Best WW1 Fighter?

Best WW1 Fighter?

  • Airco D.H.2

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Airco D.H.5

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Royal Aircraft Factory B.E.2

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Royal Aircraft Factory F.E.8

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Royal Aircraft Factory B.E.12

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Sopwith 1½ Strutter

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Sopwith Pup

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Sopwith Snipe

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Sopwith Triplane

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Vickers F.B.5

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Albatros D.I

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Albatros D.II

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Albatros D.III

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • DFW C.V

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Fokker E.I

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Fokker E.II

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Fokker E.III

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Fokker E.IV

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Fokker D.I

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Pfalz D.III

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Pfalz D.XII

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Rumpler Taube

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Hanriot HD.1

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Morane-Saulnier Type L

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Morane-Saulnier Type N

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Nieuport 10

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Nieuport 11

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Nieuport 17

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Nieuport 27

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • SPAD S.VII

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    37

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

DerAdlerIstGelandet

Private Chemtrail Disperser
Staff
Mod
49,438
14,277
Nov 8, 2004
USA/Germany
What do you think was the best WW1 fighter?

My opinion it is the Fokker D VII. It did not show up till end of the war (1918) but it was proven to be superior to anything else in the sky. It was the only aircraft the Germans used that was specifically mentioned in the armistance agreement to be turned over to the allies.

The D VII could dive without any fear of structural failure. The D.VII was also noted for its ability to climb at high angles of attack, its remarkably docile stalling behavior, and its reluctance to spin. These handling characteristics contrasted with contemporary scouts such as the Camel and SPAD, which stalled sharply and spun vigorously.

However, the D.VII also had problems. Heat from the engine often ignited phosphorus ammunition until cooling vents were installed in the ammunition cans. Fuel tanks sometimes broke at the seams. The D.VII also shed fabric and experienced rib failures on the upper wing. Planes built by the Fokker plant at Schwerin were particularly noted for their lower standard of workmanship and materials. Nevertheless, the D.VII proved to be a remarkably successful design, leading to the familiar aphorism that it could turn a mediocre pilot into a good one, and a good pilot into an ace.

Info was taken from: Fokker D.VII - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

775 D VIIs made it into service before wars end and it quickly racked up kills (565 alone just in August 1918).

Post war it was used by the United States (142), Poland (50), Netherlands, Switzerland and Belgium.
 
The D.VII for sure but don't forget the D.VIII. Only 200 or so reached the front and they were superior to anything in the air. It's kind of a would of, should of, but they did serve...
 
I almost wanted to vote for the Siemens-Schuckert D.IV. It is considered the best fighter to see service but as you said about the D. VIII it was too little too late with only 123 being built before wars end.
 
I believe the Snipe was the best, but as with the D. VIII and the Me-262, it entered service too late to make a huge impact. So I voted for the D. VII.
 
ANXBe.png
 
Last edited:
Based on the number of enemy aircraft it's type dispatched, the Camel is undisputably number one. From an aeronautical engineering point of view,
I would opt for the D.VIII, but it has no appreciable record.
 
I like the Camel but the reason I did not vote for her was because she was not a very stable aircraft.

The Camel owes its difficult handling characteristics to the grouping of the engine, pilot, guns, and fuel tank into first seven feet of the aircraft, coupled with the strong gyroscopic effect of the rotary engine.

The Camel soon gained an unfortunate 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 takeoff. 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..... The pilot was therefore required to apply constant forward pressure on the control stick to maintain a level attitude at low altitude. However the machine could also be rigged in such a way that at higher altitudes it could be flown "hands off." A stall immediately resulted in a spin and the Camel was particularly noted for its vicious spinning characteristics.



The Camel was however very agile.
 
Then, as today, instability equals agility. Now that aspect is controlled
and enhanced by computers. In WW1 it was up to the pilot to make best
use of those "deficiencies", and no doubt the Camel hurt a lot of novice
airmen. However, it is responsible for downing more aircraft than any other,
and by a good margin. (Thankfully, WW1 was fought from acres and acres
of turf, and not tarmac runways!!!)
 
Given the progression of the designs through the war, the best aircraft is most likely going to be the last one to be introduced before the war ends. Simply because it was the most advanced (or at least amongst the most advanced).

A better question would be "Which aircraft had the greatest affect on WW1?"

The Fokker E3? Albatross D3? Gotha? Camel? Be2? Keep in mind the Air War in WW1 was very much subserviant to the ground war. Granted, the D3 shot down a couple of hundred British observation and spotting aircraft, but even 1 of the Spotting Aircraft could kill more German Soliders in one shoot then all the Be2 crewmen killed over the span of the war. Hence, which was more effective to the war?

Probably the Be2 or the Re8. Both killed thousands, maybe even tens of thousands of German troops.
 
I've gone for the SE5a I know it was unpopular with some pilots in its initial SE5 configuration but it was noted by many as an easy plane to fly which with the very limited training available was a bonus this allowed pilots to concentrate on attacking the enemy rather than just keeping the plane on a even keel also having an inline engine the plane did not suffer from the torque troubles associated with some of the rotarys. With 200hp (when upgraded from the original SE5) and a top speed around 138mph she was no slouch and was also note for her high altitude capabilitys (17000-19000ft approx ceiling)
Im not saying that many of the other aircraft where not nimbler in a dog fight but IMO the speed available was a big advantage.
I believe Albert Ball (as mentioned in One of Adlers threads) although not initially a lover of the SE5 accounted for 17 of his 44 kills in one.
 
