S.E.5a Woes

[No.23_Gaylion]

What kind of noob forgets to close their radiator for that long?

[HagarTheHorrible]

3 hours ago, US213_Talbot said:

What kind of noob forgets to close their radiator for that long?

 

 Funny, that was my first thought as well ?

[76SQN-FatherTed]

Or open it?

[SP1969]

Come late to this thread, because the advent of the SE modelling ended my association with FC.

 

It never felt right.

 

 

[ST_Catchov]

I hear what you're saying SP1969. Sad. BUT SO DO MANY OTHERS! Where's the bloody poll? What's going on? What's happening with Shuttleworth? Prop pitch? Have we even got the right engine modelled? What say the devs? ("sigh not again"). Well, yes it is again. Until it's fixed! LISTEN TO LARNER! …. AND OTHERS! …. You know who I mean ….

 

I'm sorry, forgive me …. I'm getting a bit cranky. Just a bit emotional is all. And tired. IT'S ALL THIS SOCIAL ISOLATION AND STUFF! F*** COVID-19 and Jim Beam! Hic.

[No.23_Triggers]

3 hours ago, catchov said:

What's happening with Shuttleworth? Prop pitch? Have we even got the right engine modelled?

We do have the right engine for 1918, at least, one of the right engines. Our in-game S.E. is powered by a Wosley Viper, which was generally intended to replace the Hissos - although I'm sure some Hissos remained in service through 1918. As for Shuttleworth, it'll be a while before we can get any news from them, as many of the staff are Furloughed. F*** Covid-19. The GOOD news, however, is that they are keeping a log of any inquiries to do with the collection, and to quote Mr. Webb of the Shuttleworth Team "I'm sure we should be able to provide the sort of data you're looking for". We've been told that the collection won't be open until at least the end of June, so still a little wait ahead...

 

3 hours ago, catchov said:

LISTEN TO LARNER!

This is awful advice in almost any situation. 

 

Edited April 25, 2020 by US93_Larner

[ST_Catchov]

1 hour ago, US93_Larner said:

5 hours ago, catchov said:

LISTEN TO LARNER!

This is awful advice in almost any situation. 

 

Agreed. Talbot put me up to it. Bastard.

[Smelly]

The Se5a has elevator trim; keep your speed up--while doing adjustments with the throttle--and you can hang with a D7f in a ridiculously tight turn.

 

 

Edited April 28, 2020 by Smelly_Fella

[emely]

54 minutes ago, Smelly_Fella said:

The Se5a has elevator trim; keep your speed up--while doing adjustments with the throttle--and you can hang with a D7f in a ridiculously tight turn.

 

 

Good advice, but it will work once and your speed will be spent.

SeVa was inferior in energy to D7f even in RoF, but certainly not as fatal as in a circus.  But even in the RoF it was unreasonable to engage in battle with the D7f without an advantage in height.  In the circus, you have a chance for one attack from above, if you are alone.  After you run away, because you have run out of energy.

However, if you just want to have fun, and your plans do not include getting the Blue Max, then you can try to make not one, but several attacks.  You can even try to go down and do it at low altitude.  True, the fun alone will not be very long, so I recommend doing this with friends ?

Recently there was an occasion, our guys got bored, and we took a one-way ticket to the festival in the area of the German airfield. When the height was already spent by us, and our ranks were thinned, just for fun, I tried some of the things that helped SeVa in RoF.  What was my surprise when it happened!  :-))) At first I thought it was not D7f, but just D7.  I even tried to compare our turns with him (which led me to fall in the end), but the truth turned out to be banal.  It was a D7f, but its wing was damaged ?

If the developers would return SeVa to its former capabilities from RoF, the game would surely have become more interesting, and the Blue Max award would have acquired a slightly higher value than what it currently has.

 

 

Edited April 28, 2020 by emely

[Bartman]

One question I have about the SE5a is how the heck do you get the elevator trim to work?

 

I've tried binding it to the TMS switch on my Warthog stick for "Adjustable Stabiliser Switch : Pitch up/Pitch Down" and  "Elevator Trim Switch : up/down" and neither work.

