tttiger

BH, I went back and read it again. You are correct. No point in arguing the fine points here but he also makes a distinction between high wing load fighters and low wing load fighters (which you have to B&Z because they can't turn, like the Spad), so there are more than two. As to Shaw being your drinking buddy and the two of you teaming up to sweep the virtual skies...well.... Hey, I write books. Buy one and I will autograph it. Any author will.... ttt

No, much of it is universal (not about any era). It quotes everyone from Billy Bishop to Chuck Yeager to Miyamoto Musashi to Baron Manfred von Richthofen. and even some guy named Adolph Galland. There are some areas you can ignore completely for OFF purposes (you won't ever need to maneuver for a "Rear Quarter Missiles Only" shot here). And there are chapters on fighting with two or four aircraft that only work if you have a human wing man, which we don't. But there are, for instance, very long chapters on "One-versus-One Maneuvering, Similar Aircraft" and "One-versus-One Maneuvering, Dissimilar Aircraft. There is a 30-page chapter just on using guns, a 36-page chapter on basic fighter maneuvers. It really is The Bible for fighter tactics. It's also a text book so it is kind of dry and technical reading. Oh, and what Bullethead calls "Energy Fighting," Shaw calls "Angles fighting." What Shaw calls "Energy Fighting is what we call Boom and Zoom. The Albatross, in Shaw's terminology is an "angles fighter." I call it a "vertical fighter." But it's all the same stuff. It's a book you can go back to again and again if you are into combat flight sims and as you gain experience over the long haul the text means more and more. Suddenly, what used to be mysterious becomes what we called in the Army a "BFO" (Blinding Flash of the Obvious). ttt

Olham. I'll share this with you but try to keep it secret, okay? http://www.amazon.com/Fighter-Combat-Tacti...8239&sr=8-1 ttt

Oh, I do agree with Bullethead on the merge. A shallow dive in their direction as they're coming down followed by a reverse when they've passed you really screws up their plans (Boelcke Rule #6: If they're diving on you, keep your nose pointed toward them; Mannock Rule # 14: Never dive away from an enemy: his bullets are faster than your aeroplane.) What you do in the merge is the single most important part of the fight in terms of what happens next (Shaw: "Fighter Combat.") ttt

First, I don't think anything flown in QC is a true test. Once I've learned a new plane, I've never lost a QC, even against aces. The AI just aren't that good (maybe dumber in QC?). Human opponents are another story and I've often been murdered by Trosses flown by humans...but not here. QCs are a great little laboratory for learning the plane and a good warm-up before a campaign flight you are flying but not for comparing AI aircraft. The real tests should be in a campaign where you can be surprised by enemies that arrive during an ongoing fight, enemies that have a huge numerical and altitude advantage, etc., etc. With all that windy lead-in, I've never met an AI Albatross in an equal fight I couldn't kill, assuming we're talking about both planes being in the correct time frame. One of the problems of fighting AI opponents is they become very predictable. I know the Albatross (all models) fights in the vertical, not the horizontal (it's historically correct) and the sim models this very well. This is very different from Boom & Zoom or energy fighting. It's still a turn fight but the Albatross turns up or it turns down, not left or right. We had a few guys back in Dawn of Aces (while all the rest of you apparently were flying RB3D) who were absolute masters of the DVA. I would not mess with them in my SE5a or F2b. Ever. But they were human, not AI, and they could adapt to human opponents. If the AI Tross goes up (and he will the first time I take a shot at him), I simply do lag pursuit slightly nose down so I build up some energy while he's burning up his energy climbing. When he gets near the top of his climb I switch to lead pursuit, zoom up get him in my sights and bye, bye Tross. If he dives I follow only a short way and then stay up and wait for him. I can't match the Tross in a vertical fight (except in the Camel or SE5a, which won't come apart in a power dive, but they can't roll as well as the Tross, so I stay high in them, too). When the Tross dives I just point my nose in his general direction and stay high and watch and wait. As soon as he climbs past me and is low on smash (energy), I'm on him. It never fails. Because the Trosses are German, they always do it "by the book" and once you've read their book.... ttt

