In-game Nieuport 28.C1 & Albatros D.Va sustained turn rate comparison to C++ simulations

[Chill31]

On 11/4/2022 at 3:26 PM, J2_Trupobaw said:

That's very interesting because our RoF/FC ALbatros D.Va is both very responsible to controls and very noob friendly; come to think of it it is both very stable and very maneuverable... Does it make it an impossible plane?

Not at all.  But what is more maneuverable, a Dr.I or an Alby? Which is more stable and noob friendly? You could probably even lump in N17 with Dr.I.

 

I want to see @Holtzaugecompare the N17 to the Dr.I!

[1PL-Husar-1Esk]

Alb is not maneuverable, it easy to fly, you don't need to worry about loosing control of that plane, pull hard, kick rudder what ever you do it's not gonna kill you. 

[No.23_Starling]

11 hours ago, LufberyJAA said:

Yup! That's from the appendix on wing failures in Hamady's book. It's very interesting.

Hi all,

 

I had a super busy week, and wasn't able to log on. I followed the discussion, however, and think this discussion has some really valuable information in it. 

 

Regarding good/experienced pilots automatically correcting and accommodating aircraft movement tendencies while flying to the point that they don't notice they're doing it — A. S. G. Lee in his book Open Cockpit (a follow-up to No Parachute) talks about attending an advanced flight school after the war ended. I don't have the book handy right now, so I can't get a direct quote, but the gist was that during the war, he knew how to fly, but during the advanced flight training, he realized just how little he really knew about flying.

 

Regards,

-Drew

Yes! Excellent example. Lee complains in the book about trying to turn with the Diis in his Pup; if you read McCudden’s take on the Pup he mentions that he can get 2x circles to the Albi’s 1x. Mac was the top scoring RFC so likely was more capable of getting better performance out of her. If you didn’t have a chute would you risk pushing your crate to the edge?

[Holtzauge]

Spoke to Mikael Carlson yesterday. He is helping review my book before it is published and I also had a chance to ask him about his experience flying the Nieuport 28 he has recently renovated for the Collings Foundation.

 

His overall impression was positive: The long fuselage provides good control authority and there were no difficulties in handling. However, these are very expensive planes and he had not tried out the stall properties but he did say that in the mock dogfight he had with the Fokker D.VII, they were about equal in his estimate when it comes to turn performance. I would assume that this refers to instantaneous turn performance, since I think they were trying to get on each other’s tails as fast as possible but that is of course just speculation on my part.

 

As I understood it, takeoff and landing were unproblematic and he mentioned a low landing (or did he mean settling speed?) of 70 Km/h, so quite low. Connected to this he did not mention anything in particular regarding low speed handling which is in contrast to the Pfalz D.VIII, which I remember he said had low speed characteristic you had to watch out for.

 

Control authority is good, but as with many other WW1 aircraft, once the speed builds, the ailerons get very heavy. In context, he has said much the same thing about the Pfalz D.VIII, while pointing out that the Dr.1’s ailerons remain light which must have been a huge advantage in dogfights.

 

Mikael has not had the chance to take any speed measurements on the N28, but as I understood it, it felt fast and it climbed really well and at a steep angle, Mikael mentioning 30 degrees. I forgot to ask him the take-off weight, but AFAIK there was only one gun replica on it and no ammunition, which of course cuts off a lot of the T/O weight. But even so, the simulations in the book also shows the N28 as a good climber which is after all to be expected given its comparatively low power loading (W/P).

 

Apparently they had some engine trouble on the N28 and burnt a piston but luckily Mikael was over the airfield and could put it down safely anyway. As I understood it, the root cause has not been finally determined but could be related to a too lean mixture Mikael said.

 

One negative thing he had to say about the N28 was that it was terrible when it comes to maintenance: While probably literally not true, by way of a parable he said that on the Nieuport, you have to take the wings off to change a sparkplug!

