Roden Fokker Dr 1 - 1:32 scale by Popeye the Sailor - finished

[Egilman]

10 minutes ago, popeye the sailor said:

.....once I get over that hurdle.....

It's part of the fun.... My wish is that kit manufacturers go just a little bit closer to what is actually smoothly buildable instead of absolute detail....

 

Leave the absolute detail for those that are willing to put in the work and want the pain..... But learning how to model does not make model companies any money....

[popeye the sailor]

I did go a little bit further........adding the machine guns to the model.

I did start to think about the HobbyCraft model.........I put the two side by side.   I fitted the top wing on to get a better idea.......

these models are quite similar,  with a few differences.......the raised ribs on the HobbyCraft wings.......the machine guns........the one thing that the HobbyCraft model has over the Roden model,  is that the cable holes are exposed.  I have had to drill out all the holes for the Roden kit.

  

  

the decals are in tough shape.........note the slot in the upper wing for the cabane strut.  the wings are thicker too.........   

[CDW]

Shaping up very nicely Denis. She's almost ready for the hunt.

[Jack12477]

54 minutes ago, popeye the sailor said:

Kennscht Mi'noch?    looking up the meaning is a bit confusing,  because it appears there is a word missing,  but it translates to "do you remember me?"

Actually, I think it translates to "Remember Me ?" as a sarcastic question

[lmagna]

On 5/28/2020 at 9:10 PM, Old Collingwood said:

If you find you glued the wings on back to front  - just turn the plane around.

Or jut leave it as it is and call it a prototype:

[CDW]

I've been reading a book by James Hamilton Paterson, Marked for Death. The book chronicles the first air war during World War 1. After reading the book, it gives the reader a broader view of what the pilots went through in the war and shines a light on the average airman and hardships they endured. Really tough stuff. 

[popeye the sailor]

I've had models that were a joy to build.........and I've had some that were a down-right bear.   some could even go farther with detail........limiting how much molded detail,  which would up the parts count.  accuracy could be better too.   but it is what it is.......it's up to us to make it what it is     how much further you want to go with it is up to you.

[Jack12477]

Growing up in the 50s we had a neighbor across the street who had flown with the La Fayette Escadrile in WW1 France. We asked him how they learned to fly back then. He said after hours of classroom instruction on flying techniques they put you in a single seat biplane and had you take off solo and fly around. If you landed without crashing, they gave you your pilot's wings.

 

At the time we knew him he was a pilot for one of the major airlines and his son commanded the USAF Thunderbirds flying team.  

[lmagna]

I once got to spend an evening talking to an ex U-Boat commander from WWII but never got to talk to anyone from WWI.

[cog]

2 hours ago, popeye the sailor said:

I started the decal process by applying the bottom wing fields.   I will need to trim them.

 

the upper wing was done next,  while the bottom wings were drying........the insignias were added,  as well as the name graphics.

 

the top wing was trimmed before they had dried.......there was minor chipping.  with that.......the bottom wings were trimmed,  and the insignias were added.

  

the wing skids were added next.

 

where I left off on this bird,  was at the middle wing.  there are two decals there that are a phrase:  Kennscht Mi'noch?    looking up the meaning is a bit confusing,  because it appears there is a word missing,  but it translates to "do you remember me?"

more to come.....I trying to get up the gusto to paint the stabilizer and rudder.   the bottom of the stabilizer is flat black.........I tried to brush on the upper paint { flat white} and what a mess I made!  as you recall,  the other stabilizer was ruined by paint thinner.  the other stab was sanded along the leading edges,  flattening a curvature,  so it could be used.   once I gt over that hurdle,  the cabane struts will be the next big one.  it seems there are no slots for the struts in the upper wing.  I can't wait to see what I'll have to do with them   

 

 

 

 

It would be written in full "Kennscht mich noch"

Translation would be: Do you still know me

I would say it would imply you've got away with your life the the previous time, and he's there to finish the job ...

 

1 hour ago, popeye the sailor said:

I did go a little bit further........adding the machine guns to the model.

 

I did start to think about the HobbyCraft model.........I put the two side by side.   I fitted the top wing on to get a better idea.......

 

these models are quite similar,  with a few differences.......the raised ribs on the HobbyCraft wings.......the machine guns........the one thing that the HobbyCraft model has over the Roden model,  is that the cable holes are exposed.  I have had to drill out all the holes for the Roden kit.

 

 

the decals are in tough shape.........note the slot in the upper wing for the cabane strut.  the wings are thicker too.........   

