Fokker DR1 vs Sopwith Camel turn performance in Rise of Flight 

@Greg's Airplanes and Automobiles >>> 👍👍

FWIW: The type is not addressed in this video, but I only recently learned -- maybe in the last 10 to 12 years, or even LESS -- that Fokker fielded the D.VIII parasol wing _monoplane_ very late in the war. I always thought the D.VII was their last advanced fighter design.

As I have said elsewhere, the Camel achieved MORE KILLS THAN ALL OTHER ALLIED TYPES 1,294 air-to-air kills. It is just a shame we didn't train pilots all too well back then. Also a fight is very rarely equal, context is everything. For example, historically the Germans were usually fighting in formation, defensively and to support local air superiority. Great to fidn you doing ww1 videos, would love to see the Bentley engine (150hp) Camel played. Mini Snipe?

He went down like Dr.1 Werner Voss !!! Problem with this Dr.1 was it was slow so once it was in a fight, it was in the fight until the other guys decide to fly away. Verner found himself taking on numerous enemies and was finally ventilated by Reginald Hoidge before Arthur Rhys-Davids swooped in and put two long bursts into him to be sure he was good and dead, with the Dr.1 flipping inverted and diving in. Both those boys who put rounds into him were flying the SE.5. Rhys-Davids died a few weeks later because he was stupid and reckless but good Canadian boy Reginald Hoidge lived until 1963.

Really interesting and useful advice on maintaining the Camel's turn. Btw I had no idea some pilots watch the plane behind as carefully as that.

Greg no mention of gyroscopic effect on the Camel’s turn. It was dramatically different. The right turns I think were very snappy the left turns v slow especially with a Bentley engine with aluminium pistons.

I must know the identity of this Dr.1 Pilot, who is this mysterious man? Cheers, Greg.

Interessanter Vergleich zwischen den zwei Meisterstücke im ersten Weltkrieg. Danke!

I never did like either of these planes. I'll take a Se.5a, Fokker D.VIIF, or Pfalz D.XII any day of the week. Good video.

Thanks for this Greg, very enlightening in a few regards. Great job. Only issue would be I didn't think the Camel was fastest. SALUTE !

Fun video. Im jealous of your skill set. Two questions. 1.) Does this sim take engine torque into account (maybe favoring the Camel). 2.) Can the Dreidecker escape by outclimbing the Camel (my understanding is that rate of climb was a major argument for adopting the DrI)?

From what I've heard, the DR1 triplane was built partly in response to the Sopwith triplane. But the Sopwith triplane had good visibility, while the DR1 design ended up with poor visibility, worse than the visibility from the Camel. I know, this discussion is mainly about turn performance...my bad. Although, what good is turn performance if you can't see anything?

I lived opposite the old sopwith factory in Kingston upon Thames, (S.W. greater London, England), I have an affinity with them due to this local history. love the camel (and the pup) aesthetically speaking, (lol) id choose a camel over the Se5a anyday :-)

Hi Greg, nice video and specs given on these two plane. I also believe (by experience) that the Camel can out turn the DR1 as demonstrated in this video - in a RIGHT-HAND turn that is. However I have found that the Camel cannot do this in a left-hand turn if the DR1 pilot is well practiced in left turning. Even against the best Camel pilots in ROF (including the one mentioned), I will lure them in a left-hand turn fight and that normally saves the day for me. The DR1's ability to flip over from the right-hand into a left-hand turn quicker than the Camel, together with diving below the firing line might save the DR1 pilot or he might take a few shots but can normally survive to finish the fight. Of course, experienced Camel pilots will rather break the turn fight to the left, gain height and enter into a vertical fight rather than to fight the DR1 in a left-hand turn. (This is with 15-20% fuel and full ammo load in DR1). I will practice these concepts with the Camel after viewing this video. (Immortal)

Greg, Buddy! The gruesomeness at 6:30 is the reason why you _NEVER_ reverse your turn (like the DR.1 did there) unless you are 100% sure your opponent will overshoot your current position!

For WWI planes, what are the factors that make a plane a better gun platform? Effect of recoil on control? # of guns - 1 or 2? having the guns fire through the prop vs over it, etc?

Interesting.

