Fokker Eindecker E III

[=Xone_96=Allen_and_Heath]

Looking forward to see that bird in the virtual sky! 
Any chance ?

[=IRFC=Gascan]

Soon. It will be part of the Flying Circus Volume 4, along with the DH-2, Albatros D.III, Sopwith 1-1/2 Strutter, Sopwith Pup, Roland C.II. I might have forgotten a few. But yeah, its coming very soon.

[Trooper117]

2 hours ago, =IRFC=Gascan said:

Soon. It will be part of the Flying Circus Volume 4, along with the DH-2, Albatros D.III, Sopwith 1-1/2 Strutter, Sopwith Pup, Roland C.II. I might have forgotten a few. But yeah, its coming very soon.

 

There is another Strutter variant, ( if you bought the Strutter in RoF, you got both versions, but here it's counted as a separate aircraft ), so 7 aircraft in all, you certainly haven't forgotten a 'few'...  but who knows, they might include the D.II late version that is still missing!

[Dr1falcon500]

24 minutes ago, Trooper117 said:

 

There is another Strutter variant, ( if you bought the Strutter in RoF, you got both versions, but here it's counted as a separate aircraft ), so 7 aircraft in all, you certainly haven't forgotten a 'few'...  but who knows, they might include the D.II late version that is still missing!

Here's hoping the DII will no longer be missing in action! It must have got lost over the Channel.

[LukeFF]

The only D.II planned right now is the one already released.

[Dr1falcon500]

4 hours ago, LukeFF said:

The only D.II planned right now is the one already released.

Well isn't that nice.

[Aapje]

No time to D.II

 

[BMA_Hellbender]

I’d much rather have an additional Albatros D.Va 200hp than the D.II late which only has a radiator change and has the exact same performance as the regular D.II.

[Trooper117]

Let's face it, the chance of getting anything above and beyond FC4 are virtually nil...

[Zooropa_Fly]

Surely the time to worry about what comes next, if anything, should be 6 months to a year after the release of the imminent FC4.

Presently, everyone should be beside themselves with excitement about the fact that FC4 is just around the corner.

No ?

[BMA_Hellbender]

1 hour ago, Zooropa_Fly said:

Surely the time to worry about what comes next, if anything, should be 6 months to a year after the release of the imminent FC4.

Presently, everyone should be beside themselves with excitement about the fact that FC4 is just around the corner.

No ?

I’m very excited about the Pup, Strutter and Albatros D.III.

 

And the N28 FM review, obviously.

[Trooper117]

9 hours ago, Zooropa_Fly said:

everyone should be beside themselves with excitement about the fact that FC4 is just around the corner.

No ?

 

I would be if a little bird told me that the Channel map was also included...

 

edit: just found out we are getting the mentioned planes and the one map, nothing else sneaking in unfortunately...  😢

Edited September 3, 2024 by Trooper117

[RNAS10_Mitchell]

Combination of excitement and anxiety.  I know the devs can do excellent work, but also know they are human and like all of us can make mistakes.   My excitement diminished with news that the pup was not the ROF pup, and the news blackout on progress.  Hopefully optimistic at this point. 

[1PL-Husar-1Esk]

New Pup should have more believable FM which is good. 

[BMA_Hellbender]

2 hours ago, 1PL-Husar-1Esk said:

New Pup should have more believable FM which is good. 

I really hope so.

 

The pre-1.034 RoF Pup could fly circles around the Fokker Dr.I. It was the only truly good thing to come out of that update, the fact that the Pup got nerfed. It’s just not physically possible that it would be any faster than a Nieuport 11, at least not with the 80hp Le Rhône. I’m hoping they port it straight over from RoF as they did with the Fokker Dr.I.

[1PL-Husar-1Esk]

27 minutes ago, =IRFC=Hellbender said:

I really hope so.

 

The pre-1.034 RoF Pup could fly circles around the Fokker Dr.I. It was the only truly good thing to come out of that update, the fact that the Pup got nerfed. It’s just not physically possible that it would be any faster than a Nieuport 11, at least not with the 80hp Le Rhône. I’m hoping they port it straight over from RoF as they did with the Fokker Dr.I.

I think they didn't port Pup FM and adjust it but made new one from scratch.

[AndyJWest]

3 hours ago, Trooper117 said:

 

I would be if a little bird told me that the Channel map was also included... 

 

Complete with a free Felixstowe? That would be nice. Not likely, but nice...

[LukeFF]

The one map and the mentioned planes are all that's coming, guys. Yugra Media is busy enough finalizing all the details being added to the Western Front map as it is. 

[PatrickAWlson]

On 9/3/2024 at 6:12 AM, Trooper117 said:

Let's face it, the chance of getting anything above and beyond FC4 are virtually nil...

 

Probably true, but not entirely hopeless.  They have to make some money while they are working on Korea.  The FC development team is also (I think) mostly an independent contract team.  As long as FC is profitable (I understand that it is, or at least was) development might continue.  Otherwise you would have to terminate the contract and watch that expertise, developed over years, walk away to find new work.

 

If we get word that the contract team has been let go then it is the end for FC and probably WWI.  Until then, we'll have to see what happens.
 