 

[NO.20_Krispy_Duck]

Supposedly the N.28 was actually better on maintenance than the Spad XIII. That both required frequent engine repair and re-build, but that the Nieuport's engine could be serviced in relatively short order, while the geared Hisso on the XIII had frequent breakages and took extensive time to rebuild. Some pilots were reluctant to turn in their 180hp Spad VII aircraft because of the maintenance problems with the XIII.

[ST_Catchov]

That geared Hisso seemed to be always problematic. Wolseley brought in the direct drive Viper version of it and presto ....

[Holtzauge]

On 11/7/2022 at 3:37 AM, Chill31 said:

Not at all.  But what is more maneuverable, a Dr.I or an Alby? Which is more stable and noob friendly? You could probably even lump in N17 with Dr.I.

 

I want to see @Holtzaugecompare the N17 to the Dr.I!

 

I don't have any Nieuport 17 modelled yet. Maybe later!

 

5 hours ago, NO.20_Krispy_Duck said:

Supposedly the N.28 was actually better on maintenance than the Spad XIII. That both required frequent engine repair and re-build, but that the Nieuport's engine could be serviced in relatively short order, while the geared Hisso on the XIII had frequent breakages and took extensive time to rebuild. Some pilots were reluctant to turn in their 180hp Spad VII aircraft because of the maintenance problems with the XIII.

 

That may well be so. AFAIK Mikael Carlson has not worked with the Hispano engines so I would assume he is comparing the N28 to the German aircraft (Fokker Dr.I & D.VII and Pfalz D.VIII) he has built in terms of serviceability. In addition, I did not understand it as he was talking about the MTBF but rather how hard it was to take them down and put them back together again.

 

19 minutes ago, ST_Catchov said:

That geared Hisso seemed to be always problematic. Wolseley brought in the direct drive Viper version of it and presto ....

 

Yes, and reliable gearing seems to have been an general issue back then, not only on the Hisso: When Mikael disassembled the Pfalz D.VIII's Siemens-Halske he told me the wear on the gearing for the counterrotating crankshaft was more than he had expected, even with so few hours on the engine.

 

[US41_Low]

On 11/11/2022 at 3:25 AM, Holtzauge said:

 

I don't have any Nieuport 17 modelled yet. Maybe later!

 

 

That may well be so. AFAIK Mikael Carlson has not worked with the Hispano engines so I would assume he is comparing the N28 to the German aircraft (Fokker Dr.I & D.VII and Pfalz D.VIII) he has built in terms of serviceability. In addition, I did not understand it as he was talking about the MTBF but rather how hard it was to take them down and put them back together again.

 

 

Yes, and reliable gearing seems to have been an general issue back then, not only on the Hisso: When Mikael disassembled the Pfalz D.VIII's Siemens-Halske he told me the wear on the gearing for the counterrotating crankshaft was more than he had expected, even with so few hours on the engine.

 

Hey OP, have you posted this in the FC suggestions section yet? I’d also link this to wardog in discord. Just to get some eyes on it. Would be cool to see in-depth FM reviews 

[BlitzPig_EL]

As I recall from my last visit to the USAF Museum in Dayton, the early Curtiss aero engines with prop reduction gearing also had reliability issues. Seems it was endemic to the technology of the times.

[Holtzauge]

20 hours ago, Sl0w said:

Hey OP, have you posted this in the FC suggestions section yet? I’d also link this to wardog in discord. Just to get some eyes on it. Would be cool to see in-depth FM reviews 

 

Maybe later: After book is published and comparisons of in-game measurements, simulations and historical data have been done and there is some sort of consensus about which are the numbers to aim for. ? 

 

PS: Have no idea what "wardog on discord" is but if someone who does links that would be good: The more feedback the better!

 

Edited December 1, 2022 by Holtzauge

[US41_Low]

Sorry, wardog is the community manager guy. I’ll link your post to him.

[Wardog5711]

I'm already following this thread. ? 

Has Regingrave or anyone on the DEV team seen the hard data?