 

Any ideas anyone?

Edited April 28, 2020 by Bartman

[1PL-Sahaj-1Esk]

11 hours ago, emely said:

Good advice, but it will work once and your speed will be spent.

SeVa was inferior in energy to D7f even in RoF, but certainly not as fatal as in a circus.  But even in the RoF it was unreasonable to engage in battle with the D7f without an advantage in height.  In the circus, you have a chance for one attack from above, if you are alone.  After you run away, because you have run out of energy.

However, if you just want to have fun, and your plans do not include getting the Blue Max, then you can try to make not one, but several attacks.  You can even try to go down and do it at low altitude.  True, the fun alone will not be very long, so I recommend doing this with friends ?

Recently there was an occasion, our guys got bored, and we took a one-way ticket to the festival in the area of the German airfield. When the height was already spent by us, and our ranks were thinned, just for fun, I tried some of the things that helped SeVa in RoF.  What was my surprise when it happened!  :-))) At first I thought it was not D7f, but just D7.  I even tried to compare our turns with him (which led me to fall in the end), but the truth turned out to be banal.  It was a D7f, but its wing was damaged ?

If the developers would return SeVa to its former capabilities from RoF, the game would surely have become more interesting, and the Blue Max award would have acquired a slightly higher value than what it currently has.

 

 

S! Emely

[1PL-Sahaj-1Esk]

Emely, BTW is it possible to obtain your skins somewhere? I don't have them.

[NO.20_Krispy_Duck]

I agree a review of how the SE5a flies is a good idea. It seems slow to accelerate and struggles to retain energy, though it's straight-line top is fast once you get steam built up. It does seem to have fairly mild handling characteristics. I do not sense the adverse yaw effect mentioned in the Vintage Aviator notebook. Engine is pretty tolerant of running full-bore and of kind of rough handling of the throttle. I don't sense the tendency to have to fight lift to land - I remember reading that the SE5a can be a handful to land if you're coming in hot because the wings generate a good amount of lift even at lower speeds. If anything, the SE5a should have a greater ability to mix it up close than the Spad XIII (though certainly less than the Sopwith Camel up close). But my experience is similar - you get one pass... maybe two if you're lucky. It's possible to do well in it, but it just seems kind of anemic relative to other planes.

 

Someone earlier made a really good point about flight models being both relative and absolute. You have the objective absolute of the flight model in isolation versus the data, and then you have the kind of subjective factor of "how does this compare to other planes' flight models". I'd love to see more "notebook" type reviews like what Vintage Aviator did - say, something from Shuttleworth or other operators.

[No.23_Triggers]

1 hour ago, Krispy_Duck said:

If anything, the SE5a should have a greater ability to mix it up close than the Spad XIII (though certainly less than the Sopwith Camel up close). But my experience is similar - you get one pass... maybe two if you're lucky. It's possible to do well in it, but it just seems kind of anemic relative to other planes.

I think yes, at lower speeds, the S.E. should be able to fight on the level of, or (probably) better than, the SPAD. The pilot accounts suggest it should be somewhere on the level of the Albatros (which could mean either our S.E. is too weak in this aspect, our Alb is too good in this aspect, or both (which is what I kind of suspect). 

According to Cecil Lewis, the Dolphin should, in turn, beat the S.E., and should sit somewhere between an S.E. and a Camel. But the Dolphin would need its own thread if we wanted to really examine that plane  

At the moment, I feel like the SPAD is closer to how the pilot accounts make it out to be. I can't say if it's bang-on, as you seem to hear about SPAD pilots being perfectly happy to turn with Albs (Guynemer), and D7s (Nordhoff, Hall), but the general consensus seems to be the same - the German planes had the edge in a turn-fight, but there was little enough in it that a good SPAD pilot could out-dogfight an Alb / D7. I would wager that the D7 would be far better vs a SPAD than an Alb would be in such a situation. 

RFC / RAF accounts said similar things about the S.E. Could turn with Albs, could beat an inexperienced D7 pilot in the turn (but couldn't match them in an equal-pilot-ability turning contest) - but, the current S.E. bleeds energy at such an alarmingly fast rate that, unless the S.E. can fight 'going downhill' it won't even last 30 seconds unless the guy at the controls is a flying genius. 

