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

[Holtzauge]

5 hours ago, US103_Larner said:

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? 

 

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! 

 

 

The minispar as you call lit probably helped and in the book I reference modern simulations (done for TVAL) that take this into account but still indicate a very low Vne. On the other hand, there are historical accounts pointing to higher numbers, also mentioned in the book. But I think whatever that number was, it fell far short of the S.E.5a's and SPAD's Vne.

 

The 300 mph figure for the S.E.5a will also be covered in more detail in the book. And, yes, I agree it's a very high number but the way the RAE talks about it in the report indicates it is terminal as in the max speed you can safely attain, and not terminal as in this is when your wings fall off! 

 

BTW: Thanks for the comittment to buy the book! Hope you will find it interesting!

 

4 hours ago, West said:

 

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 ...

 

This is a story I also have in the book: The 1,2 and 3 bump in the wing fabric method for speed gauging in the S.E.5a is attributed to an Australian by the name Captain Arthur Conningham.

 

[Holtzauge]

Correction: I looked again in the RAE report covering the S.E.5a, appropriately named  RAE R&M 492 “The terminal velocity of S.E.5” and it turns out I was being optimistic with my claim that it was all of 300 mph, mixing it up with a number that was for the SPAD. It was actually estimated to be “only” 265 mph in that report.  Still, pretty good considering that the RFC speed dials mounted in many aircraft at the time bottomed out already at 180 mph IAS!

 

[No.23_Triggers]

10 hours ago, Holtzauge said:

Correction: I looked again in the RAE report covering the S.E.5a, appropriately named  RAE R&M 492 “The terminal velocity of S.E.5” and it turns out I was being optimistic with my claim that it was all of 300 mph, mixing it up with a number that was for the SPAD. It was actually estimated to be “only” 265 mph in that report.  Still, pretty good considering that the RFC speed dials mounted in many aircraft at the time bottomed out already at 180 mph IAS!

 

Still considerably faster than the Flying Circus S.E. can do in a dive before it reaches the breaking point (about 223mph). Same for the SPAD. 

[ST_Catchov]

The Se5a could certainly do with a FM revision. I do not like her inexplicably rapid energy loss about which nobody from the dev team has bothered to explain. I do not like it one bit. No sir. Not one bit. I can only hope the release of Holtzy's book will persuade the devs to review this unsavoury decade long episode and revert the Se5a to her rightful place as a magnificent thoroughbred.

[NO.20_Krispy_Duck]

On 1/12/2023 at 4:10 AM, ST_Catchov said:

The Se5a could certainly do with a FM revision. I do not like her inexplicably rapid energy loss about which nobody from the dev team has bothered to explain. I do not like it one bit. No sir. Not one bit. I can only hope the release of Holtzy's book will persuade the devs to review this unsavoury decade long episode and revert the Se5a to her rightful place as a magnificent thoroughbred.

 

I hope with the recent shake-up of management and the book that we'll see some real improvements in that arena.

[ST_Catchov]

Yes it's been a long time to seethe Krispy. Not good for ones health. I really do hope they also look at the AI before the FC campaign is released. But I drift off topic Sorry.

[Holtzauge]

Unfortunately I have some bad news regarding the release of the WW1 aircraft performance book.

 

The draft I was hoping to base the release on, was due to arrive home to me 5-6th January.

 

When I never got it, I contacted my post office, Fedex, Swedish customs but no one seems to know where it is. There is a lot of finger pointing going on and wherever it is, it’s in limbo.

 

However, on the bright side, the publisher is sending me a new copy free of charge, So there is that.

 

But the problem is the turn-around time: They told me this on Thursday, and it usually takes them around a week before they ship it. Then it has to get here which with the shipping time and getting it through customs takes at least another two weeks.

 

So unfortunately, it looks like another month.

 

Believe me, I’m not very happy with the situation myself either, but in the meantime, here are another couple of simulations you may find interesting.

 

I did say earlier on that the Albatros D.Va has no redeeming features, but I must say that with the overcompressed Mercedes DIIIaü engine it is back in the game.

