Which plane did... Part Two, for posting

[Olham 164]

Hello, all!

Thanks for so many answers already.

I must admit it was a bit of a quick shot, and I had forgotten two important question.

As I could still edit the post, I added them now.

Everyone, who can still edit yours as well - would you please add your answers to the last two?

Thanks! Olham

[Hellshade 110]

I flew Dead is Dead outcome for the pilot

Realism was only 70% because I had unlimited fuel turned on so I wouldn't run out when I warped. Everything else was turned on to realistic or hard mode and I used the Normal Damage Model. You should probably ask to see which DM most people are using too. Its a lot harder to get shot down in Hardcore than it is in Normal DM.

 

Hellshade

[Olham 164]

Yes, I have been thinking about DM too, but didn't put it in, because, with Hardcore,

you will also find it harder to shoot down enemy fighters, too. It may be balanced?

 

Wow, Wels - you really scored 17 kills with the Eindecker???

(And the you died, ramming a windsock pole - what a sad fate. Lol!)

 

Rooster on the Halberstadt - also rather uncommon. Seven kills is pretty

good on this plane, I'd say. Must try it again myself.

 

Tttiger, your's will be hard to top. My goodness - 32 kills.

Was that with 100% reality, and DiD?

 

I must say, I find all from 10 kills onwards, very impressive!

[Hasse Wind 46]

32 kills is a lot, I hope one day one of my pilots lives long enough to achieve such numbers. And 17 kills while flying the Eindecker... wow! I've tried that old monoplane a couple of times, but I didn't like it one bit.

 

But I just love those nimble & quick Entente fighters, like the Pup and the Nieuport series. With them I've gotten the most kills. I've learned to dislike the Pfalz D.III in my Jasta 10 campaign, fortunately we should be getting some new planes soon. I've always preferred turn fighters over energy fighters, especially in WW1 sims, because zoom & boom is not that easy a tactic when the aircraft are weakly armed - you just can't get kills in a Spad or Albatros as easily as when flying something that is armed to the teeth with MGs and 20 or 30 mm guns, like FW 190 or Me 262 of WW2 fame!

[Olham 164]

Well, Hasse, the SPAD XIII or the Albatros (all versions) ARE armed to the teeth.

Both plane have the maximum armament of their time with TWO machine guns.

On an Albatros D Va, you even get 1.100 rounds! You can literally shredder planes with these armes!

I mostly fly the Albatros, cause she's a mix of both tactics (although not perfect on any of them - Lol!)

 

The German turn fighter to recommend is the Fokker Dr.1 - when you learn how to handle an "instable plane".

she will be a dream of a turn fighter. Try it!

 

PS/Edit: and don't compare the WW1 crates to those of WW2. That's useless, as they never had to fight each other.

Edited April 8, 2009 by Olham

[themightysrc 5]

"fortunately we should be getting some new planes soon."

 

Oooooh.....when! yes please!

 

As for aircraft, squadrons, kills, hours, etc: I prefer early war, so I clock up a fair number of hours in rubbish aircraft patrolling empty skies and never shooting anything down - well, certainly never hitting very much on the off chance I see one of the blighters. As a result, my 130% DiD pilots look immensely brick.

[Hauksbee 103]

Being a QC devotee, my kite-of-choice is the old default and stand-by: the SE-5 [...having enlisted with the Brits.] Were it not for the SE-5, I might have quietly put the OFF disc 'way back on the top shelf of the closet and locked the door. I never suspected they flew that badly.

 

I received my OFF disc just after I had 3D modeled the Hawker/von Richtofen duel. I was hot to fly the DH-2 and immediately took it out for a spin. I think I spun for 45 minutes. Then I thought, 'Well now, this was designed to take on the E.III, let's see what that was all about'. After a few minutes in a E.III I concluded that WWI was even less fun than I had previously thought.

 

So, briefly: the SE-5 is first choice. I've had good luck with Sopwiths, Camel and Pup, Sopwith Triplane is not bad. Bad luck with Albatros. The Dr.1 is more stable than I expected it to be from its rep., the Pfaltz, easier to fly than its age would indicate, the D.VII, not as smooth as the SE-5 and I see no evidence for the famed 'hanging on the prop'.

[Hasse Wind 46]

Olham:

 

I wasn't comparing WW1 fighters to their WW2 counterparts as such, I only meant that aircraft with a heavier armament are able to down their opponents much more quickly than old crates with a max armament of a couple of MGs and are thus much better as energy fighters. In my opinion, turn fighters excel in a WW1 environment, but that's just my opinion and I'm sure all the Spad aces here disagree with me.

 

themightysrc:

 

Hopefully my Jasta 10 will get their new Fokkers sometime before the summer of 1918. Don't really know about new aircraft for *OFF*, but I hope they're coming too.

[Olham 164]

You'll get your Fokkers historically correct; so, if Jasta 10 had them, you'll get them.

 

But new planes? Why is everybody so keen on new planes? Have you really flown all the

planes and their various types in here?

For me, that may take years, to really get to good results with each type.

So, I don't mind, if they throw new planes in - but I don't need them urgently.

[Hasse Wind 46]

You'll get your Fokkers historically correct; so, if Jasta 10 had them, you'll get them.

 

But new planes? Why is everybody so keen on new planes? Have you really flown all the

planes and their various types in here?

For me, that may take years, to really get to good results with each type.

So, I don't mind, if they throw new planes in - but I don't need them urgently.

