Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I’ve just heard back from Shuttleworth. The collection is still under lockdown although it’s possible they will reopen early next month, at which point they will start looking at these kinds of enquiries. In the meantime it might be worth a few of us drawing up a set of questions so we have our technical query ready to go. Do PM me if you have ideas (Hagar and Larner have been very helpful already)

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, US93_Rummell said:

I’ve just heard back from Shuttleworth. The collection is still under lockdown although it’s possible they will reopen early next month, at which point they will start looking at these kinds of enquiries. In the meantime it might be worth a few of us drawing up a set of questions so we have our technical query ready to go. Do PM me if you have ideas (Hagar and Larner have been very helpful already)


One of the very first questions that should be asked imo is:

 

“How differently is this SE5a at Shuttleworth flown, compared to how it was actually flown in combat in WW1?“

 

If their answer is, “exactly the same“, then continue your line of questioning but if their answer is something like, “not really like they did back then because we ‘baby‘ this aircraft due to the fact that it’s one of a kind and worth a hell of a lot”, then it’s seems that any info after that would practically useless. 

Edited by J5_Adam
  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
42 minutes ago, J5_Adam said:


One of the very first questions that should be asked imo is:

 

“How differently is this SE5a at Shuttleworth flown, compared to how it was actually flown in combat in WW1?“

 

If their answer is, “exactly the same“, then continue your line of questioning but if their answer is something like, “not really like they did back then because we ‘baby‘ this aircraft due to the fact that it’s one of a kind and worth a hell of a lot”, then it’s seems that any info after that would practically useless. 

I was going to start with engine RPM, speed, and acceleration as this is one of the easier aspects from a data perspective. possibly prop pitch too.
 

They’ve already said many times that they have to be extremely careful when flying her as she’s a one of a kind, so handling would be low down the priority list. 

Edited by US93_Rummell
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, US93_Rummell said:

I was going to start with engine RPM, speed, and acceleration as this is one of the easier aspects from a data perspective. possibly prop pitch too.
 

They’ve already said many times that they have to be extremely careful when flying her as she’s a one of a kind, so handling would be low down the priority list. 

 

That being said, I would get pilot impressions where possible still. We have the impression notes publicly available from Vintage Aviator, and it would be nice to see if Shuttleworth hast the same opinion of their original aircraft as Vintage Aviator's pilot had about the reproduction down in NZ. I consider pilot notes to be in the area of "expert opinion evidence". It's nice to have both hard statistics and data as well as an expert opinion to explain and pull it all together.

 

https://thevintageaviator.co.nz/projects/se-5a-reproduction/flying-se5a

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/6/2020 at 2:40 AM, US93_Rummell said:

 

I was going to start with engine RPM, speed, and acceleration as this is one of the easier aspects from a data perspective. possibly prop pitch too.
 

 

That is a good start Rummell. Bleeding revs and poor acceleration are absolutely beastly in this old kite. I'd be very interested into insights by members of the 56 Squadrons out there as well. Where are they? 

 

So, find out if the Shutto Se5a drops revs, to the degree that FC does, in slight climbs and turns. If it performs better than FC (as I hope), what is the prop pitch? Acceleration may correct itself (if the bleeding revs issue were ever to be fixed?)

 

Of course I have been wrong before on rare occasions and the Shutto results may show a close resemblance to FC's Se5a. But I bloody well hope not.

 

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, catchov said:

 

That is a good start Rummell. Bleeding revs and poor acceleration are absolutely beastly in this old kite. I'd be very interested into insights by members of the 56 Squadrons out there as well. Where are they? 

 

So, find out if the Shutto Se5a drops revs, to the degree that FC does, in slight climbs and turns. If it performs better than FC (as I hope), what is the prop pitch? Acceleration may correct itself (if the bleeding revs issue were ever to be fixed?)

 

Of course I have been wrong before on rare occasions and the Shutto results may show a close resemblance to FC's Se5a. But I bloody well hope not.

 

 

 

If it is close, then it raises the question of whether other aircraft are outperforming their real life counterparts. Which is much harder variable to pin down. But you still have a striking variation in performance of the SE5a between RoF and FC. They're too different for both to be right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I had an interesting thought the other day regarding the "Historical" S.E.5a's dogfighting qualities. 