 

[Holtzauge]

2 hours ago, Wardog5711 said:

I'm already following this thread. ? 

Has Regingrave or anyone on the DEV team seen the hard data?

 

 

No, but as soon as the book is published I was planning to make contact. I think this could be a good time since they can then see more of the simulation results and get an understanding of how they have been derived. Maybe you could help with introductions when the time comes?

[Holtzauge]

I've done an update on the Fokker Dr.I versus SPAD S.XIII turn rate estimates on website https://militaryaircraftperformance.com/:

 

The previously stated turn rate numbers labeled to be at 1000 ft altitude for both these aircraft were erroneous and actually for another higher latitude. But this has now been corrected and you can find the new figure here.

 

I should have noticed it when I first published the original numbers on the website since the Dr.I turn time stated was inconsistent with the estimate in the Sopwith Camel Fokker Dr.I turn rate comparison (Figure 3 in this pdf) which correctly shows a turn time of around 11 s at this altitude.

 

Thanks @Chill31 for noticing this and giving me the heads up! 

[HagarTheHorrible]

It’s interesting to see the drop off in performance, of the Dr1 at altitude, and I look forward to reading your ‘expanded’ thoughts on this in your book.  It would be interesting to see how the Dr1’s performance, at altitude, compares to that of its ‘inspiration’, what with it’s longer, narrower, staggered wings.

 

I’m not convinced the DVa was ‘totally’ devoid of redeeming features, although I would agree, if you said, that it’s sleek, race car like, styling have given it a ‘gloss and glamor’, in hindsight, that it ill deserves. Certainly, it wasn’t much of an improvement on the aircraft it was supposed to replace, but properly used, even with it’s limitations and idiosyncrasies, it was ‘useful’ for taking on the likes of the N17 and Sopwith Triplane.  It’s acceleration in a dive (if it didn’t become ‘overly’ streamlined) was a distinct benefit compared to the aircraft it was designed to fight against.

 

You also mention the ‘increasing’ altitude at which aircraft confronted each other, later in the war, and you are quite correct, this would certainly have put the Dr1 at a disadvantage, but I also think that the air war, at this time was ‘fracturing’.  On the one hand, becoming more attached, and directly useful, to the ground campaign, thus conducted lower down, but on the other, ‘strategic’ bombing was taking off, as it were, with aircraft, such as the Dolphin and Snipe designed to compete in this environment, protecting the bombers.  Any single seater, would I feel,  have increasingly struggled, what with a lack of a clear distinction in speed, between attacker and attacked, and armament being more closely matched between the two ( The Me 110, I think, bares this rationale of design philosophy out, even if ultimately a failure, due to increasing speed and a mismatch in firepower between the two opponents).

 

Looking forward to the publication of your book, although I suspect it might be more a birthday present (Feb, so not to long to wait, although my wife, having primed her, is now scratching her head, wondering what to get me for Christmas)

Edited December 10, 2022 by HagarTheHorrible

[HagarTheHorrible]

I confess, that I’m surprised that there isn’t, or I haven’t seen (given all the superbly talented and industrious people who inhabit flight sims) an app, or simple program that gives a top down animated graphical view of a comparison between turn rate, turn radius, and aircraft speed, over a chosen length of time (or number of circles), between two aircraft.  Plug in the ‘variables’ ; aircraft type, altitude, speed (sub-variable) etc etc.

[Holtzauge]

2 hours ago, HagarTheHorrible said:

It’s interesting to see the drop off in performance, of the Dr1 at altitude, and I look forward to reading your ‘expanded’ thoughts on this in your book.  It would be interesting to see how the Dr1’s performance, at altitude, compares to that of its ‘inspiration’, what with it’s longer, narrower, staggered wings.

