+Geezer 3,569 Posted February 20, 2018 Also, the Aviatik Berg D1 gets some love. 5 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Crawford 570 Posted February 21, 2018 Wow! Incidentally, does not enter into your future plans to make a "spider" (HB D.I "Star-strutter") ? 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
+Geezer 3,569 Posted February 22, 2018 Got the Halberstadt CL4 flying for the first time. 4 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
+Geezer 3,569 Posted February 22, 2018 A few more early test shots. 9 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
+Geezer 3,569 Posted February 24, 2018 More development shots as we slowly perfect the new Generation 2 aircraft. 7 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
+Geezer 3,569 Posted February 24, 2018 Below are two experimental screens for the Pfalz D8. If they survive the testing process, They'll become the templates for other aircraft. 7 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Stratos 3,192 Posted February 24, 2018 Love the 28!! 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Verdun 21 Posted February 26, 2018 Well done! It looks great! :D 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
+Geezer 3,569 Posted March 3, 2018 Testing sorta/kinda realistic battle damage for the wooden fuselage and cloth covered wings. 6 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
+Geezer 3,569 Posted March 3, 2018 (edited) Got the new Breguet 14 fuselage mapped, and made some new escadrille markings for the Nieuport 24. When this stuff gets released, the files will include templates and sample colors so guys can make new markings. Edited March 3, 2018 by Geezer 7 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
+Geezer 3,569 Posted March 11, 2018 Progress shots of the Br14. 7 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JacksonM 74 Posted March 19, 2018 (edited) Is there anything new, Geezer? How are things going? Fine, I hope? Edited March 19, 2018 by JacksonM Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
+Geezer 3,569 Posted March 19, 2018 (edited) Been quietly working away on a lot of stuff, such as Pfalz D3 (not D3a) LODs and ships. In middle shot, the top aircraft is LOD2: 7,720 polys. The bottom aircraft is LOD1: 22,400 polys. Also trying to get the damage textures to look realistic. Test shot below shows bullet holes that are too large. Edited March 19, 2018 by Geezer 5 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JacksonM 74 Posted March 19, 2018 Just EPIC! Awfully nice work! 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
+Geezer 3,569 Posted March 24, 2018 (edited) Thanks. Recognition and thanks is owed to Mike Dora for his assistance with researching a technical question concerning spent brass disposal on German aircraft. Some famous German aircraft, such as Fokkers, just dumped the expended cartridges into the slip stream. This often resulted in hot brass showering the pilot so it was a less-than-ideal solution. Other aircraft manufacturers took a different approach, which caused endless confusion. So Mike, who is an associate of the Old Rhinebeck Aerodrome in up state New York, drove to the airfield and photographed their replicas. Unfortunately, the replicas ignored that detail - but Mike gets an A for effort! Some snippets from our development thread: ...Also, a word of explanation for my earlier skepticism. I am one of the fast disappearing group of guys who have real-world experience with aircraft machine guns. First shot shows the old B-52 gun turret I worked on during 'Nam. Note the rectangular slots of the ammo chutes that disposed of the empty cartridges - typical of most 1940s-1950s aircraft. Second shot shows guys maintaining the four .50 Brownings clustered in the rear turret - I was one of those guys. We had endless problems with ammo feed and empties disposal because cartridges almost never behave in a predictable manner - they twist and tumble and cluster in unpredictable ways that drive engineers crazy. The higher the rate of fire, the worse it gets. Now you know why the first thing I looked for was rectangular ammo chutes in the belly. When I did not see any, I naturally concluded that some German aircraft did not dispose of their empty cartridges. It never occurred to me to look for what appear to be drainage tubes, located next to aft-most circular door. Edited March 24, 2018 by Geezer 5 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
