Kwiatek, we just went over this and learned, using a chart from one of your own sources, that the E.III's wing generated about the same lift as the DH2's, but with less drag.
I do understand your other points, but I'm not going to continue the discussion if you repeat claims that were refuted less than a day ago. You are hurting yourself. Until we all pull the springs out of our joysticks and pedals to simulate the aerodynamically balanced elevator and rudder (and 777 removes the option for joystick profiles), you will not be able to make a valid comparison of pitch/yaw sensitivity between the game and anecdote.
At least i see that i just kick-started a little these topic. Of course effect will be close to zero but i had thought it would be in these way.
EIII wings area is 75% wings area of DH2. So lift generating for both planes are similar if so with some adventage for DH2 ( it it have about 80% efficently compared to monoplane with the same wing area).
Also looking for different suorces for maximum speed of both planes we could find that some claimed faster speed for DH2, some equal speed for both some little faster speed for EIII. We could take that both planes have equal maximum speed what mean that EIII hadn't so much better aerodynamic efficently then DH2.
Morever DH2 had push engine-prop what mean that it give him more adventage in turning then standart prop. You just ingoring these fact also.
All these mean that i dont see here any adventage for EIII which could allow him to be better in turn then DH2.
Other fact is that IRL EIII wasnt easy plane to fly beacuse of oversensivity elevator and rudder but also wing warping system. EIII had also very thin wing profile. All these mean that these plane shouldn't be easy plane to dogfight and manouvering. Oversensivity pitch and yaw and thin wing profile mean that these plane would more prone to stall and spin.
Im not wonder why Immemlan discovered that it would be much easier to make his famous "Immemlan turn in vertical" then just try to turn horizontal in EIII.
Obviously in ROF EIII is very easy plane to fly. Very stable and safe to fly without too much risk to stall in hard manouvers and turning. It also outurn horizontaly both DH2 and N11. It has much safer and easier flying charactersitic then both these planes.
Moreover N11 which had lower engine power ( 80HP) then EIII (100 HP) was faster plane and better climber. It mean that biplane (N11) had better aerodynamical efficently then Fokker monoplane. Funny isn't? I really wonder how it could be possible that N11 which was faster, was better climber, had lower wing loading then EIII could turn worse? Magic?
I'm inclined to think that kwaitek is spot-on with his assessment of the EIII and DH2 match-up. The DH2 honestly doesn't stand a chance against an EIII until you're at 2km.. then it's a pretty fair and very enjoyable fight. But the E.III does turn better than the DH2, and is extremely easy to fly. Clearly that's not how it should be.
Bottom line: they nerfed the DH2 too much in beta.
@ Jay, I'm not surprised by your agreement.
Well, sorry Gav, but one look at that horror-show of a tailplane and you can tell that the E.III should be a real handful. Yet it's incredibly docile in ROF (read: stable in pitch and yaw). Maybe if 777 simply addressed that, the relative performance of the E.III and DH2 would align with what history tells us.
It is good that that there are still some people here who are not hardminded and could read and think objectively.
But i dont expect also that someone like J2_vonHuetz with such significant avatar would able to get it, even if you would show a tons of facts. Yea proabably if i would be familiar with any side i wouldn't be like if any plane from my side would be more difficult to fly and win.
What a bunch of BS.. I'm out of this thread.
Sad but true JAy. But dont give up so fast
At least some other people some time ago though the same " … the de Havilland machine has unquestionably proved itself superior to the Fokker in speed, manoeuverability, climbing and general fighting efficiency." Sir Henry Rawlinson, 23 May 1916"
" The late Frank Tallman in his book Flying the Old Planes (ref. 110) says ". . . the major flight characteristic ever present is the feeling that if you took your hands off the stick or your feet off of the rudders, the Eindecker would turn itself inside out or literally swap ends." He also indicates that the all-moving surfaces continually hunted back and forth with an attendant feedback into the pilot's hands and feet. These characteristics describe an aircraft that by modern standards would be considered unpleasant to fly, would be unlicensable, and certainly would inspire little confidence in the mind of the pilot."