I find the ribs on the HobbyCraft's wings a bit to pronounced, when I look at the 1/72's I built from Eudard and Revel, there is a softer wave patern on the wing which makes it more realistic

 

You have made some nice progress spinnach man, good recovery from the decal disaster

[Egilman]

56 minutes ago, CDW said:

I've been reading a book by James Hamilton Paterson, Marked for Death. The book chronicles the first air war during World War 1. After reading the book, it gives the reader a broader view of what the pilots went through in the war and shines a light on the average airman and hardships they endured. Really tough stuff. 

I believe that the average life span for a fighter pilot towards the end of the war was 6 missions..... Most of the aces gained their victories not by dogfighting but by stalking the lone straggler. (including the red baron) That new young pilots were often set up as bait to attract the enemy where the more experienced pilots would wait to spring upon them.....

 

WWI aviation was far from the glamour and chivalry we often read about.... (yes they buried the Red Baron with full military honors and dropped notice of such over a german airfield) you read this and get a picture of one ideal, but in reality Richtoften was descending on a helpless brand new Camel pilot looking for his 81st kill. All Captain Brown managed to do was scare him off and in the loss of concentration allowed himself to sink too close to the ground and the Aussies on the ground shot him out of the sky... (although the RAF still credits Capt. Brown with the victory)

 

It was a particularly nasty, vicious type of warfare... Richtoften likened it to being the hunter or the hunted no quarter offered....

[cog]

There is hardly chivalry in war, when it concerns the taking of life.

[CDW]

1 hour ago, Egilman said:

It was a particularly nasty, vicious type of warfare...

What surprised me was how poorly trained and prepared the pilots were in almost every way. Wealthier pilots who paid to learn to fly as civilians were some of the best prepared, but even then, there were so many things working against them: the planes were fabric, wood and dope covered. As such, they were extremely prone to burning. Pilots would sometimes shoot themselves rather than burn to death when their aircraft either caught fire in combat or for other reasons. It is said that many rookie pilots simply got lost/disoriented in flight and never returned from their very first mission. Still others were ejected from the cockpits due to no seat belts or inadequate seat belts. Then there was a big learning curve in developing winning air combat strategies by the generals in charge. Just a myriad of problems really.

[Tony Hunt]

3 hours ago, CDW said:

I've been reading a book by James Hamilton Paterson, Marked for Death. The book chronicles the first air war during World War 1. After reading the book, it gives the reader a broader view of what the pilots went through in the war and shines a light on the average airman and hardships they endured. Really tough stuff. 

I just read it too!  Fascinating, and highly recommended. I really enjoy the clear-eyed, objective and dispassionate lens that some modern historians are bringing to these subjects, leaving out all the romanticism, jingoism etc. The books written by James Holland on WW2 are equally good.

[popeye the sailor]

I think that's why he hyphenated it Carl....probably thought that it all wouldn't fit there.   from the sites that I read,  it was though that he had been wounded and kept out of the sky for a bit.........it would take finding out what plane he flew before the Dr 1  to put any validity in that statement.  the Hobby craft model was worse than this kit,  in building it........very thick plastic and nothing really fit well.  the center wing root and the top part of the fuselage was assembled differently than the Roden kit,  although,  there was still somewhat of a 'top' for the center wing root.  rigging it was easier though.......I was able to run the 'cables' through the holes before assembling the wing....all the holes being pre-formed.  I don't consider the model to be a true representative of the Dr 1 due to the raised rib lines....looks to klunky. 

 

not to say that other nations didn't revere their pilots,  but the Germans perhaps went a little overboard with their adulations.  the color red was a badge of honor...how much one had on his plane,  denoted how fearless he was.  injuries were common with these early planes........either by becoming wounded,  or too rough a landing {these planes were not kind to their pilots}.  German pilots who performed well in battle also got free reign on the camo of their plane.......most came off the assembly line already decked out in military camo.......some four color camo,  some with five color.....the speckled lozenge was particularly interesting.   one must remember too,  that these planes were not tested as they are today.........they would likely fail a wind tunnel test.....or even be torn apart  

 

thanks to all who commented.......you all have the patience of a saint.   thanks for the likes as well.  to go a bit further on this build,  I took a look at the underside of the top wing.   the holes for the cables were drilled out,  and the same wire I use for the landing gear will be used.  the hole on the fuselage were also drilled out.   the cabane struts are removed from the sprue and cleaned up.........note the absence of slots for them on the top wing.....just those four pins {?}   I have no clue what they were thinking here.  the top root of the strut does not fit in between them.  I've yet to dry fit the wing again in place and attempt a dry fit of the struts...that will be my next step.   