 

I’m not convinced the DVa was ‘totally’ devoid of redeeming features, although I would agree, if you said, that it’s sleek, race car like, styling have given it a ‘gloss and glamor’, in hindsight, that it ill deserves. Certainly, it wasn’t much of an improvement on the aircraft it was supposed to replace, but properly used, even with it’s limitations and idiosyncrasies, it was ‘useful’ for taking on the likes of the N17 and Sopwith Triplane.  It’s acceleration in a dive (if it didn’t become ‘overly’ streamlined) was a distinct benefit compared to the aircraft it was designed to fight against.

 

You also mention the ‘increasing’ altitude at which aircraft confronted each other, later in the war, and you are quite correct, this would certainly have put the Dr1 at a disadvantage, but I also think that the air war, at this time was ‘fracturing’.  On the one hand, becoming more attached, and directly useful, to the ground campaign, thus conducted lower down, but on the other, ‘strategic’ bombing was taking off, as it were, with aircraft, such as the Dolphin and Snipe designed to compete in this environment, protecting the bombers.  Any single seater, would I feel,  have increasingly struggled, what with a lack of a clear distinction in speed, between attacker and attacked, and armament being more closely matched between the two ( The Me 110, I think, bares this rationale of design philosophy out, even if ultimately a failure, due to increasing speed and a mismatch in firepower between the two opponents).

 

Looking forward to the publication of your book, although I suspect it might be more a birthday present (Feb, so not to long to wait, although my wife, having primed her, is now scratching her head, wondering what to get me for Christmas)

 

Well, it’s nice to see that you have taken the time to read what I wrote on the simulations page. Kudos for that!

 

Regarding how the Sopwith Triplane compares to the Dr.I, the Sopwith is more than 100 Kg heavier and it shows even though the wing configuration is much better. The Sopwith is faster but that's about all.

 

You are right that I’m a bit harsh on the D.Va when I say it was ‘totally’ devoid of redeeming features and with the over-compressed D.IIIaü engine it does take a step in the right direction. But I would say that it was still pretty much obsolescent by the end of the war. Regarding diving, it does accelerate decently but all evidence I’ve seen so far indicates that it had a very low Vne and was prone to shed its wings. In addition, wasn’t it said that you had to use a lot of force to make it fly in the direction you wanted? Also, while Mikael Carlson has not flown it, he said to me that those who have are not overly enthusiastic about how it compares to other replicas.

 

About the quest for altitude, there are probably a lot of persons on this forum that have a much better grasp of tactics and how the different scouts were used and intended to be used. However, I think it’s fair to say that climb rate and a high ceiling became more and more important as witnessed by the over-compressed engines and obviously climb optimized aircraft like the SS D.IV being fielded at the time. The observation about the small difference in speed between hunter and prey is also a good point: Must have been very difficult to catch a high flying reconnaissance aircraft in those days unless the crew of the recce plane got overconfident and crossed the lines at a too low altitude or got unlucky with a scout already in place at high altitude in their immediate vicinity.

 

About the release date, Sorry for the delay: I am still waiting on feedback from some people I would like to have an OK from before I release it and while the time plan is looking more and more optimistic, I don’t think it’s time to announce a new release date just yet.

 

1 hour ago, HagarTheHorrible said:

I confess, that I’m surprised that there isn’t, or I haven’t seen (given all the superbly talented and industrious people who inhabit flight sims) an app, or simple program that gives a top down animated graphical view of a comparison between turn rate, turn radius, and aircraft speed, over a chosen length of time (or number of circles), between two aircraft.  Plug in the ‘variables’ ; aircraft type, altitude, speed (sub-variable) etc etc.

 

Yes, the basic calculations are not “rocket science” so perfectly possible to do on a smartphone. However, the problem is to determine the wings lift and drag, propeller efficiency etc. on an aircraft model and it is herein that lies the “art”.  In fact, I think this is well illustrated in-game: FM’s are tweaked and tuned, and the aircraft behave differently, while still being the "same" aircraft in terms of basic data.

 

Edited December 10, 2022 by Holtzauge

[HagarTheHorrible]

1 hour ago, Holtzauge said:

 

Well, it’s nice to see that you have taken the time to read what I wrote on the simulations page. Kudos for that!