Dear Greg;I would love to hear/watch your thoughts on the P-38 as one of my relatives flew them in WW-II. I have flown the P-38 hundreds of hours in various flight games and sims, but as a amateur Private Pilot and BOOM and ZOOM kind of guy I do not have the experience to do the kind of in depth analysis I find in all of your Videos.Sincerely,Stewart.

Hello I don't play this digital game, but I am interested to know if the game designers include the influence of rotary engine torque with the Camel and Dr1 upon the rate of turn? Kind regards, Kevin C

Is this sim worth getting? I only fly dcs so far. Cheers Greg!

Heavens - memories. I flew in one of the first online sims - I think it was run Genie or prodigy: think about 1990. Unless flying with a bud when we'd do doubles with DRIs, I flew Camels or sometimes Spad XIIIs :a decent ride for a "B" grade player - dove like a brick and let you leave the premises. (In 1919 Rickenbacker was commissioned by the Army Air Corps to go to Europe and fly every plane he could to aid the Air Corps to build a decent fighter of their own - much egg on US face concerning aircraft construction during WWI. He chose the Spad XIII - emphasizing it's great speed in a dive. Come to think about it, US WWII fighters almost all had excellent dive capabilities - even late model 38s.) What I remember about the Camel was the huge torque - a real trick to bank to the left. As I understand it, the Camel and Triplane went out together. In the huge engagements often found in 1918, both suffered from low critical altitude. In 1918 the RAF increasingly employed mixed formations and put Camels low (8-10,000 feet) with SE5s or, if available, Snipes above (14,000 plus). The most advanced analysis of real world Camel vs DRI I've seen is strongly pro-Camel. The Tripe had the "slip turn" that amazed some allied pilots (think Werner Voss' last fight against eight RAF aces) and excellent initial climb rate. It was, however, slow and dove very poorly which hurt it against any allied plane. The Camel had very good visibility and the DRI was very poor in that regard - very bad news in a multi-plane fight. The Germans built about 350 Tripes - it was built in response to the Sopwith Tripe, and by the time it was the DRI was flying Camels had replaced most Sop Tripes. But in good hands it was arguably a better plane than the Albatross V or Pflaz III. We do know that Richthoven had tested the D. VII and liked it a lot. He would have received the first. The Camel was in service longer than wanted by the RAF, but the Snipe was a difficult build and proper engines for the SE5 were not widely available until 1918. (The French built them and wanted them in Spad XIIIs.) When engines were there, the SE5 became the RAF "top gun" although Camels may have had more kills overall because there were more of them in late 1917 and early 1918 when the air war was entering a fierce stage when German planes began to fly over allied lines to support the "Kaiser-Schlacht" offensives cooked up by Ludendorff. Ironically, rather like the fate of the P-47 when displaced by the over-all superior P-51, the Camel ended up doing a lot of ground support in 1918 - a dangerous proposition to German troops on the move or any RAF pilot. It doesn't fit the image, but ground support was the last job desired by any pilot that wanted to survive the war. It's amazing in retrospect that P-51s were being encouraged to do ground attack after leaving bombers they'd been escorting. But the young will live forever, right?

Does altitude have any effect on the turn performance or does it remain constant?

"Those popping little firecrackers." Bear in mind the Fokker is Oberursel powered while the Sopwith had at least three different powerplants. Here a pilot is voicing his distaste for the Clerget powered Camels.

Did this type of prolonged turn-fight happen in real life?

Go Snoopy

Ever try War Thunder, Greg? The realistic battles are quite fun and the historic modeling is better than I'd ever imagined it could be. Not perfect but they are getting there. MomentaryHero is my handle if you ever need a wing. I do very well and have been playing since 2013.

Camel had vickers guns not damned hun spandaus.

We didn't get CAMELS, we Boom& Zoom S.P.A D.'s... said PaPaw... You Have broad Horizons ...Sir GREG!!! FLY till ya DIE!!! ( or Neiports) Viva la Esqudrille... & Tailwinds Too.

Moro made me rage quit.... Little bastard...

How is "Rise of Flight"? .... I ask because it has a fairly bad overall-rating on Steam.... but this video makes me think its worth a try. I used to play War Thunder, but had to eventually give it up, because the game is no longer recognizable from what it started out as, and has just become a money-grabbing piece of Russian propaganda, with clear prejudice against German tanks (tank mode) and American aircraft (aircraft mode).

You need to give up kid games and join the real world.