I'm in the "Make the S.E. a better turner" camp (I'm sure many will disagree with me on that), but more than anything I'd like to see the prop pitch addressed, so that the S.E. can at least return to being a great BnZer, and not a pawn-shop SPAD 

Edited April 28, 2020 by US93_Larner

[HagarTheHorrible]

I wonder about that Cecil Lewis quote.  He doesn't say what altitude he was at, when the mock combat took place.  The Dolphin, evidently, was designed with a regard to fighting at 19000 ft, or there abouts.  I assume thats why it had bigger wings, to catch loads of lift up high. In that rarefied air, aircraft that try turning, usually have to make a choice between trading altitude for angles or a bigger circle for less altitude loss.  The Dolphin, at, what might have been considered typical "combat altitudes" might well have been able to make fewer compromises and as such had the advantage of the "upper" hand over aircraft, even those that were claimed to retain a good engine performance up high, such as the SE5a.

[No.23_Triggers]

27 minutes ago, HagarTheHorrible said:

I wonder about that Cecil Lewis quote.  He doesn't say what altitude he was at, when the mock combat took place.  The Dolphin, evidently, was designed with a regard to fighting at 19000 ft, or there abouts.  I assume thats why it had bigger wings, to catch loads of lift up high. In that rarefied air, aircraft that try turning, usually have to make a choice between trading altitude for angles or a bigger circle for less altitude loss.  The Dolphin, at, what might have been considered typical "combat altitudes" might well have been able to make fewer compromises and as such had the advantage of the "upper" hand over aircraft, even those that were claimed to retain a good engine performance up high, such as the SE5a.

I think it was low to the ground, wasn't it, over an Aerodrome? Both planes landed immediately after Lewis had been thoroughly "Shot Down" IIRC...I'll see if I can find the page

EDIT:

"I came over St. Omer at about five thousand feet and saw a back-staggered scout circling the aerodrome. I turned to have a look. When I came close, I saw that it was one of the new Sopwith Dolphins. I plunged down onto his tail as a challenge for a scrap". (p.182)

So, sub-5000 ft? 

Edited April 28, 2020 by US93_Larner

[Adler_Blau]

4 hours ago, 1PL-Sahaj-1Esk said:

Emely, BTW is it possible to obtain your skins somewhere? I don't have them.

Hi Sahaj, not now, sorry)

 

S! 

[No.23_Starling]

3 hours ago, US93_Larner said:

I'm in the "Make the S.E. a better turner" camp (I'm sure many will disagree with me on that), but more than anything I'd like to see the prop pitch addressed, so that the S.E. can at least return to being a great BnZer, and not a pawn-shop SPAD 

The turn adjustment is a hard sell to the devs however if we can get firsthand rpm data from an actual Viper and SE5 (Shuttleworth) then I’m hoping the energy bleed, muted zoom, and poor acceleration can be addressed without much argument. Just the little literature ive seen state the level flight RPM is currently suspect. It is possible to win a 1v1 in a vertical dogfight (I’ve won a couple) but it’s not at all easy. Right now she’s a death trap to newbies and even seasoned energy fighters, without a ton of practice, wingmen, and a bit of luck. The best I’ve seen in her so far is Mannock, but there aren’t many of them.

[Smelly]

9 hours ago, Bartman said:

One question I have about the SE5a is how the heck do you get the elevator trim to work?

 

I've tried binding it to the TMS switch on my Warthog stick for "Adjustable Stabiliser Switch : Pitch up/Pitch Down" and  "Elevator Trim Switch : up/down" and neither work.

 

Any ideas anyone?

In the "Airplane Control" settings it's the "Adjustable Stabilizer Axis".  I'm using a Warthog fuel box and have it set to Joy1_axis_p....which is the grey wheel (it's an axis) on the right hand side of the fuel stick.  It's pretty slick once you get the hang of it.

Edited April 28, 2020 by Smelly_Fella

[emely]

5 hours ago, US93_Larner said:

According to Cecil Lewis, the Dolphin should, in turn, beat the S.E., and should sit somewhere between an S.E. and a Camel. 