I still need to add the levers for the ailerons and elevators.......go from there   

[Egilman]

23 minutes ago, popeye the sailor said:

 one must remember too,  that these planes were not tested as they are today.........they would likely fail a wind tunnel test.....or even be torn apart

Except for the D7 & D8, Fokker actually wind tunnel tested both of them and the results showed in their performance during 1918....... They were virtually undestroyable in the air unless you killed the pilot/engine or somehow set it afire...

 

After the war when the germans turned them all over to the allies, the US army took one of theirs, (D7) and had the smithsonian test it in their Wright brothers designed wind tunnel. they found that the airframe could withstand 13 g's of force without breaking and it didn't shed fabric under 200 knots... It was a revolution in aircraft design.... 

 

They were getting around to building better airplanes driven by the needs of the war....

[popeye the sailor]

not at that time though.......and remember that the D VII was rejected before the F 1 came out.  I've built quite a few Dr1's and D VII's.........I built a Guillow's D VIII and that was my best flyer     but yes.......wind tunnel testing had come into play around this time period......but I don't believe the Germans were actively doing it until a bit later.   they had started to work on jet powered planes,  and this required testing the air frame to be sure it could withstand the forces.  to me.....I don't think it was important to them......these planes didn't go very fast and the war was on.  after what they learned about the Dr 1....handling and such,  it likely became common practice for future planes.......the D VII & D VIII.

 

Fokker took some of his planes with him to the Netherlands,,,,they didn't get 'em all  

[Canute]

The Wrights were early systems engineers, not so much by schooling (they were bicycle mechanics by trade), but by figuring out they needed something to do something else. They developed a crude wind tunnel and figured the engine they wanted to propel their airplane didn't exist yet, so they reached out to a friend to develop a lighter weight engine for the Flyer. Read "The Bishop's Boys" for more insights into these 2 gentlemen. The Flyer turned by wing warping, not ailerons. The aileron concept was developed in the UK in the late 1800s, but the  French applied it to a glider a year or so after the Wrights' first flights.  Since wing warping put more stress on the wing structure, ailerons took over as the primary means of roll control and coordinated turns.

[Egilman]

1 hour ago, Canute said:

The aileron concept was developed in the UK in the late 1800s, but the  French applied it to a glider a year or so after the Wrights' first flights.  Since wing warping put more stress on the wing structure, ailerons took over as the primary means of roll control and coordinated turns.

But it was the Brothers that first revealed how they actually worked. they didn't deflect air like the first ones were designed to, Ailerons work by changing the curvature of the wing increasing lift on one side and decreasing it on the other... The Wrights wing warping illustrated that perfectly. and it was Curtis that first applied it in full form as proper ailerons (actually have an airfoil shape themselves) instead of simple directional flow vanes to deflect the airflow....

 

The Wright brother weren't the first to study the science of aeronautics, but they were the first to actually apply scientific and engineering principles to it. they discovered that Lilienthal's table of airpressures (and hence his wing curvatures to develop lift was off by 50%, they were the first to consider a propellor as a rotational wing that should develop thrust rather than just move air like a fan.... they were the first to develop the constant flow wind tunnel cause they understood that they could not correct Lilienthal's table if they didn't have a consistent, repeatable flow of air over the airfoils....

 

They are considered the fathers of modern aeronautical engineering, and rightfully so... Their contributions go way beyond the first controllable (barely) flight...... They were the first to actually understand how to fly, everyone else before was playing at it... The greatest advances are usually the simplest ones, and controllable flight is so simple, that once the Wrights revealed how it was done, everyone duplicated the feat upon seeing it...... Heck show the principle to a 5 yr old child today, and they instantly understand it.  The Wrights let the cat outta the bag so to speak.... and right then WWI comes along to give a huge push to the engineering....

[cog]

It's funny but I get the distinct impression a lot of French and US airplanes find their origin in German research, design, and development ... not just the jet engine (V1, V2, .....), but also e.g. the flying wing ... and now it seems aerodynamics too ...

[Egilman]

31 minutes ago, cog said:

It's funny but I get the distinct impression a lot of French and US airplanes find their origin in German research, design, and development ... not just the jet engine (V1, V2, .....), but also e.g. the flying wing ... and now it seems aerodynamics too ...