When looking at pilot accounts, I quickly noticed a trend with SPAD pilots - more specifically the XIII -  a large amount of them (I daresay all of them - that I've read, anyway!) talk about the SPAD as being mainly a BnZ aircraft, stressing that it couldn't turn with Fokkers (most of the accounts I've read are USAS accounts, and they had tons of scraps with D.VII Jastas in 1918), and that you should 'dive on' enemies before 'zooming up'. 

Strangely, I only remember one account of an S.E.5a pilot citing the S.E. as being best-suited to a BnZ role - and that was, again, in reference to fighting the D.VII. I'd have to find the quote (I believe it was from McScotch's book), but it said something to the effect of (paraphrasing here) "You should never try to turn with a Fokker unless you are very sure of yourself". I believe the context was a Flight Lead or a C.O. 'Instructing' some rookies. 

On the other hand, some of the memoirs / accounts I've read do, in fact, talk about turn-fighting! More specifically in the context of VS. Albatroses. I'm referring to pilots like James McCudden, Ira Jones, Cecil Lewis, etc. 

McCudden talks a lot about getting into turning fights in Flying Fury. Another thing that struck me was in some cases he'd talk about being out-turned, and I noticed more than once that he would refer to the pilots that got the better of him as "Good", or "Very Good". Arrogance, maybe? I don't think so - McCudden seems quite humble in his memoir. 

So, then, what could that mean? 

A) -- In RoF and FC, the Albatros and the D.VII seemed to be quite well-matched and comparable in the turn. Is it possible, then, that the D.Va turns to quickly in FC? Or that the D.VII turns too slowly? Or that the S.E.5a turns too slowly? Or some combination of the three? 

B) -- Would the 'correct' pitch (assuming that FC's is wrong) allow the S.E. to turn more closely to that of the Albatros' ability? 

C) -- does McCudden citing pilots that out-turned him as being 'Good' imply that either the Albatros couldn't be yanked-n-banked as effortlessly as it can in FC, or that the S.E. was more lenient than it is in FC, and closer to the FC Albatros in that respect? Is that, perhaps, why the Albatros and D.VII feel so closely matched? 

D) Could this simply be that some pilots weren't experienced or ballsy enough to make the most out of their aircraft's turning ability? That's definitely a possibility! Especially in the context of fighting crack S.E. pilots that absolutely were experienced and ballsy enough! 

E) Will a squadron vs squadron scrap be much different from a 1-on-1 scrap? Again, I think it's definitely possible.  If that were the case, how much of an impact would this have on the S.E. pilot accounts? 

F) Did the two aircraft's actual control columns affect their ability to be turned? Having been fortunate enough to have worked an Albatros' control column (only on the ground, though!), I could see this being a possibility - the Albatros' column felt really awkward, and I found myself thinking "How the hell did they keep a hold of this in a fight?". 


G) -- Assuming the S.E. could realistically fight an Albatros in a turning battle, what would that then mean for Multiplayer? Certainly, the Central pilots wouldn't be too happy - at first...but I actually think it would make for an interesting dynamic, and might even bring both the S.E. and the Albatros a little more 'purpose'. The Ententes would have a decent turn-fighter that isn't, like the two Sopwiths, a handful to the uninitiated...and the Albatros would have an opponent that it could actually get into a good scrap with...assuming the S.E. pilot chose to engage him in the turn. 

Yes, the S.E. could still BnZ an Albatros to death - but, let's be honest here...turn-fighting is more fun! I don't think we'd have too short a supply of S.E. pilots ready to 'mix it up'...if the S.E. was capable of that. 

Of course, the one 'imbalance' that would remain is that the S.E, if he's smart and there's still some altitude left, will bugger off in a power-dive and leave the Albatros in the dust...again, if the S.E. pilot chooses to do that (but they do that anyway, so no big loss there!) 