 

I think this is so in our circus.

2 hours ago, No.74_Waggaz said:

 It is possible to win a 1v1 in a vertical dogfight (I’ve won a couple) but it’s not at all easy. 

You probably have records of these two cases, could you show them here?

I somehow managed to shoot down one or two enemy planes, but I can’t remember a single 1x1 battle.  There was nothing interesting, smart, beautiful.  I just took advantage of the situation when there are more allies, or when the enemy does not see me.  Even the battle on the video above in the subject, it is difficult to consider 1x1.  Although this is probably the only case where I did not just hit and then ran away.  In the standard plot, at the first attempts to arrange a stellfight, a second D7f appears and makes a sieve from Seva ?

Therefore, it is very interesting to see your victories in vertical maneuvers.

[No.23_Starling]

Emely- will send you a PM. Have three tracks I can share but they need editing 

[HagarTheHorrible]

I was doing a bit of reading and if figures are to be believed, I can well understand why Cecil Lewis might have considered the Dolphin to be superior.  If the numbers from this website are in any way to be considered close to the actuality.

 

Aircraft investigation info   I don't know anything about the person compiling the numbers or his technical credentials.

 

Dolphin;   (908 kg)  Max speed - 206 kph     (1000m)               climb to 3000m - 8.17 min,  turn dia (at 500m) - 56m (9.5 sec)

 

SE5a;        (895 kg)  Max speed - 203 kph     (1000m)             climb to 3000m - 8.50 min,  turn dia (at 500m) - 61m (11.2 sec)

 

Spad XIII; (845 kg)  Max speed - 218 kph      (1000m)            climb to 3000m - 8.22 min,  turn dia (at 500m) - 65m (11.3 sec)

 

Unfortunately, it doesn't look so rosy for the Germans, even the much vaunted "f".

 

DVa;          (876 kg)  Max speed - 186 kph      (1000m)            climb to 3000m -  11.11 min,  turn dia (at 500m) - 71m (12.6 sec)

 

D VII;         (852 kg)  Max speed - 189 kph      (1000m)            climb to 3000m - 13.17 min,  turn dia (at 500m) - 71m (12.7 sec)

 

D VII f;       (906 kg)  Max speed - 189 kph      (1000m)            climb to 3000m -  9.58 min,  turn dia (at 500m) - 75m (12.8 sec)

 

  Interestingly, according to this, the Dolphin could reach it's top speed (75% throttle) with juice to spare, presumably good for keeping  speed as altitude inceased.  Not only would the Dolphin be a, if not THE, star turn, it would be a match, if not better than the D VII f.  It might explain why, despite the French having good aircraft manufacturers, with competetive designs, they'd ordered Dolphins (very un-French to by foreign stuff if they can help it), even if the war finished before the order could be fulfilled.   Whatever the veracity of the figures above, it wouldn't surprise me if, after investigation, it was found that the Dolphin was running the wrong propeller for the gear reduction ratio. The prop animation certainly appears different to that of the Spad, even though it supposedly has the same engine, running with the same gearing ratio, 21:28 (1500 rpm prop) ?

 

"The gearing of the propeller shaft was the determinate of whether it would have a two bladed propeller or a four bladed propeller.
Those French 200 hp Hispano-Suiza 8ba, 8BCa, 8BCb engines that had 1170 propeller rpm and the crankshaft turning of 2000 rpm, gearing ratio of 24:41 used the 4 bladed propeller T.28096, 2360 mm diameter and 3340 mm pitch. Also the French Hispano-Suiza 200 hp engines, 8Ba, 8Bb and 8BDb with gearing ratio 26:39 with a propeller shaft turning at 1333 rpm used a 4 bladed propeller T.28098, with a diameter of 2515mm and a pitch of 3230mm.
There were 200 hp Hispano-Suiza engines,8Ba, 8Bb, 8Bd, 8BEa, 8BE, also the 220 hp Hispano-Suiza 8BEc and 8BEe with gearing ratio of 21:28 and the propeller shaft speed of 1500 rpm. These engines used the T.28134 two bladed propeller."

