SE5a

[SP1969]

I may have wet myself a little.

 

Joy, joy, joy.

[Cynic_Al]

24 minutes ago, SP1969 said:

I may have wet myself a little.

 

 

 

Perhaps hope is at hand.

[SP1969]

At hand, maybe, but only three shakes......

[US103_Baer]

Quick test.

Trimmed full nose down still had to have decent stick forward for level flight.

Got level flight at around 75% throttle. 

 

What's the trim wheel for again? I can't see any use case except full forward.

[Trooper117]

Yep... had a go with the S.E.5a last night. (and the Albatros)

Both were easy to take off and land (very forgiving)... and a joy to generally fly around the area and fling about a bit.

Requiem has done his usual famil videos for both of them...

 

Combat flying today to see how they do against each other 

[Atomic_Spaniel]

14 hours ago, US103_Baer said:

Quick test.

Trimmed full nose down still had to have decent stick forward for level flight.

Got level flight at around 75% throttle. 

 

What's the trim wheel for again? I can't see any use case except full forward.

 

If it's like the RoF one, a spring centred stick will put in quite a lot of up elevator at neutral because the real a/c had a lot more back-stick travel than forward-stick travel. Have a look in external view with it on the ground. I suspect the elevators will be up quite a bit when hands off. For RoF I ended up using an FFB stick as the only way to get round the problem before they added the tuneable response curves. 

[SP1969]

Flew the SE5a about in OG server yesterday for a little while, thank you to the gentlemen concerned for allowing this.

 

I'm certainly out of practise! 

 

Seems to deal well with the DVIIF at furball altitudes.

 

A well flown Dr1 is a problem, the marked difference in speed between the two aeroplanes seen in RoF seems much lower here and means the SE5a pilot has to be very careful to maintain energy and gaining separation, if one screws up the initial attack certainly  isn't as easy as it used to be......

 

I suspect the DVa is going to be easy meat once I'm back in the groove.

 

Speed and acceleration seems right, dive characteristics better then RoF, in as far as the engine doesn't overspeed when throttled back, so a more realistic dive speed is possible, climb rate at 1600 rpm@70mph seems identical in feel to RoF. 

 

Rolls well, rudder is responsive, spin recovery spot on. 

 

Wings remain attached unless you do something dumb, absorbs a fair amount of battle damage.

 

Which is nice.

 

I have an X52 pro stick and throttle - the nose up attitude is an issue, and is affecting my aim.

 

Real SE5a had a jack screw mechanism that varied the incidence of the horizontal stabiliser, enabling the rigger to dial out the tendency to assume a nose up attitude - not sure how to make this happen in FC - any tips would be appreciated - in RoF I used curves.

 

Certain DVa pilots ( they know who they are ) with good aim will wound you with their first burst - the nose up attitude, combined with the red mist effects, means there is very little chance of retaining control, let alone achieving a crash landing.

 

As in RoF, this is far and away my favourite single seater.

 

Soon as the Arras map gets here - well, let's put it this way - I anticipate my right arm getting more exercise than at any time since I discovered a stash of 'adult magazines' when I had just moved to grammar school.....

 

 

 

 

Edited June 12, 2019 by SP1969

[Garven]

2 hours ago, SP1969 said:

Real SE5a had a jack screw mechanism that varied the incidence of the horizontal stabiliser, enabling the rigger to dial out the tendency to assume a nose up attitude - not sure how to make this happen in FC - any tips would be appreciated - in RoF I used curves.

It has an adjustable horizontal stabilizer controlled by the pilot via a wheel on the left side.  Should use the same binding as horizontal stabilizer trim control in the WW2 planes.  Works for me.