Yep, Otto Lilienthal was the first to figure out that it was the curvature of a birds wing that caused lift, and the physical principle of air movement over that curve that caused the lowering of air pressure over the wing. He also deduced that the center of air pressure buildup is what caused the air to accelerate over the wing.... his only mistake was to calculate the curves that caused the buildup of air pressure too shallow, which reduced the lift the curve was capable of.... This principle of flow over a curved surface was known to those who designed ship propellers, (and the Wrights tried the table of pressures for ship propellers in their calculations after figuring out that Lilienthal was wrong then deciding that they needed to create their own table) but was thought not to apply to wings flowing through air... So what Lilienthal actually discovered was that air acts as a fluid when under pressure. But this wasn't fully understood until the Wright's fully clarified it with their testing. (and corrected his calculations in the process) In fact the only reason the Wrights built the Flyer was to prove their concepts and they built it in such a way that it was unflyable without human input.... They discovered the principle of angle of attack increases/decreases lift and the point when a certain curve will stall at too great an angle also. Which lead to their engineering solutions to control and efficient propeller thrust in air. All revolutionary discoveries yes, but based upon much of what was discovered before them.

 

I could go on, like the truss design they used for their wings was a lightweight modified pratt truss designed by Octave Chanute... The Wrights took what was available from the common aeronautical literature of the time and developed their own solutions using the info in different ways to solve the problems others were having on making it work, In the process they made hundreds of discoveries that no one else was even considering... But it was all built on what came prior.... they didn't invent the airplane, they invented a control system for airplanes by learning and understanding the information that was already there, and correcting for the previous errors and testing for what actually worked.

 

Their solutions were and still are, pure genius....

[Canute]

Carl, Jack Northrop in California, had flying wing designs in the late 30s. He started building on a government contract in 1941, about the same time the Hortons were doing similar in Germany.  A couple of 1/3rd scale N-9Ms were built during the war as proof of concept, flight testing and  flying trainers. The first bomber, an XB-35, flew in 1946. A jet powered version, YB-49 was flown in early 1949. Whether Northrop or the Hortons were first is hard to call. The Hortons got contracts for airframes about the same time, so it's a tossup. We definitely learned stuff from the Hortons, but for reasons known to the Dear One, we scrapped the whole program in the early 1950s. It took until the late 80s to resurrect the  Northrop designs and build the B-2.

 

Whittle (UK) and Ohain(Germany) developed the jet engine simultaneously. I think there was some acrimony as to who was first, but  I think they finally agreed to a simultaneous start.

 

Now, the rocket program was definitely grabbing all the German designs we could.

[Jack12477]

17 minutes ago, Canute said:

Carl, Jack Northrop in California, had flying wing designs in the late 30s. He started building on a government contract in 1941, about the same time the Hortons were doing similar in Germany.  A couple of 1/3rd scale N-9Ms were built during the war as proof of concept, flight testing and  flying trainers. The first bomber, an XB-35, flew in 1946. A jet powered version, YB-49 was flown in early 1949. Whether Northrop or the Hortons were first is hard to call. The Hortons got contracts for airframes about the same time, so it's a tossup. We definitely learned stuff from the Hortons, but for reasons known to the Dear One, we scrapped the whole program in the early 1950s. It took until the late 80s to resurrect the  Northrop designs and build the B-2.

 

 

From Wikipedia

 

"In a 1979 videotaped news interview, Jack Northrop broke his long silence and said publicly that all Flying Wing contracts had been canceled because Northrop Aircraft Corporation refused to merge with competitor Convair at Air Force Secretary Stuart Symington's strong suggestion, because, according to Jack Northrop, Convair's merger demands were "grossly unfair to Northrop." Shortly thereafter, Symington became president of Convair upon leaving his post as Secretary of the Air Force. Allegations of political influences in the cancellation of the Flying Wing were investigated by the House Armed Services Committee, where Symington publicly denied exerting pressure on Northrop to merge."   ..............

 

"in April 1980, Jack Northrop, then quite elderly and using a wheelchair, was taken back to the company he founded. There, he was ushered into a classified area and shown a scale model of the Air Force's forthcoming, but still highly classified Advanced Technology Bomber, which would eventually become known as the B-2; it was a sleek, all-wing design. Looking over its familiar lines, Northrop, unable to speak due to various illnesses, was reported to have written on a pad: "I know why God has kept me alive for the past 25 years." Jack Northrop died ten months later, in February 1981, eight years before the first B-2 entered Air Force service."