 

Granted not as fast as the Nieuport as you can see, but it does beat the Sopwith Camel with the Clerget engine at all altitudes over 1500 m.

 

Another thing is that the D.Va with the aü engine is back with a vengeance when it comes to climb times: It beats the 28.C1 with a close to 2 min lower climb time from SL up to 5 Km altitude!

 

So given that the D.Va in real life is outturned by the 28.C1 with the engine variant we have in-game, a Mercedes DIIIaü variant in Il-2 Flying Circus would be a nice addition in the future.

 

Maybe something for the developers to start looking at right away? 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited January 28, 2023 by Holtzauge
Spelling

[ZachariasX]

Finers crossed for your book!

 

Thanks for the new data. I wouldn't have guessed that the overcompressed engine makes that much of a difference.

[Holtzauge]

23 minutes ago, ZachariasX said:

Finers crossed for your book!

 

Thanks for the new data. I wouldn't have guessed that the overcompressed engine makes that much of a difference.

 

No, neither did I. The D.Va is with its over 900 Kg takeoff weight a bit on the heavy side to put it mildly. But the DIIIaü's ability to keep the SL 185 hp all the way up to 1800 m seems to work wonders.

[SYN_Vander]

2 hours ago, Holtzauge said:

 

So given that D.Va in real life is outturned by the 28.C1 with the engine variant we have in-game, a Mercedes DIIIaü variant in Il-2 Flying Circus would be a nice addition in the future.

 

Maybe something for the developers to start looking at right away? 

 

 

 

Love your enthusiasm! This is something we have asked for -along with Fokker DVII- for many many years. In fact I'm pretty sure some of us had this in their signature  

[=IRFC=bbob]

Really stoked to read this book Holtzauge, the TOC has me tingling in anticipation!

 

Particularly interested in learning about your simulation model. If you feel like teasing with some equations, I'd be a giddy little engineering student.

 

On another note, are you and your publishers planning to do an ebook version for us poor people, or physical copies only? I will buy in any case.

Edited January 29, 2023 by =IRFC=bbob

[Holtzauge]

4 hours ago, =IRFC=bbob said:

Really stoked to read this book Holtzauge, the TOC has me tingling in anticipation!

 

Particularly interested in learning about your simulation model. If you feel like teasing with some equations, I'd be a giddy little engineering student.

 

On another note, are you and your publishers planning to do an ebook version for us poor people, or physical copies only? I will buy in any case.

 

Glad to hear that! When ít comes to equations, I do have some in the book but they are few. My ambition has been to do the explanation without resorting to that. It is said that if you really master a subject, you should be able to explain it without complications, and that has been my ambition in the book. So I'm looking forward to hearing how you guys rate it!

 

About the e-book question, I have already answered that here and followed up with a sales pitch for the hardback. 

[BMA_Hellbender]

I’m more excited about this book than anything that has recently come out of FC*. I have officially become my grandad.

 

(*) Edit: The DM fixes were nice, please keep it up

Edited January 30, 2023 by =IRFC=Hellbender

[1PL-Husar-1Esk]

The FM changes are needed to restore realistic plane behavior and  be in line with history.  I highly doubt that gonna happen even with proofs found in the book. With new project in development,  whole future of  GB ww2 series are not certain let alone  FC which never was as important as WW2 franchise.

[Holtzauge]

4 hours ago, =IRFC=Hellbender said:

I’m more excited about this book than anything that has recently come out of FC*. I have officially become my grandad.

 

(*) Edit: The DM fixes were nice, please keep it up

 

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

The FM changes are needed to restore realistic plane behavior and  be in line with history.  I highly doubt that gonna happen even with proofs found in the book. With new project in development,  whole future of  GB ww2 series are not certain let alone  FC which never was as important as WW2 franchise.

 

Well, I spent a lot of time researching and doing the simulations so I would of course be very happy to establish a constructive connection with the developers.

 

In addition, I would be more than happy to do provide them with data from my simulations in the format they need to do FM revisions if I can. But, as they say, it takes two to tango!