 

That's true - flight models in OFF are so good that there are endless details to be learnt from all the various planes the game currently has. I'm learning something new every day, for example how the Nieuport 17 behaves in different weather and things like that. (I really have to give the Dr.I a go one of these days!)

 

I just hope OFF is going to be a commercial success (as much as any simulator can be!). If it is, I'm sure the dev team will be more enthusiastic about adding even more content to the game. My secret hope is to have a couple of extra planes for the French, which could be used also by the American squadrons...

[themightysrc 5]

"But new planes? Why is everybody so keen on new planes? Have you really flown all the

planes and their various types in here?"

 

Yep new planes.

 

The reason I'd like to see new planes is to fill in the gaps in the squadron/jasta profiles - well, that's the main one. The other one is that I'm immensely curious - given the skill with which the OFF team have put the current planes together - to see how other aircraft would be rendered, and how they'd compare, and how I'd get on with them.

 

Actually, scrub that last point: I know how I'd get on with them; I'd get killed in them just as regularly as I currently do in the existing aircraft.

 

I'm just curious, full stop. I know it'll take me months to get the measure of the existing aircraft and campaigns, but I see so many possibilities now that OBD have done so much work that I'm interested enough to see how much further it might go.

 

At the risk of outraging some people, I'd be happy to pay for those new aircraft if an expansion were offered that I liked, particularly if it were to cover different geographical areas. If a 1915 pack came out, yup, I'd grab it like a shot. Ditto Austro-Italian air war. The point is that the engine is done: at this time - and probably after a very well earned breather - *if* sales of BH&H justified more effort then additional aircraft would be less effort (I'd have guessed) than any other option for OBD, including what I've seen amusingly described as the "final divorce" from CFS3.

 

But this is all for another thread, I suspect. Until then I'll keep on being a rubbish pilot avoiding dodgy looking fights in whatever BH&H has to offer.

[Olham 164]

The dev team surely want themselves to get some more planes into BHaH, but such models take long to build perfectly.

I dare to guess, that they already work on ideas in that direction.

The Americans want the Nieuport 28.

For the Germans, it could be early Fokkers, or late war Fokker D VIII, or Siemens-Schuckert D III.

The British seem to want the Sopwith Snipe mostly.

And the French, having the good Nupe 28 to share with the Americans already, might get an additional Morane Parasol.

 

An add-on package with these planes couldn't be free, and most of us, who want those planes, would be willing to pay

for them - no question.

They may come one day - but until then, I have enough planes yet to experience.

Edited April 8, 2009 by Olham

[almccoyjr 7]

Being a QC devotee, my kite-of-choice is the old default and stand-by: the SE-5 [...having enlisted with the Brits.] Were it not for the SE-5, I might have quietly put the OFF disc 'way back on the top shelf of the closet and locked the door. I never suspected they flew that badly.

 

I received my OFF disc just after I had 3D modeled the Hawker/von Richtofen duel. I was hot to fly the DH-2 and immediately took it out for a spin. I think I spun for 45 minutes. Then I thought, 'Well now, this was designed to take on the E.III, let's see what that was all about'. After a few minutes in a E.III I concluded that WWI was even less fun than I had previously thought.

 

So, briefly: the SE-5 is first choice. I've had good luck with Sopwiths, Camel and Pup, Sopwith Triplane is not bad. Bad luck with Albatros. The Dr.1 is more stable than I expected it to be from its rep., the Pfaltz, easier to fly than its age would indicate, the D.VII, not as smooth as the SE-5 and I see no evidence for the famed 'hanging on the prop'.

 

Have you tried the D.VIIF? If the fm is close, we should be able to "hang the prop" or at least, approximate it. I'm still in QC exploring the fm's. In the *F, I've gotten close to 45+ angle very briefly without stalling and the plane just seemed to "float". The degree of control is excruciating for those few moments so that after a while, I have to quit; my wrist and mid-arm hurt. I think if I screw around with my Courgar's response curves, it might be a little easier. I haven't been close in the other D.VII fm's.

 

I hope it's doable, because that one maneuver is simply awesome.

[Interlocutor 0]

And the French, having the good Nupe 28 to share with the Americans already, might get an additional Morane Parasol.

 

Unfortunately for the French, the N28 did not serve with any French escadrilles, only with the Americans. So the only way to fly the N28 would be with one of the American squadrons.

 

Since I love turn fighters so much, I'd like to see the N24/N27 in the game, but even these, the last of the Nieuport sesquiplane fighters, did not serve with many French escadrilles.

 

I'd also like to see some French 2-seaters someday. An N12 for early war, and the Breguet & Salmsons for later.

[Olham 164]

Unfortunately for the French, the N28 did not serve with any French escadrilles, only with the Americans.

I'd like to see the N24/N27 in the game, but even these, the last of the Nieuport sesquiplane fighters, did

not serve with many French escadrilles.

 

Why was that? Are there reasons? Did the Americans pay more for them (Lol!) ?

[themightysrc 5]

"Why was that? Are there reasons? Did the Americans pay more for them (Lol!) ?"

 

As far as I know, the French decided against them because they weren't quick enough and were still liable to fall to bits when stressed, which probably isn't a good combo if you've just hopped out of a Spad XIII. Well, that was what I'd previously heard. Anyone else know better?

[RAF_Louvert 101]

The French and British air services both rejected the N28 as they felt it was not an improvement over earlier models and it had the tendency to shed its upper wing fabric in a hard sustained dive. It was heavy in the controls and not as agile as its predecessors. So, it was given to the Americans to use as it was still far better than anything the US had in 1918.

 

Cheers!

 

Lou