Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

SE5a FM - review & fixes!


  • Please log in to reply
331 replies to this topic

#161 gavagai

gavagai
  • Posts: 15542

Posted 13 September 2011 - 01:36

Hehe, I just saw that the "Kestrel" must be a mistake. Nonetheless, 280hp is unambiguous.

The point, HT, is that 777's own store page data for the Falcon III Bristol is close to what I posted, but the in-game aircraft climbs much, much better.
  • 0

#162 HotTom

HotTom
  • Posts: 8177

Posted 13 September 2011 - 02:26

Hehe, I just saw that the "Kestrel" must be a mistake. Nonetheless, 280hp is unambiguous.

The point, HT, is that 777's own store page data for the Falcon III Bristol is close to what I posted, but the in-game aircraft climbs much, much better.

Okay. I'll tell you a secret if you promise not to tell anyone….shhhhhhh……

I've never read any of the store page data. I have books and internet links I trust more.

This is just between us, comprende? :mrgreen:
  • 0

#163 gavagai

gavagai
  • Posts: 15542

Posted 13 September 2011 - 03:09

Cool, if you have F.2B data that shows under 10 minutes to 10,000ft, please post it.
  • 0

#164 Josh_Echo

Josh_Echo
  • Posts: 3931

Posted 13 September 2011 - 04:48

A kestrel is a falcon, for what it's worth.
  • 0

#165 1PL-Sahaj-1Esk

1PL-Sahaj-1Esk
  • Posts: 940

Posted 13 September 2011 - 08:37

Concerning N17 data, I share the idea that the french RoF community could play a major role here. At least if I would be in their position or if it would be a polish plane I would do everything possible to get accurate historical data to improve the FM, even going/calling the military or national museum/aviation museum - if they lack accurate data concerning N17, you can still help them and at least try to provide them with info before it will be too late.

:S!:
  • 0

kpt. pil. / Capt. Sahaj / Operations Officer / 1. Eskadra Mysliwska / 1. Pulk Lotniczy / http://www.1pl.boo.pl

bannerf11esks.png?raw=1

http://warthog-extensions-by-sahaj.com


#166 =Fifi=

=Fifi=
  • Posts: 10329

Posted 13 September 2011 - 09:17

Concerning N17 data, I share the idea that the french RoF community could play a major role here. At least if I would be in their position or if it would be a polish plane I would do everything possible to get accurate historical data to improve the FM, even going/calling the military or national museum/aviation museum - if they lack accurate data concerning N17, you can still help them and at least try to provide them with info before it will be too late.

:S!:

I completely agree with you, but i'm kind of out here…too far away from any aerial museum or archive building! I really wish i could do something, cause N17 stuck all my careers for now.
And it's all but nothing i readed about.
I can only access the web, but nothing i found, except testimonies. No data as 777 wants :(

KarmaPolice, JJ, Pollux, Criquet, Rama… HELP!!
  • 0

#167 ImPeRaToR

ImPeRaToR
  • Posts: 7902

Posted 13 September 2011 - 14:31

Concerning N17 data, I share the idea that the french RoF community could play a major role here. At least if I would be in their position or if it would be a polish plane I would do everything possible to get accurate historical data to improve the FM, even going/calling the military or national museum/aviation museum - if they lack accurate data concerning N17, you can still help them and at least try to provide them with info before it will be too late.

:S!:

Very good point, their general lack of involvement puzzles me as well.
  • 0

#168 MattM

MattM
  • Posts: 2595

Posted 13 September 2011 - 16:43

I don't see why it would make much difference. The N11 rolls faster at 150kmh than the N17 rolls at 150kmh.
Why should the N17 roll faster than the N11?

Moreover, I'm pretty sure that our Nieuport 11 rolls faster at its worst rolling speed than Niueport 17 rolls at her best rolling speed.
Not sure about that.

Anyway, of course it seems more likely, that the N17s rollrate is off. Especially when you fly planes like Pfalz D.IIIa, Albatros D.II, Pup etc. roll like crazy. And i'm not saying that the N17 doesn't roll too slowly.

But i would guess that the N17 rollrate is not that far off compared to some other planes in ROF.

I think the extreme fragility of the N17 in a dive, together with it's too low topspeed (if someone can explain to me why the N11 or DR.I should be faster, please don't hesitate to tell me why exactly) and it's overcooling engine (almost impossible to fly at 4000+ meters) are probably even bigger problems than the too low rollrate.
  • 0

#169 gavagai

gavagai
  • Posts: 15542

Posted 13 September 2011 - 17:22

I don't see why it would make much difference. The N11 rolls faster at 150kmh than the N17 rolls at 150kmh.
Why should the N17 roll faster than the N11?