 

As for the SE5a, I wouldn't be surprised if what we actually have under the hood isn't actually a  Hispano Suiza 8Ab liquid-cooled 8 -cylinder V-engine, normal rating : 180 [hp](132.4 KW) at 1800 [rpm] at 500 [m] above sea level,rather than the supposed Viper W4a.  I base this on, whats good for the goose is good for the gander.  The engine used in the DVa, D.III and VII, can achieve a maximum of 1500 - 1550rpm, depending on the aircraft, for an engine that is rated as 180 HP at 1400 rpm.  If the SE5a engine is performing similarly then 180/1800rpm is possibly the rated HP/RPM and 1920 is it's maximum RPM. The showroom salesmen have possibly sold us a

 

 

instead.

 

Edited April 29, 2020 by HagarTheHorrible

[No.23_Starling]

2 hours ago, HagarTheHorrible said:

 

 

As for the SE5a, I wouldn't be surprised if what we actually have under the hood isn't actually a  Hispano Suiza 8Ab liquid-cooled 8 -cylinder V-engine, normal rating : 180 [hp](132.4 KW) at 1800 [rpm] at 500 [m] above sea level,rather than the supposed Viper W4a.  I base this on, whats good for the goose is good for the gander.  The engine used in the DVa, D.III and VII, can achieve a maximum of 1500 - 1550rpm, depending on the aircraft, for an engine that is rated as 180 HP at 1400 rpm.  If the SE5a engine is performing similarly then 180/1800rpm is possibly the rated HP/RPM and 1920 is it's maximum RPM. The showroom salesmen have possibly sold us a

 

 

instead.

 

I quite like the Dva and Diii as it is with the RPM it pulls. If we had duds like the ones BvR complained about it would be less fun and then everyone would pile into the mighty Dviif (man I love that plane up high). I would just like an Se5a that can zoom, retain energy, and accelerate better (AKA BnZ) more like the Spad. I feel like the entente side could use a noob-friendly plane, much like the Dva. Whenever I introduce new guys to the sim I usually tell them to take the Dva.

[NO.20_W_M_Thomson]

1 hour ago, No.74_Waggaz said:

Whenever I introduce new guys to the sim I usually tell them to take the Dva.

I would introduce them to the Bristol as well, very friendly pilots plane. turns like a dog chasing its tail, climbs like an eagle and isn't much slower than the se5 can BNZ just as good if not better than SE5. Sturdy gun platform and for an extra bonus you have a rear gunner so no one can sneak up on you. 

[HagarTheHorrible]

1 hour ago, No.74_Waggaz said:

I quite like the Dva and Diii as it is with the RPM it pulls. If we had duds like the ones BvR complained about it would be less fun and then everyone would pile into the mighty Dviif (man I love that plane up high). I would just like an Se5a that can zoom, retain energy, and accelerate better (AKA BnZ) more like the Spad. I feel like the entente side could use a noob-friendly plane, much like the Dva. Whenever I introduce new guys to the sim I usually tell them to take the Dva.

 

Yes, I quite agree.  I was interested in someone else’s take on it though.  I don’t know how he arrived at the various figures.    I know “Balance” is a dirty word around here, but it would be a pretty poor game if it was very one sided.

 

As for the engine, I just wondered, if the D.IIIa engine is capable of performing at it’s MAX power, rather than just its rated power, maybe the same is true for the SE5a engine, in which case we might actually have the wrong engine, with the right prop, or, the right engine with the wrong prop. It’s just another permutation of where the issue lies.  Just because the sticker says “Viper”  doesn’t mean it actually is.

[No.23_Triggers]

Yeah, the S.E. would defo be more 'noob-friendly' (although the BnZ fighting style takes a lot of practice and patience that a Noob might not necessarily have). 

I think something along the lines of a Nieuport 17 / Nieuport 24 (If done correctly and not with severe, hard-to-tame  handling issues like in RoF) would be a great Entente noobie plane, and would make for a great match-up VS. the Alb D.Va. 