Whoops, just re-read the thread title. Said we were looking for a fighter, not a mass killer. Ok, back in the game here.

Go with the D7 here. It was the only aircraft specifically mentioned in the Versailles Treaty that had to be turned over to the Allies. That, in and of itself, is a testment to how much respect the Allies had for it. Here is the section:

"Conditions of an Armistice with Germany

IV. Surrender in good condition by the German Armies of the following war material:

5,000 guns (2,500 heavy, 2,500 field).
25,000 machine guns.
3,000 trench mortars.
1,700 fighting and bombing aeroplanes-in the first place, all D7's and all night-bombing aeroplanes."

Probably the only fighter that saw heavy service in WW1 and the last ones were built in 1929 (shades of the Corsair here). I think the Swiss were flying them as late as 1933 or so.

Read about a guy who flew one once, in Smithsonian Magazine back in the 80s. Pilots from the First World War said it was the easier than others to fly. But according to this guy, it wasn't easy to fly compared to modern birds. Said after an hour flight he got down beat up, tired and sweaty.

My vote goes for the D7. Not because I like it (think the Se5A was a better bird) but because it really was the best of the long service active fighters from WW1.
 
I vote for the DVII also. Seems like I read that some of the early WW1 a/c in effect had no throttle but you decreased power but cutting the ignition off and on. Also the early rotary engines were lubricated with castor oil and the blowback from the engine into the pilots face caused a perpetual case of the GIs. There is a replica of a Camel in the Cavanaugh Air Museum in Addison ,Texas and it is really diminutive. Also an example of of the rotary engine. Can you imagine those 7 or 9 cylinders whirling around with the prop attached.
 
In the rotary engines you control power by cutting the ignition . I'll go for the Bristol fighter even if was a 2 seater it had a long and distinguished military career
 
Well put your 2 cents in then. :lol:

I wish I knew anuff about WW1 planes to have 2 cents to add...LOL..

I'm 42 and been a ww2 aircraft buff all my life..And these days been doing some digging around on ww1 aircraft...And tank warfare...

I used to "think" I knew about ww2 aircraft...Then I found this forum ..And found out how much I did not know.. Some (most) of you guys really know your stuff... And if you come in here with off info ..You guys will sink there ship..LOL... And you should.. History is jacked up bad anuff..You guys ran me off some time back.. You guys can be real hard on nOObys at times ... :( ....

I do really injoy coming here everyday and learning.. Being an American.. All we hear is one side ..Its really neat to hear about ww2 from people from all over the world ...And there take on what went down... I'm seeing that America has a bigger bull sh#%t info machine.. Then I knew... I wonder how "off" the info on the Iraq War is? ... And what will come out fifty years from now..?

On some car fourms ..I'm the man with all the info 8) ... But here I'm your student... I can ask alot of question...LOL... And have alot of questions to ask ..

But I must admit defeat in this game ... I do not have the info to even be on the field ... Please do not think this is a put down to you guys and the forum... Hats off to you guys...You sure know your stuff...

I could be the guy on the fourm that ask all the dumb questions ..LOL...I'd be the master of that..

Sorry to hijack this ... Please go back to WW1 aircraft .. And I'll get back to learning..

Have a good day

David
 
David, your welcome here any time - if you go back in the threads and see the noodbs we harass you'll find they usually don't know what they are talking about and come in here with an attitude. All of us are always learning, its another thing to humble yourself and ask a question or say "I don't know."
 
I wish I knew anuff about WW1 planes to have 2 cents to add...LOL..

I'm 42 and been a ww2 aircraft buff all my life..And these days been doing some digging around on ww1 aircraft...And tank warfare...

I used to "think" I knew about ww2 aircraft...Then I found this forum ..And found out how much I did not know.. Some (most) of you guys really know your stuff... And if you come in here with off info ..You guys will sink there ship..LOL... And you should.. History is jacked up bad anuff..You guys ran me off some time back.. You guys can be real hard on nOObys at times ... :( ....

I do really injoy coming here everyday and learning.. Being an American.. All we hear is one side ..Its really neat to hear about ww2 from people from all over the world ...And there take on what went down... I'm seeing that America has a bigger bull sh#%t info machine.. Then I knew... I wonder how "off" the info on the Iraq War is? ... And what will come out fifty years from now..?

On some car fourms ..I'm the man with all the info 8) ... But here I'm your student... I can ask alot of question...LOL... And have alot of questions to ask ..

But I must admit defeat in this game ... I do not have the info to even be on the field ... Please do not think this is a put down to you guys and the forum... Hats off to you guys...You sure know your stuff...

I could be the guy on the fourm that ask all the dumb questions ..LOL...I'd be the master of that..

Sorry to hijack this ... Please go back to WW1 aircraft .. And I'll get back to learning..

Have a good day

David

Dave thats why I started this thread, because I dont know a lot about WW1 aircraft and this way I can learn more.

Sure I know the names of most of them but what made each one great or bad I dont know.

Feel free to chime in at anytime, ask questions and learn. That is what this forum is here for.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back