+Geezer 3,569 Posted March 26, 2018 Concerning the spent cartridge ammo chutes, Mike Dora got a reply from an associate at The Vintage Aviator: “The spent cartridges on German lanes like the Albatros were expelled through a downward chute or tube that exited the bottom of the fuselage. The German V strutters like the Albatros did suffer from “flutter”. This was identified many years later when the phenomenon of “flutter” was actually understood. The case that exemplifies this is that of an Albatros crash, the Pilot was Von Hippel and the lower wings separated (suspected to be because of flutter) and he managed to crash land the rest of the plane some distance from the lower wings and lived to tell about it. The Nieuports were much stronger and could handle much higher g loads. The issue of flutter is not always directly related to G loading but is an aeroelastic effect that depends on the structure, the material and the geometry of the aircraft and also its resonance, for example the flutter event can be started by flying through another aircraft wake or simply flying through turbulence. There are also a number of other ways to “excite “ the aircraft structure and start the flutter event….. There is also the sheer structural strength or lack of it inherent in V strut designs I don’t have enough scientific data to comment on this and I certainly haven’t flown many aircraft to their structural limit to test it ! I would suggest researching flutter a bit more and use that for your comparison.” Mike: It is _very_ interesting that Gene advises that the Nieuports were _stronger_. From my previous research, the Nieuport design was alleged to have exacerbated the aeroelastic effect (and perhaps the flutter effect?) by having a non-rigid lower-wing attachment point for the V-struts, in effect a loop through which the lower-wing spar was free to rotate. Or - thinks - perhaps this arrangement actually _alleviated_ the negative effects, by allowing that spar to twist temporarily without breaking anything? Looks like we may have to reconsider all those lower wing MaxG settings for the Nieups. I did find it a bit hard to understand how eg Guynemer, Nungessor, Bishop (well the first two at least) were so successful with a design that was allegedly prone to fall apart? Jeanba had some excellent comments about aeroelasticity: This is the old discussion stiff vs soft. Both designs have their pro and co but none is really superior unlike what was "believed" in the years 50-60, where planes were usually designed as "stiff" As a lot of aircraft literature roots back to those years, this misconception is still widely spread among "amateurs". Most of the time, flutter is the result of a combination of very fast change from "stiff" to "soft" and concentrated masses Paradoxically, the failure of the French to produce good two-seaters in the years 1916-1917 (until the Breguet and Salmson say) was indeed due to the belief by Dorand that to be resistant, the structure had to be very stiff "everywhere", this resulted in too heavy structures. Boeing was one of the first aircraft companies to really exploit aeroelasticity, when they introduced the B-47, B-52, and 707 in the early/mid 1950s. A great deal of weight was saved by designing wings that would flex under load, rather than traditional wings that were stiff but heavy. 3 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Crawford 570 Posted March 27, 2018 On 26.03.2018 at 5:50 PM, Geezer said: Concerning the spent cartridge ammo chutes, Mike Dora got a reply from an associate at The Vintage Aviator: “The spent cartridges on German lanes like the Albatros were expelled through a downward chute or tube that exited the bottom of the fuselage. ” The same tubes for the removal of spent cartridges ... Machine-guns of the Red Baron. 3 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
+Geezer 3,569 Posted March 28, 2018 Progress shots show the endless hours spent testing and tweaking. 10 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JacksonM 74 Posted March 28, 2018 (edited) Great, amazing job! To say that this work is awesome and was done in good faith - to say nothing... Good luck! Edited March 28, 2018 by JacksonM 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
+Geezer 3,569 Posted March 31, 2018 More test shots - enjoying gterl's map and VonS' atmospherics. 5 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Verdun 21 Posted April 7, 2018 It looks Amazing! Great work, Geezer!!! :D Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
+Geezer 3,569 Posted April 16, 2018 Also worked on two new aircraft, the Sopwith Triplane and Berg D1. 6 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Eugene2 327 Posted April 17, 2018 Great work, Geezer ! When can We fly on this aircraft ? For beginning, on Nieuport- XVII and Pfalz DIII ? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
+Geezer 3,569 Posted April 17, 2018 (edited) 1 hour ago, Eugene2 said: Great work, Geezer ! When can We fly on this aircraft ? For beginning, on Nieuport- XVII and Pfalz DIII ? It takes as much time to set up the files as it does to construct the models and skin them. Mike Dora and VonS are busy fixing many subtle file problems left over from FE/FEG - these aircraft are for FE2. Meanwhile, the aircraft are available as WIPs - note the files are still rough. WIP Nieuport17c.rar WIP Pfalz DIIIa.rar D3a Templates.rar N17 Templates.rar Pilots.rar Edited April 17, 2018 by Geezer 1 3 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