Edited June 12, 2019 by -332FG-Garven

[HagarTheHorrible]

Quite like the SE5a, so far, although flying against the A.I is hardly a great test. It seems to be better able to stay with an Albatros in a turn with a little extra power, or speed retention, for trading angles into out of plane manouvering. My biggest disapointment is that no adjustment to the angle of fire has been, or could be, done.  The bullets stil leave the barrel at the wrong angle.  I'm surprized to hear that the stabilizer adjustment doesn't give a more positive nose down attitude (I use FFB so notice it less), given that the fuel tank is not in a position to affect CoG depending on fuel level, unlike the Camel.  Maybe the Dev's have some secret way of knowing our weight and adjusted our CoG accordingly (which is a polite way of saying " You fat bast**d, of course it fly's tail heavy").

Edited June 12, 2019 by HagarTheHorrible

[Garven]

47 minutes ago, HagarTheHorrible said:

My biggest disapointment is that no adjustment to the angle of fire has been, or could be, done.  The bullets stil leave the barrel at the wrong angle

Same here looks completely wrong once you notice it.  If it was correct you would see better over the nose for high angle deflection shots.  They can do amazing things in this sim, but yet somehow the Aldis on two of the planes can't be corrected due to technological limitations.  

Edited June 12, 2019 by -332FG-Garven

[SP1969]

2 hours ago, HagarTheHorrible said:

Quite like the SE5a, so far, although flying against the A.I is hardly a great test. It seems to be better able to stay with an Albatros in a turn with a little extra power, or speed retention, for trading angles into out of plane manouvering. My biggest disapointment is that no adjustment to the angle of fire has been, or could be, done.  The bullets stil leave the barrel at the wrong angle.  I'm surprized to hear that the stabilizer adjustment doesn't give a more positive nose down attitude (I use FFB so notice it less), given that the fuel tank is not in a position to affect CoG depending on fuel level, unlike the Camel.  Maybe the Dev's have some secret way of knowing our weight and adjusted our CoG accordingly (which is a polite way of saying " You fat bast**d, of course it fly's tail heavy").

 

That isn't fat, it is a bloody sandbag.

2 hours ago, -332FG-Garven said:

It has an adjustable horizontal stabilizer controlled by the pilot via a wheel on the left side.  Should use the same binding as horizontal stabilizer trim control in the WW2 planes.  Works for me.

I'll try, thanks very much!

[Trooper117]

It's the same wheel we had in RoF for the S.E 5a mate... I'm sure you used it in the old game.

[migmadmarine]

5 hours ago, -332FG-Garven said:

Same here looks completely wrong once you notice it.  If it was correct you would see better over the nose for high angle deflection shots.  They can do amazing things in this sim, but yet somehow the Aldis on two of the planes can't be corrected due to technological limitations.  

I thought the issue was not the Aldi's, but that the AI wouldn't be able to use a gun that is not aligned along the vector of flight. 

[JGr2/J5_Klugermann]

I prefer using the iron sight. It's much easier to follow the tracers.

Edited June 12, 2019 by Klugermann

[HagarTheHorrible]

 

2 hours ago, thenorm said:

I thought the issue was not the Aldi's, but that the AI wouldn't be able to use a gun that is not aligned along the vector of flight. 

 

Yes, I think that was the reason given, I had rather hoped that it might have been overcome with this updated game engine though. 

 

Why a player should be limited by what the A.I can do is beyond me though.  I would have thought that the player ability to adjust the convergance was game mechanic enough to compensate between A.I and players.  If the player SE5a already had a default built in extra long convergance, for the Vickers, of for example, 2000 yds or whatever (obviously the longer the range the more the bullets have to arc up to allow for bullet drop), before allowing for the normal player defined preference to set the convergance from that point.  All that would need to then happen is for the front of the Aldis to move up to be in line with the extreme convergance range.  Obviously we aren't really intreasted in where the bullets are at that extreme convergance range, just where they cross the bead of the sight after 200 yds, more or less.

 

Tails up

Edited June 12, 2019 by HagarTheHorrible

[No.23_Starling]

Salute friends!

 

Ive put in a few hours on MP now when servers have had 5-6 people in them. Big thanks to the OG server for spinning that up. I’ve started racking up half a dozen kills in her and have noticed a few differences to RoF.