British-eh: Sri, I suppose I should have finished my thought. True, as you said, the structural weaknesses in the DR1 were corrected. But, from everything I've read, the plane's reputation never recovered and few pilots trusted it. Actually, WF2's question is an interesting "what if?" if you're into that sort of thing. The Sop Tripe actually was one of the fastest (faster than the Camel, which used the same engine and on a par with the SE5a) British fighters of the war. It couldn't dive with the late war planes, though, without coming apart. The DR1 was the slowest late war German fighter. The Tripe could always break off and run, the DR1 didn't have that luxury. On the flip side, the RNAS mechanics considered the Tripe a maintenance nightmare. It wasn't designed to be repair friendly. So, what if they had met in combat? That's the problem with "what if" questions: We'll never really know. ttt

Noop 28 and Other (Snipe and Dolphin)! If you build a Morane Parasol for Warneford (and Pol) you gotta have a Zep for him to blow up, right? ttt

Best writing? Cecil Lewis' book: "Sagittarius Rising." Beautiful prose, almost poetry. Best oral history: "Voices in Flight" by Anna Malinovska and Muriel Joslyn. Interviews with surviving British RFC/RNAS vets conducted in the 1970s but never before made public until the book was published in 2006. Best overview (tie): "The First Air War" by Lee Kennett and "The First Air Campaign" by Eric and Jane Lawson. Somewhat different takes on the same stuff, both well worth reading. Best flim documentary (available in a hundreds of little pieces on YouTube but the whole set is well worth the price): http://raindesert.com/great_war/great_war_buy_film.htm One I would avoid: Billy Bishop's book. Most of his victories (including the one for which he was awarded the VC) had zero witnesses. Not a bad read but I really question how much is fiction. Rickenbacker's book is a good (but not great) read and available on line: http://richthofen.com/rickenbacker/ Finally, best on line resource and the first place I go to look stuff up (including a huge book list): http://www.theaerodrome.com/ Come back when you've finished. There will be quiz! ttt

Brilliant! ttt

Gotta agree with Olham (did I say that????). These were two completely different generations of planes. The Sop Tripe first appeared in November 1916 and was withdrawn from service in the fall of 1917 to be replaced by the Camel. It was flown only by the RNAS, never by the RFC (which went with the Pup instead) and only 152 were built. Wonderful fighter (for its time) and wonderful to fly in the sim (if you play with the trim to keep the nose from heading for outer space :warning2: ). The DR1 first appeared in August 1917 and also lasted in service only about a year to be replaced by the DVII. It suffered a bad reputation for catastrophic structural failures and also was produced only in relatively small numbers: 320. The DR1 was a contemporary of the Camel and SE5a. So, yes, I agree that if I were going to war I would choose the DR1 over the Tripe, too. But it's a silly point because wouldn't you pick an F22 over an F16? ttt

See the thread called "violent pitch" Sheesh. Another Snowbird. Temp hits a mere 115F and they all fly north for the summer ttt

Wow! Looked it up (ain't Google amazing?) and you are absolutely correct! AND the elevator trim wheel is modeled in the sim! In the Tripe it's that big silver wheel on the right side of the pilot's seat! I've been making models of Sopwiths for at least 50 years and never knew you could control trim. Ya learn something every day! Numpad 7 and 1 are about to get some exercise.... Thanks, B ttt

Thanks, Pol! ttt

Scout, Were these all AFTER the new patch? I just flew a couple Tripe missions and it just confirmed what I said. I spent the whole mission fighting the airplane, which keeps trying to climb unless I hold the stick forward quite firmly. If I let my grip loose while I'm looking around it will try to go up and will begin to stall. It's simply too tail heavy. I fly with the default pitch settings (which in real life couldn't be changed in flight except in the SE5a, which actually had adjustable trim tabs). I suppose I could pound on the Numpad 7 key but I shouldn't have to do that. Whatever was done in the last patch to move the center of gravity to make the other planes more tail heavy needs to be done in the opposite direction with the Sop Tripe. As far as aligning the sights with Track IR, I've never been able to do that in the Tripe (I don't like using the iron sight setting because it doesn't allow me to look around; it's locked on that view). My sight picture in the Virtual Cockpit always has the rear sight much lower than the front sight (this is not a problem in any other plane). I get around it by aiming low because I know the rounds are going to go high. If there's some magic method you have, please share it ttt

