Tweaked Flight Models and Realism Pack for FE2

[vonOben 55]

Hi VonS

Back with some more feedback and questions.

I'm now using VolumeStructurePoint=3000.

In the last mission flying Fokker EIV and the Nieuport 12 seems more fragile now compared to when i flew the Fokker EIII.

One AI had 3 hits and shot down one Nieuport 12, another AI had 5 hits and shot down 2 Nieuport 12.
I had 17 hits and shot down 3 Nieuport 12.

Since the Fokker EIV is not included in your FM I suspect that there is something in the Laton FM that makes it to easy.
Any ideas?

Best regards

vonOben
 

Edited July 2, 2016 by vonOben

[vonOben 55]

Hi VonHi VonS

I've now edited the FokkerEIV_DATA.INI as follows:
GunTypeName=7.92MM_SPANDAU_LMG08/15

I changed it to use the same gun as your EIII:
GunTypeName=7.92MM_SPANDAU_early

Then I did fly a new campaign mission where we encountered Caudron G4. The Caudron had very fragile engines, a few hits and they started smoking (18 hits total in both engines).

Cheers

vonObenS

[+VonS 1,424]

Hi VonOben,

 

Sorry for noticing your previous post this late - I've been a bit busy with RealLife over the summer but will get back into FE2 by early August to tweak new plane type FMs further - and I also want to tinker more with the aircraftaidata file (the general one). The Fok. E.IV I haven't touched yet - it's possible that Laton's has the armor rating set too low, or the inertia settings may be too high, which means that it hurtles down in a dive and may get structural damage and or wing damage that way. I will look into the file soon hopefully. Your changes to the file are correct - the E.IV should use the Spandau early type (350 rounds/min) that I have for the early German monoplanes (in the 8.0 FM update). Each gun should carry about 200 rounds on the E.IV - to save weight. It's also possible that the E.IV in unmodified form is underpowered and does not have a historical top speed - top speed should be about 170kph on the type. Also, it should be less maneuverable than the E.III because of the heavy, two-row rotary engine.

 

Your volumestructurepoint value of 3000 sounds like a reasonable one - you might also want to test at a value of 3500 or 4000, but anything higher than that is probably not realistic.

 

The Caudrons, historically, were fairly flimsy with temperamental engines. The Voisans, particularly the type 5 of the Voisan, were more robust machines.

 

Happy flying,

Von S

[vonOben 55]

Hi VonS

Some more observations with VolumeStructurePoint=3000.
The Nieuport 11 has very week upper wings, a few hits and they fall off. Doesn't seem right IMHO.
I haven't seen that on any other plane.

S!

vonOben

[vonOben 55]

Hi VonS

 

Some more observations with VolumeStructurePoint=3000.

The Nieuport 11 has very week upper wings, a few hits and they fall off. Doesn't seem right IMHO.

I haven't seen that on any other plane.

 

S!

 

vonOben

 

Hi VonS

 

Back with some stats about the Nieuport 11 and the extremely fragile upper wings (VolumeStructurePoint=3000 and flying the Fokker EIII).

 

I had 9 hits and 2 Nieuport 11 lost their upper wings.

In another mission I had 2 hits and one Nieuport 11 lost the upper wings.

In two different mission one AI had 1 hit and a Nieuport 11 lost the upper wings.

 

Can I do some edit on the Nieuport 11 to make the upper wings sturdier?

 

S!

 

vonOben

[+VonS 1,424]

Hi VonOben,

 

You will notice that the Nieu. 16 and 10 are also quite fragile on the upper wing - a few well-placed hits and the wing comes off. The types were fairly fragile historically but if you want to make them more robust - increase the armor rating to about 23 or 24 on them...and retest with volumestructurepoint at around 3500 or 4000 - this might help. More specific components to the upper wings of early Nieu. types I will have to study more thoroughly once I am back on my main computer in August (I am currently on a netbook...not very convenient for editing and testing data inis).

 

Happy flying,

Von S

[Nicholas Bell 117]

Can I do some edit on the Nieuport 11 to make the upper wings sturdier?