 

1. The wings! Thank The Maker! At last they don’t come off when someone frowns at them. It really feels like a BnZ bird now and fixes my biggest gripe with the RoF model. Fast dives are now a joy rather than a roll of the dice. 

 

2. Energy retention on the zoom feels better than the spad now. It’s sad but I think I’m done with the Spad as it is in FC for energy fighting.

 

3. Speed! Man she feels fast, even when disengaging from a DviiF who is diving on you. It now reminds me of McCudden’s comments about being able to quickly get out of a scrap. I could be wrong but I feel like I can disengage faster than in RoF.

 

4. She turns a tiny bit better than in RoF but she’s still an energy fighter. I can see pairs of her being lethal. The DviiF is her biggest threat as there’s no point engaging one without height advantage and the F has excellent climbing. I did manage to get a couple through bouncing including a pilot instant kill. 

 

5. I miss response curves. Even with the stabiliser im putting constant forward pressure.

 

she will outclimb all the German birds on the sim right now except the DviiF, and I was able to swot down two dvs this evening by extending and them climbing above them. She feels amazing in VR.

 

see you in the skies soon friends 

[DD_Arthur]

11 minutes ago, Waggaz said:

She feels amazing in VR.

 

Agree very much.  I've recently been flying a lot more DCS as well as plenty of BoS but the stars of the VR show are undoubtedly the WW1 birds of Flying Circus

[SP1969]

39 minutes ago, Waggaz said:

Salute friends!

 

Ive put in a few hours on MP now when servers have had 5-6 people in them. Big thanks to the OG server for spinning that up. I’ve started racking up half a dozen kills in her and have noticed a few differences to RoF.

 

1. The wings! Thank The Maker! At last they don’t come off when someone frowns at them. It really feels like a BnZ bird now and fixes my biggest gripe with the RoF model. Fast dives are now a joy rather than a roll of the dice. 

 

2. Energy retention on the zoom feels better than the spad now. It’s sad but I think I’m done with the Spad as it is in FC for energy fighting.

 

3. Speed! Man she feels fast, even when disengaging from a DviiF who is diving on you. It now reminds me of McCudden’s comments about being able to quickly get out of a scrap. I could be wrong but I feel like I can disengage faster than in RoF.

 

4. She turns a tiny bit better than in RoF but she’s still an energy fighter. I can see pairs of her being lethal. The DviiF is her biggest threat as there’s no point engaging one without height advantage and the F has excellent climbing. I did manage to get a couple through bouncing including a pilot instant kill. 

 

5. I miss response curves. Even with the stabiliser im putting constant forward pressure.

 

she will outclimb all the German birds on the sim right now except the DviiF, and I was able to swot down two dvs this evening by extending and them climbing above them. She feels amazing in VR.

 

see you in the skies soon friends 

 

 

Agreed with all of these, Waggaz.

 

Especially with the comment about pairs.....got bounced by the DVII's wingman a couple of times today. If someone had been watching my tail, it would have been nice.

[Garven]

7 hours ago, thenorm said:

I thought the issue was not the Aldi's, but that the AI wouldn't be able to use a gun that is not aligned along the vector of flight. 

I would think it could be solved by making the AI SE5a a separate model from the player controlled one.  In the end if that couldn't be done I'd rather it modeled accurately/correctly at the expense of the AI.

[HiIIBiIIy]

On 6/11/2019 at 12:28 AM, US103_Baer said:

Quick test.

Trimmed full nose down still had to have decent stick forward for level flight.

Got level flight at around 75% throttle. 

 

What's the trim wheel for again? I can't see any use case except full forward.

The "Trim wheel" does not work at all for me!  

I set the mechanical trim on my J-stick full forward and still had to hold a lot of forward stick. It is NOT flyable for me, very disappointed.☹️  

Edited June 19, 2019 by HiIIBiIIy

[SP1969]

I found it took some doing, Hillbilly, I wound up binding two keys, one up, one down, eventually did the trick. When I tried binding to a wheel, it didn't work.

