Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Can we have a discussion (for reals) about the Sopwith Tripe


  • Please log in to reply
380 replies to this topic

#1 Dressedwings

Dressedwings
  • Posts: 2094
  • LocationOntario, Canada

Posted 19 December 2014 - 17:55

Just to start,

" No. 1 (Naval) Squadron, 'Naval one', went into action with the type in April 1917, in support of the hard-pressed R.F.C. The hitherto very successful Albatros D-III was completely outclassed, and IdFlieg , the German Inspectorate of Flying Troops, received a severe shock. The Tripehound could out-climb and out-turn the Albatros, and was 15 mph faster. Naval Eight and Naval Ten, equipped in April and May, also made their presence felt. Proof of the Triplane's worth was soon to be shown. In April 1917 Flight Commander R. S. Dallas and Flight Sub-Lieutenant T. G. Culling attacked a formation of fourteen German aircraft. After forty-five minutes they had shot down three of the enemy and driven the remainder into retreat. "

- http://www.aviation-...h/triplane.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.aviation-...h/triplane.html

Im assuming thats against DIIIs with the Merc DIII engine, but the point is still made that the Triplane was superior to the DIII at least in speed and turn.

Image

New top speed at (near) sea level. 104.5-105mph is equal to 168kmh, or around 19kmh slower than what every source lists the Tripehounds top speed at.

Image

around 97mph or 156kmh @ 5000ft (rest of album here http://imgur.com/a/b9tVX" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://imgur.com/a/b9tVX)

http://www.theaerodr...th_triplane.php" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.theaerodr...com/aircraft/gb … iplane.php

http://www.militaryf...aircraft_id=452" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.militaryf...ry.com/aircraft … aft_id=452

http://www.aviation-...h/triplane.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.aviation-...h/triplane.html

Since the common idea is this is an accurate representation of the Tripehound, where do they get their numbers? Why was this changed? I've never heard of complaints about the Rise of Flight tripe being innaccurate or poorly represented.

It would be hypocritical of me to support FM changes before and let this sort of thing slide so I have to know.

I know before the FM wasn't perfect but slowing it down was a step in the wrong direction :P

inb4 sopwith noob mad his plane was nerfed.

Attached Files

  • Attached File  ....png   36.19KB   1131 downloads

  • 1

TOeIhAe.png

^CHECK THE LINK^


#2 J5_Matthias

J5_Matthias
  • Posts: 203

Posted 19 December 2014 - 18:00

It uses the same engine as the Camel. The Camel engine was nerfed, this got hit as a side effect. That being said, I heard it got a manuverability upgrade. That should help compensate.
  • 0

#3 Dressedwings

Dressedwings
  • Posts: 2094
  • LocationOntario, Canada

Posted 19 December 2014 - 18:04

I've been hearing that its a side effect of the Camel being fixed, just wished someone would officially comment on the future of it (will it remain this way, will it be "fixed", or what).

So far (with my limited anecdotal evidence on the matter.. lol) I've found maneuverability to be pretty similar.

It may feel more agile since the plane is moving slower over all, but I dont know
  • 0

TOeIhAe.png

^CHECK THE LINK^


#4 BraveSirRobin

BraveSirRobin
  • Member
  • Posts: 6341
  • LocationHackistan

Posted 19 December 2014 - 18:13

just wished someone would officially comment on the future of it (will it remain this way, will it be "fixed", or what).


I believe that Zak has already officially commented on this:

But we need to warn everyone, changing FMs can lead to unforeseen technical issues and unintended consequences. The endless debates about flight models will likely continue no matter what we do or how hard we try to make it right. So, with that in mind, this is likely the last attempt to tweak existing FMs in ROF. We’ve given it our best shot and we hope you find them acceptable.

  • 0

The toughest part of my job is dealing with incompetent clowns who think they're good at their job.

Free Plank!