I would recommend adding  StructuralFactor=1.5 to each Topwing** component to address the specific problem.  It can be anywhere in the data list.  Increase the value until you get the results you are looking for - a then report back so we can take advantage of your work. 

There was a strange thing happening in the last mission with a damaged Vickers FB5 flying 2 meters over the ground round and round,

 I've seen this behavior in the DH-2 also.  It does appear to be an asymmetrical lift problem caused by damage.  You might change the damage status of the wingtips from heavy to destroyed to see if that helps - I've not had an opportunity to experiment. 

[vonOben 55]

Thanks for your suggestions!

I'll test that and report back!

 

[vonOben 55]

Hi Nick

In Nieuport11_DATA.ini I added
StructuralFactor=1.5
under these sections:
[TopWingLeft] & [TopWingRight] & [TopWingMidLeft] & [TopWingMidRight] & [TopWingTipLeft] & [TopWingTipRight]

Is that correct?

I didn't notice any major difference. The wings are still very weak and fall off after a few hits.
I'll test to increase the value in steps of 0.5.

Thanks!

Best regards

vonOben

[vonOben 55]

Hi

 

Back with some more feedback.

 

I'm now using StructuralFactor=2.5 on the Nieuport 11 but the wings are still very fragile.

 

I've started flying the Fokker D.II and my first impression is that it stalls more easily than the Eindeckers. The flight behavior during a stall is somewhat strange IMHO with an displayed speed around 1-2 km/h.

What is the measures to get out of a stall in FE2?

I had to switch to Autopilot to get out of a severe stall.

 

S!

 

vonOben

[+VonS 1,424]

Hi Von Oben,

 

Strange stall behavior on a few aircraft has always been an interesting topic for me in FE2. There are a few - such as the Fok. D.II, sometimes also the M-S N (Bullet), one or two more, that sometimes display a kind of sideslip stall and a speed that drops to close to 0 kph. The best way to get out of such stalls is to attempt a nose-down position, and full rudder in the direction of the stall (not opposite to the stall direction if the problem is an uncontrollable sideslip). Also, turning off the engine sometimes helps, to minimize gyroscopic effects on rotaries. As you start gaining control of the aircraft, then turn on the engine.

 

There are three or four entries in the data inis that control such behavior (stall limiters, stall risk, return to pre-stall state, stall type whether starting from wing tips or from wing base/center near the fuselage, etc.), and that were posted here on the forums a few years back (I have a printed copy but can't remember the link to the info. now) - will investigate these oddities once I start tweaking new data inis in August. You will also notice that if an uncontrollable sideslip/stall continues for too long, the wing tips and eventually the whole wings will break apart on an aircraft - I have experienced this a few times with the Bullet type N, also the type H.

 

The Fok. Eindeckers don't seem to have this problem but they sometimes go into an inverted flat spin (that is nearly impossible to get out of but is probably historical for the early monoplanes....whether the odd sideslip stalls are historical is the really interesting question here). That the Fok. D.II stalls more frequently than the Eindeckers is good (historical) since it was underpowered for its weight - therefore only one machine gun on it to save weight/improve performance. The Fok. D.III resolved some of these problems with its more powerful two-row rotary, particularly with the addition of ailerons on late models of the D.III (instead of wing warping).

 

Happy flying,

Von S

Edited July 25, 2016 by VonS

[Nicholas Bell 117]

Guess I would push the structuralfactor  to 4.0 and work down from there then.  Recall the size of the hitbox is the basis of the amount of damage, and the N 11 is a small plane.

 

What's more surprising to me is that you can hit anything while flying an Eindecker.

[vonOben 55]

Hi guys

VonS;
When in a stall where the speed drop close to 0, the problem was that it had very little effect whatever I did with my stick.
I've encountered tricky stalls also with Peter01 FM in the Eindeckers, but not in your FM.
I'll test your advice the next time.

Nick;
The Eindeckers have a gun sight at least, which the Fokker D.II doesn't have.
So I find it much easier to aim with the Eindeckers and have more problem aiming when there is no gun sight.