Eh? No one has said that it should Matt. I think our working premise is that they shouldn't be drastically different, that's all.
  • 0

#170 Kwiatek

Kwiatek
  • Posts: 680

Posted 14 September 2011 - 09:09

If we speak about SE5a FM revision maby it is time to say about elevator trim like real one had?
  • 0

#171 volatile_void

volatile_void
  • Posts: 55

Posted 14 September 2011 - 12:21

btw - is there anything more exept we already have in Windsock Datafile special tables and Profile publications about N17?

Three is a the Crowood Nieuport aircraft of WWI book, however it's performance figures are inline with the windsock data.

Yes the data in the Crowood aircraft book seems to be inline with the windsock data. However i have found data 2 additional books.

A comparison:

Crowood Nieuport aircraft of WWI:

Attached File  crowood-nie17-data.png   159.04KB   342 downloads

Davilla, Soltan - "French Aircraft of the First World War", additionally states the climb time and speed for 4,000m:

Attached File  davilla-n17.png   689.95KB   342 downloads

Kenneth Munson - "Aircraft of World War I", states a speed of 110mph at 6,560ft:

Attached File  Kenneth, Munson - Aircraft of World War I, Nie17.png   56.04KB   342 downloads

Can the different speed stated by Kenneth Munson be due to IAS/TAS conversion?
  • 0

#172 MiG-77

MiG-77
  • Posts: 2651

Posted 14 September 2011 - 14:30

Can the different speed stated by Kenneth Munson be due to IAS/TAS conversion?

That could be possible. 103mph IAS at 6500ft is ~109mph TAS, but reported 103mph/165kmh at sealevel would still be 103mph/165kmh and that dont fit the picture.

What I personally think is that N17 speed is correct (for normal frontline plane). It just is not comparable to other rotaries that have perfomance of factory fresh engines.
  • 0

#173 Kwiatek

Kwiatek
  • Posts: 680

Posted 14 September 2011 - 17:15

But N17 shouldn't be faster and better turner then N11?. Also both Nieuports was known as a very manouverable planes comparing to German ones - which isn't true in ROF.
  • 0

#174 gavagai

gavagai
  • Posts: 15542

Posted 14 September 2011 - 21:51

But N17 shouldn't be faster and better turner then N11?. Also both Nieuports was known as a very manouverable planes comparing to German ones - which isn't true in ROF.

The N17 was considered maneuverable compared to other Entente planes, too. ;)
  • 0

#175 HotTom

HotTom
  • Posts: 8177

Posted 14 September 2011 - 21:56

But N17 shouldn't be faster and better turner then N11?. Also both Nieuports was known as a very manouverable planes comparing to German ones - which isn't true in ROF.

The N17 was considered maneuverable compared to other Entente planes, too. ;)

So was the Nieuport 28 (anecdotally the equal of the Camel) but there is no data on turn rates….
  • 0

#176 hq_Reflected

hq_Reflected
  • Posts: 4711

Posted 14 September 2011 - 21:56

But N17 shouldn't be faster and better turner then N11?. Also both Nieuports was known as a very manouverable planes comparing to German ones - which isn't true in ROF.

The N17 was considered maneuverable compared to other Entente planes, too. ;)

Hey, what do you meant by maneuverable? Roll rate? Turn rate? Turn radius?! Be more specific! :lol:

Just kidding, that's what you usually say when somebody says the N17 was maneuverable! :D
  • 0

#177 gavagai

gavagai
  • Posts: 15542

Posted 14 September 2011 - 22:04

Hehe, touche!
  • 0

#178 =Fifi=

=Fifi=
  • Posts: 10329

Posted 14 September 2011 - 22:10

Hey, what do you meant by maneuverable? Roll rate? Turn rate? Turn radius?! Be more specific!

ALL OF THEM, at this time of war :D

The fact is N17 was a better plane than N11. In ROF it's not ;)

Up to devs to find out why…imo.
  • 0

#179 MiG-77

MiG-77
  • Posts: 2651

Posted 15 September 2011 - 03:24

So was the Nieuport 28 (anecdotally the equal of the Camel) but there is no data on turn rates….