 


#5 Dressedwings

Dressedwings
  • Posts: 2094
  • LocationOntario, Canada

Posted 19 December 2014 - 18:22

that would be acceptable if it was just a few mph, but this makes the tripe irrelevant
  • 0

TOeIhAe.png

^CHECK THE LINK^


#6 J2_VonGraff

J2_VonGraff
  • Posts: 686
  • LocationCenter of the Universe

Posted 19 December 2014 - 18:30

Frankly it was already irrelevant, and that's why no one seriously flies this machine. It never turned in ROF the way I felt it should, so perhaps this has been improved. It should not be a speed demon either however, so a better turn rate may well bring it closer to accuracy. It wasn't a world beater anyway, and that's why it had such a short tenure at the front and was quickly superceded by other better designs.

V-Graff
  • 0

'Flight leader, fuel check - I have "E" gallons sir.'

 

j2-graff-signature-e1425051735579.jpg


#7 Dressedwings

Dressedwings
  • Posts: 2094
  • LocationOntario, Canada

Posted 19 December 2014 - 18:33

it had a short tenure because of difficulty in maintenance and introduction of better german types..
  • 0

TOeIhAe.png

^CHECK THE LINK^


#8 B24_LIBERATOR

B24_LIBERATOR
  • Posts: 3874
  • LocationSan Diego

Posted 19 December 2014 - 18:35

Frankly it was already irrelevant, and that's why no one seriously flies this machine. It never turned in ROF the way I felt it should, so perhaps this has been improved. It should not be a speed demon either however, so a better turn rate may well bring it closer to accuracy. It wasn't a world beater though, and that's why it had such a short tenure at the front and was quickly superceded by other better designs.

V-Graff

Problem is now you can't catch an Albatros with it…

Yes, it did turn better but it was also faster & had a better rate of climb, the Triplane was, in my opinion, one of the best flight models we had in the game. It seems unfortunate that it got caught up in the crossfire, but even then it seems like the Camel & Dr.1's speeds have been overcompensated for and are now too slow as well.
  • 0

Liberator's Tutorials: http://steamcommunit...s/?id=438268482

 

tahhfk.jpg


#9 Avimimus

Avimimus
  • Posts: 1317

Posted 19 December 2014 - 18:36

I thought it was perfect. But, I'll defer to the programmers.

It'd be interesting to have more information about what each of the changes are (and what they are based upon) - for the sake of pure curiosity on my part at least.
  • 0

#10 =HillBilly=

=HillBilly=
  • Posts: 5605
  • LocationSouthern Ozark Mountains

Posted 19 December 2014 - 18:40

Someone call the wambulance please
  • 0

     So Long, and Thanks for All the Fish

 
 


#11 Dressedwings

Dressedwings
  • Posts: 2094
  • LocationOntario, Canada

Posted 19 December 2014 - 18:44

nice real discussion there friendo.
  • 0

TOeIhAe.png

^CHECK THE LINK^


#12 J2_VonGraff

J2_VonGraff
  • Posts: 686
  • LocationCenter of the Universe

Posted 19 December 2014 - 18:47

and introduction of better german types

Yup, pretty much what I said. Also, if there is proof that it was faster than the Albitri, then you may have a point for a tweak of this one machine at some later date. I'd like to see some evidence that it was faster than the Tross's first though. However, slowing the Camel needed to happen as it was simply too fast to be correct.

V-Graff
  • 0

'Flight leader, fuel check - I have "E" gallons sir.'

 

j2-graff-signature-e1425051735579.jpg


#13 Waxworks

Waxworks
  • Posts: 630

Posted 19 December 2014 - 18:48

The development of the Clerget engine is not as straightforward as that of the Mercedes DIII.

Broadly:

The French Clergets were at first considered better, however the French discontinued development and assigned the engine to second rank types like spotters, seaplanes or export types.

The British license built copies were poorer until mid-1917, when the RNAS engines became better because of the efforts of Bentley, leading eventually to the Bentley engine. The RFC did not have access to these engines until the formation of the RAF and used a mixture of French and license-built engines.

The HD-2 uses a French Clerget. French Strutters had French engines. RNAS 130hp Strutters were mostly not in front-line service long enough to profit from RNAS improvements, as the vastly superior DH4 replaced them.

The Triplane has a license built Clerget and was considered underpowered, which is why it only has one gun.