Cheers

vonOben

[vonOben 55]

Hi again

The Fokker D.II wasn't that bad when I got used to it and if I was careful not getting into a stall.

But the Halberstadt D.V is terrible to fly IMHO. It accelerates very slowly and it's hard to get enough speed to take off safely. I also had one weird stall experience with it. I couldn't recover from the stall so I switched to Auto pilot. After the auto pilot had recovered I could never go back to flying without it because if I did I would go into a spin directly. The Auto pilot couldn't land either and crashed the plane when trying.
After that I removed your Halberstadt D.V FM....

Best regards

vonOben

[+VonS 1,424]

Hi Von Oben,

 

The Halb D.V was historically an improvement on the Halb. D.II but was still somewhat under-powered (and slow to accelerate). It is a good plane in dives however and is fairly twitchy/maneuverable on the ailerons. The rudder/elevator are sensitive on it too. I recommend that you retest my latest FM tweak for the Halb. D.V that was uploaded with the big 8.0 update pack. I will retest the Halb. in a few days once I'm back at my main computer - it is possible to put the Halb. into spins/stalls if one is rough on the controls but I've never had trouble recovering from such spins and stalls. Thanks for the continued feedback.

 

Happy flying,

Von S

[vonOben 55]

Hi VonS

My feedback is for the latest version 8.0.

Have you considered editing the "waltzing" behaviour as Nick suggested here:
http://combatace.com/topic/88783-heres-how-to-stop-your-wingmen-from-waltzing-in-formation/

And the "Bouncy elevators" as you called it here:
http://combatace.com/topic/88951-some-newbie-questions/

I usually edit your FM files as suggested in those threads with good result.

Best regards

vonOben

[+VonS 1,424]

Hi VonOben,

 

The waltzing behavior I've managed to reduce for some plane types by tweaking the MaxRollFormation entry in the general aircraftaidata ini file to 3.0 - this has resulted in minor "waltzing," usually much more stable looking formations. Such values in the individual aircraft data ini files will obviously override the setting in the general aircraftaidata file, should there be such an entry in the individual data inis. I recommend a value of about 3.0 for MaxRollFormation to help offset the major waltzing for some plane types - values of less than about 3.0 will probably lead to too stable/unrealistic formations (considering that formations in the modern WW2 sense of the term didn't really exist in WW1).

 

The bouncy elevators have been remedied whenever possible in my data ini tweaks for the various plane types - the relevant entry is ElevatorDeltaPitch - this entry usually had high values of about 3.0. The values should range from about 0.5 to no more than about 1.5 - for elevator porpoising/twitching to be kept to a minimum when the AI is involved in dogfights.

 

I am now finally back on my main computer (quad-core MacMini) and will retest the Halb. D.5 before tweaking the general aircraftaidata file further using some of NBell's tips posted on another forum here for FE2.

 

Happy flying,

Von S

[+VonS 1,424]

Hi VonOben,

 

Have now retested the Halb. D.5 with good results - acceleration is indeed slow on the type (both off and on ground), and it weighs more with its "Argus" engine than the D.2 variant with its Mercedes - the HP output is about the same for both types. The D.5 has a top speed of about 155/156 kph (the D.2 is about 150 kph historically). Climbs are best at speeds between 90 and 100 kph, giving a climb of about 2.5 m/s. It still climbs even in the 70s and 80s kph - but will fall into a nasty spin if climbed below 71/72 kph approx. The only way to get out of those nasty spins is to use rudder in the opposite direction of the spin. For takeoffs, I recommend getting the tail up as soon as possible (dragging the tail along will slow the type down noticeably) - then let it ascend gently once you pass about 100 kph, and try not to drop the speed below about 85 kph as it ascends - this should allow for a good and steady climb.

 

Happy flying,

Von S

[+VonS 1,424]

More info. on the Halb. D.5: while testing was successful, I have been reading more about the D.5 variant. Apparently it had an empty weight about 50 kg less than the D.2 (525 vs. about 570 or 580 for the D.2). The similar HP output however meant that the top speed on the D.2 was between 145 and 150 kph, with the D.5 barely faster. The ceiling was higher on the D.5 by a couple of thousand feet. I am now tweaking that data ini file further and will upload the changes with an 8.5 update of my tweaks.