 

 

 

I assure you, the pleasure was all mine. ?

[Holtzauge]

Update on book publication: The publisher has sent me what I hope is the final proof copy which is due to arrive the 6th January. If this looks OK I will give the thumbs up which means it should be orderable during the first half of January 2023.

 

I updated the book info page on my website with a picture of the contents page and a thumbnail of the book pages which if you have keen eyesight will give you some idea about what it covers. 

 

 

[HagarTheHorrible]

Any notion as to potential price ?  A general idea would be fine, if you know (please don’t feel obliged to commit if you’re not sure, or would rather not say at this point).  Are we talking £20 ish, £40 ish or more like a £100 ish ?  Just need to start laying the groundwork if I’m angling for my wife to buy it for my birthday (Feb). ?

[BMA_West]

If she does not bite you may always buy it for hers?

[Holtzauge]

12 hours ago, HagarTheHorrible said:

Any notion as to potential price ?  A general idea would be fine, if you know (please don’t feel obliged to commit if you’re not sure, or would rather not say at this point).  Are we talking £20 ish, £40 ish or more like a £100 ish ?  Just need to start laying the groundwork if I’m angling for my wife to buy it for my birthday (Feb). ?

 

The list price will be $59.99. I would have liked to see a lower price and I have set it as low as I can: I will make less than $1 per book sold on Amazon. The rest is printing and distribution costs that I have no influence over.

 

Sales pitch: It’s a hardback linen wrapped book and if you compare to other WW1 niche books at Amazon and do a price per page count, it’s not bad at all, especially since many are paperbacks and not a linen wrapped book clothed in Flugzeugstoff!

 

[Trooper117]

13 hours ago, Holtzauge said:

Update on book publication: The publisher has sent me what I hope is the final proof copy which is due to arrive the 6th January. If this looks OK I will give the thumbs up which means it should be orderable during the first half of January 2023.

 

I updated the book info page on my website with a picture of the contents page and a thumbnail of the book pages which if you have keen eyesight will give you some idea about what it covers. 

 

 

 

Great video of the Beatles that... could have been filmed 'yesterday' 

[Holtzauge]

2 minutes ago, Trooper117 said:

 

Great video of the Beatles that... could have been filmed 'yesterday' 

 

Yes, I was surprised by the quality too. And it does look like it was filmed at a time when my troubles were so far away.....

[Trooper117]

Just now, Holtzauge said:

 

Yes, I was surprised by the quality too. And it does look like it was filmed at a time when my troubles were so far away.....

 

Lol!... I've always been a fan of the Beatles, followed them since the 60's.

[1PL-Husar-1Esk]

Great, i will order book   when it came out, i see you have Siemens, sadly no Snipe which recently was relisted. Would like to read about it turn performance, and compre it with the game. Meybe some day you will add it to the collection or to website as an article.

[Holtzauge]

42 minutes ago, 1PL-Husar-1Esk said:

Great, i will order book   when it came out, i see you have Siemens, sadly no Snipe which recently was relisted. Would like to read about it turn performance, and compre it with the game. Meybe some day you will add it to the collection or to website as an article.

 

Well, I have not modeled it (the Snipe) yet. I have a WW2 book project on-going as well and the question for me now is should I finish that or do a follow up on other WW1 aircraft? It all depends on how much interest there is in the WW1 book I'm about to publish. Shameless blackmail of the WW1 community I know, but there it is!

 

But whoever orders the WW1 Aircraft Performance book will of course get first hand info about the Sopwith Snipe if/when I do model it! 

 

[BMA_Hellbender]

17 minutes ago, Holtzauge said:

Well, I have not modeled it (the Snipe) yet. I have a WW2 book project on-going as well and the question for me now is should I finish that or do a follow up on other WW1 aircraft? It all depends on how much interest there is in the WW1 book I'm about to publish. Shameless blackmail of the WW1 community I know, but there it is!