An RFC Camel had either a French engine or a license built engine. An RNAS Camel had a Bentley Clerget, later Camels had Bentleys.

So it would be more accurate to claim that the slower Camel was a side-effect of the Triplane being fixed, as the majority of Camels used better engines than that used in the Triplane.

Also, British pilots overclaimed hugely, Naval 1 might have shot down three confirmed Albatros DIIIs in all of April 1917.

You could take about 6 mph off your listed speed to take into account the engines that were used in production Triplanes as compared to the 'best engine.' The Mercedes inline engines were far more reliable and were not affected to anywhere near the same extent.

However the Triplane was known to have decided climb and manoeuvrability advantages over the Albatros DIII, if the Albatros now climbs better as well as being faster those advantages would have been eroded.

And if the Triplane was outmoded why would Richtofen want one? If 1918 Clergets were so bad why would Jacobs scour the countryside to get them for his DR1…?
  • 0

#14 J2_VonGraff

J2_VonGraff
  • Posts: 686
  • LocationCenter of the Universe

Posted 19 December 2014 - 18:57

Interesting points. Still would like some verification that this machine was faster than an Albatros flat out on the level. Perhaps one day they could make a special Bentley version with a bit more horsepower and two guns! Now I would try that…..yes I would.

And if the Triplane was outmoded why would Richtofen want one?

Because they were amazing in a turn fight and climbed well if fought properly……this does not however mean thay were faster than Albitri. If they were though I will happily stand corrected, cause I don't really know. Also, notice the difference between the DR1 and the Sopwith Tripe. Its got a smaller wingspan, I'm not sure about the chord though, but I'd love to see numbers on the overall wing area. I believe you will find the Dr1 has a slightly reduced wing area, which makes it a hotter faster machine. If not then the reduced span will certainly make it more agile and turn faster in roll. The Germans were in essence "improving upon the initial idea". Thats why Richtoffen wanted one,

V-Graff
  • 0

'Flight leader, fuel check - I have "E" gallons sir.'

 

j2-graff-signature-e1425051735579.jpg


#15 B24_LIBERATOR

B24_LIBERATOR
  • Posts: 3874
  • LocationSan Diego

Posted 19 December 2014 - 18:59

Albatross D.III:

109mph

Sopwith Triplane:

110HP: 113mph

130HP: 117mph

RoF Triplane:

Old: 114mph

New: 98 (103 @ sea level)
  • 0

Liberator's Tutorials: http://steamcommunit...s/?id=438268482

 

tahhfk.jpg


#16 J2_VonGraff

J2_VonGraff
  • Posts: 686
  • LocationCenter of the Universe

Posted 19 December 2014 - 19:02

Well if thats true, there you go. Maybe a Bentley version will one day be in our future.

V-Graff

PS> which engine are these figures representing, Clerget or Bentley?
  • 0

'Flight leader, fuel check - I have "E" gallons sir.'

 

j2-graff-signature-e1425051735579.jpg


#17 Blade_meister

Blade_meister
  • Posts: 1356

Posted 19 December 2014 - 20:15

Just a suggestion here, but maybe we should all just fly 1.034 this weekend and really get a feel for it before everyone starts dissecting it? Maybe???

S!Blade<><
  • 0

#18 gavagai

gavagai
  • Posts: 15541

Posted 19 December 2014 - 20:21

Just a suggestion here, but maybe we should all just fly 1.034 this weekend and really get a feel for it before everyone starts dissecting it? Maybe???

S!Blade<><

+1

Give it at least a week. And, I'll say it again, test data went out the window in 1.034, so stop using it as a baseline. The Albatros, Pfalz, Camel, Tripe, Dr1…none of them match test data now, and that is intentional. The point was to rationalize the planeset as a whole, as the test data could very well be crap.

English language history of WW1 air combat is heavily skewed toward the British version of events, so much so that someone could be forgiven for not knowing that most of the combat was between France and Germany, not Germany and the UK.
  • 0

#19 Dressedwings

Dressedwings
  • Posts: 2094
  • LocationOntario, Canada

Posted 19 December 2014 - 20:27

I'm really glad the way the update went, and I'm really enjoying flying around.