 

Von S

[+VonS 1,424]

Halb. D.5 now successfully tweaked, with a top speed of 153 kph below about 500 feet altitude. It now climbs more easily with an empty weight of 525 kg, and the ceiling is slightly higher than previously. Climbs of about 2.5 m/s can now be attained at speeds between 85 and 100 kph - it still climbs at around 2 m/s in the low 80s and also through the 70s kph - stalls happen below about 65 kph but it's easy enough to recover using opposite rudder, and it now gives a broader, let's call it, "climb envelope" - than was possible previously. Take offs are best at slightly above 100 kph. Will now slightly de-tune aileron sensitivity on the BE2 types, will then tweak the BE12 types, the Fokk. Eindecker E.IV (two-gun variant) - these will be uploaded with an 8.5 update. Also included in that update will be the Nieu. 16 Vickers-armed variant with functioning LePrieurs, a modified Left Vickers Gun for the Weapons Folder that is limited to 250 rounds and that corresponds with the Vickers Nieu. 16, also a tweaked Nieu. 11 that has funcitoning LePrieurs.

 

Been testing the VolumeStructurePoint setting further and it seems that a value of 2500 is the sweet spot - making it harder to down planes but not terribly hard or unrealistic - a good balance I think (will include that file with the 8.5 update too).

 

Still testing the general aircraftaidata ini file further - have successfully increased firing times for different dogfight skill levels, ranging from a few seconds for aces all the way to about 10 second bursts for novices - now need to tweak the file further since the cannonfireangle is still somewhat troublesome. I keep thinking that the aces and veterans should be given a wider fire angle - contrary to logic - since their maxcannonrange is shorter, whereas the greens and novices need a tighter gun angle with their high maxcannonrange...hmm, will see how that works out.

 

Also been reading Robert Jackson's 'Aces Twilight' (from the late 1980s) and it seems that it was not that difficult to pop wings off of early and mid-Nieuport types (a few well-placed, short rounds by an attacker, and off they go...instances were recorded where such things happened on a Pfalz. D.3 type too...which is at any rate more robust than a Nieuport)....this leads me to think that the fairly fragile Nieu. wings in FE2 are more realistic than initially thought - many of us are probably still used to the "toughness" of certain models in RB3D...at any rate those are Jackson's views on the subject....

 

Happy flying,

Von S

[vonOben 55]

Hi VonS

 

Nice too see that you are back tweeking FM's  .

 

Any chance for a AlbatrosD2_Early FM in next update?

 

S!

 

vonOben

[+VonS 1,424]

Hi Von Oben,

 

Yes it's good to be back tweaking FMs and other things for FE2 - and testing the tweaks which is great fun.

 

I will look into doing a "radiator ears" Alb. D2 tweak for the 8.5 update. The BE2c has had its ailerons slightly detuned now for greater realism. Also the Fok. E.IV (two-gun variant) has been completed. I want to complete the two BE12 types now, for the western and middle eastern theatres, and will then see about the early Alb. D2 - will probably roll that into an 8.5 update.

 

A version 9.0 update will consist of:

 

French-built Nieuport 12

Hannover CL.2 and 3 types

Albatros C.3

Farman F.40

Vickers FB5

 

Updates after version 9.0 will then consist of small updates of individual plane FM tweaks that catch my interest and any new ones that might show up here in the downloads section.

 

Happy flying,

Von S

[jeanba 1,915]

Great !

[vonOben 55]

Hi VonS

Back with some more feedback and observations!

I'm now flying the Albatros D.I in an Armchair Aces campaign.
When taking of the tail is heavy and takes some time to lift which makes the acceleration slow and the speed rather low when getting up in the air, usually in the end of the airfield. The Albatros D.I is prone to start burning when hit, it's the plane I've flown so far that starts burning most easily.