 

But as a first step I will send them a copy of the book. I still think that is the best and first step forward: To convince them (and the the forum community of course!) that my results hold.

 

In addition, seeing the amount of work I put into it, I'm of course glad that some of you are planning to get the book. I can only hope it lives up to your expectations!

 

[J99_Sizzlorr]

As you are allowed to advertise your product in this forum even if it is against the forum rules, chances might be there that the devs will at least have a look at it...

[Wardog5711]

Quote

As you are allowed to advertise your product in this forum even if it is against the forum rules, chances might be there that the devs will at least have a look at it...

I have been following this thread closely.

There is a huge difference between someone working on an actual reference book that would be of direct interest to this community and someone trying to sell their old games/hardware or other assorted junk.  Nevermind the spammers hawking their garbage.

As long as the links remain as part of the conversation text within the individual posts and not as a stand-alone thread, I'll let this one slide.

 

 

 

 

[TheSaxman]

Has anyone else noticed a change in the Nieuport handling recently? It seems a bit livelier in the turns than it used to be, and I'm actually getting over the top of loops without it trying to fall off to the side.

[Holtzauge]

1 hour ago, Wardog5711 said:

I have been following this thread closely.

There is a huge difference between someone working on an actual reference book that would be of direct interest to this community and someone trying to sell their old games/hardware or other assorted junk.  Nevermind the spammers hawking their garbage.

As long as the links remain as part of the conversation text within the individual posts and not as a stand-alone thread, I'll let this one slide.

 

 

 

 

 

Thanks. I just sent you a PM with some questions about how/where to send the book. Would appreciate if you could spare some time to help out with that!

[Zooropa_Fly]

 

 

Email me.

[Wardog5711]

@Zooropa_Fly I had to go re-check the rules to see if personal testimonials are allowed.

 Your good. But most guys would want to keep that a secret and you just put it right out there....?

 

ANYHOW...lets stay on topic.

 

 

 

[Holtzauge]

Maybe he is suggesting some sort of a package deal? OTOH it's only 8" so I can't see that anyone other than @Zooropa_Fly would be in the market for something like that......

[TheSaxman]

1 hour ago, Holtzauge said:

Maybe he is suggesting some sort of a package deal? OTOH it's only 8" so I can't see that anyone other than @Zooropa_Fly would be in the market for something like that......

 

Suddenly remembering Austin Powers.

[LukeFF]

5 hours ago, TheSaxman said:

Has anyone else noticed a change in the Nieuport handling recently? It seems a bit livelier in the turns than it used to be, and I'm actually getting over the top of loops without it trying to fall off to the side.

 

Nothing has changed with its flight modeling since it was first released.

[LufberyJAA]

11 hours ago, TheSaxman said:

Has anyone else noticed a change in the Nieuport handling recently? It seems a bit livelier in the turns than it used to be, and I'm actually getting over the top of loops without it trying to fall off to the side.

Yes. I'm having a much easier time with it in dogfights. I don't know if it's because I'm getting used to the plane, or the flight model has changed, or the fact that I'm starting my dogfights higher at 3,000M instead of 1,500M. In any event, I'm really starting to like it!

[J99_Sizzlorr]

18 hours ago, Zooropa_Fly said:

 

 

Email me.

I like to purchase...whats your last price?

[Zooropa_Fly]

Two previous owners - so I can't push it up too far !

[NO.20_Krispy_Duck]

Interesting results with the D.Va and N.28. Some of the German pilots complained about the D.Va when it first arrived, that it was no advance over the D.III. It looks like with the basic engine, it's really kind of a weak performer for 1917-18. But the improved engine might make an interesting variant in the game.

 

Another 30-50hp can do wonders in these early aircraft. Will you have studies of the jump in performance from the early 150hp SE5 to the stronger SE5a, and the improvement of Spads VII and XIII as they also increased? A number of different engine variants kind of are still somewhat of an untapped possibility for FC.