Just hope the tripe wasn't permanently shafted
  • 0

TOeIhAe.png

^CHECK THE LINK^


#20 B24_LIBERATOR

B24_LIBERATOR
  • Posts: 3874
  • LocationSan Diego

Posted 19 December 2014 - 20:31

Just a suggestion here, but maybe we should all just fly 1.034 this weekend and really get a feel for it before everyone starts dissecting it? Maybe???

S!Blade<><

I don't think a week is going to change my opinion honestly, but we'll see :S!:
  • 1

Liberator's Tutorials: http://steamcommunit...s/?id=438268482

 

tahhfk.jpg


#21 J5_Klugermann

J5_Klugermann
  • Member
  • Posts: 851
  • LocationChateau Boistrancourt

Posted 19 December 2014 - 20:47

Not trying to open a can of worms but how much work would it take to add a few more rpm/mph to the Triplehound/Camel ?
  • 0

#22 J2_VonGraff

J2_VonGraff
  • Posts: 686
  • LocationCenter of the Universe

Posted 19 December 2014 - 20:48

Just a suggestion here, but maybe we should all just fly 1.034 this weekend and really get a feel for it before everyone starts dissecting it? Maybe???

Agreed! I don't give a flying @#$% about the SopTripe anyway…..was just an interesting discussion.

V-Graff

PS. But the Camel does not need more mph, it is finally within reasonable limits.
  • 0

'Flight leader, fuel check - I have "E" gallons sir.'

 

j2-graff-signature-e1425051735579.jpg


#23 Dressedwings

Dressedwings
  • Posts: 2094
  • LocationOntario, Canada

Posted 19 December 2014 - 20:51

so not caring about an aircraft means it doesnt deserve a fix, or at least a closer look?
  • 0

TOeIhAe.png

^CHECK THE LINK^


#24 Blade_meister

Blade_meister
  • Posts: 1356

Posted 19 December 2014 - 21:43

Just a suggestion here, but maybe we should all just fly 1.034 this weekend and really get a feel for it before everyone starts dissecting it? Maybe???

S!Blade<><

I don't think a week is going to change my opinion honestly, but we'll see :S!:

Rgr that, but maybe you guys who are big MPs will see a surprising new challenge in MP that adds a new life to ROF. Maybe just go and fight, turn off the simple gauges, develop new tactics to engage your bandit with things the way they are and then come back after a few days and discuss it. Give this a chance to see what has actually happened in reality, in the actually game play dynamics. Don't base this assessment on, " well I used to….. in this plane" ,try to experience it how it is now in combat.

S!Blade<><
  • 0

#25 Dr.Zebra

Dr.Zebra
  • Posts: 2663

Posted 19 December 2014 - 21:53

I thought it was perfect.

me too, I always thought of the tripe FMs as one of the finer ones in the virtual skies.

haven´t gotten round to testfly it now, though
  • 0

#26 Dressedwings

Dressedwings
  • Posts: 2094
  • LocationOntario, Canada

Posted 20 December 2014 - 05:30

anecdotal experience here:

I took up the Tripehound during a winter 1917 mission in which our main enemies turned out to be many DR1s who were still very experience in prop hanging :P

Both flights I did, it felt that the Tripe was much closer to a stall/spin during a medium turn. Still was able to stand its ground somewhat against most types but it feels a bit more sluggish to me (not sure why, some say the exact oppisite)
  • 0

TOeIhAe.png

^CHECK THE LINK^


#27 gavagai

gavagai
  • Posts: 15541

Posted 20 December 2014 - 05:35

The Sopwith Triplane gains roll rate with speed, so it doesn't surprise me that it feels a bit more sluggish now. Its top speed is slower and it accelerates slower.

