Mike Dora

Found that pic of von Hippel's crash-landing, see below. He walked away from this (indeed he survived the war and lived at least into the 1970's). As you can see, the whole lower port wing has detached cleanly. With a close look you can see that the port flying wires are still in place, which is probably why the port upper wing stayed put. Mike

Bart, Quick question, is this with FE1 or FE2? Because if the jagged haze line is still there in FE2, then that is one more reason why I may stick with my heavily-modded FE1. In any case, I'm looking forward to trying this trick when I get back to my desktop next month, that blasted haze line is the last remaining FE bugbear for me. And if it doesn't work, can always try another wee dram of the single malt - that usually helps soften any haze! Mike

Thanks Peter, Yes that is what I meant. Looking forward to the new 130hp Camel, when it's ready. You've already worked wonders with this sim, but please take your time, you deserve the break! Mike

Peter Haven't been able to try your updated FMs yet (or Jan Tuma's new terrain or even FE2 - why do major upgrades always happen when I'm overseas??), but remind me please - did you re-do the Camel, if so, which version? (110hp, 130hp, 150hp?) Thanks MIke

I have a somewhat basic question about FE2. What real advantages does it actually offer to someone running FE1 under WinXP with DX9? I have to ask because I'm concerned, not at the cash cost of the new version, but at the "transactional cost" of installing FE2 then having to update it to the same level as my current installation of FE1, with its scores of flyable ac (all with improved FMs), four theatres of ops (all with full seasonal effects), enhanced SFX, sounds, menu screens, music etc etc. I'd really need to see some indispensable, cannot-do-without improvement before I move over - I doubt if I'm alone in this? Have to confess that I didn't see such a drop-dead improvement in SFP2 or WOV2. Although I bought these I ended up sticking with my much-modded originals, I couldn't be bothered having to struggle with the inconvenient Vista-driven revised file structure coupled with the changes in some of the file formats. Mike

So chaps What I'm hearing so far is that FE2 brings me Vista/Win7 & DX10 compatibility, plus some improvement to AI gun effectiveness and to roll modelling. When I bought my new rig last year I deliberately selected WinXP to avoid Vista - I think that's the worst Windows since the original Windows 3 - so those first 2 enhancements aren't relevant. As for the gun modelling, my FE config has long since had carefully modded ammo weights to provide realistic hit/kill ratios (sometimes one or two rounds do it, sometimes it takes scores of hits, the average is in the range of 30-50 hits for a kill). That appears to leave the roll modelling, on which I defer to Peter01 - personally I am very very happy with all of his FM updates. (BTW does FE2 introduce "collidable" trees and buildings, for realistic hedge-hopping flight?) So it comes down to Heck's economic argument for buying FE2. I think that and that alone will make me buy it. But I'm unlikely to use it, based on the above, and the huge transactional cost of updating it to the level of my much-modded and fine-tuned FE1 setup. Mikt

DH9! ..if possible with some engine reliability parameter that makes half the formation drop out before reaching the target, its Puma engine was a genuine dud.

Bart I have a recollection from somewhere (no recollection of where, it might have been Biggles) of a typical 1918 RFC Vickers loading sequence being 5 ball/1 AP/1 tracer. I guess it may have varied a lot throughout the war, depending on a whole range of factors. As for incendiary ammunition, there was quite a "thing" in the RFC/RAF against carrying incendiary bullets such as Buckingham unless on a specifically balloon-busting sortie. Against the Hague Convention or something like that. Seemingly pilots were issued written orders when loaded with it, verifying that they were on a legitimate anti-balloon mission, so that they wouldn't be liable for court-martial if forced down and found to be carrying the stuff. Pretty ironic when you consider all the other beastliness the combatants did to each other during the war. Mike

"No, those Fockers are Sukhois.. " to borrow from a bad old joke!

Does anyone know what parameter(s) determine whether a damaged aircraft goes down as a flamer? Since implementing Stary's modified aircraftsmokeeffect.ini back in September, I've noticed that actual flamers seem to be an extremely rare occurence. Most WW1 aviation literature, on the other hand, implies that flamers were not that uncommon. A (very) rough analysis suggests that they might be of the order of 10-15% of shoot-downs. I'm therefore wondering if there is a parameter buried away somewhere that will let us tinker with an ac's susceptability to going down as a flamer? Thanks Mike

Hi Bart I've only seen this effect a very few times in the couple of hundred shootdowns I did in trials. What I did notice on these occasions is the plane flaring up with a fuel fire (the bright white flames enveloping the fuselage), but then the fire going out before it developed into the regular long trail of orange-red flame and greasy black smoke. What I think may be happening here, is that the burning fuel is "used up" before the fire can progress to the structure. Adding fuel to the flames (ouch) of this speculation is that on at least two occasions I noticed that the burning aircraft was also trailing the thin line of fuel vapour that indicates a holed tank, and that this went away when the fire went out. It's all hit and miss of course, so maybe upping the ProgressionChance to something much higher (95?) might be appropriate. After all, once the tank is on fire, what chance is there really of a heavily varnished and doped wood and fabric structure _not_ catching fire? Mike