[Holtzauge]

10 hours ago, NO.20_Krispy_Duck said:

Interesting results with the D.Va and N.28. Some of the German pilots complained about the D.Va when it first arrived, that it was no advance over the D.III. It looks like with the basic engine, it's really kind of a weak performer for 1917-18. But the improved engine might make an interesting variant in the game.

 

Another 30-50hp can do wonders in these early aircraft. Will you have studies of the jump in performance from the early 150hp SE5 to the stronger SE5a, and the improvement of Spads VII and XIII as they also increased? A number of different engine variants kind of are still somewhat of an untapped possibility for FC.

 

Yes, the D.Va with the standard Mercedes D.IIIa we have modelled in-game was a terrible performer IRL.  It lagged behind the others when it comes to speed, climb, ceiling and turn. Basically nothing in the tool box.

 

Its one redeeming feature in FC now is that it turns decently. However, I don’t believe it should for reasons I expand in the book and that are to some extent covered in the OP.

 

However, giving it the overcompressed D.IIIaü engine seems to work wonders. At least in my C++ simulation environment. In addition, I believe it would be a much more fun plane to fly in-game as well: While not turning as well as the Sopwith Camel for example, it would however both outrun it in speed and outclimb it at altitudes above 1500 m.

 

So, doing a properly modelled D.Va with the overcompressed engine would change game play a lot. Pushing the Alby more towards a BnZ plane and away from being the one trick pony TnB plane we have today.

 

Regarding the S.E.5a and SPAD’s, no, I have not modelled the early variants yet but in the book go directly for a 210 hp SL S.E.5a and a 220 hp SL SPAD S.XIII. Maybe add those versions later. Or maybe do a book on WW2 aircraft instead. Time will tell.

 

 

Edited February 1, 2023 by Holtzauge

[No.23_Triggers]

On 2/1/2023 at 7:41 AM, Holtzauge said:

So, doing a properly modelled D.Va with the overcompressed engine would change game play a lot. Pushing the Alby more towards a BnZ plane and away from being the one trick pony TnB plane we have today.

I always got the impression from the pilot accounts the D.Va should be more of a BnZ'er - it would be very interesting to see that in-game...! 

 

 

On 2/1/2023 at 7:41 AM, Holtzauge said:

Regarding the S.E.5a and SPAD’s, no, I have not modelled the early variants yet but in the book go directly for a 210 hp SL S.E.5a and a 220 hp SL SPAD S.XIII. Maybe add those versions later. Or maybe do a book on WW2 aircraft instead. Time will tell.

I'd be especially curious about the 200HP S.XIII, as that's the model we (erroneously, I believe, based on the stats claiming 220hp) currently have in FC 

[Holtzauge]

 

8 hours ago, US103_Larner said:

I always got the impression from the pilot accounts the D.Va should be more of a BnZ'er - it would be very interesting to see that in-game...! 

 

Well, as soon as the book is released, I'm going to send the developers a copy. And after they have had a chance to look at it, I'm going to reach out and see if they are interested in a discussion around how the results in-game compare with those in the book and which conclusions can be drawn from this. What happens after that is anybody's guess. 

 

7 hours ago, US103_Larner said:

I'd be especially curious about the 200HP S.XIII, as that's the model we (erroneously, I believe, based on the stats claiming 220hp) currently have in FC 

 

The thing is with engines from this time it's very difficult to get a fix on what power they actually delivered: Take for example the "110 hp Le Rhone". It certainly was referred too by this name but it looks like it actually delivered 120-130 hp IRL. When it comes to the HIsso, it's sometimes referred to as the "200 hp Hispano" in British texts but they calculate that it actually delivered 210 hp. And for the SPAD S.XIII I'm using 220 hp in the simulations just as Baer is doing here.

 

But if you want to make an estimate for the 200 hp version, you could use for example the 218 km/h speed number at 2000 m with the 220 hp version and estimate the speed with the 200 using the speed cube law:

 

(200/220)**(1/3)*218= 211 km/h

 

This type of estimate usually gives a very good approximation so if we really have the 200 hp engine in-game I would expect it to do 211 km/h TAS at 2000 m. So this would be slightly above 191 km/h IAS at 2000 m on an autumn map.