And D.VII was more manouverable than Camel and Albatros D.V was equal to it in left turn by anecdotes ;)
  • 0

#180 catchov

catchov
  • Posts: 4166
  • LocationQld, Australia

Posted 15 September 2011 - 04:02

Well … there's anecdotes and there's propaganda. :lol:
  • 0

#181 MiG-77

MiG-77
  • Posts: 2651

Posted 15 September 2011 - 06:46

Well … there's anecdotes and there's propaganda. :lol:

But who decide which is which? ;)
  • 0

#182 gavagai

gavagai
  • Posts: 15542

Posted 15 September 2011 - 10:28

A historian.
  • 0

#183 =FB=VikS

=FB=VikS
  • Developer
  • Posts: 1246

Posted 15 September 2011 - 10:37

A historian.

Allied historian or Certral Powers historian? :lol:
  • 0

#184 Tom-Cundall

Tom-Cundall
  • Posts: 5549

Posted 15 September 2011 - 11:22

This one's a nice summary for the Camel:

“Our Camels were excellent fighting planes. Although they were slower in climb and
speed than the Albatros Scouts, they could outmanoeuvre the heavy-engined German
planes on a turn. We seldom had the initiative in a scrap but we very quickly took it
over once the scrap began.”
Captain Norman Macmillan, 45 Squadron

But this one is my favourite:

"One word on the Camel: There is not one pilot in the squadron who would not argue
to the end for a Camel. Although slow, she could get around anything, also one could
not run away from anything, which rather aimed for success."
Captain Edgar Mcloughry DSO DFC, 4 Squadron AFC.

These are the undisputed fan-boys of the Sopwith Camel - the aces that flew them so I'd tend to lean on their expert opinion. Historians as we all know make stuff up and ignore other things to prove their points… ;)
  • 0

#185 MiG-77

MiG-77
  • Posts: 2651

Posted 15 September 2011 - 11:28

These are the undisputed fan-boys of the Sopwith Camel - the aces that flew them so I'd tend to lean on their expert opinion. Historians as we all know make stuff up and ignore other things to prove their points… ;)

Ah, but those anecdotes what I refer are pilots that flew or against them too ;) They do contradict each other and you have to choose what to believe or ignore them altogether. Just to illustrated point, using only anecdotes any of the these planes (N28, Camel, D.VII) could be most manouverable depending what anecdote you believe.
  • 0

#186 Tom-Cundall

Tom-Cundall
  • Posts: 5549

Posted 15 September 2011 - 11:48

But all agree the camel was slow and struggled to catch anything other than the Dr.1 manoeuvrability is subjective - speed is not.
  • 0

#187 MiG-77

MiG-77
  • Posts: 2651

Posted 15 September 2011 - 11:56

But all agree the camel was slow and struggled to catch anything other than the Dr.1 manoeuvrability is subjective - speed is not.

Speed can be also, when you take account different altitudes (ofcourse not nearly as same degree as manouverability). IE some plane can be slower/faster than other plane depending which altitude it is compared.
  • 0

#188 JoeCrow

JoeCrow
  • Posts: 4155

Posted 15 September 2011 - 12:07

But all agree the camel was slow and struggled to catch anything other than the Dr.1 manoeuvrability is subjective - speed is not.

But don't forget that in combat speed and energy are different manifestations of the same thing. You can be low on speed but high in energy and vice versa. Other variables are power and acceleration.

I'll settle for power and acceleration.
  • 0

#189 MattM

MattM
  • Posts: 2595

Posted 15 September 2011 - 17:22

The fact is N17 was a better plane than N11. In ROF it's not ;)
I don't agree with that.

The tighter turn and better climbrate of the N17 easily compensate for the better aileron effectiveness (i wouldn't call it better rollrate, because if you use rudder, which you'll do anyhow, the N17 can roll atleast as fast as the N11) and slightly higher speed.

The N17 is very hard to fly effectively, but imho, it's definately better than the N11 against every Central plane in ROF.


Problem with the Camels speed is that it used so many different engines and even the same engines varied quite a bit ("English" Clergets and "French" Clergets etc.). So when you read pilot anectdotes you always have to figure out what engine that Camel had, if the engine was worn out or brand-new and if the pilot was objective.

For instance, the Camel is "struggeling" to catch anything but Albatros, Pfalz D.IIIa and DR.I. And atleast the Albatros speed is probably too low (especially if you think about a D.IIIau engined Albatros). The other planes are about as fast or faster than the Camel.