Edited April 29, 2020 by US93_Larner

[emely]

1 hour ago, US93_Larner said:

I think something along the lines of a Nieuport 17 / Nieuport 24 (If done correctly and not with severe, hard-to-tame  handling issues like in RoF) 

In the modern world it is difficult to meet a person who knows for sure "how it should be right" And Larner is one of them)))

I always thought that it is better for beginners to start flying for the Central on Alb5 and P3.  But in reality, for some reason they prefer Dr1 and Camel ?

[No.23_Triggers]

1 hour ago, emely said:

And Larner is one of them)))

 

Edited April 30, 2020 by US93_Larner

[NO.20_W_M_Thomson]

1 hour ago, emely said:

for some reason they prefer Dr1 and Camel ?

Their the most recognised fighters and the best turn fighters, everyone wants to be a great turn fighter until they relies they can't run for it when things get dicey.  

On 4/21/2020 at 3:33 PM, US93_Larner said:

I propose the S.E. gets given this FM. 
 

 

That must be the new MS flight sim.

[emely]

Fighting in a group sometimes gives more chances.  But I was not able to use them ?

 

[NO.20_Krispy_Duck]

Memorial Flight in France has operated both an SE5a and a Spad XIII in the past (I know they still have the Spad, not sure whether SE5a is still there). They might be another source for a comparison of those aircraft.

[No.23_Triggers]

I've always been curious about the memorial flight's SPAD XIII. I might try to think up some questions to ask them, should they be willing to reply! 

 

On 4/29/2020 at 7:50 PM, HagarTheHorrible said:

I was doing a bit of reading and if figures are to be believed, I can well understand why Cecil Lewis might have considered the Dolphin to be superior.  If the numbers from this website are in any way to be considered close to the actuality.

 

Aircraft investigation info   I don't know anything about the person compiling the numbers or his technical credentials.

 

Dolphin;   (908 kg)  Max speed - 206 kph     (1000m)               climb to 3000m - 8.17 min,  turn dia (at 500m) - 56m (9.5 sec)

 

SE5a;        (895 kg)  Max speed - 203 kph     (1000m)             climb to 3000m - 8.50 min,  turn dia (at 500m) - 61m (11.2 sec)

 

Spad XIII; (845 kg)  Max speed - 218 kph      (1000m)            climb to 3000m - 8.22 min,  turn dia (at 500m) - 65m (11.3 sec)

 

Unfortunately, it doesn't look so rosy for the Germans, even the much vaunted "f".

 

DVa;          (876 kg)  Max speed - 186 kph      (1000m)            climb to 3000m -  11.11 min,  turn dia (at 500m) - 71m (12.6 sec)

 

D VII;         (852 kg)  Max speed - 189 kph      (1000m)            climb to 3000m - 13.17 min,  turn dia (at 500m) - 71m (12.7 sec)

 

D VII f;       (906 kg)  Max speed - 189 kph      (1000m)            climb to 3000m -  9.58 min,  turn dia (at 500m) - 75m (12.8 sec)

Am I reading this right? Does that have the D.VII F being both slower in a climb and less tight in a turn than the Dolphin, SPAD and the S.E.5a? If so - wow!!! 

I'd be quite dubious about the S.E. and SPAD being able to out-turn an F...all evidence appears to be to the contrary...but the climb rates are quite interesting. I'm curious as to how they reached that conclusion, given the F's climb performance in-game...Although, without any solid evidence as to where those figures were obtained, you couldn't really do much with them. I wouldn't complain too much  if 1CGS went with those figures though...

Edited May 1, 2020 by US93_Larner

[ZachariasX]

1 hour ago, US93_Larner said:

Am I reading this right? Does that have the D.VII F being both slower in a climb and less tight in a turn than the Dolphin, SPAD and the S.E.5a? If so - wow!!! 

You have to be careful with these numbers. To have every datum, the author calculated various entries. Speed for example is also determined by prop pitch and rpm in several cases that I've seen. Take those values with a grain of salt.

 

I find more interesting that he calculates the load limit for the D.VII as 4.5 g, the ultimate load limit being 6.8 g...

