SOPWITH F.1 BEATS FOKKER Dr.1 RED BARON WW1 MODEL PLANE

Sopwith F.1 Camel
& Fokker Dr 1 Triplane Aircraft Model

TWO HISTORIC AIRPLANES FOR THE PRICE OF ONE! The AIR SUPERIORITY SERIES Triplane vs. Sopwith Camel desktop model planes.

Wingspan: 7.5" and 9"
Model Length: 6" and 6.25"
Height: 8.5"
Base: 7 3/4" x 12 3/4"
Code: AS06007

NEVER SEEN BEFORE AND NOT AVAILABLE ANYWHERE ELSE: TWO HISTORIC AIRPLANES FOR THE PRICE OF ONE! The AIR SUPERIORITY SERIES Triplane vs. Sopwith Camel desktop model planes, an ALL-NEW collectible from Mastercraft! Unique and highly colorful representation of the golden age of aviation. Presenting a handcarved 7.5-inch wingspan Fokker Triplane, handpainted in the Red Baron's livery, side-by-side with a handcarved, handpainted, 8.75-inch wingspan Sopwith Camel. This combination measures only 13 inches at its widest - great for display anywhere! Get Big Bang for your Bucks, only here at Mastercraft!

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Fokker Dr.1 Triplane

The Fokker Dr. I Dreidecker (triplane) was a World War I fighter aircraft designed by Reinhold Platz and built by the company led by Anthony Fokker. It became most famous as the plane flown by the Red Baron, Manfred von Richthofen.

Royal Naval Air Service (RNAS) introduced the Sopwith Triplane. The Sopwith swiftly proved itself superior to the Albatros and Halberstadt scouts then in use by the German Air Service. In response, the Idflieg immediately solicited designs for new triplane scouts. No fewer than 11 German aircraft manufacturers, including Albatros, Pfalz, AEG, DFW, Sch�tte-Lanz, and Euler, responded with triplane prototypes. Most showed little promise, though limited production of the Pfalz Dr. I was undertaken.

The Fokker works responded with the V.3, a small rotary-powered triplane with a tubular steel frame fuselage and thick cantilever wings. Initial tests revealed deficiencies in the V.3, particularly regarding control forces. Instead of submitting the V.3 for a type test, Fokker produced a revised prototype designated V.4. The most notable changes were horn-balanced ailerons and elevators, as well as longer-span wings. The V.4 also featured interplane struts, which were not necessary from a structural standpoint, but which minimized wing flexing.

The V.4 proved far superior to the triplane prototypes submitted by other manufacturers. Climb rate and maneuverability were exceptionally good, though overall speed was low and gliding characteristics were poor. The ailerons were light but not very effective. The rudder and elevator controls were light and powerful. Rapid turns, especially to the right, were facilitated by the triplane's marked directional instability.

After a type test, an immediate production order ensued. The V.4 prototype was intentionally destroyed in static structural tests. The two pre-production examples, designated F.I, were delivered in the middle of August 1917. These were the only machines to receive the F.I designation. Delivery of production machines, designated Dr. I, commenced in October of that year.

Sopwith F.1 Camel

Intended as a replacement for the Sopwith Pup, the Sopwith Camel prototype first flew in December 1916. It was known as the "Big Pup" early on in its development. It was armed with two .303 in (7.7 mm) Vickers machine guns mounted in front of the cockpit, firing forward through the propeller disc. A fairing surrounding the gun installation created a hump that led to the aircraft acquiring the name Camel. The Camel entered squadron service in June 1917. Approximately 5,500 Camels were produced.

Unlike the preceding Pup and Triplane, the Camel was not considered pleasant to fly. With the majority of weight packed into first seven feet of the aircraft coupled with the strong gyroscopic effect of the rotary engine the Camel exhibited several idiosyncrasies and soon gained a dangerous reputation with student pilots. The Clerget engine was particularly sensitive to fuel mixture control, and incorrect settings often caused the engine to choke and cut-out during take-off. Many crashed due to mishandling on takeoff when a full fuel tank affected the center of gravity. In level flight, the Camel was markedly tail-heavy. It turned sharply to the right with a nose-down attitude, while it turned slowly to the left with a nose-up attitude. Turns in either direction required left rudder. A stall immediately resulted in a spin and the Camel was particularly noted for its vicious spinning characteristics. Controls were light and sensitive.