[Panzerlang]

After FC4 I think the only important stuff that'll be missing are some DH2/EIII contemporary 2-seaters (ones they could historically catch). I hope they'll be provided as a 'mini pack'.

[BMA_Hellbender]

13 hours ago, Panzerlang said:

After FC4 I think the only important stuff that'll be missing are some DH2/EIII contemporary 2-seaters (ones they could historically catch). I hope they'll be provided as a 'mini pack'.

This, and a late war Central two-seater, the Rumpler C.VII Rubild. Something that is virtually impossible to intercept.

[=IRFC=Gascan]

Yep, those are the ones I want the most: early war two-seaters for the early-war scouts to catch, and a late-war high-alt German 2-seater

[Avimimus]

On 9/19/2024 at 3:17 PM, =IRFC=Hellbent said:

This, and a late war Central two-seater, the Rumpler C.VII Rubild. Something that is virtually impossible to intercept.

 

I'd recommend considering the Rumpler C.IV - It loses 5 km/h but you gain the option of having a fixed forward firing gun, an ability to carry bombs, and a much earlier service entry date. Plus you can remove the gun and bombs to lighten it (and probably obtain most of that 3% speed difference back).

[BMA_Hellbender]

31 minutes ago, Avimimus said:

 

I'd recommend considering the Rumpler C.IV - It loses 5 km/h but you gain the option of having a fixed forward firing gun, an ability to carry bombs, and a much earlier service entry date. Plus you can remove the gun and bombs to lighten it (and probably obtain most of that 3% speed difference back).

 

It's a good suggestion (I'd love to see them both, of course)--although the Rumpler C.VII has a much more powerful high altitude engine.

 

The Maybach Mb.IVa in the C.VII is in typical German fashion not rated as one would typically expect at sea level. If that were the case it would in fact generate 300hp, compared to the 250hp of the Mercedes D.IVa in the Rumpler C.IV.

 

The idea of course is to have a pure recon two-seater that is virtually untouchable and only requires the bare minimum in terms of defensive armament. This would create a late war scenario where the Rumpler C.VII, Fokker D.VIIF and SS D.IV reign supreme, and the SPADs, SEs and Snipes of this world are on the defensive. Think almost of a P-51 vs. Me262 scenario where the most vulnerable phases of flight are takeoff and landing.

[Avimimus]

Yes, but by the second half of 1917, the Rumpler C.IV are also being equipped with the Maybach Mb.IVa, and achieving similar performance to the Rublid with 96% of the ceiling and 97% of the speed. So they are comparable... essentially one and the same miracle.

 

Also, they clearly didn't think that speed and altitude were always sufficient. Here is a C.VII with a field mod incorporating a second gun:

 

Although, I do wonder if it might be seeking to have more redundancy by having a second type of gun - in case icing led to one of them jamming at altitude. So that might also be an explanation.

[LukeFF]

3 hours ago, Avimimus said:

Also, they clearly didn't think that speed and altitude were always sufficient. Here is a C.VII with a field mod incorporating a second gun:

 

Interesting too that one gun is a captured Lewis.

[=IRFC=Gascan]

That looks more like an Entente Scarff Ring rather than the German MG mount. Notice how it has a bar to raise the guns. I wonder if that was standard, and why it was used instead of the mounting system seen on the other German two-seaters? A quick google image search shows several more images of that particular mounting, most without a gun, but there is another one showing the setup with two different MGs.

 

 

Here is a Rumpler C.IV showing a similar mounting bar.

[Avimimus]

4 hours ago, LukeFF said:

Interesting too that one gun is a captured Lewis.

 

Apparently it isn't uncommon. The relatively light weight of the Lewis gun apparently made it quite popular - so there are a bunch of documented cases of German's using them.

 

The early series Roland C.II didn't have a fixed forward firing gun - and there are photos of an obliquely mounted Lewis in the roll-over cage. I almost proposed it be added as a field mod, but there were a number of refinements between the first series and later series of the Roland C.II - so it wouldn't have been accurate to show the version we have with the option of removing the forward gun (even though it would save weight).

 

 

2 hours ago, =IRFC=Gascan said:

That looks more like an Entente Scarff Ring rather than the German MG mount. Notice how it has a bar to raise the guns. I wonder if that was standard, and why it was used instead of the mounting system seen on the other German two-seaters? A quick google image search shows several more images of that particular mounting, most without a gun, but there is another one showing the setup with two different MGs. Here is a Rumpler C.IV showing a similar mounting bar.

 

 

 

Looking at Rumpler C.IV images I've found a standard ring mount, but also an elevated ring (with telescopic sight):

 

And this more interesting mounting:

 

I assume that this field modification would have expanded the field of fire downwards (at the expense of reducing the forward field of fire). Seems practical given how these aircraft were used. It would probably have been a bit draggy though!

 

[=Xone_96=Allen_and_Heath]

November? Should I prepare my wallet ?

[LukeFF]

Next week is the plan, yes.

[Jaguar320]

The anemometer on the Fokker E.III is not working

[LukeFF]

Yes, it's known, thanks.