Perhaps I'm just reading way too much into the pilot accounts, or I haven't found the right ones yet, but I thought it was an interesting thought to share ;) 
 

Edited by US93_Larner
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

“The Fokker VII was the principal enemy to be fought now, and against that good little machine the S.E. had to be careful “Dive and zoom” I was told, “dive and zoom - don’t try a dogfight with them until you’ve plenty of experience. They can generally out-manoeuvre you” 

“But we’re faster on the level and in a dive”.  Keep the old S.E. going fast and you can beat anything in the sky”. Duncan Grinnel-Milne - Wind in the wires.      Of course there are a tremendous number of caveats to consider with a statement like that, such as the altitude at which combat was typically taking place for one.

 

I think I recall Carl Deglow mentioning in his book, if memory serves he was referrring to either the Pflaz DIII or D. XII, that the design of the control column restricted lateral control, I think it caught on his legs. 

Edited by HagarTheHorrible

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, HagarTheHorrible said:

“The Fokker VII was the principal enemy to be fought now, and against that good little machine the S.E. had to be careful “Dive and zoom” I was told, “dive and zoom - don’t try a dogfight with them until you’ve plenty of experience. They can generally out-manoeuvre you” 

“But we’re faster on the level and in a dive”.  Keep the old S.E. going fast and you can beat anything in the sky”. Duncan Grinnel-Milne - Wind in the wires.      Of course there are a tremendous number of caveats to consider with a statement like that, such as the altitude at which combat was typically taking place for one.

 

I think I recall Carl Deglow mentioning in his book, if memory serves he was referrring to either the Pflaz DIII or D. XII, that the design of the control column restricted lateral control, I think it caught on his legs. 

And here’s the problem with our SE. The zoom is not enough to get your out of DviiF prophang danger. With the current DM, in any fast dive you have to pull back up very carefully to avoid a wing shed. You’ll probably get tops 2x more zooms before you’re co-alt, let alone out of lethal prophang territory.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, HagarTheHorrible said:

“The Fokker VII was the principal enemy to be fought now, and against that good little machine the S.E. had to be careful “Dive and zoom” I was told, “dive and zoom - don’t try a dogfight with them until you’ve plenty of experience. They can generally out-manoeuvre you” 

“But we’re faster on the level and in a dive”.  Keep the old S.E. going fast and you can beat anything in the sky”. Duncan Grinnel-Milne - Wind in the wires.    


That's the ticket! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All that make sense when you also consider the generally negative reactions to the Alb. D.Va on the German side - that it was heavier and less maneuverable than the D.III; that it was really no improvement in the lineage of Alb fighters; and ultimately that the D.VII was superior to the D.Va. I could see turning with an Alb. D.Va, especially if you can bring the lift of the SE5a wings to bear, and bring into play the stabilizer wheel. I concur that it's a BnZ situation with the D.VII.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A topic I'm unaware of touched upon, and I could be wrong here but the engine makes the complete wrong sound. The whining sound in game I assume is meant to be of a hearing system in the engine. The Wolsley viper had no such thing to my knowledge. There is a real SE5 with what I believe a real Viper in the front of it and it most certainly doesn't make that sound!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, =RAW=Wellington said:

A topic I'm unaware of touched upon, and I could be wrong here but the engine makes the complete wrong sound. The whining sound in game I assume is meant to be of a hearing system in the engine. The Wolsley viper had no such thing to my knowledge. There is a real SE5 with what I believe a real Viper in the front of it and it most certainly doesn't make that sound!

 

It mostly just whines, at the moment, but you might find that's actually just the pilots venting their frustration as they try and get the engine to actually reach it's rated speed.  😁

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all, I've sent a chaser to the Shuttleworth team. The last time I heard from them the Collection was still largely closed; will keep you all updated if/when I hear more.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, HagarTheHorrible said:

 

It mostly just whines, at the moment, but you might find that's actually just the pilots venting their frustration as they try and get the engine to actually reach it's rated speed.  😁

I'm sure if it hit it's rated speed it would just fall apart.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Won't help today...or tomorrow...but I'll be finishing an SE5a project over the next few years.  Gotta have something to shoot at in the Dr1!

