Albatros under the looking glass

[Olham 164]

Winder, I didn't expect it to be changed for P3 anymore, but just wanted it to be

on the list for P4 - which I think it is now. Thank you guys.

[JFM 18]

Well, I was hoping you'd add this stuff to P2.

[Hasse Wind 46]

Thanks for listening to our suggestions. It's good to know many things will be improved in P4.

[+Polovski 460]

Absolutely, the DIII shouldn't be worse of course, and if it is we'll look at. Who knows maybe the D.II we improved too much actually - rather than the D.III being poor - something to consider.

(note we have to have the AI behave reasonably well lots to consider).

 

However as always there is data suggesting more agile, and others suggesting it was not more agile as the design changes should have brought. It did have a better field of view which helps greatly with combat so even that alone would improve it's standing with pilots.

 

Also figures quoted for top speeds for DII and DIII are often at different altitudes and were likely closer than the immediate stats seem.

 

Also note the DIII 'early' version in OFF also has a slightly lower HP than the later DIII. I fitted DII engines to the early D.III - 10HP less ;)

[Bletchley 8]

Catch, Louvert

 

I am happy to lend my copy of 'Sopwith Scout 7309' - I could post it to Catch, Catch could then post it on to Louvert, then back to me :)

 

PM me if you want to borrow it.

 

Bletchley

[Olham 164]

Here is are two copies of that book for 80,- and 110,- Dollars.

Type the title into the search window.

 

http://www.eurobuch....rch_results.php

Edited April 16, 2010 by Olham

[catch 81]

Catch, Louvert

 

I am happy to lend my copy of 'Sopwith Scout 7309' - I could post it to Catch, Catch could then post it on to Louvert, then back to me :)

 

PM me if you want to borrow it.

 

Bletchley

 

Hey Bletch that is a very kind offer and I thank you very much for the thought.

 

However, I've just located a first edition copy for 80 bucks in a Melbourne bookstore and ordered it ! Hopefully I will have it in my dirty mits in a few days. I'm well pleased

 

That saves you sending it all the way down to Oz anyway. RAFL may take you up on the kind offer though.

[Herr Prop-Wasche 7]

To add further light (or heat) to the discussion, I gathered the following information by using Airwrench and looking at the specifications for the entire Albatross' series.

 

Aircraft	HP	Weight	Speed/sea(mph)	Climb rate(ft)	Roll rate	Turn radius(ft)

D II		180	1485	105.5 		1335		65.2		177.1
D III early	162.5	1850	108.8		1335		53		193.4
D III		170	1850	108.8		1385		57.6		193.4
D III OAW	170	1850	108.8		1385		57.6		193.4
DV		180	2017	112		1430		62.2		193.4
DV later	180	2017	112		1430		63.4		193.4
Dva		180	1780	114.9		1402		63.9		192.4
Dva 200		200	1862	118.5		1480		63.9		192.4

 

From analyzing the results, it seems either that the D II as currently represented is much better than it was historically, or the D III and D V series are worse than they were historically, or both. As a result, there is not much difference between the D II, D III, and D V. Arguably, it's not until we get to the DVa 200 that there is a significant improvement in the Alb from one model to another. Also, based only on these specs, it seems that the D II is a better all-around aircraft than all varieties of the D III's. In particular, shouldn't the D III's have a better turn radius than the D II because of their improved wing design? Finally, I should also note that the turning radius for ALL of the Albatross' is longer than that of every other airplane I looked at--including the Spads, Se5a's, and even the Pfalz.

 

Again, this is relying only on the listed specifications for these planes in the .cfg and .air files. How each plane performs in the sim is another matter entirely. It may be that the devs had to tinker a little with the historical settings for some aircraft in order to get them to perform as they did historically. For example, perhaps tightening up the turning radius for the Albs so they are closer to their Allied counterparts makes the Albs a little too ubermenchish, if you get my mangled German. And, maybe a D II with a lower hp engine instead of a 180 hp engine causes it to fly too poorly without the higher rated engine.

 

At any rate, this is not meant to be a flame towards the devs. Absent any data entry errors, I'm sure they had very good reasons for making the Albs as they are currently. Mainly, I thought that posting these specs might be of particular interest to Olham and the other Alb aficionados.

[Olham 164]

Thanks for the numbers, Herr Prop-Wasche.

Not sure, if numbers got mixed up, or purpously set "wrong" to still get the result right.

 

But what I know is, that yesterday I tried to turn after some DH-5 at about 10.000 feet in a D.III,

which was blubbering like a dying soap box up there.

At the attempt to turn the craft left, it stalled as if we were in the thin air of the stratosphere,

and when catching up the stall and pulling her round, the right wingtip broke off!

It was absolutely ridiculous! Sorry, but if you had seen it, you would say the same.

Edited April 19, 2010 by Olham

[Hasse Wind 46]

Thanks HPW - those numbers show very nicely what we're talking about in this thread. And they aren't just numbers; you can easily feel the difference between the D.II and D.III in the game. A short flight in QC will show it quite clearly.

 

But fortunately the devs are looking into it, so I'm sure in P4 we'll see a much improved Albatros D.III and D.V and not the clumsy flying boats they are now.

 

Edited April 19, 2010 by Hasse Wind

[+Polovski 460]

Guys, please note the numbers are changed for various reasons as hinted at by Herr P, such as how the AI perform in all sorts of situations, such as issues low down or whatever (DII is one of those) or maybe for some craft climb rate reported in AirWrench is not what is shown in sim, so changes are made to get the performance (and many other reasons). Climb rate is found from flying and tweaking - the figure there is very often not what you will see in sim.

 

Anyway this is closed now, we have said we will look at in p4, so many things will change with P4 that this may well be useless info now anyway.

Albatros is still a killer machine, if it turns like a Pup too (which has 1 pop gun) then you will get 100 kills a week. They are well balanced currently and were not easy to control or very nimble like allied craft. We researched a lot on the Albs and came to the conclusions we have but as we say we will look yet again in P4.

 

By the way turn radius in Airwrench is an estimate it's not something that is 'dialed in', also that is distance/tightness of the turn, but not necessarily at what speed.