 

What does it do in-game?

 

 

[No.23_Starling]

Mr Baer posted the various data points and notes his sources here:

It looks like he measured 208kph TAS at 2k for the FC model which is around 10kph slower than the various test datasets for the 220hp engine. NB, the 220hp engine was tested to output 238hp at 2240rpm.

From your modelling the FC engine is 3kph slower even for the 200hp version.

 

[J99_Sizzlorr]

Is the fuel being used part of your simulations? The reason I ask is that Germans used higher octane fuel called "Fliegerbenzin" from early 1918 onwards which allowed their overcompressed engines to run at full throttle at sea level without the fuel detonating. They also got some more h.p. out of their engines this way. This is not modelled in FC but maybe you simulations take it into account?

[No.23_Starling]

15 minutes ago, J99_Sizzlorr said:

Is the fuel being used part of your simulations? The reason I ask is that Germans used higher octane fuel called "Fliegerbenzin" from early 1918 onwards which allowed their overcompressed engines to run at full throttle at sea level without the fuel detonating. They also got some more h.p. out of their engines this way. This is not modelled in FC but maybe you simulations take it into account?

The sources quoted previously in the RoF forum suggest that the AU couldn’t even reach 160 PS without the modified fuel mixture, but I’ve not seen sources to suggest the full HP was available at sea level. Could you share any sources showing full HP was available at SL? https://riseofflight.com/forum/topic/33857-mercedes-diii-engines/

[No.23_Starling]

On 2/1/2023 at 7:41 AM, Holtzauge said:

 

Yes, the D.Va with the standard Mercedes D.IIIa we have modelled in-game was a terrible performer IRL.  It lagged behind the others when it comes to speed, climb, ceiling and turn. Basically nothing in the tool box.

 

Its one redeeming feature in FC now is that it turns decently. However, I don’t believe it should for reasons I expand in the book and that are to some extent covered in the OP.

 

However, giving it the overcompressed D.IIIaü engine seems to work wonders. At least in my C++ simulation environment. In addition, I believe it would be a much more fun plane to fly in-game as well: While not turning as well as the Sopwith Camel for example, it would however both outrun it in speed and outclimb it at altitudes above 1500 m.

 

So, doing a properly modelled D.Va with the overcompressed engine would change game play a lot. Pushing the Alby more towards a BnZ plane and away from being the one trick pony TnB plane we have today.

 

Regarding the S.E.5a and SPAD’s, no, I have not modelled the early variants yet but in the book go directly for a 210 hp SL S.E.5a and a 220 hp SL SPAD S.XIII. Maybe add those versions later. Or maybe do a book on WW2 aircraft instead. Time will tell.

 

 

 

One other question - would you expect a significant turn performance between the SE5a 200hp HS 8B engine (often given 4 bladed prop) vs the SE5a Viper 200hp normally fitted with a 2 bladed prop (upgraded 150hp HS 8A, with compression ratio changed from 4.68 to 5.3 to produce 200hp at 2000rpm)? The Viper engine was created pretty much by accident when the wrong engines were shipped to the factory.

 

Jon Guttman gives test data for 2 airframes with the two respective 200hp engines (see image) and the performance in terms of speed and climb are pretty similar until we get up to 5km where basically no combat happens in FC multiplayer. There's been noises in the community about having the 'wrong' 1917 SE5a and that the performance would be markedly different between the two variants in terms of turn and speed, but the data seems to suggest otherwise.

 

We do know however that the HS 8A engine was slightly lighter than the 8B engine (see HS data below), so did this combined with better reliability vs the 8B geared engine give it a minor edge? The data does not show a massive difference in performance between the two variants.

