I googled around a bit and it seem there lower surface dihedral about about 2 degrees and the upper surface anhedral was only 1 degree. So, yeah, on a model this just really doesn't matter all that much.

On the other hand, this IS one of those things that DVII fanatics regularly obsess about. I recall people slamming the Nieto DVII drawings because they don't show the anhedral.

From what I saw in my DVI documentation, the center rib of the wing is thicker that the tip, but the section appears to be the same. So in other words, the root rib may be around 20% but the tip section is only 9%. The DVII is the same design just a longer span. I am going to guess the DVI used the same airfoil as the DVII.

Now I know Abu will not like this ...........but that was my thinking to cheat the tip to make it look scale, while using a more "flyable" airfoil for the majority of the wing.


The 3 views in the Windsock DVI anthology will be of a great help in verifying the outlines against the BUSA DR1 fuselage. Of particular focus will be the Rudder and stabalizer. I have checked and the fuselage between the DR1 and the DVI are the same length. A fellow pilot friend told me he thought the DVI was longer, but this seems not to be the case.

Sorry if I have dragged my upcoming project into this thread. I may do a build thread on this one when I get it going. I think it may be of some interest. If you guys remember Del Johnson doing the monoplane (parasol) version of the DVII. I forgot the prototype designation. DVII fuselage with a stretched DVIII/EV wing. He used BUSA parts as well with a GTM, EV wing.

I have been focused on WW2 for a couple of years now, and I miss my WW1 stuff. After I get this big TA 152 finished, I will be getting 2, 1/4 scale Fokkers flying. The DRI and this DVI. They are just too much fun to fly.

I'm just not convinced that the Clark-Y "flies" any better than the sort of thick airfoil used on the DVI, DrI, and DVII. But at the same time, I don't think the original airfoils looked significantly different from the Clark-Y, so as I've said all along, I think the Clark-Y looks fine for these later Fokkers. And, yes, modifying the tips is a must...and easy to do as well.

I just realized that I have Nieto's large print drawings (order from the Smithsonian when I was 12 years old!) right here in the house in the US. These are the same shown in the MAN book but still it's awfully impressive to see them on these large sheets. Sheet #2 (of 4) shows all the ribs and you're right that it goes from a very fat airfoil in the middle to a fairly thin airfoil out at the tips.

Thinner tip sections are used in full scale to reduce drag. Not sure if this was the primary design parameter of Reinhold Platz, but the Fokkers were certainly moving in a "cleaner" direction, by going cantilevered eliminating flying wires. The thick sections in the middle of the wings being of great importance here to maintain structural integrity.

I'm just about finished my DVI from GTM. The wing has dihedral but its on the underside of the wing. Much like the current aerobatic planes like the Edge 300 etc.

Picture looking at the wing to Its relatively flat all the way across. Now look along the bottom. It level for a bit and then it rises towards the wing tip. Pretty clever for its day!

As I said above, the DVII wing has dihedral on the bottom surface and anhedral (also called cathedral) on the top surface. Bottom dihedral was 2 degrees, top anhedral was only 1 degree.

LOckheed 10A features Clark Y airfoil

Is it Clark-Y all the way to the tips?

Whoops, wrong thread.

Martin