I got stuck in a 2vs1 with a D.VII and a Dr.I with the Tripe, so I can't say I have experience in it against the correct opposition. Second sortie went better but it is definitely in trouble against the Dr.I (it was before the patch, too). I am much more interested in how it stacks up against the Albatros D.III, but the New Wings maps just keep running 1918 again and again.
  • 0

#28 B24_LIBERATOR

B24_LIBERATOR
  • Posts: 3874
  • LocationSan Diego

Posted 20 December 2014 - 05:36

Rgr that, but maybe you guys who are big MPs will see a surprising new challenge in MP that adds a new life to ROF. Maybe just go and fight, turn off the simple gauges, develop new tactics to engage your bandit with things the way they are and then come back after a few days and discuss it. Give this a chance to see what has actually happened in reality, in the actually game play dynamics. Don't base this assessment on, " well I used to….. in this plane" ,try to experience it how it is now in combat.

S!Blade<><

I'm somewhat insulted you believe I'm that sort of person Blade.
  • 0

Liberator's Tutorials: http://steamcommunit...s/?id=438268482

 

tahhfk.jpg


#29 Dressedwings

Dressedwings
  • Posts: 2094
  • LocationOntario, Canada

Posted 20 December 2014 - 05:42

The Sopwith Triplane gains roll rate with speed, so it doesn't surprise me that it feels a bit more sluggish now. Its top speed is slower and it accelerates slower.

I got stuck in a 2vs1 with a D.VII and a Dr.I with the Tripe, so I can't say I have experience in it against the correct opposition. Second sortie went better but it is definitely in trouble against the Dr.I (it was before the patch, too). I am much more interested in how it stacks up against the Albatros D.III, but the New Wings maps just keep running 1918 again and again.

Yeah, If my router wasnt locked out I would try to set up a proper mission for the Tripe. I think I could handle the DVII in a turn fight, but every German I came across there was 4 DR1s following him..

edit: everything could run away from me though, except maybe the DR1 which just could climb away
  • 0

TOeIhAe.png

^CHECK THE LINK^


#30 gavagai

gavagai
  • Posts: 15541

Posted 20 December 2014 - 05:46

As a benchmark, in the past Josh Echo and I dueled Tripe versus D.III. Regardless of who was in which aircraft, the Tripe would win.
  • 0

#31 B24_LIBERATOR

B24_LIBERATOR
  • Posts: 3874
  • LocationSan Diego

Posted 20 December 2014 - 06:18

Isn't that how it's supposed to be?
  • 0

Liberator's Tutorials: http://steamcommunit...s/?id=438268482

 

tahhfk.jpg


#32 ZachariasX

ZachariasX
  • Posts: 794

Posted 20 December 2014 - 08:11

Albatross D.III:

109mph

Sopwith Triplane:

110HP: 113mph

130HP: 117mph

RoF Triplane:

Old: 114mph

New: 98 (103 @ sea level)

98 IAS which make about 108 mph TAS. This is what the nemometer of the "Kisten" is showing. If we have the 110 HP Tripe, then we are really close. Before the Tripe was really fast and youcould just alk away from the Albys if you didn't really blow it beforehand. Now that can get more problematic.

Numers don't look so bad to me so far as I'm speed testing all the crates now…

Z
  • 0

#33 Dressedwings

Dressedwings
  • Posts: 2094
  • LocationOntario, Canada

Posted 20 December 2014 - 08:18

We have the 130
  • 0

TOeIhAe.png

^CHECK THE LINK^


#34 ZachariasX

ZachariasX
  • Posts: 794

Posted 20 December 2014 - 08:31

We have the 130

Thnx for the info. Good to know. But the old one 114 IAS at 5000 ft.? That would be like 125 mph then. so we had 7 too fast vs. 8 too slow?
  • 0

#35 blackram

blackram
  • Posts: 123

Posted 20 December 2014 - 09:09

Wasnt the 130 Tripe faster than Albie DIII?
  • 0

#36 hq_Jorri

hq_Jorri
  • Posts: 14143

Posted 20 December 2014 - 10:18

In my mind, the Tripe can't be faster than the Camel, with its three wings and the same engine. And the Camel was slower than the Albatros. So the Tripe has to be slower than the Albatros, as well.

That's not saying the tripe isn't too slow, now. But as long as it's slower than the Alb and slower than the Camel, that's worth a lot.

