mastering the Nieuport 28

[Waldemar Kurtz 1]

this is a very difficult plane to fly. I know lots of people have said that the Fokker E.III is the hardest plane to fly-- but since I had a lot of practice with the old Flanders in Flames flight-model in RB3D (an online campaign that's similar to the OFF flight-model excepting that it bleeds off energy less dramatically and had even more torque).

 

with the E.III it wasn't too difficult to predict when a stall would come. it had a rotary engine and I knew that left-hand turns had to be done by reducing power and pointing the nose down. right hand turns you had to be careful not to try and bank too hard or you could end up inverted.

 

but with the Nieuport 28 the stalls are vicious and without warning (at least for me). it can happen going either direction. I've found that (like the Fokker E.V) if I can keep my speed above 70 mph it's mostly manageable... but it still becomes almost impossible to control at 60 mph.

 

the visibility feels bad. maybe I'm spoiled because most of my flight hours have been in the Fokker E.III, FE2b, and the Roland C.II. but it's really hard to keep track of enemies in a fight!

 

any suggestions or tips? comparing this to the fast and rugged SPAD XIII it's easy to see why most American pilots were glad to be rid of this fragile and tempermental machine

[Olham 164]

Although it is a rotary driven aircraft, you should fly it more like the SPAD XIII - in other words:

 

- gentle turns/wide curves softly banked (10 - 15 °) with use of rudder in the same direction

 

- tight combat turns hard banked, with elevator instead of rudder to bring you round - no rudder!

(Bank, and then pull the stick - find out, how far you can go)

 

- attack fast (diving) then change direction eventually by climbing steep, and when the craft lost most speed,

give full rudder left or right, to reverse your direction; then go down on your opponent again (Hammerhead, I think it's called).

 

That should get you to survive - the rest is training.

Edited September 7, 2010 by Olham

[vyrago 0]

I personally love the Nieuport 28. some things to remember: It bleeds energy fast in hard turns and has a tendency to 'roll over' on a stall. Its very much a stick, rudder and throttle plane. For hard turns, I cut or reduce throttle then a quick blast of gas when you hear the airframe creaking and the wind noise calm down. Trust me, with practice you'll begin to feel the moment you approach stall speed in the Nieuport. Its a combination of mushy controls and wind noise. One of the best features of the 28 is it's decent climb rate, which is good for extending away from a low energy opponent. The only real trick, I find, is marksmanship: the odd gun placement makes estimating your shots a little difficult when first learning the aircraft.

[Pips 5]

Good tips Olham, clear and concise.

 

Unfortunately the Nieuport 28 flight model, like the Spad VII and XIII, is incorrectly modelled in OFF. One of the very few rare mistakes made by the guys. Hopefully the that will be corrected in Phase 4.

 

The Nieuport 28 possessed great agility (courtesy of teh short wingspan and powerful rudder), speed and climb. Sadly it lacked somewhat in durability, and the French attitude to it rubbed off on the Americans (who were trained and equipped by the French). Initially equipped with the N.28, several wing failures (although only two resulted in deaths) created a poor impression by pilots. That lack of confidience (so critical) did much to earn the N.28 a poor reputation.

 

In fact the problem (the top wing spanwise cover seam) was quickly identified by Nieuport and corrected with overlay reinforced leading edge seams which solved the problem. However the damage had been done and the Aviation Militaire had discared its' N.28's to the unfortunate Americans, who in turn discarded it in favour of the SPAD XIII.

[Waldemar Kurtz 1]

I personally love the Nieuport 28. some things to remember: It bleeds energy fast in hard turns and has a tendency to 'roll over' on a stall. Its very much a stick, rudder and throttle plane. For hard turns, I cut or reduce throttle then a quick blast of gas when you hear the airframe creaking and the wind noise calm down. Trust me, with practice you'll begin to feel the moment you approach stall speed in the Nieuport. Its a combination of mushy controls and wind noise. One of the best features of the 28 is it's decent climb rate, which is good for extending away from a low energy opponent. The only real trick, I find, is marksmanship: the odd gun placement makes estimating your shots a little difficult when first learning the aircraft.

