd never heard of this plane! :o

It wasn't the lubrication that was the problem, it was a bad alloy used for the pistons.

Full size replica in omaka,nz.

Certainly one of the prettiest of WW1.

well. Insetead of giving us dry noumbers for rate of climb you could have taken all 3 vaues (0m 0s being start point for all of them) for all 3 aricraft, put it in a graph in exel, use find best fiting function with option for logartythimc and show us a graph. I'm not exactly sure but if i remember they had no forced air intake so log graph would be roughly fitting comparison of optimal climb rate. Or even simple represtation with points would have given us idea what kind of climbing rate we are talking about.

Ya, I like ze Siemens schtuff.... ;)

On a related note, for the S-S D4, Fokker, and other biplanes of WWI, where did the effective 'combat range' of these machines come in with regard to design requirement specifications? It's rarely mentioned.

So often it is said WW1 aircraft rotary engines were made for cooling. This is the lesser reason... Any piston engine on a power stroke has a wasted side force on the piston wall. The engines easily resist this force. The rotary allowed that wasted side force to be turned into engine power. Any engineer asked to do a free body diagram of a piston and con-rod half way through a power stroke can confirm this.

The propeller pitch seems to go the “wrong” way with the leading edge of the prop. being curved and the trailing edge straight, contrary to practice then and now to have the straight edge as the leading edge. Anyone have any ideas what’s going on with that?

Fascinating string bag.

They must have resolved the lubrication issues with the engine to continue with it to the end of the war. Did they manage to find a source of castor oil, or did they persist with the troublesome mineral oil?

I think the Martinsyde Buzzard may have given it a run for its money. Especially at low level, given its 25mph top speed advantage.

So it was plywood covered not fabric. Like this was some radical new development? The Albatross line of aircraft had been plywood monnocock fuselage for years already

@Getoffmycloud53

Жыл бұрын

Pfalz D.III and D.XII as well, being comparable to the Albatros D.V and Fokker D.VII respectively. The Fokker D.VII stood out because it was relatively cheap to produce, easy to maintain, including repair, and it was easy to fly for average pilots. The latter is very important. There are many examples of aircraft with high performance that were more difficult to fly for the average pilot, or had some quirks that made them even dangerous. The F6F hellcat seems to be such an aircraft, with good performance, relatively cheap to produce and with hardly any vices. The Siemens-Schuckert D.III/D.IV is a nice little could have been, just like the Fokker D.VIII. It certainly looks like a little chubby thoroughbred. Have to admit that I am biased towards the Fokker D.VII with a soft spot for the Pfalz D.XII, BUT nothing beats the clean lines of the Albatros D.III and D.V ❤

I have read the Treaty of Versailles and while I found multiple references about handing over weapons to the victors in general terms I have not been able to find the Fokker D.VII specifically mentioned. I'm starting to wonder if this isn't a long standing urban legend.

@EdNashsMilitaryMatters

Жыл бұрын

The Armistice agreement that stopped the fighting. Versailles came late. Think it's clause 1, subsection 4, iirc.

I always thought that 4-bladed props on ww1-era biplane fighters weren't a thing 'til you brought the plane up. To me, when it comes to that I think of Stuart Little's yellow plane. It's also a biplane & has a 4-blade prop Thanks for proving me otherwise

@rossanderson4440

Жыл бұрын

See also the Bristol F2.B, often found with a four-bladed propeller.

0:25 Eddie !

Is there one anywhere in preservation, presumably not or you would have shown a picture of it.

What about the Sopwith Snipe

No doubt it was a magnificent fighter, but I feel the qualities of the Martinsyde F.4 Buzzard eclipsed it, except possibly as a tactical, fast-response interceptor. The 25 mph speed advantage of the F.4 reflects the changing engagement techniques of fighters at the end of the war, among other advantages.

Later Siemens sold its engine and aircraft factory and after the first WW that became BRAMO works Brandenburger Motoren und Flugzeugwerke.

Sheiis!

Good to see the love of wonder-waffles and myth spouting continues to flourish

It’s amazing how the fitting of the bubble canopy transformed the mustang, and the fitting of the Merlin engine too.

The ending e on Siemens-Halske is not silent. It's the same als the ending e on Focke from Focke Wulf. Otherwise you are doing great in pronouncing German names. Does anybody know where the exceptional high altitude performance was coming from? The Fokker D.VII used over-compressed BMW engines to get as much power at altitude as possible. Did the Siemens-Halske engine have over-compression too?

@rosiehawtrey

Жыл бұрын

Probably the four blade paddle prop might have had something to do with it. It has a much wider blade chord than others looking at the pictures.

1:10 the Fokker D.VIII/E.V?

NEVER heard of this one

In long wars *quantity* is a quality of its own. Suppose the allies don't accept the armistice and Germany (foolishly) decides to fight on until 1919? Whatever small numbers of the D.IV could have been produced would have been facing incredibly tough odds with an ever growing number of allied aircraft. Seeing as castor oil was in short supply in Germany I'm not sure how exactly they are going to solve this very pressing issue in late 1918 and 1919.

8k views in 6 hours? Nice.