Edit: make no mistake, I really loved the Triplane and I thought the flight model was pretty much perfect. But it just takes some collateral damage here. As it is, both the Tripe and the Camel could get an extra 5mph back, but definitely no more.
  • 0

#37 =CfC=FatherTed

=CfC=FatherTed
  • Posts: 993

Posted 20 December 2014 - 11:41

That's not saying the tripe isn't too slow, now. But as long as it's slower than the Alb and slower than the Camel, that's worth a lot.

Yep, as Gav said it's the relative speeds of the planeset that count really. The data we have are a narrow sample, so arguing over a 5% difference is not very scientific anyway. Also, do you really notice how fast you are going in absolute terms? How fast you're going when trying to out run or catch someone, yes, but not just in level flight. In RoF, I only look at the ASI when landing (no FF stick) and when diving.
  • 0

#38 J2_Trupobaw

J2_Trupobaw
  • Moderator
  • Posts: 4146
  • LocationKraków / Poland

Posted 20 December 2014 - 12:58

" No. 1 (Naval) Squadron, 'Naval one', went into action with the type in April 1917, in support of the hard-pressed R.F.C. The hitherto very successful Albatros D-III was completely outclassed, and IdFlieg , the German Inspectorate of Flying Troops, received a severe shock. The Tripehound could out-climb and out-turn the Albatros, and was 15 mph faster. Naval Eight and Naval Ten, equipped in April and May, also made their presence felt. Proof of the Triplane's worth was soon to be shown. In April 1917 Flight Commander R. S. Dallas and Flight Sub-Lieutenant T. G. Culling attacked a formation of fourteen German aircraft. After forty-five minutes they had shot down three of the enemy and driven the remainder into retreat. "

Sopwith Pup and Sopwith Camel you attack from above and behind or above and ahead almost with inpunity. Technically, they are both inferior to Albatros :o .
SE, attack the same way, but it's very dangerous, performs as well as Albatros :P and outperforms it on high altitude. […]
The 140HP SPAD is inferior to Albatros, not to mention Fokker :0o: (DR.I).
The SPAD with stronger engine is superior to Alabatros in climbing and maneuvrability :lol: .
The newest Triplane - one with all wings equal length - is damn agile nad can withstand even deepest dives :?: , but all in all it's no better than Albatros :roll: .
Nieuport is very agile, too, and can escape you by diving away :| , but otherwise it's inferior to Albatros in every respect.

Leutnant Adam refamiliarising Lothar von Richthofen with British types, September 1917, from memoires of Karl Bodenschatz


Apparently we can ask for whatever flight model we want and find a relation that matches it :S!: .

English language history of WW1 air combat is heavily skewed toward the British version of events, so much so that someone could be forgiven for not knowing that most of the combat was between France and Germany, not Germany and the UK.

Off topic here, but the majority of German Jastas were stationed opposite the British squadrons except during offensives on the south in 1918, for a reason (according to von Hoppners book). All German sources I saw agree fighting was less intensive on French front (then again, all I saw was translations…). The results of British strategy of air fighting for sake of air fighting are apparently more romantic than clashes between more pragmatic Frenchmen and Germans, so they get more coverage.
  • 0

Forum moderator.

Deputy Staffelführer, Jasta 2 ''Boelcke'' http://jasta2.org

“Now now,” Akua chided. “Personal attacks are the mark of failed argument. If you’ve no counterpoint to offer, such flailing only serves to shed further light on your incompetence.”


#39 gavagai

gavagai
  • Posts: 15541

Posted 20 December 2014 - 13:06

My memory says it was Bender who first argued for relative airspeeds. It is a sound principle. The uncertainty in the data from WW1 is often larger than the airspeed differences we care so much about.

If the tripe can still stomp on the Albatros 1vs1 then things are ok. The tripe's turn radius might be smaller now, so it might be easier than before.
  • 0

#40 hq_Jorri

hq_Jorri
  • Posts: 14143

Posted 20 December 2014 - 13:11

I guess it's time some good pilots had some good duels??

I don't understand this better turning thing, though. Why then is it such a bad idea to throttle down during a turnfight?
  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users