 

But whoever orders the WW1 Aircraft Performance book will of course get first hand info about the Sopwith Snipe if/when I do model it! 

 

I'm putting you on my watchlist along with @Chill31 of people shamelessly trying to get rich quick by swindling a couple hundred dudes who all need to ask their wives permission to buy themselves a Snipe for Christmas. (let them fix it first)

[Holtzauge]

3 hours ago, =IRFC=Hellbender said:

 

I'm putting you on my watchlist along with @Chill31 of people shamelessly trying to get rich quick by swindling a couple hundred dudes who all need to ask their wives permission to buy themselves a Snipe for Christmas. (let them fix it first)

 

Damn: Is it that obvious? And here I was hoping to fly under the radar.....BTW Snipe? WTF is that? You mean the common Snipe (Gallinago gallinago)? A small, stocky wader bird native to the Old World?

 

Edited December 23, 2022 by Holtzauge

[ST_Catchov]

6 hours ago, Holtzauge said:

I have a WW2 book project on-going as well and the question for me now is should I finish that or do a follow up on other WW1 aircraft?

 

Ha nice joke. WWII is ancient history. No-one's interested in it.

[BlitzPig_EL]

12 hours ago, Trooper117 said:

 

Lol!... I've always been a fan of the Beatles, followed them since the 60's.

The Beatles were the very first concert I ever attended.  Saw them play the Olympia in Detroit Michigan.  I believe I was 7.

 

Oh, and rest assured I will be ordering the book!!

Edited December 23, 2022 by BlitzPig_EL

[Holtzauge]

11 hours ago, ST_Catchov said:

 

Ha nice joke. WWII is ancient history. No-one's interested in it.

 

Good point Catchov: Follow the money: I will do the X-wing and TIE fighter next then!

 

 

[LufberyJAA]

Any update on the book's ETA? Not trying to rush anything. I'm just curious.

[Holtzauge]

20 minutes ago, LufberyJAA said:

Any update on the book's ETA? Not trying to rush anything. I'm just curious.

 

The publisher says I can expect what I hope is the final proof copy in my mailbox on the 6th January. If this looks OK I will give the thumbs up which means it should be orderable during the first half of January 2023.

 

FYI: I have recently updated the page which describes the book on my website with a picture of the contents page and thumbnails of the book pages which gives more info about what it contains.

 

[No.23_Triggers]

On 12/10/2022 at 3:06 PM, Holtzauge said:

You are right that I’m a bit harsh on the D.Va when I say it was ‘totally’ devoid of redeeming features and with the over-compressed D.IIIaü engine it does take a step in the right direction. But I would say that it was still pretty much obsolescent by the end of the war. Regarding diving, it does accelerate decently but all evidence I’ve seen so far indicates that it had a very low Vne and was prone to shed its wings. In addition, wasn’t it said that you had to use a lot of force to make it fly in the direction you wanted? Also, while Mikael Carlson has not flown it, he said to me that those who have are not overly enthusiastic about how it compares to other replicas.

 

One note on this - The Flying Circus Alb doesn't seem to be able to even reach enough speed to tear its wings off in a dive - the engine will pop long before the wings come off and from there you simply can't get the speed up to remove the wings unless you deliberately pitch up violently enough to overload them. Same thing with the Pfalz D.IIIa, IIRC...!

On a side note, did you ever run any simulations of the SPAD VII? I've always been curious as to how it matched up against the Albatros D.III / D.V and the SPAD XIII! 

[RNAS10_Mitchell]

On 12/23/2022 at 6:10 PM, BlitzPig_EL said:

The Beatles were the very first concert I ever attended.  Saw them play the Olympia in Detroit Michigan.  I believe I was 7.

 

Oh, and rest assured I will be ordering the book!!

 

Go Green.  Never saw them, but own every album.  You still in Michigan?