Anyhow, the Camel seems to be a bit too fast for a non-prototype Camel.
  • 0

#190 gavagai

gavagai
  • Posts: 15542

Posted 15 September 2011 - 17:52

A historian.

Allied historian or Certral Powers historian? :lol:

Doesn't matter. The whole point of scholarship is to arrive at an informed point of view that is independent and objective. While not all historians succeed equally in those respects, it is their shared goal, regardless of nationality.

Tom's point is incorrigible. When the biggest proponent of an aircraft type says that it has some specific weaknesses, and he names them, dismissing that as propaganda is irrational. In these cases we must interpret the speaker as having mostly true beliefs and as expressing them sincerely. Otherwise we are burdened with the onerous hypotheses that the speaker was irrational, did not understand English, or had a devious plan to deceive everyone, and then we can only support one of those hypotheses with an inexorable weight of additional evidence that undermines the normal presumption of true-beliefs and sincerity. For example, the quoted pilot followed it up with, "and I always drank a liter of whiskey before I flew the Camel."
  • 0

#191 Greywing2

Greywing2
  • Posts: 433

Posted 15 September 2011 - 18:05

the N17 can roll at least as fast as the N11 and slightly higher speed.
Nope. It has much slower roll rate than N11 (in game). Some of the guys (including beta testers) tested roll speeds and the results were posted in forum.

The N17 is very hard to fly effectively, but imho, it's definately better than the N11 against every Central plane in ROF.
Nope its not. Because of the wrong FM. Its only faster in climb.
  • 0

#192 Josh_Echo

Josh_Echo
  • Posts: 3931

Posted 15 September 2011 - 18:10

It's tough to say, but I'm inclined to agree with MattM here. 17 has much worse roll rate, of course, but she's also easier to snaproll. On the other hand, those snaprolls lose a significant amount of E. Meanwhile, she climbs much better and has a better sustained turn than the Nieuport 11, but is slower and doesn't seem to have quite as tight of an instantaneous turn. She definitely dives better than the 11. I know that I'm much more effective in Nieuport 17 than in the 11, and if I were to be bounced by a well-flown one when flying my Albatros, I'd rather be bounced by an 11. Overall I think that 17 is significantly better than the 11, but I can't tell how much of that is because I have ~80 hours in Nieuport 17 and only ~4 hours in the 11.
  • 0

#193 Greywing2

Greywing2
  • Posts: 433

Posted 15 September 2011 - 18:24

N17 in a dive? No chance….wings are weak you know :-)
  • 0

#194 Josh_Echo

Josh_Echo
  • Posts: 3931

Posted 15 September 2011 - 18:47

She can effectively dive as long as you slip her. You'll never dive very fast, but you can sustain dives almost straight down from any altitude all the way down to the deck. You can even sustain a straight-down dive, as long as you hold down the blip switch and keep a full slip.

Diving the Nieuport 17—don't try this without a decent safety harness. I had 80% fuel when I began the dive; the more fuel you have, the more careful you have to be on the pullout. Here I used power in the dive to keep my engine from over-cooling. With shorter dives, you can dive more steeply because you don't need to do this. In an emergency, you can put the throttle to idle and even blip if you like, so that you can sustain a steeper angle. But know that you're probably going to over-cool your engine if you do that for too long.

  • 0

#195 MattM

MattM
  • Posts: 2595

Posted 15 September 2011 - 19:11

the N17 can roll at least as fast as the N11 and slightly higher speed.
Nope. It has much slower roll rate than N11 (in game). Some of the guys (including beta testers) tested roll speeds and the results were posted in forum.

i wouldn't call it better rollrate, because if you use rudder, which you'll do anyhow, the N17 can roll atleast as fast as the N11
Maybe you should quote (and read) the entire sentence next time.

Don't tell me you only use ailerons to roll any of the planes in ROF in a dogfight? If you use rudder in combination with ailerions, the N11 won't roll noticably faster than the N17. And both will roll atleast as fast as the historical opposition.


(small side-note: this is exactly THE reason, why the very good rollrate of the N28 is of no practical use, because it can't snap-roll at all)

The N17 is very hard to fly effectively, but imho, it's definately better than the N11 against every Central plane in ROF.
Nope its not. Because of the wrong FM. Its only faster in climb.
And can outturn a D.III for instance, which the N11 is unable to. N11 vs. D.III, you'll lose practically every time in the N11. In the N17, you have a very decent chance of beating your opponent, if you know how to fly the N17.