[No.23_Triggers]

14 minutes ago, ZachariasX said:

You have to be careful with these numbers. To have every datum, the author calculated various entries. Speed for example is also determined by prop pitch and rpm in several cases that I've seen. Take those values with a grain of salt.

 

I find more interesting that he calculates the load limit for the D.VII as 4.5 g, the ultimate load limit being 6.8 g...

Funnily enough, while doing some DM-tests I fired up TacView to do some 'no damage' G Limit testing and I was recording between 4-7g manoeuvres for several aircraft without any adverse effects past a very unhappy pilot...weirdly enough, at higher speeds, wings were failing at as little at 2g. 

I can't profess to have any in-depth knowledge about aerodynamics, but I was under the impression that airspeed shouldn't affect the load-limit of a plane - the only thing I can think is that: 

A) The increase in G-forces was so quick when pulling sharply out of a dive that Tacview didn't register it in time 
B) Airspeed has an effect on airframe durability within IL2 

Edited May 1, 2020 by US93_Larner

[HagarTheHorrible]

2 hours ago, US93_Larner said:

I've always been curious about the memorial flight's SPAD XIII. I might try to think up some questions to ask them, should they be willing to reply! 

 

Am I reading this right? Does that have the D.VII F being both slower in a climb and less tight in a turn than the Dolphin, SPAD and the S.E.5a? If so - wow!!! 

I'd be quite dubious about the S.E. and SPAD being able to out-turn an F...all evidence appears to be to the contrary...but the climb rates are quite interesting. I'm curious as to how they reached that conclusion, given the F's climb performance in-game...Although, without any solid evidence as to where those figures were obtained, you couldn't really do much with them. I wouldn't complain too much  if 1CGS went with those figures though...

 

Keep in mind that his calculations would have been made, I assume, with the default engine power ( He suggests 185hp), because of the 500m altitude, for an aircraft that is both heavier and with a smaller wing area.  If using anecdote, I think you need to consider the possible context. Combat, between these aircraft, would have probably been at a relatively high altitude, or at least started , where the margins between a turn and speed, or power, were much closer.  The power advantage of the BMW engine, with the altitude boost, plus the benign handling and soft stall would have made a significant difference where the margins are so slim, with less altitude potentially sacrificed for a similar, or better, turn.  I wonder what the difference would be if the full engine power was used in the calculation ?

[ZachariasX]

2 hours ago, US93_Larner said:

A) The increase in G-forces was so quick when pulling sharply out of a dive that Tacview didn't register it in time 
B) Airspeed has an effect on airframe durability within IL2 

I haven‘t used TacView so far, but from what I read it seems that measuring g and AoA is not really what what it is made for. So I would say A) is a possibility.

 

As for B), it is true that high airspeed can produce additional load on the structure that has to be discounted from your total budget of static strenght. It would be really cool if such could be processed by the games FM, but I doubt it. It would be opening a can of worms and little to gan in terms of gameplay.

[ST_Catchov]

7 hours ago, US93_Larner said:

 

 

 I wouldn't complain too much  if 1CGS went with those figures though...

 

Just quietly, neither would I. But there'd be a lot of whining from others.

[HagarTheHorrible]

There does seem to be a discrepancy between the figures, from the “Aircraft Investigation” website, for the D VIIf and the performance claims attributed to this aircraft in the section on the BMW IIIa engine. 

 

I think, in retrospect, that the performance figures provided for the D. VIIf are for the "unboosted" engine rating (200hp) and don't include the performance with the altitude throttle engaged (240hp).  I've messaged him to see if he will suppliment the figures with the altitude throttle engaged, to see what difference it makes.

Edited May 3, 2020 by HagarTheHorrible

[No.23_Triggers]

Looking about TVAL's website for some bits n bobs on the S.E. Here's what I found (chopped up a little bit to be less of a wall of text, and put in the spoiler below)

 

Spoiler

 

"The SE5a handles well on the ground; it is equipped with a steerable tailskid, responsive engine and effective rudder. The only thing to be mindful of is it feels a bit heavy on the ground and can pick up speed rather quickly. That being said even the newest pilot could get the SE5a to the runway. The boxy angular ship is airborne at about 50 mph and immediately you realize looks aren’t everything - this airplane really feels good. The controls are crisp and responsive although heavier than the Sopwith Camel or Triplane or even the Fokker Triplane".