I find it tricky to get a realistic balance in FE2. I've been using VolumeStructurePoint=6000 now for a while, but both myself and the AIs still get those 1-2 bullet kills.
The Nieuport 17 is a tough opponent and a lot sturdier than the older Nieuport versions and doesn't have fragile wings.

If those 1-2 bullet kills happen sometime it would be acceptable, but since most parts of the planes are non critical more hits should be needed to get the plane down IMHO. I've read that MvR as an average used 200 rounds per victory, and he was an ace...
So how many rounds/hits would be historically accurate, what do you think?
And how can we achieve that in FE?

Best regards

vonOben

[+VonS 1,424]

Hi VonOben,

 

I'm glad to hear that the Alb. D.I burns more easily than the later Alb. types - this confirms that the following two entries are working well in the data ini:

 

DamageTempDelta=60

OverheatDamageRate=0.7

 

I've set the damagetempdelta and overheatdamagerate to fairly high for the earlier inline engines, the later inlines are a bit more reliable post-damage, with the single row rotaries and radials faring better after being hit, and the two-row rotaries being the most sturdy, post-hit, of them all. Those two values are for post-hit rate of failure and/or fire.

 

That the D.I is tail-heavy is also good, since most of the Albs., including several other WWI types, were heavier in the tail. Have now retested the Alb. D.I - full throttle works well for fairly quick take offs, but push the elevator forward right away so the tail comes up - keep the tail up until you get to about 100 kph, then let the plane gently ascend. Good climbs can be maintained at speeds of around 110 kph. You can maintain fairly steep climbs at around 90 to 100 kph, but I wouldn't recommend climbing at speeds below about 85 kph since stalls are likely. The engine is powerful enough that the climb envelope is fairly broad, either steep and slow climbs, or more gradual but relatively fast climbs at between 110 and 120 kph.

 

You will also notice that the rudder is more effective on the early Albs. than on the D.3 and particularly on the D.5 variants (the oval-shaped rudder, while nice looking, was less effective than the flat one). The D.I and D.II sideslip very well and can tangle fairly well with the Nieuport types. Personally I like the late D.II the most of all the Albs. since it is sturdy and fairly maneuverable. I'm surprised that the German Air Service didn't continue building that airframe and fitting it with more powerful engines to increase top speed - an excellent interceptor would have emerged, and a great plane for diving too (no need for the Pfalz D.III then...).

 

The Nieu. 17 C.1, also the 17bis, are tougher than the 16, 11, also the 10, as you noticed. I think that the Nieu. 23 and the 24bis are in many ways the best of the Nieu. types - very maneuverable and fairly tough (relative to other Nieu. types). Your value for the volumestructurepoint seems a bit high but is worth experimenting with - I've had good results with a value of 2500.

 

It's difficult to theorize an average hit rate per pilot skill level, especially in a historical context. The question is interesting. MvR seems to have placed many rounds into opponents before they spun out of control - this perhaps has something to do with his preference to attack two-seaters and larger, slower aircraft (they may have been more stable targets but harder to knock down). René Fonck was rumored to have been able to knock planes down with a few well-placed hits (somewhere between 5 and 30 rounds approximately) - also good in the low-hits per kill category were some of the Italian aces I think (Baracca who preferred the earlier SPADs that were more maneuverable, and only one machine gun).

 

The simplest way to increase hit numbers per kill is probably to increase the armor rating on aircraft, although this may upset other factors in FE2 - making it too difficult (unrealistic) to knock some aircraft down. I will have a look at some of the data ini for wing strength and/or fuselage strength once I finish tweaking the BE12 types and early Alb. D.2 - there may be some hidden things to explore in the files.

 

I think generally that it should be harder to bring down the later war (1917 and 1918) aircraft than the early war types (to about mid-1916). That the Nieu. 17 is harder to bring down than earlier Nieu. types is good evidence of that. I would recommend that you retest some of the aircraft that seem very easy to bring down by changing their armor rating either to 25 or 26 (these are the values that I use for late-war aircraft and they make it very difficult to bring aircraft down without firing most of your ammo. into them).

 

Happy flying,

Von S