 

You will still need some forward stick at higher throttle settings.

 

When one is injured, however, the aeroplane becomes impossible to fly, unless the engine is switched off, or idling, which makes landing almost impossible.

Edited June 19, 2019 by SP1969

[1PL-Husar-1Esk]

I don't remember how it was in ROF (linear pitch curve), but  I can't level fly (hands off) using only stabilizer with full power . My m8 which is using MSFF2 joystick can without problem.

Edited June 19, 2019 by 307_Tomcat

[Garven]

The horizontal stabilizer definitely helps reduce the amount of forward stick but it's not enough to hold the nose down.   It is pretty much same as it was in RoF for a linear curve.  

[J2_Bidu]

What's with all the problem of pushing the joystick? I push my Warthog no problem at all. Do your joysticks have very strong springs? It's not like I'm Mr Muscle (BELIEVE me).

[HiIIBiIIy]

12 hours ago, J2_Bidu said:

What's with all the problem of pushing the joystick? 

It's no problem, but shouldn't the trim make it so you don't have to push the stick forward? 

[J2_Bidu]

4 hours ago, HiIIBiIIy said:

It's no problem, but shouldn't the trim make it so you don't have to push the stick forward? 

 

Whatever is historical would be ok for me. Anyone got a clue how it worked?

[1PL-Husar-1Esk]

1 hour ago, J2_Bidu said:

 

Whatever is historical would be ok for me. Anyone got a clue how it worked?

That would be useful information .

[HiIIBiIIy]

2 hours ago, J2_Bidu said:

 

Whatever is historical would be ok for me. Anyone got a clue how it worked?

" Adjusting the elevator trim allows the SE5a to be flown hands off something I’m not used to in a WW1 fighter. " This quote is from the Vintage Aviator.http://thevintageaviator.co.nz/projects/se-5a-reproduction/flying-se5a

Looks like the devs screwed the pooch on this one.

Edited June 20, 2019 by HiIIBiIIy

[1PL-Husar-1Esk]

7 minutes ago, HiIIBiIIy said:

" Adjusting the elevator trim allows the SE5a to be flown hands off something I’m not used to in a WW1 fighter. " This quote is from the Vintage Aviator.http://thevintageaviator.co.nz/projects/se-5a-reproduction/flying-se5a

Looks like the devs screwed the pooch on this one.

  Thanks I will post it on beta forum.

BTW I think that adverse yaw is  almost absent, do you agree ?

Edited June 20, 2019 by 307_Tomcat

[HiIIBiIIy]

Tomcat, I haven't flown it much because of the "trim" issue.

But the rest of  the planes does seem to have very little or none adverse yaw.

[Sgt_Joch]

There were multiple threads about this on the ROF forum, the consensus was that at "neutral" trim, the AC should require only minimum forward pressure on the stick. There does seem to be an issue with the way it is presently modeled.

Edited June 20, 2019 by Sgt_Joch

[J2_Bidu]

9 hours ago, HiIIBiIIy said:

" Adjusting the elevator trim allows the SE5a to be flown hands off something I’m not used to in a WW1 fighter. " This quote is from the Vintage Aviator.http://thevintageaviator.co.nz/projects/se-5a-reproduction/flying-se5a

Looks like the devs screwed the pooch on this one.

 

I can fly it with my feet only at 115 km/h 80% throttle, if I trim it completely.

Edited June 20, 2019 by J2_Bidu

[US103_Baer]

7 hours ago, J2_Bidu said:

 

I can fly it with my feet only at 115 km/h 80% throttle, if I trim it completely.

Right, so what's the trim wheel for then, if full down trim is level at 115k? So you can trim it back a tiny bit to fly level at 100kph?  

 

Edited June 21, 2019 by US103_Baer

[J2_Bidu]

2 hours ago, US103_Baer said:

Right, so what's the trim wheel for then, if full down trim is level at 115k? So you can trim it back a tiny bit to fly level at 100kph?  