 

now that you mention it, I have noticed that cutting throttle before a turn helps out a lot. the rudder is very responsive-- maybe a little too much so. I've found that the 28 is best handled stick, throttle rudder. that rolling over on a stall proved handy when I was dogfighting Dr.Is in Quick Combat. there was no way I could out-turn them in the level, but if I knew that I was going to roll over in a stall and drop like a rock, the Nieuport 28 recovers pretty readily if you pick up speed.

 

I've been practing in the floating chase-plane view Shift + F6 and doing a couple of Free Flights. that's helped me out tremendously. I can get a better feel of how the aircraft behaves in various parts of the flight envelope. inside the forward cockpit view I can't get a good feeling for what the machine is doing. and, since I don't have Track-IR this seems like the most practical solution.

[SirMike1983 3]

The N.28 is a sort of hybrid aircraft-- it was an attempt by Delage and his team to create a fast, sleek aircraft that maximized the 160hp rotary it was given (Gnome Monosoupape). For its time it was a rather well streamlined fighter. It was originally built to hold only a single gun, but by 1918 2 guns was a necessity. The Nieuport is more maneuverable than the Spad XIII, but isn't quite as fast. An N.28 probably tops out around 120 or so, a Spad 13 around 135 or so, roughly. What the Spad lacks in turning it makes up for in diving. With a Spad XIII you can engage and leave as you please, pretty much. The N.28 dives well, but not as well as the Spad.

 

The N.28 in OFF is not quite as maneuverable as it should be, I think. But that said it is an effective fighter if you use a mixture of turning and energy tactics. It differs pretty greatly from its V-strut predecessors in that you can engage in decent vertical maneuvers, to a point. The 28 lives somewhere in the middle of the road-- if your opponent is a turn fighter, use energy tactics. If your opponent is more energy oriented, use turns. The Spad is a bit different in that you'll almost always use energy, the N24 a bit different in that you'll try to turn mostly, whereas the 28 needs to change from scenario to scenario.

[Guest British_eh]

Hey there Olham,

You've just about finished all that's needed for an aircraft/ pilot primer. This is exactly what we are looking for to write the Albatros D?

Cheers,

British_eh

 

Although it is a rotary driven aircraft, you should fly it more like the SPAD XIII - in other words:

 

- gentle turns/wide curves softly banked (10 - 15 °) with use of rudder in the same direction

 

- tight combat turns hard banked, with elevator instead of rudder to bring you round - no rudder!

(Bank, and then pull the stick - find out, how far you can go)

 

- attack fast (diving) then change direction eventually by climbing steep, and when the craft lost most speed,

give full rudder left or right, to reverse your direction; then go down on your opponent again (Hammerhead, I think it's called).

 

That should get you to survive - the rest is training.

[Olham 164]

Well, I have started to write down the Albatros D.II and D.III, but I have the ambition

to write my own "Dsherrmann" style. Of course Dej or you should correct it, but the

way should be kept. This weekend, I will fly them against all their OFF opponents,

so I can give tips for fighting each of them.

[Stratos 3,192]

Hello. Sorry for rescuing this old post, but I'm trying the Nieuport now and I think is the more fragile plane in all OFF, I know it had some problems with the upper wing, but it should be that easy to break? I can't stay in hard turns against the Albatros, they can make circles around me cause my plane breaks every time. Is that a realistic feature?

BTW Olham being an Albatros guy like yourself, did you posted those Albatros guides?

Edited November 17, 2010 by Stratos

[Olham 164]

Not ready yet, sorry, Stratos.

The Nieueport 28 definitely breaks up too easy. But you may fly softer banked turns with full rudder,

or hard banked turns, using elevator. But don't dive much at the same time.

[Stratos 3,192]

Is ok with me If the real plane was so easy to break, but how can we know that?

[Olham 164]

Here's Wikipedia about the N 28:

 

On the whole the type was not a success, however. Although very maneuverable and easy to fly, its performance turned out to be mediocre and its engine unreliable.