For what it's worth... The ONLY time I have this problem is when I'm flying an escort (which someone incorrectly called Close Air Support) mission and I warp from the airfield through numerous closely-spaced waypoints to the point where I'm supposed to meet the bombers/recce planes (who never are there). When it comes out of warp ONLY ON THESE MISSIONS and ONLY AT THIS POINT IN THE MISSION, I'm going up very fast (once I was actually inverted) with a red warning that I had exceeded the limits of the aircraft and I have to chop the throttle and push the nose down very hard (oddly, it slows down when I push the nose down). At this point the map also is off, sending me to a way point behind my own lines. I have to adjust my way point headings to send me me back to where I was going. It happens in every plane I fly, which is all the Brit planes and the Noop 17. And it happens in every type of weather. And it happens every time I have a "Close Air Support" mission but in no other types of mission. I've always been able to correct this but it really should be addressed. I fly on auto mix (heck, we have auto start, so why not?) and use a Saitek Evo Force. It's not a deal-breaker and I've come to expect it. But it would be nice if it could be fixed. Hope that info helps you track it down. My (totally uneducated) guess is it has something to do with how close the initial waypoints are set up in those missions in order to gain altitude. Good luck with it and thanks for checking it out! ttt

Thanks for the head up, RC! I'll grab it right now. Thank you again, Team! ttt

Overall, the patch is a huge improvement! Thank you! The gunnery, both player and AI set at "normal" is much closer to what I would consider realistic. Like everyone here, I have no experience firing an MG from a bobbing biplane but I have considerable experience shooting MGs from both ground and vehicle mounts. They simply were too accurate at long range previously. Now I would rate them "Excellent" at "normal." The damage also seems much closer to what I would expect in real life. Two thumbs up for the gunnery changes! The planes that were fragile (e.g. the Noop 17 and the Sop Tripe) are even more so now and that's making the sim more realistic. BRAVO! BUT (there it is!): There have been significant changes in the vertical trim in all the planes I flew today in Campaign mode: The Pup, Camel, F2b and Noop 17 (Vickers). The changes are a mixed bag. Some, like the Camel, which used to be nose heavy now is tail heavy. That's great! Because from everything I've read the real Camels were indeed tail heavy and the stick constantly had to be pressed forward. Having it nose heavy as it was in the earlier versions clearly was inaccurate. The Brisfit and the Pup and the Noop 17 also used to be nose heavy and now are tail heavy. Makes taking off, particularly in the F2b, a lot smoother (dunno if it's more or less realistic now but they sure fly better). The Noop is quite unstable in a fight now and that's probably more realistic. It really requires a light touch. The good news is it's still easy to unspin. The Sop Tripe, however, has gone from bad to worse. It was way too tail heavy in the earlier versions and now is even more tail heavy. It pops up off the ground in about 10 feet and is very erratic in level flight. It's very hard to keep the nose on the horizon. It's impossible to line up the front and rear sights using TIR. It may be worth taking another look at it. The other thing I noticed was that some (not all) planes now fly in formations in which the wing men are in front of the flight leader (I always fly as flight leader). That was true of the Pup and the Tripe. It isn't accurate and kinda bruises the immersion with the wingies out in front of the leader. Those are mostly quibbles. Overall, another big step forward. Thanks! ttt

Thanks, Aussie! I'll give it a try! ttt

As I suggested in another thread, you really need to buy it and get used to it (takes a few days) and experiment with it. I guarantee you won't regret the purchase! TIR actually has a forum of its own and a very helpful community. It includes a section on CFS3 that also covers OFF 3: http://forum.naturalpoint.com/forum/ubbthr...d=10&page=1 Just a caution: some of the threads are quite old and the problems they had then have since been solved. Check the dates before you get too involved in the topics :) ttt

Go to Amazon.com and read the reviews. That's the quick way to check out customers' views of a product. You likely will find good prices there as well. Personally, I use a laser printer. They're very fast, very sharp and the toner lasts forever. The down side is they don't do color but black & white (& gray) is fine for my purposes. Odd. I thought this was a WWI flight sim forum. I must have taken a wrong turn on my way in.... ttt

TIR is such a matter of personal taste and style, I'm not sure advice from one user is useful for the whole flock. As a TIR user of many years (and many versions) in many sims, I really suggest you buy it, spend a week or so getting used to it and then start experimenting with tweaking the profile until it fits your style.. For example, for me, it works great in OFF but it is essential I keep the F12 button (center the screen) handy because I use so much body English in a dog fight that it's hard to keep my sights aligned. If you're good at holding your head (and everything else) still, F12 is not that important. I have no objections to a thread but until you've tried it and are used to it, all the hints in the world are going to seem meaningless. Just go out and buy it! It really has NO warts. Well...if you're prone to motion sickness keep your keyboard covered for the first few days. Your brain will adjust quite soon. Probably. ;) ttt

Thanks Combat Ace & MK2! ttt