 

Just saying it is possible as stated. No idea what the ww1 plane designers original objective was with it. Are there adverse performance effects of trimming versus nosing down? If so maybe they wanted a trade off...?

[1PL-Husar-1Esk]

33 minutes ago, Plank said:

 

Heck. I was railing about this years ago in Rof.

 

If the bullets departed the gun barrel "along the darn tube thing" then you would gain a good advantage when chasing a target in a flat turn ( se5's , n17 lewis etc ) .

The bullet path becomes a chord not a tangent.  ( yes trigonometry raises it's ugly head yet again...) 

 

However, what we have in RoF and now in FC is not a "feature" that a fighter pilot will relish and it's not even actual irl historical.

 

If the game cannot adjust gunfire vertically at this time they should blooming well aim to make it so in the future.

Horizontal and Vertical gun harmonization was a critical part of gunnery blah blah blah etc.  Poor show. 5 out of 10.  No VC.

 

Gun sights simply do not look down in the se5a.

 

Wet blanket anyone?

Buying  a borked plane in RoF is well, an act of faith, buying the same borked plane again in FC  is an act fan boy banality.

 

S!

 

Planky.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             Still rinsing out RoF and all of it's glorious 2d clouds...

They did some small fixes and minor adjustment  when porintg to FC but devs said that major is just copy from ROF. No time and resources to redo. I pointed that and more issues.  

 I regret it to , just how it is ,take it on leave it. 

 

Any way now multiplayer FC is just occasional ones a week small dogfights, not popular at all. Hope it change with the map. IL-2 GB is lack of true events, with commanders and regualr shedule like ROF has. I hope FC will bring it here.

[Zooropa_Fly]

36 minutes ago, Plank said:

 

Heck. I was railing about this years ago in Rof and haven't stopped wittering about it since !

 

If the bullets departed the gun barrel "along the darn tube thing" then you would gain a good advantage when chasing a target in a flat turn ( se5's , n17 lewis etc ) .

The bullet path becomes a chord not a tangent.  ( yes trigonometry raises it's ugly head yet again...) 

 

However, what we have in RoF and now in FC is not a "feature" that a fighter pilot will relish and it's not even actual irl historical.

 

If the game cannot adjust gunfire vertically at this time they should blooming well aim to make it so in the future.

Horizontal and Vertical gun harmonization was a critical part of gunnery blah blah blah etc.  Poor show. 5 out of 10.  No VC.

 

Gun sights simply do not look down in the se5a.

 

Wet blanket anyone?

Buying  a borked plane in RoF is well, an act of faith, buying the same borked plane again in FC  is an act fan boy banality, I can't believe I bought it.. then gave it away !!!

 

S!

 

Planky.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             Still rinsing out RoF and all of it's glorious 2d clouds... who am I kidding - RoF clouds are naff !

 

 

Fixed !

[HagarTheHorrible]

7 hours ago, Zooropa_Fly said:

 

 

Fixed !

 

 

????????

 

You haven't done away with Planky, have you  ?????? 

 

He might be a bit dense (tropical hardwood), but he takes a nail well.

[HagarTheHorrible]

1 hour ago, Plank said:

 

 

 

I am not dense at all!

 

I could be a low density balsa wood plank but cunningly laminated to give great strength to weight ratio.  : - ) 

 

Salute!

 

Planky.

 

 

Might I suggest you go and have a word with a Mr Dehaviland, he might be able to put you to good use during the next innings, although don't blame me if everyone laughs at you or doesn't take you seriously, you'll have to show your metal (or not) first, maybe pay them a very quick flying visit.  ?

Edited June 21, 2019 by HagarTheHorrible

[SP1969]

Does anyone else find the windscreen a little heavily tinted?

 

I sometimes find myself losing target when I stick my head back inside the cockpit.

 

I am perfectly prepared to accept that it is just me - but it doesn't seem to have quite the same effect on the other aeroplanes.

[Garven]

44 minutes ago, SP1969 said:

Does anyone else find the windscreen a little heavily tinted?

Its quite a bit less tinted than it was in RoF