The N11 only advantages over the N17, are the better rollrate with ailerons only (of no big use in a dogfight, because you need to use rudder in the N11 aswell to outroll your opponents) and the slightly higher speed (again, no big advantage, because the opposition is as fast or faster). It can't outturn, outdive, outroll or outclimb any of the Central planes, excluding the E.III.

I think people saying that the N11 is better than the N17 simply haven't spend enough time in atleast one of those planes.
  • 0

#196 Josh_Echo

Josh_Echo
  • Posts: 3931

Posted 15 September 2011 - 19:29

If you use rudder in combination with ailerions, the N11 won't roll noticably faster than the N17. And both will roll atleast as fast as the historical opposition.

Only with snaprolls, which are E-lossy.

And can outturn a D.III for instance

Nieuport 17 can almost, but not quite, out-turn an Albatros D.III with two highly-skilled pilots who are equally experienced in their ships. She can do it if she has an energy advantage coming in, maybe. But not in a standard-protocol duel. The Albatros can't keep up with '17 in climbing turns, but as long as the Albatros pilot keeps his speed up instead of trying to match the '17 pilot's spiral climb, the Albatros will out-turn and then be able to reach up and prop-hang the other guy.

I think people saying that the N11 is better than the N17 simply haven't spend enough time in atleast one of those planes.

Agreed; if you spend enough time in both of them, I think it becomes clear that 17 is overall superior to the 11, in spite of the roll.
  • 0

#197 =Fifi=

=Fifi=
  • Posts: 10329

Posted 15 September 2011 - 19:58

MattM wrote:
I think people saying that the N11 is better than the N17 simply haven't spend enough time in atleast one of those planes.


Agreed; if you spend enough time in both of them, I think it becomes clear that 17 is overall superior to the 11, in spite of the roll.

You guys are really thinking that? :o

Since N17 release i have to spent weeks or more just flying this bird, cause i'm entente side 95% of time if not more…
Sorry, it's not a matter of flying time to learn N17 behavior. Or i must be a very bad ROF pilot :?
This plane just sucks (sorry 777 :oops: ). N11, DH2 (!), EIII are just superior in many ways of handling…and it's not accurate imo!

To get some results with it, i have to fly it almost like a B/Z, which is dumb!
N17 has to be (and was in RL) a T/B nothing more imo.

And no, Matt, N17 don't loose anything in dives if you don't pass over critical 200/210 Km/h.
There are signs in the sticks before the accident…It's one of the best thing modelled on N17 imo.
Of course, you have to be very gentle on the stick when full speed!
  • 0

#198 Josh_Echo

Josh_Echo
  • Posts: 3931

Posted 15 September 2011 - 20:09

And no, Matt, N17 don't loose anything in dives if you don't pass over critical 200/210 Km/h.

220+. I don't know her exact maximum safe airspeed, but it's over 220 K.P.H. because she's fine at that speed. Unfortunately, her A.S.I. ends there, and so we have to rely on the flutter as you mentioned. My guess is that she loses control surfaces at 230 K.P.H., based on how little acceleration window there is between A.S.I. max and control surface loss.
  • 0

#199 =Fifi=

=Fifi=
  • Posts: 10329

Posted 15 September 2011 - 20:14

And no, Matt, N17 don't loose anything in dives if you don't pass over critical 200/210 Km/h.

220+

Yeah, but 200/210 i start to get very bad stick vibrations (i think coming from tail) and if i go further, i see my elevator leaving the tail (sometimes rudder), so i stay maximum 200/210 in dives ;)
  • 0

#200 Josh_Echo

Josh_Echo
  • Posts: 3931

Posted 15 September 2011 - 20:18

Since N17 release i have to spent weeks or more just flying this bird, cause i'm entente side 95% of time if not more…
Sorry, it's not a matter of flying time to learn N17 behavior.

I'm not arguing against her flight model being revised (I'm all for it), but weeks isn't enough to learn '17. She's such a delicate flier that you need many hours to master her. I have over a hundred hours in her in total, at least eighty of them in multiplayer and at least forty in an actual dogfight, and I still haven't quite mastered her.

Yeah, but 200/210 i start to get very bad stick vibrations (i think coming from tail) and if i go further, i see my elevator leaving the tail (sometimes rudder), so i stay maximum 200/210 in dives

The flutter has more bark than bite. You can safely sustain 220, even though the stick is jumping around like a jackrabbit.
  • 0


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users