Tailspin

They are there for anyone to use so if you've got the software and the skills go for it.

The latest Weapon Editor at Thirdwire's site is dated 04/24/06. I'm using the one provided with the 08/06 Weapons Pack from Bunyap which is the same. I tried and tried to get the Le Prieur rockets to appear on the N11 using that editor but couldn't get it to work. Then I moved the shortcut to the .exe to the FE main folder itself and redid the editing process and it worked. I guess the Editor has to run from within the game folder. Anyway if you are having trouble getting the editor to run you can put the .EXE and its .INI in your Windows/System 32 folder. Then create a Shortcut to the .EXE and put that in your game folder. I didn't quite do it like Monty says (ie. using the "Merge" button). I copied and pasted the entries for the Le Prieur rockets and pods into the WeaponData.ini making sure to change the [WeaponDataXXX] header number to match the sequence. Then you open your Weapon Editor and "point" it to the Weapondata.ini in the correct location. Open the .ini, find the entries for the rockets, double click to open, hit OK(do this for each entry), then SAVE, then close the editor. Should be good to go now.

I've tried the N24 and I like it. Think it will be OK at least IMHO. My thoughts on the 17 are it should be very manoeverable, just not fast and manoeverable. Really my only question about its FM was the reluctance roll out of a turn.

Tex...I don't disagree that some of the planes IRL had bad diving characteristics. Your idea does have some merit in that you must watch your dive speeds to avoid loss of elevator effectivness. However overall game balance is important too. Now, about the N11. I can't seem to get it to reverse its turn as it doesn't want to roll out of a turn. Since it also it loses altitude in a turn very quickly its very dangerous to fight down low. Any ideas? I was expecting it to be light and nimble but it seems very heavy on the ailerons. Maybe I just need more practice. ps...we really need to get the Eindecker fixed too.

Actually the MaxControlSpeed is the speed at which a control surface is most efficient. Efficiency increases with speed until the MCS is reached then falls off gradually as speed goes higher. IMHO MCS is often set too high. For example Thirdwire's Fokker DVII's ailerons have a MCS of 80. Thats nearly 179mph! A speed only reached in a dive. I don't think that is right. MCS should probably always be less than MaxSpeedSL. As for the compression, personal opinion here...and you know the old saying about opinions , I don't think its a very good substitute for structural weakness. This is why I asked about maybe providing a way (separate data.ini?) to remove it for those (like me) who don't want it. After all, as B Bandy notes, none of the other planes model their structural weaknesses, ie. the Albatros' and Dr. I losing wings in dives. That said, I can certainly live with it and will say no more as it is entirely up to the modders.

Ya'll gotta keep reminding yourselves this game is not even 3 months old yet. We've already gotten 2 patches and beaucoup additions. Its only gonna get better.

File approved...come and get it.

Well its been a couple of days now and I haven't seen Capun's usual release post so just in case any of you didn't know the ATeam has released the Sopwith Pup. Marvelous model and great plane to fly in the sim...one of my favorites now. Go gitcha one.

Ouch! Thats always a pain CP. I had to put a new power supply in mine last week. Not as bad as an OS reinstall though. Good luck.

Sounds good Tex.

BTW....Welcome to CombatACE, jossearbraz. Thanks for participating in our forums.

Nowhere in my post did I compare the N11 to the DIII nor the N17 to the DIII for that matter. As stated the DIII was the better of anything in the air until the next round of upgrades during mid 1917...that would obviously include the N24. I couldn't find much on the DI and DII as they related to their contemporaries. The DI was unsatisfactory and the DII quickly replaced it. It seems it was like a game of checkers during the war. Move. Countermove. Advantages were lost as quickly as they were gained.

B Bandy, you should try the last version. It is far less "slippery" than the earlier...just needs more rudder, IMHO.

From what I could gather it was the N11 and DH 2 that bested the Eindecker. The N17 should be superior to the DH 2 but inferior to the DIII. The DIII should better than anything until the West upgraded after BloodyApril 1917.

Hey guys. You all know how I feel about the great job you are doing on the Nieuports so please don't take this request the wrong way. Would it be possible to have a choice of whether or not to install the "compression" effects? A seperate .ini or just a post on which values to change in the .ini file? Thanks.

Hmmmm....I was always under the impression that, due to the lack of aileron authority, without the additional induced roll from rudder input these planes would not roll very well at all. I think using the rudder to induce roll is an essential part of manoevering so rudder authority is important. In fact, in the original pre-patch game, doubling all the rudder Cndc values just about made the FM perfect, IMHO. Post patch, with the exception of the SE 5a which has far too touchy a rudder, I think most planes are pretty good in this respect.

Ok, the new FM is much better, IMHO, in directional stability. I added more rudder authority (Cndc...I split the difference between the old values and new) and it seems handle pretty good. I like it! PS...Almost forgot. My tests were done with the FM set on Normal. Since the majority of planes aren't "tuned" for Hard, I rarely fly that way anymore. There doesn't seem to be anything wrong with the Neiuports on Normal though. They fly just fine.

How about that. I had just taken the N24 up for a test run (been busy with RL things and hadn't been flying much lately) and was going to post that I thought the plane was a little too "loose" and that the nose tended to "float". I'll have to try out the new .ini now. Great work guys.

The N28 works pretty well without a gunsight...or anything else. Tends to keep me from wasting ammo shooting from too far away.

Hey!! Thats supposed to be Top Secret! Its the latest in low level, terrain following capability. Sheesh, caint keep nuthin a secret anymore.

Interesting discussion regarding the Lewis guns. I think the first thing you have to ask is why. Why would the RFC issue, and apparently continue to do so, a gun mounting design that should have proven itself unworthy in testing as quickly as it apparently did in the field? Reading the many internet sites on the Dolphin, the references to the gun angle indicates (speculates?) they had to be mounted obliquely to avoid the propeller arc (I don't know if the model in FE is all scaled correctly but its clear the Lewis guns are indeed firing throug the prop arc in the sim). Something that may support that idea is the attempt to mount the guns on the lower wings outside the prop arc. If direct fire from the top wing setup was possible, why go to the trouble (mounts, firing mechanism, etc) of moving the guns to a position where they could not be reloaded? Next, it is clear that once in the field either one or both guns were removed. Trading performance for firepower? Possibly. Ridding yourself of the encumbrance of the almost useless extra weight? Also possible. Also I've not yet seen ANY photo of the guns in the forward level firing position. If they could be fired directly, perhaps the pilots simply didn't like the arrangement regardless of the extra firepower? It seems the Lewis guns would obstruct the view, tending to defeat the purpose of the open wing design. Perhaps the Lewis guns were seen as just another thing to crash your head into in a design that was already disconcerting to pilots?

You gotta slow down the old fashioned way...a couple of quick s-turns to scrub off my initial approach speed works for me.

Be advised those altitude values are in METERS so adjust accordingly for WWI aircraft.

http://bbs.thirdwire.com/phpBB/viewtopic.p...07&start=32 Certainly sums it up AFAIC. All the complaining gets rather tedious, IMHO.

Thank you raven-1. That actually was the original intent of the five post minimum...to expose folks to the forums and the community and get them more involved with the site. We're glad you like it here.