"In flight the D.Va performs well, not nearly as well balanced and harmonized as the RAF SE.5a though. The ailerons are heavy and the roll rate isn't very spectacular, the elevator is very sensitive, almost too sensitive while the rudder is less than adequate".

 

"To get a better feel for what this airplane can do, steep turns, lazy eights and wingovers are attempted, all easily carried out but an excessive amount of adverse yaw is experienced.The adverse yaw is easily compensated for, by balancing aileron application with rudder and doesn’t prove to be a problem at all.  Next, slow flight and stalls are explored, a good idea to check before landing.... again nothing unusual other than the fact that this airplane is rather easy to fly. Adjusting the elevator trim allows the SE5a to be flown hands off something I’m not used to in a WW1 fighter. A few more stalls are investigated and a power off stall speed of 43 mph is noted".

"With the power pushed up a bit, a conservative top speed of 115- 120 mph is achieved! I would expect during wartime even this top speed would be increased to the reported numbers of about 138 MPH. The only aircraft that could come close was the Fokker DVII, so the SE5a was faster than anything out there and very competitive with the later produced DVII. The performance doesn’t seem to diminish with altitude either, it can maintain 120 mph right up to about 15,000 ft. After the formalities of recording figures for temperatures, pressures and airspeeds, it’s time to really get a feel for the new plane. I am still amazed that it is so easy to fly and feels so stable. Turns in either direction are simple as long as they are coordinated with the rudder. Climb performance is a respectable 750 feet per minute or so. The controls feel good at low speed and there is plenty of warning before the stall. The Se5a isn’t overly agile but it can be thrown around with a little effort and has the ability to dive away and pick up speed rather quickly".

 

Here are TVAL's specs when compared to the RoF Store's specs. Both specs are for the V8 Wolseley equipped S.E. Some interesting discrepancies here and there. 

TVAL written in RED, RoF Store written in BLUE.

Length: 6.38m / 6.3m
Height: 2.89m / 2.7m
Wingspan: 8.11m / 8m 
Empty Weight: 639 kg / 635 kg
Loaded Weight:  880 kg / 886 kg

Maximum Speed: 222 km/h* / 218 km/h Sea Level 
Service Ceiling: 5185 m / 6500 m

*Alt not specified

 

A couple things really stood out for me among the pilot report from TVAL. Among them, "it can maintain 120 mph right up to about 15,000 ft".  

 

120 mph is 193 km/h, and 15,000 ft is about 4,500 m.  The RoF S.E.5a's stats claim that it could do just 165 km/h at 4,000 m and 151 km/h at 5,000m. Bearing in mind also that the TVAL S.E. was only sporting a 180hp Hisso, it would seem that we're being short-changed a little in this department. 

The next quote I found interesting was "The controls feel good at low speed and there is plenty of warning before the stall. The Se5a isn't overly agile but it can be thrown around with little effort and has the ability to dive away and pick up speed rather quickly". 

For me, some of this rings true in FC, and some of it most definitely does not. When I put the S.E. through its paces, I found that, although there is plenty of warning before a complete stall (usually a lot of shaking), the S.E. is actually incredibly hard to control at low speed, and constantly wants to drop into the ground, kick you out of a turn, etc. The controls feel wholly unresponsive at low speeds. Unless you have lots of alt as well, dropping the nose will hardly replenish any airspeed at all. I certainly didn't feel like it took 'little effort' to control it at low speeds. 

Will be very interesting to compare with Shuttleworth once we get a message back from them. Still a minimum two-month wait for that though ? 

As a side note, I'm hoping Shuttleworth will be happy to answer some questions about the D.Va, Bristol and Camel as well, just out of curiosity's sake and to see how their experiences compare with FC aircraft. 

Edited May 2, 2020 by US93_Larner

[US103_Baer]

Did go through this when investigating the SPAD. FC and RoF have interesting spec changes and variation against in-game performance. 

 

Edited May 3, 2020 by US103_Baer