Edited January 8, 2023 by RNAS10_Mitchell

[Holtzauge]

7 hours ago, US103_Larner said:

One note on this - The Flying Circus Alb doesn't seem to be able to even reach enough speed to tear its wings off in a dive - the engine will pop long before the wings come off and from there you simply can't get the speed up to remove the wings unless you deliberately pitch up violently enough to overload them. Same thing with the Pfalz D.IIIa, IIRC...!

On a side note, did you ever run any simulations of the SPAD VII? I've always been curious as to how it matched up against the Albatros D.III / D.V and the SPAD XIII! 

 

High speed diving is certainly an interesting subject to look deeper into. Both in-game and in simulations.

 

From a theoretical perspective, the Albatros D.Va should be a good diver and able to pick up speed quite well. While it strangely enough is a quite draggy airframe (given its clean lines!), the heavy weight overcomes this and it accelerates well in a dive. In fact, it should be able to get up to speed quickly, and it’s not that far from both the S.E.5.a and SPAD S.XIII in a C++ simulated dive. In fact I cover just this scenario in the book with some simulations.

 

In the book, I also reference an RAE report that pegs the terminal velocity of the S.E.5a in a dive at close to 300 mph IAS! Try that in-game if you will!

 

When it comes to the Albatros shedding its wings, I was not actually thinking about the load case when you make a pitch up when I wrote that, but rather how the lower part of the V-strut on the sesquiplane is placed so far back (behind the resultant of the aerodynamic forces in some scenarios) that the lower wings are prone to be torn off. Just like what happened on von Hippel’s Albatros.

 

I have not done simulation models of either the SPAD VII or Albatros D.III yet. Maybe later!

 

[BlitzPig_EL]

8 hours ago, RNAS10_Mitchell said:

 

Go Green.  Never saw them, but own every album.  You still in Michigan?

 

Had relatives in the Detroit area back then.  I live in north west Ohio, but spent lots of time on Woodward Ave. back in the day.

 

[No.23_Triggers]

5 hours ago, Holtzauge said:

When it comes to the Albatros shedding its wings, I was not actually thinking about the load case when you make a pitch up when I wrote that, but rather how the lower part of the V-strut on the sesquiplane is placed so far back (behind the resultant of the aerodynamic forces in some scenarios) that the lower wings are prone to be torn off. Just like what happened on von Hippel’s Albatros.

Me neither - but I was using that as the only way I've managed to get rid of FC-Alby wings in a dive ? 

Interesting that the Alb's theoretical dive potential is quite potent - I've heard that said about the Pfalzes, but not so much the Albs. How much of a boost does the D.Va get from the mini-spar to strengthen the V-Spar, then? 

 

5 hours ago, Holtzauge said:

In the book, I also reference an RAE report that pegs the terminal velocity of the S.E.5a in a dive at close to 300 mph IAS! Try that in-game if you will!

300 mph?! Wow, "Terminal" sounds like it could take on another meaning at those dive speeds! I can't remember exactly where I read it (McCudden's 'Flying Fury', perhaps?) but I remember reading a story about an S.E. pilot diving on a balloon hard enough that he broke the main spars in 3 of his wings and had to tentatively nurse his S.E. home...I wonder how close to 300 mph he got? 

As always, can't wait to get my hands on a copy of the book! 

 

[BMA_West]

29 minutes ago, US103_Larner said:

>>>
300 mph?! Wow, "Terminal" sounds like it could take on another meaning at those dive speeds! I can't remember exactly where I read it (McCudden's 'Flying Fury', perhaps?) but I remember reading a story about an S.E. pilot diving on a balloon hard enough that he broke the main spars in 3 of his wings and had to tentatively nurse his S.E. home...I wonder how close to 300 mph he got? 

<<<
 

 

Still in ROF times I learned this next bit from an old on-line British instruction guide with completions of what their instructor added off record.
For latest pull out moment, as by that time their dials maxed out a manually note advised to watch their wing for the appearance of a third rumple.

 

Sorry, lost copy of that .pdf after pc change ...

Edited January 8, 2023 by West