Thanks Peter, And good hint, I'll use the 400hp Liberty Plane model with RFC/RAF skins to make a 375hp Eagle VIII DH4 version. Now I wish someone would do a DH9 for FE. Mike

Looking forward to trying these Peter. Just one question, which engine variant does the new DH4 FM represent? Is it Eagle III, Eagle VIII, Puma, BHP or whatever? I ask because there was up to a 50% difference in power between these, so that performance-wise there were DH4's and there were super-DH4's (ie the ones with the Eagle VIII's). Mike

Now _I'm_ no longer sure what I mean Peter! I was referring to the wingtip shape, which I _thought_ looked different on your BE2c (more BE2c-like) from that on the A-Team's version, which I seem to recollect looked the same as the BE2a's symmetrically-tapered wingtip shape. Trouble is, I can't check for a while, just gone overseas on a 2-3 month TDY, and of course all this good stuff is on the desktop back home. In other words, everyone please ignore my burbling!! Mike

Ah, now I get it Peter. One further question then, where did you find the BE2c model? The ones I've found seem to have BE2a wings, not the BE2c type. BTW let me also add a hearty welcome back! Mike

But what's this BE2C masquerading as an Avro 504D? I'm confused - is this a new Quirk that you've cooked up Peter? Mike

It's the ObjectData file. To unpack it you need the CatPack utility, available (I think) at <http://forum.combatace.com/index.php?app=downloads&showfile=7933> Mike

Thanks Tailspin, Good clue. I've tinkered with the [ObjectFire] parameters in the AircraftObject.ini file, and after experimentation, find that the following figures result in about one in six shootdowns being flamers. That seems about right to me, though if anyone out there knows of any solid research on this ratio that would be useful. [ObjectFire] FireCheckTime=6.0 APRoundFireChance=30 HERoundFireChance=30 HERoundExplosionChance=1 ExplosionChance=1 SuppressionChance=1 ProgressionChance=50 The interesting thing is that the original FE [ObjectFire] parameters were almost the same as the SFP [ObjectFire] parameters, despite the huge disparity in airframe types. Anyway I find that these revised parameters further improve the immersion factor, especially when you see some poor sod going down in flames away in the distance. Horrible and fascinating at the same time. Mike

I've been looking again at the earlier of the two Falklands mods for SFP1, and have encountered an odd issue. Whenever I try for an air combat sortie (intercept/sweep/CAP), no opposing ac show up. Makes for rather a dull sortie. Does anyone know what file(s) control the generation of opposing formations? BTW, when I try the newer (Malvinas) mod, I encounter huge (for the time & place) formations - eg FAA sqn-strength formations of Canberras, when in real life the only had about half-a-dozen which bravely attacked in ones and twos. So, alternative question, how can I reduce the formation sizes in the Malvinas mod? Thanks Mike

First of all, congrats and thanks to all the OFF team for producing yet another deeply immersive Western Front flying experience (BTW what is the theme music? It is quite moving, quite appropriate). My question is, how does the HITR damage model relate to previous OFF damage models, including the range of optional third party damage models provided by Herr Prop Wasche? Are the latter incorporated, or does HITR stick with the original "base" OFF damage model? Mike

Thanks Stary, As for FE2, I view its introduction with a degree of trepidation. While looking forward to the anticipated improvements (hope it includes descending balloons & balloonatics' parachutes), I just pray that it is backwards-compatible with all of the work that so many people have invested in expanding and polishing FE1. BTW, random silly thought, if FE2 gets a couple of patches, would the second one turn it into an FE2b? Mike

Thanks for that Stary, I'm away from home just now, so look forward to experimenting with these alternative settings when I get back. In the meantime though, will these AlphaObjects setting in the *_data.ini files, affect the surface fog hard-edged "line" that is a major source of annoyance? I ask because I'm getting that line over the sea, where there are of course no trees. Thanks Mike

File Name: Flanders Seasonal Coastal Tiles File Submitter: Mike Dora File Submitted: 06 Dec 2009 File Category: First Eagles Terrain and Environmental Mods Flanders Seasonal Coastal Tiles This is a small add-on to previous third-party terrain packs, providing a set of new seasonal coastal tiles to allow the user to enjoy Stary's seasonal tiles with Edward's Flanders terrain. Installation is a simple 5-stage process, just follow the steps set out in the ReadMe file. My part in this pack has been only to build upon other people's excellent preceding work. Major acknowledgements are due to Edward for filling an important gap by bringing us his comprehensive Flanders front in the first place, and to Stary for his wonderful seasonal upgrade which has brought a new dimension to First Eagles. Serious personal acknowledgements go to B Bandy RFC and NathanKell for all of their advice, encouragement and coaching through the challenges of first-time tile editing. Thanks chaps, it was a long haul but you never let me give up! Any errors or omissions are of course mine and nobody else's (though if someone can figure out a way of extending Stary's new-style buildings and trees onto the coastal terrain that would be great). Mike Click here to download this file