[mtaylor]

10 hours ago, Canute said:

The Wrights were early systems engineers, not so much by schooling (they were bicycle mechanics by trade), but by figuring out they needed something to do something else. They developed a crude wind tunnel and figured the engine they wanted to propel their airplane didn't exist yet, so they reached out to a friend to develop a lighter weight engine for the Flyer. Read "The Bishop's Boys" for more insights into these 2 gentlemen. The Flyer turned by wing warping, not ailerons. The aileron concept was developed in the UK in the late 1800s, but the  French applied it to a glider a year or so after the Wrights' first flights.  Since wing warping put more stress on the wing structure, ailerons took over as the primary means of roll control and coordinated turns.

 

Just a bit of trivia... the Air Force Museum in Dayton has their original wind tunnel and if I'm remembering right, two of the brother's planes.  The wind tunnel does (or did) have everything needed for testing.  Most of the wind tunnels today are really just bigger but still take the same measurements. 

[Egilman]

2 hours ago, mtaylor said:

the Air Force Museum in Dayton has their original wind tunnel and if I'm remembering right, two of the brother's planes.

They have one, (Signal Corps #1, the first military airplane ever) and it's a reproduction not an original...  The original Signal Corps #1 is at the Smithsonian's NASM along with the original Wright Flyer (Kitty Hawk Flyer, as restored by Orville) after 50 years being on display in London cause the Smithsonian refused it. Wright Flyer #3 (the first practical airplane), is restored and on display at Carillion Park in Dayton Ohio. The AF museum also has a replica of Signal Corps #2 the first Curtis biplane the army bought. (and the second military airplane ever, the original was scrapped in 1912)

 

The original 1901 wind tunnel is also a replica, but it was built by Orville Wright for donation to the museum prior to WWII....

They do have Orville's 1916 wind tunnel, original, on loan from Miami U, Oxford, Ohio

 

They also have an original 1916 Wright Model "B".....

[mtaylor]

I forgot about the one at Carillion Park.   When I lived there, it  was great place to visit and then the carillion concerts on weekends.  They do have quite a bit of history tucked into that park.

[popeye the sailor]

I was thinking of the Dr1 today............I need to do a dry fit to see how the cabane struts meet the underside of the top wing.   as I guessed,  they meet at those pins.......but of course,  won't go in between them.  I can adjust that.   so now that I know,  I can cement the top wing onto the interplane struts.........but not until I add the control cables from the underside to the fuselage.  so this is the first task.......

[popeye the sailor]

name something that can ruin your day..........I got one.  our fridge is still on the fritz!   there is no division between freezer and  fridge.....everything is freezing in the bottom   we had a guy come out to look at it.........he replaced the controller.  this morning,  the admiral showed me the burger patties we bought yesterday....half froze.  I wasn't going to get involved with it.....the landlord bought it......let him deal with it.  this time,  I looked into it.......noticed the icy frost spot on the back wall of the freezer.  the admiral showed it to the guy.......he said that there might be ice behind the wall...........but he didn't check it out........just ordered the controller.  by what she told me,  he didn't check out much of anything.   this is a frost free refrigerator.......this type of nonsense isn't supposed to happen.   there is no cold division between the freezer and the fridge.........I took the back wall cover off.  it revealed a large chunk of ice where the the build up of ice was on the outside of the wall.  it covered part of the condenser,  as well as the freezer sensor.   the ice was removed.........all residual water sopt up from inside the bottom........no REAL catch basin in this mangy thing......it's all bolted in place!  I spoke to the landlord.......who knows if he understood what I was telling him.

   long story short.......I'll see if it cures the problem.  if it happens again,  I would suspect that the defrost heater is at fault.  the guy didn't even know that maytag refrigerators have a diagnostic circuit.......I found that out from a crumpled up paper in the back of the fridge,  in the compressor cavity.   what a world........what a world!   the admiral was so happy {I guess}, that I could order a model.........a 1:28 Fokker Dr 1    it will look good next to my Fokker D VII.

[lmagna]

18 minutes ago, popeye the sailor said:

the admiral was so happy {I guess}, that I could order a model

WOW........ I never got PAID for my atta-boys! I was lucky if they were even acknowledged! "You man, you fix, I woman, I boss man around."

[Jack12477]

Denis, bet the drain tube for the deicer/defroster was plugged up. Happened to me. Causes everything to freeze and ice up. Probably household dust or lint. It drains to a small evaporator tray under the unit.