Tailspin

Welcome to CombatACE Arnir.

When I select Bomb Target in Single Missions the AI in the flight take off, stay on the take off heading, and climb steadily until they reach max. atlitude. The don't follow waypoints in either direction or altitude. Player's plane on auto pilot behave correctly. I've tried several different planes and they all do it. I don't have any modded AI routines installed just a patched install with a couple of add on A/C. Can anyone confirm this? Thx.

Hmmmm...thanks Zero. Thats very interesting. I'm just hitting AP at mission start and they don't follow.

Right now its 61F in Southern Illinois.

Just a quick test flight...didn't notice any excessive torque effects. Good job Tex.

Yeah, Tab/3 doesn't work. Pretty sure its a bug with the AI routine just for the Bomb Target single mission. On all the other missions the AI follow the waypoints. Could you two try it and see if it does the same for you?

Hey, thanks Bwf! I've reported it to TK over at Thirdwire and he says he'll take a look.

Good news EmlD. I'm looking forward to seeing her in all her glory.

"And march all the way to Southern Florida for a rematch of the SuperBowl of 20 years ago, and get REVENGE on the Bears!" The Bears ain't going to get that far...

Well, IMHO, the planes in FE in general tend to fly too good with parts missing so this may not be a bad thing.

There are plenty of planes and talk of a mod but AFAIK nothing was ever done as far as a campaign.

There seems to be much more rudder authority and sensitivity modeled after the patch. Makes flying with a "twisty stick" that much harder. The stock aircraft are better now but the patch seems to have hosed the FM in some 3rd party planes...especially for the AI.

Tex, I see what you mean by the sideways power comments. Reaction in the yaw axis is a pretty loose. Skids and slips quite a bit.

Very nice, Laton.

I don't think so. I've tried to rip the wings off the planes in FE without doing so. It one of the things I liked about RB3D...you couldn't just yank your plane around any old way without damaging it. I would also think that factors like CLift at AoA and CDrag at AoA combined with thrust and weight would affect overall clime rate. A poor design that lacked sufficient lift or had high drag at increased AoA wouldn't climb as well as a more efficient wing, IMHO.

Yes, I've seen that. This is the problem sometimes with Internet information. Some of it is DRASTICALLY different. The 2m/s climb rate for the SPAD taken from a couple of sites seems completely ridiculous. By all accounts the N28 was an excellent performer, hampered only by its tendency to shed its upper wing skin when pulling out of a dive.

The numbers I find are more like: Dr 1 1130ft./min. or 342m/min. N28 855ft./min. or 258m/min. SPAD 394ft./min. or 120m/min. (Wow very slow! That can't be correct)

N28 was more manouverable but not as fast. N28 top speed of @123mph vs the SPAD's 138mph. I have a different data.ini based on the post patch SE5a. Maybe a little too much but it sure is fun to fly. I can post it but like I said in the earlier post its pure "fantasy" made by crossing the N28 data with the SE5a FM. edit...On second thought, I'm not going to post it. I think its better to get a good solid FM based on the data so everybody that uses the model will be on the same page. edit...On third thought, I'll give the file to EmlD and let him decide if he wants to use it until something better comes along. Who knows, he may still prefer his instead.

Thanks guys. Gonna be a good placeholders until the models come on line. And I don't mean anything derogatory by the term placeholders.

I think we are mixing Engine designations with Aircraft designations. The Mercedes DIII ENGINE was rated @ 160hp. The Mercedes DIIIa ENGINE was rated @ 175-180hp. The Mercedes DIII engines was used on aircraft other than the Albatros DIII. I noticed all the aircraft are a bit slower after the patch. Before they were spot on AFA top speeds.

Definately something screwy with 3rd party A/C and AI. The AI flying EmlD's Nieuport does the loopy loop/stall/crash thing, and I've got a post patch flight model "plugged in" the data.ini. Thought it might help but it didn't. FWIW the ATeam has already acknowledged a problem with their planes post patch and are supposed to be working on it. What this has to do with CTDs? The Nieuport hasn't caused any CTDs. I don't have the ATeam's planes.

EmlD...What I did was copy all the SE5a values for the wings, elevators, control surfaces, and such over to the N28 Data.ini. I didn't change the data specfic to the N28 like Flight Control, Aircraft Data, Engine, Crew, guns, landing gear, etc. In other words I cheated. I came up with an N28 that flies like an SE5a...sort of. Its not anything developed on N28 data at all so I wouldn't think it proper to actually use it. I'll send you the file if you want, though. BTW...the pilot position in your latest file is OK externally but using those coordinates for the cockpit view doesn't allow you to see the instrument panel. I think a good compromise postition is 0.0,-1.02,0.57. Anything closer than -1.02 causes the instrument panel to start to disappear and any thing higher than 0.57 allows you to see under the cockpit padding, its too high. Here's some screens. You know, you gotta get that vid card fixed... The first two are with the coordinates in your last file. These two are with the coordinates I gave. It is possible to mix the coordinates to give you the outside view you want with the cockpit view that works best too.

Yes. What I wondered was if you used the SPAD data.ini file from before the patch...which it looks like you did. I think this may cause problems with the flight model (for people using the new patch) because a lot of the variables (data tables) were changed with the patch. I "fixed" the broken clock by using the "new" (after patch) cockpit ini. Just as a test, and to try and get more manouverability, I substituted the "after patch" SE5 data .ini (mixing the N28 specific data with the aerodynamic data from the SE5a) and the Nieuport 28 flys very nicely. What I was really hoping for was that using the FM from a post-patch aircraft would solve the AI problem 3rd party planes are having with looping, stalling, and crashing into the ground. Didn't work. Anyway, I can only offer encouragement. The model looks good. I'm sure you'll get the flight model worked out and all the details working. Looking forward to the finished product. Thanks for letting us be your "BETA testers" and putting up with our comments.

EmlD...Another question. Did you happen to use pre-patch files for your cockpit and Data.ini?