  • Like 3
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/1/2020 at 10:09 AM, =RAW=Wellington said:

A topic I'm unaware of touched upon, and I could be wrong here but the engine makes the complete wrong sound. The whining sound in game I assume is meant to be of a hearing system in the engine. The Wolsley viper had no such thing to my knowledge. There is a real SE5 with what I believe a real Viper in the front of it and it most certainly doesn't make that sound!

Are you sure that you are not just hearing the external sound of a spinning propeller under load? The whining disappears if you reduce the throttle and it is not audible from inside the cockpit.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/2/2020 at 7:31 PM, Rail said:

Are you sure that you are not just hearing the external sound of a spinning propeller under load? The whining disappears if you reduce the throttle and it is not audible from inside the cockpit.

 

I'm unaware of a propeller making this sound under load, and if that is the case why do the other aircraft not do it, excluding the SPAD and the Dolphin which are both fitted with the Hispano Suiza geared 200hp powerplant (correct me if I am wrong) where the SE5a modelled in game is most certainly the later 200hp Wolsley Viper powerplant. The whining being reduced at lower power makes sense in the case of the gearing as that of course is under less load. In a broad sense it's the same as when you reverse a car, the faster you get going backwards the louder the whine. In the case of it not being audible front he cockpit, I've never flown an SE5 (even though I damn wish I could) so wouldn't be able to comment on that, I imagine the noise of propwash and then the V8 feet warmer in front would drown out most noise. 

Edited by =RAW=Wellington

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, =RAW=Wellington said:

I'm unaware of a propeller making this sound under load, and if that is the case why do the other aircraft not do it, excluding the SPAD and the Dolphin which are both fitted with the Hispano Suiza geared 200hp powerplant (correct me if I am wrong) where the SE5a modelled in game is most certainly the later 200hp Wolsley Viper powerplant. The whining being reduced at lower power makes sense in the case of the gearing as that of course is under less load. In a broad sense it's the same as when you reverse a car, the faster you get going backwards the louder the whine. In the case of it not being audible front he cockpit, I've never flown an SE5 (even though I damn wish I could) so wouldn't be able to comment on that, I imagine the noise of propwash and then the V8 feet warmer in front would drown out most noise. 

The noise is a result of the particular propeller-pitch, diameter and RPM involved. It has nothing directly to do with the power-plant which simply provides power. If I remember correctly, it is the sound of the tip of the  blades hitting the air at a particular angle and speed, which is close to the speed of sound (at the tips).

It is much more noticeable in WWII aircraft which have a higher RPM.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/6/2020 at 1:30 AM, J5_Adam said:


One of the very first questions that should be asked imo is:

 

“How differently is this SE5a at Shuttleworth flown, compared to how it was actually flown in combat in WW1?“

 

If their answer is, “exactly the same“, then continue your line of questioning but if their answer is something like, “not really like they did back then because we ‘baby‘ this aircraft due to the fact that it’s one of a kind and worth a hell of a lot”, then it’s seems that any info after that would practically useless. 

 

 Yeah I kinda douby they're taking it up to 16,000ft and performing anything remotely exciting in the way of maneuvers. Still, there would be a lot of expertise and experience there along with a depth of research that potentially exceeds anything we have acces too so there's no reason so sell them short as a source of information.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Rail said:

The noise is a result of the particular propeller-pitch, diameter and RPM involved. It has nothing directly to do with the power-plant which simply provides power. If I remember correctly, it is the sound of the tip of the  blades hitting the air at a particular angle and speed, which is close to the speed of sound (at the tips).

It is much more noticeable in WWII aircraft which have a higher RPM.

 

The sound that you mention isn't really a whine though. An aircraft that is a great example, as you say more in the WW2 period is the Harvard. The tips of the propeller on this aircraft are often supersonic, however of course are subsonic at lower speeds. The audible noise from that is very different from the whine you hear from the Dolphin, SE5 and Spad in game. And if this is again the case of the propeller breaking the sound barrier to make this whine, why is it not on all aircraft and not just those fitted with the Suiza (or viper in real terms). I'd also be very curious to know about the diameters of airscrews and ratings of the powerplants as I imagine that the aircrews of the early 1900 would not be constructed to withstand breaking the sound barrier. 

Edited by =RAW=Wellington

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...