More seriously, the mixed plywood/fabric skinning of the wings proved problematic – the fabric which covered the rear portion of the wings tending to “balloon” and

become detached from the plywood leading section. Although a solution to this problem was speedily found, the operational Nieuports in American service were

replaced with SPADs as soon as sufficient of the latter became available. This process was complete by the end of July 1918.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nieuport_28

[Hasse Wind 46]

As far as I know, the wing wasn't the real problem of the N.28 - the unreliable Gnome Monosoupape rotary engine was the big one. The structural weaknesses of the wing were quickly fixed (and they didn't lead to that many accidents or casualties), but the engine problem was not so easy to solve. The SPAD XIII was the best French fighter of the war, so the American decision to get rid of the N.28's was definitely the correct one. The N.28 was no disaster as a fighter, but I think it tells something that the French didn't even bother dealing with it as they were in the process of re-equipping their fighter escadrilles with the SPAD XIII.

[Olham 164]

Still though, maybe the N 28 was introduced a bit hasty here, and I could well imagine, that the devs

will have second looks at it. After all it is an important craft for the early American campaign.

[Stratos 3,192]

Hope they take a look on it, for the moment I will try again to see If I can improve my survavility, If not will deactivate the structural limits while I use the Nieuport 28.

[Olham 164]

Don't give up on it as it is for now, Stratos. I have once shot down a German ace in his Fokker Dr.1,

me flying the N 28 - which wasn't easy.

From the Albatros D.III and D.V I have learnt how to fly a fighter with a weak sopt in the wings.

Find out, what the craft cannot do, and don't do that. That's what Rickenbaker and his boys had to do.

 

When I need to eliminate height quickly in my Albatros, I bank it hard to the right and give full rudder left -

I let the craft fall some hundred feet that way, without breaking the wings.

Maybe that works with the N 28 too - make "Quick Combat" testflights.

Edited November 18, 2010 by Olham

[Hasse Wind 46]

Yeah, I also hope they'll take a look at the Nupe 28 for P4, if possible. It can be said the plane had a very marginal role in the war as a whole, but it was extremely important for the new American air force in the first half of 1918. Poor devs - they must be completely exhausted by these constant demands!

 

I should start a new American campaign just to see what the N.28 can really do. Most of my experience with it comes from quick combat.

 

EDIT: Now wouldn't it be great if P4 were to simulate engine trouble, which was extremely common in WW1 aircraft? How exciting it would be to lose your engine while flying deep behind enemy lines!

Edited November 18, 2010 by Hasse Wind

[Stratos 3,192]

Ok, will try again to master his weakness so I can obtain something from it.

[Olham 164]

Poor devs - they must be completely exhausted by these constant demands!

I think they are working professionally, and so they will do first, what they have decided to be most important.

But they will also collect response from the users, to see if they may have over- or underestimated a point,

and what the users desire.

 

I should start a new American campaign just to see what the N.28 can really do.

I was thinking exactly that - try to survive as an American is pretty new to me. I had once started a pilot, who even managed

to kill a Fokker Dreidecker, but then he fell due to wing failure. One must first find out, where the limits are, and then develop

ways to deal with it. Took me a while with the Albatros, but it is what those pilots could only do.

 

Now wouldn't it be great if P4 were to simulate engine trouble, which was extremely common in WW1 aircraft?

How exciting it would be to lose your engine while flying deep behind enemy lines!

That is a very good idea. It might be possible to create a "random generator" for that, which uses a different factor for

each craft, so that the reliable ones would face that less often.

[Herr Prop-Wasche 7]

The devs may not be the only ones who are working on improving the FM of the N28....

[Stratos 3,192]

The devs may not be the only ones who are working on improving the FM of the N28....

 

HPW, Are you planning to work on N.28 FM? If yes will you soften up that tendency to break? All the texts I can found say that the ripping wing was soon corrected, so the plane shouldn't break so often in game IMO.

[Herr Prop-Wasche 7]

HPW, Are you planning to work on N.28 FM? If yes will you soften up that tendency to break? All the texts I can found say that the ripping wing was soon corrected, so the plane shouldn't break so often in game IMO.

 

Perhaps..... :whistle:

 

So many planes, so little time.

 

Assuming I have cracked the ability to apply FM changes to the campaign, I do plan to make a few adjustments to the N28.

[Olham 164]

Ahaaaaaa!.....

[Herr Prop-Wasche 7]

Fingers crossed, Olham.

 

I should know over the weekend if this is truly going to work.