How about the bristol monoplane and the junkers cantilever monoplane fighters

@jimdavis8391

Жыл бұрын

Weren't the Junkers aircraft used in ground attack roles?

@sugarnads

Жыл бұрын

@@jimdavis8391 the 2 seater was. I believe the single seater was a fighter. Not much info out there and when i read about it was many years ago.

@jimdavis8391

Жыл бұрын

@El-Kwako The Grumpy Duck That Bristol MC1? was supposed to be a fighter and it was fast but it wasn't manoeuvrable enough so I think they liked strafing trenches with it.

The hostilities were far from over. From this point on, the time of dishonor began

The Spad XIII.

@rossanderson4440

Жыл бұрын

The Nieuport 29.C1. The Macchi M.7 (refinement of the M.5(mod)). The list goes on...

It's interesting how many great aircraft arrive just at the wrong time. We all know about the best piston engined aircraft turning up just as the jets age starts. And the best biplanes going into service only to be surpassed by the monoplane. And here again is Germany bringing the best biplane of WW1 into service just as the war end. Something we'll see again some 25 years later with their jets.

@SoloRenegade

Жыл бұрын

It makes sense though. Evolutions in design never ends, and accelerates during wartime. If WW1 had gone on longer, perhaps we'd be talking about how the Hawker Fury came just too late to make a difference in WW1, for example. And of course the best piston fighters would emerge immediately preceding the transition to jet fighters. Because as knowledge improves and the improvements in propeller aircraft become too small (practical technology starts to converge), people start looking for the next boost in technology and performance to gain an edge.

@bigblue6917

Жыл бұрын

@@SoloRenegade That is so true. Though as WW2 is often viewed as a continuation of WW1 seeing the biplane reaching its peak in WW2 is rather appropriate.

@SoloRenegade

Жыл бұрын

@@bigblue6917 I'm not sure you're understanding what I said.

What about the Fokker D VIII?

@McLarenMercedes

5 ай бұрын

The Fokker D VII made all the headlines and the allied pilots feared it. The fighter here however barely reached the squadrons before the war was over. Only 123 were completed before the armistice and roughly half (60 planes) reached the front. In other words this was a rare bird. Had the war gone on into 1919 we might have heard more about it. Alas Imperial Germany was almost bankrupt at the end of 1918 and there were uprisings, food riots and a revolution starting in October 1918 too. Edit: As for the D VIII it is said it had some nasty flaws like badly designed wing which led to wing failures.

The Me 262 of WWI.

@McLarenMercedes

10 ай бұрын

Let's no exaggerate shall we? While the Me262 was studied by the victorious parts of WWII the Fokker DVIII was seized in great quantities in WWI to be studied following WWI. Here's what: While the Siemens-Schuckert DIV had the ultimate rotary engine this design really was facing a dead end following WWI.

Great to her get her day in the sun! More late war planes... junkers D I!

And the Fokker DVIII?

Fokker D.VII, end of discussion.

:)

The Wunderwaffen ? 😁

Too little, too late. W ery war's mantra.

Here is the NZ one. The vid doesn't convey how insanely loud this engine is. kzread.info/dash/bejne/hI6Jo7GHisnKk5c.html

Sorry the d7 couldnt turn with a camel and it couldnt run away from one, and couldnt catch an se5a. Was totally outclassed by the dolphin.

@charlieboddington

Жыл бұрын

The D.VII could hold with a Camel in a left hand turn, as the Camel had a slower turn in that direction due to its torque. It certainly wasn’t outclassed by anything in 1918, and could hold its own against a Dolphin.

@CorePathway

Жыл бұрын

@Jay Jay al-lies? Jesus, dude, turn off Faux TV and go for a walk.

@leifvejby8023

Жыл бұрын

m.kzread.info/dash/bejne/mY6OmpSxmbq2Z9o.html&pp=ygUUTWljaGFlbCBrYXJsc29uIGR2aWk%3D

@brom1857

Жыл бұрын

The D7 was a brilliant all-rounder, easy to fly, fast, more manoeuvrable than most in-line engine fighters. Moreover, its power-to-weight ratio allowed it to hang on its prop without stalling - very valuable in combat. But initially it just had the usual 160hp Mercedes engine, so performance was comparable with its opponents. The real killer machine was the D7F, which had the mighty, advanced and lightweight 185hp BMW engine - that had truly exceptional performance, and outclassed allied types. Hence the specific mention in the Armistice document.

@sugarnads

Жыл бұрын

@JayJay-vs5nl they werent. They didnt want the wars biggest aggressors to have AN AIRFORCE. That effectively meant delete their best fighter. They werent afraid of it. It was barely equal to a camel and thoroughly outclassed by the SE5a. As for the others comment re the left turn...anything with an engine could out turna camel to the left due to gyroscopic progression. No camel pilot who survived his first patrol would ever turn left in a fight unless there was no other option. Nothing could live with it to the right tho.

I find it fascinating that everyone was using rotary yet to my knowledge no-one thought "hey, let's bolt the heavy engine to the frame and spin the lightweight shaft instead", because let's face it, a Rotary is just a radial which spins the entire engine block.