 

NB when I test the Flying Circus SE5a Viper in game I get :

 

- 114mph at 6.5k ft

- 108mph at 10k ft

 

Sources:

Lage, Manuel, Hispano Suiza in Aeronautics

Guttman, Jon, SE5a vs Albatros DV Western Front 1917-18 

 

 

Edited February 4, 2023 by US103_Rummell

[J99_Sizzlorr]

3 hours ago, US103_Rummell said:

The sources quoted previously in the RoF forum suggest that the AU couldn’t even reach 160 PS without the modified fuel mixture, but I’ve not seen sources to suggest the full HP was available at sea level. Could you share any sources showing full HP was available at SL? https://riseofflight.com/forum/topic/33857-mercedes-diii-engines/

I have not much on it myself besides what is publicly available. But there is a very interesting yet old thread over at the aerodrome about that: http://www.theaerodrome.com/forum/showthread.php?t=45364 that sums it up quite nicely. Also Goerings account comes to mind when chasing down a Spad in his Fokker D.VII and it probably explains some errors in the numbers of american and to some extent british tests of the german engines after the war.

Edited February 4, 2023 by J99_Sizzlorr

[No.23_Starling]

1 hour ago, J99_Sizzlorr said:

I have not much on it myself besides what is publicly available. But there is a very interesting yet old thread over at the aerodrome about that: http://www.theaerodrome.com/forum/showthread.php?t=45364 that sums it up quite nicely. Also Goerings account comes to mind when chasing down a Spad in his Fokker D.VII and it probably explains some errors in the numbers of american and to some extent british tests of the german engines after the war.

Just had a read of the thread - lots of interesting content but nothing definitive with page referenced sources. There’s some talk there of the fleigerbenzin being used by the BMW as a priority, and the statement that it was “presumably” being used in the Merc iiiau engine to achieve 180ps at sea level. Without sources on fuel deliveries to Jastas in 1918 it’s hard to know exactly how widespread it was. Also, the SPAD chase anecdote doesn’t give the actual altitude - does low mean deck? - nor whether he had started from a dive above the SPAD. Presumably he was using the BMW in that story not the Merc?

[J99_Sizzlorr]

20 minutes ago, US103_Rummell said:

Just had a read of the thread - lots of interesting content but nothing definitive with page referenced sources. There’s some talk there of the fleigerbenzin being used by the BMW as a priority, and the statement that it was “presumably” being used in the Merc iiiau engine to achieve 180ps at sea level. Without sources on fuel deliveries to Jastas in 1918 it’s hard to know exactly how widespread it was. Also, the SPAD chase anecdote doesn’t give the actual altitude - does low mean deck? - nor whether he had started from a dive above the SPAD. Presumably he was using the BMW in that story not the Merc?

Heinrich Dechamps, Karl Kurtzbach: Prüfung, Wertung und Weiterentwickluing von Flugmotoren; Berlin 1921 and also Reinhardt being quoted about Fliegerbenzin but I think this was just a booklet.

You didn't read the whole thread did you?

Edited February 4, 2023 by J99_Sizzlorr

[No.23_Starling]

4 minutes ago, J99_Sizzlorr said:

Heinrich Dechamps, Karl Kurtzbach: Prüfung, Wertung und Weiterentwickluing von Flugmotoren; Berlin 1921 and also Reinhardt being quoted about Fliegerbenzin but I think this was just a booklet.

You didn't read the whole thread did you?

That’s not a page number nor a facsimile of the source. I’ve given both in my post on the SE5a above. If you want to provide evidence and data to be taken more seriously I suggest you do the same. 

 

What we really need is German test data for the Merc iiiau conducted with the Fliegerbenzin vs the earlier fuels which caused predetonation, showing the HP by altitude. I agree with you on the Allied tests being dodgy btw.
 

If you want that added to the sim you’ll need more than a URL and a mic drop to convince anyone, and petty point scoring (“you didn’t read it did you?”, Please dude, we are better than this) is more toxic to the community than healthy discussion. 

[J99_Sizzlorr]

I don't want things to be added to the sim I was just curious if Holtzauge's simulation did take that into account. No need to be rude. I am not your summarizer and I don't have that book so I can not give you a page number. Geez what is wrong with you? Don't know what agenda you are pushing with the S.E.5a though but if you would have read the thread I pointed you to you would see some graphs

 

Edited February 4, 2023 by J99_Sizzlorr