naturalplastic wrote:
That would be the notorious "Fokker tri-plane" flown by the notorious "Red Baron" of Germany in the first WW. But it only has two wings. So its only a 'biplane'. So its a failed depiction of the plane that they are trying to depict.
If it's supposed to be a Fokker Dr.I it's got a lot more wrong than just the missing third wing. The empennage and cowl are entirely wrong, the wings are too broad and missing the distinct wingtips of the DR.I, it's missing the little winglet between the wheels, etc.
Richthofen also flew Albatross and Halberstadt fighters, his famous red livery was first used on an Albatross D.III.
That said, it doesn't have the streamlined nose typical of the Albatross fighters, the tail is all wrong for
any single-seater flown by Richthofen (wrong shape, too much bracing), it's not boxy like the Halberstadt fighters, it's not boxy up to the cowl like the Fokker, the wing bracing is wrong for any of the mentioned fighters, the wings aren't staggered (like the Albatross, but unlike the Fokker or Halberstadt fighters), etc...
With those observations in mind, I don't believe it was modelled after any real life fighter, let alone the Fokker Dr. I. It looks to be a very generic biplane wearing the Red Baron's livery, rather than a (poor) attempt at modelling a specific aircraft flown by Baron von Richthofen.
_________________
When a clown moves into a palace, he doesn't become king, the palace becomes a circus.
"Many of us like to ask ourselves, What would I do if I was alive during slavery? Or the Jim Crow South? Or apartheid? What would I do if my country was committing genocide?' The answer is, you're doing it. Right now." —Former U.S. Airman (Air Force) Aaron Bushnell