Fokker V29 (it is not a Messerschmitt it is a Foker)

[Erfolg]

As with most full sized aircraft it has been modeled before, at least once, as a RC model. Not sure that it ever flew, or was finished. A very small number of plastic kits are around and a paper/card model.

 

To give an idea of what it is I will attach a few pictures of the near finished model.

 

The why bother is a good question. In my case the full size entered my awareness some +25 years ago, working as a site worker, not going to the pub much, I bough a discount book "Fokker aircraft builder to the world". There was a picture of it, although nothing much else. It did peak my interest, as it it seemed to be a D8 with an inline engine. At some event at Duxford, I picked up a Putnam, Early Fokker Aircraft" book. I had fancied building a Veron D8, although it seemed to small for RC, and expensive. I did borrow a plan from a club member of the Veron model, studied it, and thought, perhaps not. Then Covid came, and I read the Putnam book, this provided a wealth of information on both the D8 and the V29.

 

From the book I discerned that the D8 used a rotary engine, because Fokker now owned a company, with piles of them doing nothing. The DVL saw the limitations of rotary power units, particularly as more power was extracted form them, the peculiar handling gyroscopic issues, and the concept was nearing the end of the road. They wanted to use in line engines, and both Mercedes and BMW had developed 200hp engines. They were at that point unaware of the Hispano Suiza or the Wolsey units which more powerful. The liberty engine did not seem to register. The DVL set up a 3rd Adlershof aircraft competition which the V29 was entered. Apparently it won the competition, out performing the other contestants.

 

If anybody is interested I will continue the story mainly with build photos.

 

But what was the V29? In concept it was a natural progression of the D8. Having a heavier motor that the rotary, it needed a bigger wing. Some source suggest two wings were built a longer span D7 wing and a bigger D8. The body seems to ba a pretty standard D7, with the over compressed (at ground level) BMW.

 

So why were there not many more? At about the same time the 1918 Ludendorff offensive started, seemed to be going well, longer term events changed the situation. In that it failed to cause the collapse of the Allied forces, now with the USA involved at all levels. The Germans had literally run out of bodies, out of munitions, and all the other necessary means to carry on. It appears the Germans lost (essentially)a whole generation of young males. Although seeking a peace agreement, the first proposal was firmly rejected, only for the Germans to accept they had run out of options first, to a humiliating  surrender, which had longer term consequences for all. In short the V29 never entered production as a German aircraft, to be continued as a modified Fokker D10.

 

 

 

 

Edited March 30, 2023 by Erfolg

[dave parnham]

i stand ready to be corrected but that is a D8 with the inline engines just the same as the DV11 (d7) but really we must call it a D Vee Eleven.

The D6 was Rotary Engined and of course The DR1 with the oberusel.

Apparently its a D7 with one wing and a slightly longer body off the D8

  

Edited March 30, 2023 by dave parnham

[Erfolg]

The wing is bigger than a D8. By this time many features of Fokkers as designed by Platz were designed by ratio of things that were known to work well. To that extent the transport aircraft Fokkers made in the USA were in essence D8 wings proportionally made bigger.

 

The body is in essence a D7, but mounting a BMW engine rather than a Mercedes engine. There is also a lot in common (at least at face value) between a Mercedes unit and the BMW.

[Simon Chaddock]

I was always taken by the concept of the V25.

 

A Fokker inspired concept although Platz did not like it as he felt is would be unstable in the air.

With an Oberursel of only 110 hp and complaints by the service pilots about downward visibility it stood no chance in the second 1918 fighter competition although Fokker was impressed by the performance it had and its flying characteristics. As a result it was quickly abandoned so Platz proceeded with the DVIII.

Would the V25 actually had done better in service than the DVIII? It was slightly lighter and faster.

 

With a suitable lightweight radial engine it would have still  looked "modern" a decade or more later.    

[Erfolg]

Simon I guess there was not a low wing monoplane constructed for the 3rd trial due to the experience of the V25.

 

My experience with the construction of this model means I will never build another parasol model. Making a jig and the complexity of the wire work does not appeal. I have attached a picture of the set up.

 

A D7 body with a larger D8 wing, mounted low down would be attractive to me.

 

As an aside my Natter has now flown briefly some 6-12 months ago, albeit briefly, due to a overheating ESC. When I commence flying again (having fixed the issues) I will see how good it is. It seemed pretty reasonable even at low speed.

[Eric Robson]

3 hours ago, Simon Chaddock said:

I was always taken by the concept of the V25.

 

A Fokker inspired concept although Platz did not like it as he felt is would be unstable in the air.

With an Oberursel of only 110 hp and complaints by the service pilots about downward visibility it stood no chance in the second 1918 fighter competition although Fokker was impressed by the performance it had and its flying characteristics. As a result it was quickly abandoned so Platz proceeded with the DVIII.

Would the V25 actually had done better in service than the DVIII? It was slightly lighter and faster.

 

With a suitable lightweight radial engine it would have still  looked "modern" a decade or more later.    

It would have to be depron with that short nose Simon.

[Simon Chaddock]

Eric

It is indeed all Depron!

660 mm span and only 156g ready to go. Decorated in 1920s Royal Dutch Airforce colours. There are DVIII decorated like this.

There is a 9 cylinder rotary that goes round inside the cowling with the scale diameter 8x3.8 prop.

The brushless bell is crank case. You can see the elevator servo arms with monofilament pull/pull lines just behind the fire wall. The aileron servo is similar but low down also with pull/pull lines. The 370 mAh 2s LiPo sits just behind the firewall as well!

Surprisingly fast for its weight and very twitchy!

It really needs to be twice the size.

 

[Eric Robson]

Looks good Simon, that is the problem with small light aircraft very twitchy, are you going to build a bigger one? 

[Erfolg]

I have done a little basic  search on the V25. It took part in the 2nd. Adlershof trial. Its performance was quite poor, in all respects, in context of what was measured, rate of climb, speed at various altitudes, turning circle, with a simulated military load. So why, comes to mind.

 

Many of us modelers see the airframe, which decides what we like. Yet in the full size world, things are very much complicated. 

Much of a aircrafts performance is determined by the engine. In the case of the V25, it needed more power. How many times have seen that many aircraft built were compromised by their engine, or the intended engine never materialised, or it could not be supplied in the numbers required. German WW2 projects never materialised because the promised engine never materialised. The Westland Whirlwind troubled by the Peregrine engine or the  Vulture projects intended to use engines that were under development. We can see that the D7 and the Camel was the end of the road for single row rotary engined planes. The SE5a and D7 were the way of the future 

 

 

We can also see another development in this period, many suppose that the German colourful fighters were simply a manifestation of the fighter pilots ego, solely. The reality it was the beginning of the benefit from pilots recognising their colleagues, and distinguishing friend from foe.

 

In the case of the V29 the axle wing was a fuel tank, as the German procurement authorities had now banned fuel tanks from being in front of the pilots as many had been seriously burnt, or had died as a consequence. A small tank was placed behind the pilot, as supply to the engine.

 

I find the incremental innovations that take place and the general success seen, as opposed to the step change, fascinating. Often the step change requires a lot of longer term work to deliver.

[kevin b]

Fokker V29 (it is not a Messerschmitt it is a Foker)

 

I think Stan Boardman might disagree.